|
Whoever posted the House Rule of Crafting at 100% cost but allowing slot items to be "salvaged" at 100% value towards crafting got my attention.
WBL is a fact, as is the need for crafting. Whether one buys something crafted by another or does it himself, it's built in certain equipment is desired and unless you're playing 4E, you aren't going to find your "wish list" while adventuring. However, over time, crafters can exceed WBL. In the absurd example which no GM should allow, a character created with 10,000gp of equipment could opt to take cash only, then take that 10,000 and craft 20,000gp worth of magic items, double what his WBL says he should have.
Which is why I was intrigued by the house rule. Crafting costs market price (full cost), but you can "salvage" for crafting purposes similar slot items at full market price rather than selling them at 1/2 cost. So, a +1 short sword would basically be melted down and its energies converted to cover the cost of a +1 greatsword (less the cost of the masterwork greatsword in the first place). It covers the intent (allow characters to craft what they want/need to be better equipped) but does not disrupt Wealth By Level.
That's a pretty cool houserule. I might try that in my homegame (if it ever gets running again).
Whoever posted the House Rule of Crafting at 100% cost but allowing slot items to be "salvaged" at 100% value towards crafting got my attention.
WBL is a fact, as is the need for crafting. Whether one buys something crafted by another or does it himself, it's built in certain equipment is desired and unless you're playing 4E, you aren't going to find your "wish list" while adventuring. However, over time, crafters can exceed WBL. In the absurd example which no GM should allow, a character created with 10,000gp of equipment could opt to take cash only, then take that 10,000 and craft 20,000gp worth of magic items, double what his WBL says he should have.
Which is why I was intrigued by the house rule. Crafting costs market price (full cost), but you can "salvage" for crafting purposes similar slot items at full market price rather than selling them at 1/2 cost. So, a +1 short sword would basically be melted down and its energies converted to cover the cost of a +1 greatsword (less the cost of the masterwork greatsword in the first place). It covers the intent (allow characters to craft what they want/need to be better equipped) but does not disrupt Wealth By Level.
I kind of like that rule too Touc. I might test it next time I get a chance to run a game. If my players are interested that is... no sense in altering something that works well unless people are actually interested in the change.
It covers the intent (allow characters to craft what they want/need to be better equipped) but does not disrupt Wealth By Level.[/i]
From the FAQs,
PC Wealth By Level (page 399): If a PC has an item crafting feat, does a crafted item count as its Price or its Cost?
It counts as the item's Cost, not the Price. This comes into play in two ways.If you're equipping a higher-level PC, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. Otherwise the character isn't getting any benefit for having the feat. Of course, the GM is free to set limits in equipping the character, such as "no more than 40% of your wealth can be used for armor" (instead of the "balanced approach" described on page 400 where the PC should spend no more than 25% on armor).
If you're looking at the party's overall wealth by level, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. Otherwise, if you counted crafted items at their Price, the crafting character would look like she had more wealth than appropriate for her level, and the GM would have to to bring this closer to the target gear value by reducing future treasure for that character, which means eventually that character has the same gear value as a non-crafting character--in effect neutralizing any advantage of having that feat at all.
So the intention really is to increase the character's effective Wealth By Level. That's okay, though. As I explain here, that only really nets the character an all around +1 to stats. This keeps each crafting feat's benefit pretty close to what you'd find from other feats, like Power Attack. (Of course, just like characters that are buying items straight up, they can choose to specialize into one or two stats and gain a higher bonus in exchange for other stats being effectively lower.)
I must have unfortunate luck with Crafting and WBL because whenever I play a crafting wizard I always end up well below WBL. I'm sure it has to do with crafting consumable items like scrolls, wands, potions, certain wondrous items, etc. Whenever I stop and add up the value of my stuff it's always behind. This is based on gaming with APs. I have yet to have a crafting character come out ahead in WBL even when charging a crafting fee to other players (switched over to bidding on who gets items first and whether they wanted me to craft their item before my own, since APs are time sensitive and we tend to not have a lot of time to craft). Maybe I'm just doing it wrong. Or maybe the DM is doing it right. I don't know, but either way I need more loot!
Cheers
WBL is a fact
WBL is a "fact" in PFS play where crafting is prohibited.
