Is Craft really that slow?


Rules Questions

201 to 250 of 350 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Expensive to kill, yes. Having kept your trade monopoly going, and familes fed? Priceless.

And hey, if the assassin wants to keep all your goodies, too, we can probably cut a deal.

It would not suprise me in the slightest that using Fabricate to produce goods for sale would be outlawed in any civilized kingdom if even a whiff of this kind of economic abuse was actually possible.

I mean, seriously, you can't cast a Heroes Feast or Magnificent Mansion in any major city in Eberron for cash unless the local Halfling Family Guild gets its cut, or even allows you. Trying to use Fabricate to run Cannith artificers and forgers out of buisiness? You're a dead man.

It's just what people would do. Either get the law on their side, or take law into their own hands. Someone will be happy to get rid of the wizard, by one means or another.

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:

Expensive to kill, yes. Having kept your trade monopoly going, and familes fed? Priceless.

And hey, if the assassin wants to keep all your goodies, too, we can probably cut a deal.

It would not suprise me in the slightest that using Fabricate to produce goods for sale would be outlawed in any civilized kingdom if even a whiff of this kind of economic abuse was actually possible.

I mean, seriously, you can't cast a Heroes Feast or Magnificent Mansion in any major city in Eberron for cash unless the local Halfling Family Guild gets its cut, or even allows you. Trying to use Fabricate to run Cannith artificers and forgers out of buisiness? You're a dead man.

It's just what people would do. Either get the law on their side, or take law into their own hands. Someone will be happy to get rid of the wizard, by one means or another.

==Aelryinth

Be willing to try...perhaps. The wizard counter-offers...doubling the offer of the now-peasants...

You see, I've argued this sort of issue on a political BBS...for years, now...having an understanding of how things work in the real world...in the modern-day USA to back me on it. Occupy Wall Street vs Wall Street, anybody?


EldonG wrote:
Nosferatu wrote:
EldonG wrote:

So, by RAW, every world should be Ebberon, then.

RAI?

Maybe not.

stuff

I see, either refuse to think it through...or be incapable.

Good answer.

Sarcasm no bueno. Let me try something different; what do you want Fabricate to do?

(Edit: sorry, I meant to ask "what is it you don't want Fabricate to do?", because Aelryinth already answered what he thought was wrong.)

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

EldonG wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Expensive to kill, yes. Having kept your trade monopoly going, and familes fed? Priceless.

And hey, if the assassin wants to keep all your goodies, too, we can probably cut a deal.

It would not suprise me in the slightest that using Fabricate to produce goods for sale would be outlawed in any civilized kingdom if even a whiff of this kind of economic abuse was actually possible.

I mean, seriously, you can't cast a Heroes Feast or Magnificent Mansion in any major city in Eberron for cash unless the local Halfling Family Guild gets its cut, or even allows you. Trying to use Fabricate to run Cannith artificers and forgers out of buisiness? You're a dead man.

It's just what people would do. Either get the law on their side, or take law into their own hands. Someone will be happy to get rid of the wizard, by one means or another.

==Aelryinth

Be willing to try...perhaps. The wizard counter-offers...doubling the offer of the now-peasants...

You see, I've argued this sort of issue on a political BBS...for years, now...having an understanding of how things work in the real world...in the modern-day USA to back me on it. Occupy Wall Street vs Wall Street, anybody?

Our modern world doesn't have magic or the individualism that comes with it.

The trade guilds aren't peasants - that's the lowest of low unions. THe wizards will concentrate on high value goods and leave the dross to the tradesmen. But guess what? As long as you've got enough business, you make the same amount of money making 2 gp pots and pans as you do making 1500 gp armor...you just aren't assured of making that money for a solid month the way you are with the armor.

And Trade guilds aren't poor. You get a bunch of people pooling funds, and suddenly money is in motion. And if they can get their money out of the dead by selling off their magic items, more power to it.

A better analogy for Trade guilds would be: docters, lawyers, farmers, butchers, bakers, clothiers, shoemakers, auto mechanics, taxi drivers, plumbers, electricians, policeman and painters vs Wall Street.