WBL is a vague notion that is used as a reasonable guideline by GMs outside of PFS. It is not a fixed immutable rule of play.
If my character decides he's done fighting with shield, and wants to switch to two handed weapons, and he hands his +3 shield to a party member, the WBL Gods do not Descend from The Outer Plane of WBLness to rip the shield from that players hands simply because his loot totals higher than his level should have.
WBL is not some sort of holy grail, nor sacred law. The idea of crafting at cost is bizarre and nonsensical (especially if magic items are to be traded). Just saying but, WBL isn't that special. The core rules say it's little more than a measure of expected wealth, and that the measure changes in high/low fantasy, and is based on the assumption of incoming treasure from adventures and such vs XP.
You can wildly deviate from WBL with no issues (it's been done many times), or go with feast or famine stretches. There's more likely to be issues being under-WBL than over, and unless the WBL is broken by a few very-high-priced items (like a level 3 with a +5 sword), it's not a big deal.
The salvage suggestion is certainly interesting, but it leads to an awkward realization that if the crafting cost is the full price, how does any merchant ever make money off their crafted items.
The only items they would ever make money on are their used goods.
It's like turning pathfinder into one big pawn shop.
It's pretty dang hard to sunder a +10 weapon.
Magic staff, though, not so hard.
My players already salvage magic items. How? Well, you are required to expend X gp worth of components when making magic items. So sometimes we just use treasure we found. Someone has a tiara worth 3,000 gp? Well, we just found a component for a magic item. Has nice flavor too. If it's a magic item (instead of a trade/good or art object, we use the item's material worth (cost to create) which happens to be the same value as if we had sold it and then crafted it.
Does it make a difference? No not really. Though it has a nice feel to craft magic items out of the very loot you find. :P
|
I'm just tossing out a proposal to address SS's discussion of the magic item rules. Perfect? Probably not. But Crafting's boon isn't necessarily financial, it's allowing one to craft exactly what they want rather than rely on the whim of random loot or what may be available in the local town. Want to specialize in halberds but the only magical weapon loot seems to be long swords? Crafting.
I'm also not proposing the "salvage" option be applied to all mundane crafting, only magic item crafting (and probably not for potions, scrolls, or wands). It very roughly builds in balance for PCs in adherence to the guidelines of wealth by level, that PCs are geared with some range of value of items in order to be ready to face challenges appropriate to their level.
It also takes away from the notion of "magic shops." The salvage notion might explain why the world isn't flooded with +1 Rings of Protection on every doorstep. Maybe a caster salvages several of them to make a more valuable ring.
It's pretty dang hard to sunder a +10 weapon.
Magic staff, though, not so hard.
Dispel magic.
Shatter/Sunder.Seriously. Equipment comes and equipment goes. My brother was playing an antipaladin with an adamantine sword and some mwk full plate. He was picking up the slivers off the ground later. "Oh man, now I need to find someone to fix this stuff."
I'm just tossing out a proposal to address SS's discussion of the magic item rules. Perfect? Probably not. But Crafting's boon isn't necessarily financial, it's allowing one to craft exactly what they want rather than rely on the whim of random loot or what may be available in the local town. Want to specialize in halberds but the only magical weapon loot seems to be long swords? Crafting.
What's amusing is that I pointed out the benefit of not being pressed into the whims of the dice gods by crafting in a thread concerning class X vs class Y, and some of the same people (can you guess who?) have argued that WBL wasn't very important, or that you're sure that you'll be able to get the items you want (when I brought up that you can't reliably buy high level magic items), etc.
It's kind of odd to hear hi-- I mean people -- disparaging the idea of WBL (for PCs or NPCs) as a mechanic in one thread, only for them to bash the entirety of the item creation system for allowing you variance from the usual WBL.
|
|
Whoever posted the House Rule of Crafting at 100% cost but allowing slot items to be "salvaged" at 100% value towards crafting got my attention.
WBL is a fact, as is the need for crafting. Whether one buys something crafted by another or does it himself, it's built in certain equipment is desired and unless you're playing 4E, you aren't going to find your "wish list" while adventuring. However, over time, crafters can exceed WBL. In the absurd example which no GM should allow, a character created with 10,000gp of equipment could opt to take cash only, then take that 10,000 and craft 20,000gp worth of magic items, double what his WBL says he should have.
Which is why I was intrigued by the house rule. Crafting costs market price (full cost), but you can "salvage" for crafting purposes similar slot items at full market price rather than selling them at 1/2 cost. So, a +1 short sword would basically be melted down and its energies converted to cover the cost of a +1 greatsword (less the cost of the masterwork greatsword in the first place). It covers the intent (allow characters to craft what they want/need to be better equipped) but does not disrupt Wealth By Level.
This rule would work great in some of my games because magic shops do not exist.
If crafting is nerfed to hell and back, and needs magic items to work, how do you get magic items to craft with?
It covers the intent (allow characters to craft what they want/need to be better equipped) but does not disrupt Wealth By Level.[/i]From the FAQs,
So the intention really is to increase the character's effective Wealth By Level. That's okay, though. As I explain here, that only really nets the character an all around +1 to stats. This keeps each crafting feat's benefit pretty close to what you'd find from other feats, like Power Attack. (Of course, just like characters that are buying items straight up, they can choose to specialize into one or two stats and gain a higher bonus in exchange for other stats being effectively lower.)PC Wealth By Level (page 399): If a PC has an item crafting feat, does a crafted item count as its Price or its Cost?
It counts as the item's Cost, not the Price. This comes into play in two ways.If you're equipping a higher-level PC, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. Otherwise the character isn't getting any benefit for having the feat. Of course, the GM is free to set limits in equipping the character, such as "no more than 40% of your wealth can be used for armor" (instead of the "balanced approach" described on page 400 where the PC should spend no more than 25% on armor).
If you're looking at the party's overall wealth by level, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. Otherwise, if you counted crafted items at their Price, the crafting character would look like she had more wealth than appropriate for her level, and the GM would have to to bring this closer to the target gear value by reducing future treasure for that character, which means eventually that character has the same gear value as a non-crafting character--in effect neutralizing any advantage of having that feat at all.
And as I noted in a later thread, that +1 is only at very low levels, and rapidly builds to become +2, or +3,or simply frees up a lot of money for versatility.
Remember that at all levels, the cheapest way to build something is through multiple low bonuses, not simply increasing the bonus on one item. Being able to afford 25k on a cloak of resistance is nice, being able to afford the cloak and Nat Armor +5 necklace is nicer, or you compare against +4 cloak and +3 necklace. At any pace, the discrepency starts increasing with levels, not decreasing.
--
The problem with 'selling gear' is that Spellcrafting is not given a value for the time of the caster. Seriously, someone making magic items should earn what every other Crafter does, no more, no less. So making magic items should be able to make you money, but not scads of it.
==Aelryinth
And as I noted in a later thread, that +1 is only at very low levels, and rapidly builds to become +2, or +3,or simply frees up a lot of money for versatility.
Remember that at all levels, the cheapest way to build something is through multiple low bonuses, not simply increasing the bonus on one item. Being able to afford 25k on a cloak of resistance is nice, being able to afford the cloak and Nat Armor +5 necklace is nicer, or you compare against +4 cloak and +3 necklace. At any pace, the discrepency starts increasing with levels, not decreasing.
Which later thread? I never saw anyone actually reply to the post I linked, or the original post quoted from the locked thread.
But yes, you're absolutely right that the cheapest way to build stats up is through multiple low bonuses. And as I showed in my link, spreading out your crafting wealth throughout the Big Six results in very small bonuses over the non-crafter. But even if you focus into one stat, it still works out okay because you're trading a bunch of other stats to do so.
But you don't focus over six stats.
You focus on 2, MAYBE 3.
The Ranger gets str +4. Ranger Crafter gets str and dex+4.
Ranger gets Con+4. Ranger Crafter gets Con+4 and Amulet/Nat Armor+4
Fighter gets armor+2. Ranger Crafter gets Armor and SHield +2.
The Ranger crafter is now +8 AC ahead of his companion, at the cost of two feats. It is always more significant to focus on one or two key areas, such as AC or saves, to gain an advantage, then spread things out everywhere. He has all the offense, but his defenses are way more then the other Ranger can emulate with two feats.
Alternatively, Ranger gets Armor +2, and Crafter Ranger gets Armor +2 and Boots of Striding, etc etc, giving him more versatility. Adding flying and other options is another thing crafters do with wondrous items.