Who do you think would come out on top of THAT? well, historically, that's exactly what it was like.

heck, most political games and books, even with magic involved, come down to the fact that money is power, and even magic will bow to it in a civilized realm, if it lines up against you...the money will simply buy magic to oppose the magic. You get on the wrong side of a trade guild, and you might have to result to bloodshed to get things done, and having a guild walk off the job means that other guilds, fearing for their own livelihoods, will also walk off the job. Everything shuts down.

That level of solidarity is historically accurate. When the rich thought they could get away with not paying, an entire city could wind up paralyzed until their demands were met.

Today? In america and the world, labor and trade guilds (except the AMA and the Bar) are not in the same place they once were, I'll agree with that.

If you think they can't still be very influential, well, I'd say you are mistaken. The right wing is rife with all sorts of conspiracies with the unions out there. And most campaigns kind of assume unions and guilds are around and not weak, in a properly medieval manner. For some reason, they do tend to overlook the medical and legal professions, who defend their own turf FEROCIOUSLY...and those are very definitely trade guilds.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Nosferatu wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Nosferatu wrote:
EldonG wrote:

So, by RAW, every world should be Ebberon, then.

RAI?

Maybe not.

stuff

I see, either refuse to think it through...or be incapable.

Good answer.

Sarcasm no bueno. Let me try something different; what do you want Fabricate to do?

(Edit: sorry, I meant to ask "what is it you don't want Fabricate to do?", because Aelryinth already answered what he thought was wrong.)

trying to control Fabricate with pure economics doesn't work without getting into politics. Fabricate is about production potential. The wizard's production will match the supply. It's the people/smiths/etc below him who will suffer, unless they result to non-econmic means of competition...i.e run him out with the law/public pressure, or kill him.

The guilds could try to monopolize supply, of course, but all that does is make sure the wizard gets the people paying for his services on his side...after all, they want their armor now, not in 30 days. Trying to stand in the way of this kind of progress has doomed a lot of jobs in our current day.

if getting stuff somewhere quick wasn't important,and catering to the now, we would still be driving horse and buggies, the pony express would deliver mail coast to coast, and we'd light signal fires to communicate over long open distances. Paying customers talk.

===Aelryinth


I've got to say, if fabricate breaks economies what about Masterwork Transformation + False focus (buy 100gp focus)? Buy one 16 sling stones 1sp 6cp and make 96gp worth of mastercraft ammo. Even if you sell for 1/2, you just made 48gp with a second level spell. Of course, once you can get fabricate(artifice) you can do both for even more cash.

Clerics can put a wizard out of work...

Liberty's Edge

Nosferatu wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Nosferatu wrote:
EldonG wrote:

So, by RAW, every world should be Ebberon, then.

RAI?

Maybe not.

stuff

I see, either refuse to think it through...or be incapable.

Good answer.

Sarcasm no bueno. Let me try something different; what do you want Fabricate to do?

(Edit: sorry, I meant to ask "what is it you don't want Fabricate to do?", because Aelryinth already answered what he thought was wrong.)

It wasn't really sarcasm. That's what you suggested...that you just shouldn't think it through...that the game wasn't about that, so it should just be ignored...so...either don't think it through, or simply don't understand it. If that works for you, it's a good answer. It doesn't work for me, though, being completely capable, and embracing that sort of basic logic as a part of good scenario design.

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Expensive to kill, yes. Having kept your trade monopoly going, and familes fed? Priceless.

And hey, if the assassin wants to keep all your goodies, too, we can probably cut a deal.

It would not suprise me in the slightest that using Fabricate to produce goods for sale would be outlawed in any civilized kingdom if even a whiff of this kind of economic abuse was actually possible.

I mean, seriously, you can't cast a Heroes Feast or Magnificent Mansion in any major city in Eberron for cash unless the local Halfling Family Guild gets its cut, or even allows you. Trying to use Fabricate to run Cannith artificers and forgers out of buisiness? You're a dead man.

It's just what people would do. Either get the law on their side, or take law into their own hands. Someone will be happy to get rid of the wizard, by one means or another.

==Aelryinth

Be willing to try...perhaps. The wizard counter-offers...doubling the offer of the now-peasants...

You see, I've argued this sort of issue on a political BBS...for years, now...having an understanding of how things work in the real world...in the modern-day USA to back me on it. Occupy Wall Street vs Wall Street, anybody?

Our modern world doesn't have magic or the individualism that comes with it.