==Aelryinth
You're not focusing on six stats ever. Big Six is usually considered Weapon, Armor, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Natural Armor, Stat belt/headband for primary stat, and Cloak of Resistance. Fully half of the Big Six are affecting AC, and any Dex based character hits it indirectly with a another.
So, from items you've listed...
Non-crafter: +4 Str (16000gp), +4 Con (24000g), +2 Armor (4000gp)
Crafter: +4 Str/Dex (40000gp), +4 Con (24000g), +4 Nat Armor (32000gp), +2 Armor (4000gp), +2 Shield (4000gp)
So, 44000gp spent for the non-crafter, and 104000gp effective (52000gp spent) for the crafter.
Yeah, of course it looks bad, you gave the crafter way more cash. For that extra 8000gp, lets have the non-crafter pick up an Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (2000gp), Ring of Protection +1 (2000gp), and +2 Shield (4000gp).
Crafter has +4 Str/Dex/Con, +8 AC.
Non-crafter has +4 Str/Dex, +6 AC.
So, the crafter is ahead by 4 Con and 2 AC. Not nearly as bad as you make it sound. In fact, the non-crafter actually ends up with a higher touch AC.
nothing is stopping him from crafting and charging commission.
how about a GM?
nothing is stopping him from crafting and charging commission.how about a GM?
How about your party. Seriously I've been at plenty of tables where if a mage wanted profit for the wizard crafting their items they'd lynch him in his sleep or fire him from the party. I'm not saying its the right way to do things but its pretty believable that the guys who keep your fragile butt alive when the situation gets ugly are expecting you to help them do their job as best they can. It is entirely believable that a party faced with a profitmonger mage would kick him to the curb, thank him for his services, lynch him in his sleep, or 'accidentally let a few buggers get through the line'... oops. sorry sir... cant win them all. A magic crafter who works with his party lasts a whole lot longer than a magic crafter who takes advantage of his party.
I may be wrong, here, but it seems to me that Shallowsoul is looking for a solely objective pricing mechanism, while also asking for magic item creation to be decoupled from wealth (so that crafters can't gain some advantage when measuring WBL), plus rules for environmental restrictions on crafting.
That last I can agree with: having a lab to craft in makes sense, but there are already rules for the impact of unfavourable conditions built into the existing crafting rules, and a simple extrapolation of those as a house rule is sufficient.
The first two are mutually contradictory. The game is built around expected wealth and the cost of items compared to that wealth. The character creation rules are built to expect crafters to craft. The discount rate can be argued, but the simple fact is that it is unreasonable to expect that the developers didn't know how crafting would effect the game.
The problem stems from custom items and the pricing thereof, and for that the guidance is clear: judge items against other items.
I personally don't see a problem with that, because it means I'm being treated as an intelligent individual when it comes to running my games, not someone tied to an incomprehensible (but very precise) pricing system.
I disagree on the "discount" aspect. I have always found it highly problematic to adjudicate since 3.0 and I've seen many, many threads complaining about the mechanic here and on the WotC boards.
Pathfinder is a legacy game built on the prior editions, just as 3.5 was built on 3.0. And since it has been only since 3.0 that player driven magic item crafting was introduced, it stands to reason that the mechanic was not handed down by Gygax himself, but built by his successors.
And I must ask, why does item crafting have to come at a discount? Its primary function should be to give players a chance to customize the magic item load-out of their characters. Making the feats the economically best choice is double-dipping and, IMO, not necessary. The discount should mostly be removed and replaced by easier and consolidated crafting rules. That would actually make the choice to take crafting feats a choice, instead of an "of course!" action.
|
|
How about your party. Seriously I've been at plenty of tables where if a mage wanted profit for the wizard crafting their items they'd lynch him in his sleep or fire him from the party. I'm not saying its the right way to do things but its pretty believable that the guys who keep your fragile butt alive when the situation gets ugly are expecting you to help them do their job as best they can. It is entirely believable that a party faced with a profitmonger mage would kick him to the curb, thank him for his services, lynch him in his sleep, or 'accidentally let a few buggers get through the line'... oops. sorry sir... cant win them all. A magic crafter who works with his party lasts a whole lot longer than a magic crafter who takes advantage of his party.nothing is stopping him from crafting and charging commission.how about a GM?
I've already addressed this argument.
Whoever posted the House Rule of Crafting at 100% cost but allowing slot items to be "salvaged" at 100% value towards crafting got my attention.
WBL is a fact, as is the need for crafting. Whether one buys something crafted by another or does it himself, it's built in certain equipment is desired and unless you're playing 4E, you aren't going to find your "wish list" while adventuring. However, over time, crafters can exceed WBL. In the absurd example which no GM should allow, a character created with 10,000gp of equipment could opt to take cash only, then take that 10,000 and craft 20,000gp worth of magic items, double what his WBL says he should have.
Which is why I was intrigued by the house rule. Crafting costs market price (full cost), but you can "salvage" for crafting purposes similar slot items at full market price rather than selling them at 1/2 cost. So, a +1 short sword would basically be melted down and its energies converted to cover the cost of a +1 greatsword (less the cost of the masterwork greatsword in the first place). It covers the intent (allow characters to craft what they want/need to be better equipped) but does not disrupt Wealth By Level.
I can't talk about homebrewn games, of course, but the WBL handed out in an AP seems to be, after careful combing of two APs, 120% of what a four PC party should get, and that is calculated with every magic item being sold at 50% market price. Parties which keep magic items have even more WBL, although that could be somewhat balanced by some parties not finding/getting all possible loot.
So that houserule would pump even more money into the game. It sounds pretty good for homebrewn games, though.
|
|
I may be wrong, here, but it seems to me that Shallowsoul is looking for a solely objective pricing mechanism, while also asking for magic item creation to be decoupled from wealth (so that crafters can't gain some advantage when measuring WBL), plus rules for environmental restrictions on crafting.
That last I can agree with: having a lab to craft in makes sense, but there are already rules for the impact of unfavourable conditions built into the existing crafting rules, and a simple extrapolation of those as a house rule is sufficient.
The first two are mutually contradictory. The game is built around expected wealth and the cost of items compared to that wealth. The character creation rules are built to expect crafters to craft. The discount rate can be argued, but the simple fact is that it is unreasonable to expect that the developers didn't know how crafting would effect the game.
The problem stems from custom items and the pricing thereof, and for that the guidance is clear: judge items against other items.
I personally don't see a problem with that, because it means I'm being treated as an intelligent individual when it comes to running my games, not someone tied to an incomprehensible (but very precise) pricing system.
I disagree on the "discount" aspect. I have always found it highly problematic to adjudicate since 3.0 and I've seen many, many threads complaining about the mechanic here and on the WotC boards.
Pathfinder is a legacy game built on the prior editions, just as 3.5 was built on 3.0. And since it has been only since 3.0 that player driven magic item crafting was introduced, it stands to reason that the mechanic was not handed down by Gygax himself, but built by his successors.
And I must ask, why does item crafting have to come at a discount? Its primary function should be to give players a chance to customize the magic item load-out of their characters. Making the feats the economically best choice is double-dipping and, IMO, not necessary....
The problem is they have made it too easy and they have encouraged magic marts too much. The lure of magic items used to be the items themselves and their availability. "Oh the shopkeeper only has this selection. Well thats okay I will just go and make it". 3rd edition pushed the idea of city sizes having shops that would give you access to XYZ, so to make crafring seem worth it, they drop it to half cost.
In my games, where magic item shops don't exist, charging full market value is okay because the benefit is not in its reduced price, but in the fact that you get to have access to what you want via creation.
The idea of crafting at cost is bizarre and nonsensical (especially if magic items are to be traded).
It may be weird and nonsensical for you, because you have been trained to expect to hop into a gold mine when taking a magic item crafting feat, but it definitely is possible for magic item crafting to be profitable even if you take crafting price = 95% market price ( which is what I do in one of my games and it works out very good ).
Players just are so used to bandying tens of thousands of gold pieces around that they completely forget that even having an income of 50-100 GP per day is fantastically much for non-adventurers.
How about your party. Seriously I've been at plenty of tables where if a mage wanted profit for the wizard crafting their items they'd lynch him in his sleep or fire him from the party. I'm not saying its the right way to do things but its pretty believable that the guys who keep your fragile butt alive when the situation gets ugly are expecting you to help them do their job as best they can. It is entirely believable that a party faced with a profitmonger mage would kick him to the curb, thank him for his services, lynch him in his sleep, or 'accidentally let a few buggers get through the line'... oops. sorry sir... cant win them all. A magic crafter who works with his party lasts a whole lot longer than a magic crafter who takes advantage of his party.nothing is stopping him from crafting and charging commission.how about a GM?