The trade guilds aren't peasants - that's the lowest of low unions. THe wizards will concentrate on high value goods and leave the dross to the tradesmen. But guess what? As long as you've got enough business, you make the same amount of money making 2 gp pots and pans as you do making 1500 gp armor...you just aren't assured of making that money for a solid month the way you are with the armor.

And Trade guilds aren't poor. You get a bunch of people pooling funds, and suddenly money is in motion. And if they can get their money out of the dead by selling off their magic items, more power to it.

A better analogy for Trade guilds would be: docters, lawyers, farmers, butchers, bakers, clothiers,...

I understand where you're coming from, but mundane guilds would pale in the face of a group of wizards with every advantage of those guilds...astounding intelligence...and magic with few limitations.

I really do enjoy your points...but I'm pretty sure a determined group of wizards...in a world where magic is the ultimate answer...will overcome all of those objections, as if by magic. :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you're stating that a spell is broken, I think you have to prove that through analysis of the spell, versus the other options to achieve the same goal. We did that. The conclusion was that Fabricate's description wasn't plainly explicit on 1. if it could create masterwork items, 2. if it could create non-magical items in the Magic Items list, and 3. That material quality referred to cost of the raw material (which, as per item creation, should be equal to the cost of 1/2 the market price of the item created), but with these factors unclear, it is neither broken nor balanced, hinging upon the truth behind our interpretations.
Nonetheless, it's also observed that it has suggestive answers, which most people would rationally lean towards; that masterwork is possible (and makes no real difference to your argument against it, by itself), and that there is no profit involved in this undertaking, but time, however, the possible fabrication of non-magical Magic Items are likely not possible, including the production of holy water, which is irrelevant, because they're produced by another spell, instead. Pretty safe to say that Fabricate wasn't intended to make anything, but a sufficiently large number of things, such that problems that came up with the crafting system were hot-fixed, such as the case where going from medium to heavy armour required several weeks of downtime, if the player wished to craft their own new piece. Given this interpretation (and that's largely my main contingency), the spell is great, and a really great choice, but not broken, as there's still niches for the Craft skill that cannot be replicated by the skill.

There's a couple arguments as to which interpretation you're siding on.

If the argument is "why punish the player for doing something that the spell states?" then you have a symptom of a problem. A player is doing something you don't want to happen, BUT the rules allow it. Part of the problem is that you see something that makes it undesirable. So if the rules allow it, we have to ask, both, 'why you don't want it?', and 'why the rules allow it?', and the answers should help fix the real problem.

Why you don't want it?
Earlier you said something along the lines of "because Fabricate lets you go through a process for pure profit", and that's something I wouldn't have come to the conclusion to, because there's a suggestive wording that seems to imply the opposite; there is no profit from my perspective (I'm referring to the very awkwardly writ statement "The quality of items made by this spell is commensurate with the quality of material used as the basis for the new fabrication"). However, it stands to explain your issue (or at least, partly) with it. Another would be the ease of creating FP out of Adamantine or like expensive material, with relative ease. If there are other issues, would you state them?

Why the rules allow it?
All I see is a spell that makes money, material and trade goods isomorphic to any item (and not a creature) that isn't a 'Magic Item', in six seconds, versus six months. I ask you this, is there anything wrong with a spell that, if it were more explicitly stated to simply function as I am interpreting it? Honestly, I think this paragraph could replace the spell description, but I'm interested in forum's opinion and if there anything in the spell's description that explicitly suggests otherwise from my perspective.

My point is that leaning either way on what it does, without the description explicitly stating something - but vaguely suggesting it - still requires RAI either way (it doesn't say MW /cannot/ be created, for example), and your interpretation has the liberty to accommodate the spell's intention based on what's made available, to it's best effect, just as much as mine did. The addition of a spell that allows players to skip a tedious and undesirable process isn't a bad thing - its quite the opposite!

However, if you're pointing out that the spell disturbs the positive metagame, then economics and interpretations aren't the answer: it's human motivation and the rationale of the players. Having said that, the motivation is a balance of character profit, versus the motivation towards fair play, and using the spell as it was likely intended is an option every player has, just as much as abusing the lack of explicit terms, simply because they can. Anyone trying to create adamantine FP out of a small nugget of Adamantine (~with a value of significant disparity), is most certainly trying to abuse it, and my example with the Darkwood buckler is that there's precedence for why a nonmagical Magic Item would not qualify to be fabricated; because it's made from a magical material.