So, your players expect the crafter to be the party slave, huh?
The problem is they have made it too easy and they have encouraged magic marts too much. The lure of magic items used to be the items themselves and their availability. "Oh the shopkeeper only has this selection. Well thats okay I will just go and make it". 3rd edition pushed the idea of city sizes having shops that would give you access to XYZ, so to make crafring seem worth it, they drop it to half cost.
In my games, where magic item shops don't exist, charging full market value is okay because the benefit is not in its reduced price, but in the fact that you get to have access to what you want via creation.
I must disagree here. While I also find magic item marts to be lame, I think that making a Gather Information/Knowledge Local check, spending a few days searching should yield results in finding someone who has what you need as a heirloom ( or something in that vein ).
Magic item crafting is something which I find is good for the game, since players want to have some control of their destiny and playstyle. However, I take exception to it being double-good with the discount it gets you in terms of WBL, not to mention all the meta-game problems which arise from this. Which, of course, seem to heavily depend on wether a GM feels that WBL breaking is a problem. Which obviously not everyone seems to do, but I'd rather remove this factor entirely rather than leaving it up to a particular GMs system mastery to do that job.
|
|
The problem is they have made it too easy and they have encouraged magic marts too much. The lure of magic items used to be the items themselves and their availability. "Oh the shopkeeper only has this selection. Well thats okay I will just go and make it". 3rd edition pushed the idea of city sizes having shops that would give you access to XYZ, so to make crafring seem worth it, they drop it to half cost.
In my games, where magic item shops don't exist, charging full market value is okay because the benefit is not in its reduced price, but in the fact that you get to have access to what you want via creation.
I must disagree here. While I also find magic item marts to be lame, I think that making a Gather Information/Knowledge Local check, spending a few days searching should yield results in finding someone who has what you need as a heirloom ( or something in that vein ).
Magic item crafting is something which I find is good for the game, since players want to have some control of their destiny and playstyle. However, I take exception to it being double-good with the discount it gets you in terms of WBL, not to mention all the meta-game problems which arise from this. Which, of course, seem to heavily depend on wether a GM feels that WBL breaking is a problem. Which obviously not everyone seems to do, but I'd rather remove this factor entirely rather than leaving it up to a particular GMs system mastery to do that job.
You can't always expect a family to give up a family heirloom by selling it. I add a bit of reality to my games, each campaign and the events that go on are not always exceptions to the norm because the PCs are either the heroes or whatever.
If I present a magic item or two into a city and you do your research then you may find it but if there just simply aren't magic items in the city then a 100 on your Gather Info would still result in finding nothing.
...I may be wrong, here, but it seems to me that Shallowsoul is looking for a solely objective pricing mechanism, while also asking for magic item creation to be decoupled from wealth (so that crafters can't gain some advantage when measuring WBL), plus rules for environmental restrictions on crafting.
That last I can agree with: having a lab to craft in makes sense, but there are already rules for the impact of unfavourable conditions built into the existing crafting rules, and a simple extrapolation of those as a house rule is sufficient.
The first two are mutually contradictory. The game is built around expected wealth and the cost of items compared to that wealth. The character creation rules are built to expect crafters to craft. The discount rate can be argued, but the simple fact is that it is unreasonable to expect that the developers didn't know how crafting would effect the game.
The problem stems from custom items and the pricing thereof, and for that the guidance is clear: judge items against other items.
I personally don't see a problem with that, because it means I'm being treated as an intelligent individual when it comes to running my games, not someone tied to an incomprehensible (but very precise) pricing system.
I disagree on the "discount" aspect. I have always found it highly problematic to adjudicate since 3.0 and I've seen many, many threads complaining about the mechanic here and on the WotC boards.
Pathfinder is a legacy game built on the prior editions, just as 3.5 was built on 3.0. And since it has been only since 3.0 that player driven magic item crafting was introduced, it stands to reason that the mechanic was not handed down by Gygax himself, but built by his successors.
And I must ask, why does item crafting have to come at a discount? Its primary function should be to give players a chance to customize the magic item load-out of their characters. Making the feats the economically best choice is
Ah, now we're on to something a little different.
To answer the discount question, since it's come up before: sell at 50%, craft at the same. It could be argued that treasure in the form of gold and other trade goods (gems and jewellery, in particular) are what throws the balance off, since without those all you are doing is trading items of one type for a different item that you want at exactly the same price.
And, you will note, that except for in terms of creating higher level characters (whereby crafters do actually get a discount) if the GM hands out treasure during an organic adventure/campaign such that the party earn WBL, having a crafter in the party does nothing at all to increase it. At best they break even to WBL.
Now, the game itself necessitating certain item types (generally weapon enhancement bonuses for overcoming DR) is yet another issue, since that effectively requires that there be some way to tailor what items the players have. The "magic mart" concept may harm verisimilitude, but that just means a GM has to come up with some other way to convert items found into the ones players want. Most easily done by handing them out in the first place.
Ah, now we're on to something a little different.
To answer the discount question, since it's come up before: sell at 50%, craft at the same. It could be argued that treasure in the form of gold and other trade goods (gems and jewellery, in particular) are what throws the balance off, since without those all you are doing is trading items of one type for a different item that you want at exactly the same price.
And, you will note, that except for in terms of creating higher level characters (whereby crafters do actually get a discount) if the GM hands out treasure during an organic adventure/campaign such that the party earn WBL, having a crafter in the party does nothing at all to increase it. At best they break even to WBL.
Now, the game itself necessitating certain item types (generally weapon enhancement bonuses for overcoming DR) is yet another issue, since that effectively requires that there be some way to tailor what items the players have. The "magic mart" concept may harm verisimilitude, but that just means a GM has to come up with some other way to convert items found into the ones players want. Most easily done by handing them out in the first place.
We must make a stark distinction here between homebrewn campaigns and published APs. Homebrewn of course allows GMs to adjudicate distribution of wealth according to how things are going. APs, if run as they are published, give out quite a bit more WBL than expected for a four PC party, assuming that all magic items are sold.
My question is, why is there a need for a huge discount in the first place? It only serves to make the crafting feats doubly attractive, especially to power gamers, and creates a huge load of problems on a macro- and micro-scale.
Mostly removing that discount would open the way to make the crafting rules actually more player character friendly, in ways like consolidating crafting feats or shortening crafting times ( in terms of hours per day crafting and GP crafted per day ).
When GMing I simulate real economy when looking at a magic market:
- Items that can be crafted quickly (most minor items) will be stockpiled in the mages spare time for sale in the magic shop.
- Expensive but not overly powerful items will be held in periodic auctions or can be commissioned from local crafters. (most medium items)
- Powerful items are rarely parted with and finding a crafter this skilled may be impossible. They can't be bought unless you have special contacts and even then you may have to wait a considerable time and pay exorbitant fees. (most major items)
If I am playing a crafter It is all negotiable. If you treat me poorly you don't get items made at all. If my LG crafter WANTS the paladin to have a Holy Avenger I will make it at or near cost. As obviously I feel it is vital to the groups success. But the CE Rogue may end up paying double or more for stuff if we caught him stealing. It's all role playing.
Actually, every third level Wizard with Craft Wondrous Item and Skill Focus: Spellcraft can craft most items with a take ten check.
Three Ranks + INT 16 + Skill Focus + Class Skill = +12 Spellcraft, meaning with a take ten he can reach a DC 22 check. That translates to being able to craft things up to caster level 17 or 12 when not having one prerequisite.
I'm not particularly wedded to the discount at 50%, I must admit. To my thinking, there's functionally zero difference between crafting at 100% of price and the GM handing out 100% useful items. For every % drop in useful items handed out, the average treasure needs increasing, and the crafting cost can be reduced by half that rate. Since the rules already include "sell at 50%", it is effectively assuming that the players are receiving 100% random (and therefore potentially useless) items, are selling them at 50% and crafting useful items at 50%.
If the GM goes out of his way to hand out useless items, he must hand out twice as much treasure in non-trade items to maintain WBL.
Of course, this ignores the fact that some treasure will include trade items, such as coins, gems and jewellery. A GM building effective treasures will compensate in whatever direction is required to account for trade items, sellable items and crafting.