Aelryinth wrote:

A suit of masterwork adamantine plate is 16,500 gp (oops on the 13,500). 1/3 material cost = 5,500 gp. Sell at 1/2 == 8,250 gp.

net profit= 2,750 gp PER SPELL by a 9th level wizard who can arrange for a +10 to his Craft Armor skill, likely by putting on a +2 Headband with the Skill inset.

He will complete 68 suits in the time it takes a 20th level awesomely skilled smith to make 1, and if he only sells at half price to a middle-man instead of putting his suits out for bid, he will make 187,000 gp during the same time period.

Yeah, I think not.

And unfortunately there's no rules for economic shortages in the basic game. If you're willing to fork over the money, someone somewhere is going to dig the ore out of the ground and get it to you.

==Aelryinth

There are rules for purchasing Magic items which can be adapted to purchasing high value raw materials such as adamantine. These state that a Metropolis (The largest settlement type) has a 75% chance of having up to 16,000 gp base price stuff. At 5,500gp per item, thats 2 items. If there are no items left, you have to wait a week and try again.

So, a Maximum of 2 per week, with 75% chance of none at all. That's an average of 1.5 per week. During the 68 day period required for mundane crafting, thats 14 items, a lot lower than the 68 you suggest.

Then there is the problem of finding a buyer. The suggestion is that there is a limit of 100,000 gp available for purchasing in a Metropolis. That means that there is enough to buy 6 sets. Interpreting what that means is highly subjective; is it 100,000 gp Period; is it 100,000gp per week, etc. For the sake of the economy I would rule that that is all that is available until stuff gets sold, but some ruling would have to be made as to how many suits would be sold in that period. It being such an expensive item, I would say very few. A seller would probably expect to hold on to such an item for several weeks before he finds a buyer. Even in todays modern economy, most goods have a shelf life of months or even years (perishables aside).

Given the amount of time required to craft as 68 days, and the number of crafters undertaking such a product, I would estimate that demand would be approximately 1/month max. (it's highly subjective, I know; based mostly on gut feeling that only about 4 crafters in a city would be willing to undertake such a project and they would not be doing it continually). Also you have to factor in the security factor; crafters willing to hold 5500gp worth of materials in their workshop for over 2 months would have to invest heavily in security to prevent thieves stealing it. How many would want to do that when they can craft as much value of small stuff for the same potential profit, a better chance of sale (higher demand) and a much lower material cost (with commensurate lower security costs)).

In fact, given the security cost, I would submit that possibly only a wizard uasing fabricate would be willing to craft such a product. The security cost goes ditto for the middleman - why deal in high end low demand stuff when for a fraction of the security cost and the same base profit you could sell lower value stuff? Given that why would anyone want to buy your dwarven plate? Unless you line up a special buyer, you would probably not be able to sell it.

Again, highly subjective, but you get my drift.

Liberty's Edge

People that want top end armor seek out those that can provide it. It's not a matter of how many can he sell, it's a matter of how many customers come knocking at the door...and when it's between the craftsman who will take 6 mos to craft it or the wizard who will hand it over with your custom requirements in under a minute, guess who gets the business?

In fact, if you live a month's travel time away, and hear of it, a month is damn little time to be able to walk out wearing it...especially when it still takes the other guy 6 months.

Forget metropolis. How many can be sold to the 20 surrounding kingdoms?

Liberty's Edge

...but that's not all. If you corner the market on adamantite, you make all the medium armor, and shields, and weapons there are to be made...and then there's mithral...not quite the same profit, but still significant...


EldonG wrote:
Avh wrote:

[... re SKR's post]

He says EXPLICITLY that you can create masterwork [for the quality] swords [you can even create more than one with each casting].
...but not as an official statement.

Are you saying he forgot to put on the funny hat before typing?

Because I don't think we have any kind of formal distinction between designer explanations of the rules and Official Statements here, and what he says isn't just that he personally rules that way, but that there's nothing to suggest otherwise.

Unless you have something a lot more compelling, I'm going to assume that SKR's understanding of RAI and RAW is pretty decent, and that the obvious answer is that of course you can make masterwork items with Fabricate.

My thought on the "make a craft check" thing vs. the separate "craft the item" and "craft the masterwork component" thing is: The separate checks are if you are using the craft skill to craft an item. But with Fabricate, you're not. You're using magic to make an item. The craft skill check is needed only if you need to achieve a given standard of work beyond "roughly the shape I intended". So, yes, of course you can make masterwork items with it, just like the man said.

Liberty's Edge

seebs wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Avh wrote:

[... re SKR's post]

He says EXPLICITLY that you can create masterwork [for the quality] swords [you can even create more than one with each casting].
...but not as an official statement.

Are you saying he forgot to put on the funny hat before typing?

Because I don't think we have any kind of formal distinction between designer explanations of the rules and Official Statements here, and what he says isn't just that he personally rules that way, but that there's nothing to suggest otherwise.

Unless you have something a lot more compelling, I'm going to assume that SKR's understanding of RAI and RAW is pretty decent, and that the obvious answer is that of course you can make masterwork items with Fabricate.

My thought on the "make a craft check" thing vs. the separate "craft the item" and "craft the masterwork component" thing is: The separate checks are if you are using the craft skill to craft an item. But with Fabricate, you're not. You're using magic to make an item. The craft skill check is needed only if you need to achieve a given standard of work beyond "roughly the shape I intended". So, yes, of course you can make masterwork items with it, just like the man said.

...and I still want to know why wizards don't hold an absolute monopoly.


Because the game isn't an economic simulator.

Liberty's Edge

Aureate wrote:
Because the game isn't an economic simulator.

And?

Immersion only works if there's some sort of internal logic to the world.

Get it?


I get what you are saying. The problem is that there are a great number of other issues to consider. Like why are there dungeons left to plunder?

I see no reason to stop and pick at high level magic when the whole premise of having adventurers is usually ludicrous to begin with.

That said, I would be interested in a world that addressed those concerns. But this forum is about rules and the rules allow fabricate to make things.

The economic meltdown might even be fun to roleplay. If you don't like the spell, then don't allow it in games you run. Or houserule that there are no buyers for the "magically crafted goods".


Aelryinth wrote:

The ability to do days and days of highly skilled labor in an instant and turn it into pure monetary gain is what is broken with Fabricate. There is no cost to the spell other then raw material.

Are the crafting rules borked too? Yeah. But Fabricate is definitely not guilt-free here.

==Aelryinth

S as a house rule if you want just add some variety of additional material component cost to fabricate to compensate and call it a day.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

A Fabricate spell also creates only one item, so you couldn't create multiple sculptures.

But the idea is to make valuable items out of standard goods. I admit I'm kind of wondering how full plate has 300 gp more of raw materials then plate mail, but still...

So, yes, Fabricate is broken on its face, but at least you can't make masterwork with it.

===Aelryinth

It's easy to make multiple items with fabricate. You just separate them into multiples after casting. It positively amazes me how so many supposedly intelligent wizards can't even seem to think outside the box.

The Exchange

wizards can break the system, sure. but high-level wizards are somewhat rare in-setting, and only a limited number of them have access to the spells needed to break the system.

from this small subset of wizards, you get a few with the capacity to do all this stuff. some wont care- they may be more interested in pure research, or in the creations of magic items (and fabricate just speeds up the rate at which they can prepare materials to enchant).

of those who DO have both the capacity and will to break the system? i strongly suspect that the system will find a way to include them- this is the kind of wizard who will get job offers from powerful guilds and kings. well-paying jobs that have the bonus of an organization working to protect their investment.

most importantly- in a labor-focus pre-industrial economy, a high-level wizard with the right spells is like a post-industrial factory. he can greatly expand a kingdoms production, which will cause a massive outcry in the short-run. but in the long run, if these magics are sustainable, then you can have a much more productive economy, which may lower the income of skilled laborers some while slightly raising the cost of materials.

for an item of value P, you spend 33% on materials as per the craft rules, and you sell it for 50% of value as per selling treasure. thats 17% of an items value per casting of a lv 5 wizard spell which also requires the caster to make a skill check. by comparison, getting a lv9 wizard to cast the spell for you would cost 9x5x10= 450 gold. so paying a wizard to do this for any item costing over 2648gp is a good idea that makes a profit. And the only thing on the equipment list that costs more is a Ship. by this logic, fabric should replace shipbuilding whenever available, except it will affect only 90 cubic feet and boats are very big. even the smaller keelboat is 50' long and 15' wide (750 sq ft) at a minimum, and has a mast. So its not profitable to pay a wizard to use fabricate in general.

at one spell per day, if a 9th level wizard is making a suit of MW full plate, a base price of 1650 gold and a craft check, thats only 280gp 5sp profit for the day. thats less than 10% of the 'slow' treasure reward for a same-level encounter. let him have the profit and move on.