In short, a GM doing his job handing out treasure is already working at preventing abuses of the crafting system by ensuring that the party has the correct amount of effective wealth (wealth that can be turned into usable items).
The other side of the coin is with regard to custom items, which are already optional, with guidelines in place for equating their value to existing items. Any system which effectively allows for fully balanced custom items will be, by necessity, extremely complex. It is certainly possible (I direct the reader to Hero System for a good example of a system which is balanced around 1 point being always as effective as any other point), but always requires GM oversight. Always. It is an inescapable result of the maths that while it is trivial to make a set of benefits where 1000gp is as good as any other 1000gp, each and every additional benefit you tack onto the system exponentially increases the options for that 1000gp and without intelligent oversight the system will break. I can't say when, but it will.
A GM is necessary for a system this complex, otherwise the maths becomes WAY too complex to be usable in any meaningful way.
So, your players expect the crafter to be the party slave, huh?
No, as a player, I would expect him to be my boon companion and partner and we would both use our abilities to work to prepare and survive dangerous environments for mutual benefit.
Anything less and why the hell am I adventuring with him in the first place?
APs already circumvent that by giving out a pretty exact 120% WBL after selling everything, i.e. they already seem to assume that players will prefer crafting to just using whatever they find.
Removing the profit factor from magic item crafting would of course require some rebalancing in how much wealth is handed out, but it would eliminate a host of problems the profitability factor raises.
So, your players expect the crafter to be the party slave, huh?No, as a player, I would expect him to be my boon companion and partner and we would both use our abilities to work to prepare and survive dangerous environments for mutual benefit.
Anything less and why the hell am I adventuring with him in the first place?
So I guess he would be a lesser partner if had chosen a feat which purely benefits himself, like Spell Focus or somesuch, huh?
They may also assume a party won't find all of the treasure and that some of it will disappear as consumables.APs already circumvent that by giving out a pretty exact 120% WBL after selling everything, i.e. they already seem to assume that players will prefer crafting to just using whatever they find.
Removing the profit factor from magic item crafting would of course require some rebalancing in how much wealth is handed out, but it would eliminate a host of problems the profitability factor raises.
Well, as I said it's 120% WBL, so I guess that would cover that eventuality. As for consumables, as far as I know they fall under being part of WBL, not extra expenditures.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No. Such a feat directly benefits the whole group while adventuring.
It's assumed that the party will cooperate for their own success while in the field. This may include such things as healing other party members rather than saving heals for yourself, blocking monsters and taking attacks to protect the more vulnerable so they can get battle winning spells off, etc.
Why is it assumed that such cooperation should end the moment they get back to town? Is the crafter wizard really better off charging his companions more so that he is much stronger and they much weaker if he's going to rely on them in battles to come?
Shouldn't the cooperation they rely on in the field apply to preparing for the expedition as well?
The point I am trying to make is that, just because the party crafter took a crafting feat, it doesn't mean that his free time suddenly belongs to the whole party. It is a quite bizarre point of view that, by taking a crafting feat, the crafter agrees to completely give up his own time to craft for everybody.
As much as I personally disagree with SKRs FAQ entry that crafters are only supposed to craft for themselves, it at least doesn't share this bizarre super-communism view. Yeah, the crafter is helping out his buddies by making himself a better player by taking this feat. I don't see any good reason why he suddenly is obligated to drop all his free time into making free stuff for all the rest of the party.
Well, as I said it's 120% WBL, so I guess that would cover that eventuality. As for consumables, as far as I know they fall under being part of WBL, not extra expenditures.It's debatable. I think the devs have said they expect WBL to be roughly where characters are at any given time, not a measure of how much they've found. This is supported by guidelines of giving new characters WBL.
Therefore any of that wealth spent on already used consumables is expected to be made up with future income, so that the value of the gear you have at the moment matches what's expected.
Similarly, if you sell your found loot (at 50%), buy a +1 sword (at 100%), and then later sell that +1 sword (at 50%) and buy a +2 version, although you'd lose money on the trade, you're still expected to find loot to make up the difference, at least in the long run.
While I see why the developers would want to set such a standard, this kinda opens a whole new level of meta-gaming, where groups can basically binge themselves on consumables and the GM is supposed to make up for the difference.