EldonG wrote:
Aureate wrote:
Because the game isn't an economic simulator.

And?

Immersion only works if there's some sort of internal logic to the world.

Get it?

It sounds to me like you're still trying to make an economic sim out of it. Fabricate is a powerful spell. At 5th level, it's out of reach of most wizards in a campaign setting, so its macro-level impact will be minor, at most. Its rules are written to aid a GM adjudicate a player making one-off stuff in an adventure, not run a shop. If a player thinks they can abuse the system with it, the GM should just say, "No, that's not what we are here to play."

There are a lot of debates like these that come up that I think can be relatively easily solved by a GM with the cojones to rein a wizard in to the spirit of the game.

Liberty's Edge

Captain Xenon wrote:

wizards can break the system, sure. but high-level wizards are somewhat rare in-setting, and only a limited number of them have access to the spells needed to break the system.

from this small subset of wizards, you get a few with the capacity to do all this stuff. some wont care- they may be more interested in pure research, or in the creations of magic items (and fabricate just speeds up the rate at which they can prepare materials to enchant).

of those who DO have both the capacity and will to break the system? i strongly suspect that the system will find a way to include them- this is the kind of wizard who will get job offers from powerful guilds and kings. well-paying jobs that have the bonus of an organization working to protect their investment.

most importantly- in a labor-focus pre-industrial economy, a high-level wizard with the right spells is like a post-industrial factory. he can greatly expand a kingdoms production, which will cause a massive outcry in the short-run. but in the long run, if these magics are sustainable, then you can have a much more productive economy, which may lower the income of skilled laborers some while slightly raising the cost of materials.

for an item of value P, you spend 33% on materials as per the craft rules, and you sell it for 50% of value as per selling treasure. thats 17% of an items value per casting of a lv 5 wizard spell which also requires the caster to make a skill check. by comparison, getting a lv9 wizard to cast the spell for you would cost 9x5x10= 450 gold. so paying a wizard to do this for any item costing over 2648gp is a good idea that makes a profit. And the only thing on the equipment list that costs more is a Ship. by this logic, fabric should replace shipbuilding whenever available, except it will affect only 90 cubic feet and boats are very big. even the smaller keelboat is 50' long and 15' wide (750 sq ft) at a minimum, and has a mast. So its not profitable to pay a wizard to use fabricate in general.

at one spell per day,...

And...why would you sell it at 50%?

Amazing.

Liberty's Edge

Bill Dunn wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Aureate wrote:
Because the game isn't an economic simulator.

And?

Immersion only works if there's some sort of internal logic to the world.

Get it?

It sounds to me like you're still trying to make an economic sim out of it. Fabricate is a powerful spell. At 5th level, it's out of reach of most wizards in a campaign setting, so its macro-level impact will be minor, at most. Its rules are written to aid a GM adjudicate a player making one-off stuff in an adventure, not run a shop. If a player thinks they can abuse the system with it, the GM should just say, "No, that's not what we are here to play."

There are a lot of debates like these that come up that I think can be relatively easily solved by a GM with the cojones to rein a wizard in to the spirit of the game.

Are there moderately evil wizards in the world? Think NPCs...you know, the guys that don't care about anyone else, but want their profits?


The simplest house rule solution to Fabricate is having it require resources of the market value of the item to be made. And of course, explicitly stating that the raw materials are the _target_ of the spell, not a spell component (so there's no arguing you can bypass it).

Liberty's Edge

Ilja wrote:
The simplest house rule solution to Fabricate is having it require resources of the market value of the item to be made. And of course, explicitly stating that the raw materials are the _target_ of the spell, not a spell component (so there's no arguing you can bypass it).

I'm not really sure what you're saying here...it requires the materials in the quantities that are needed...what change are you suggesting?


Could you fabricate beer... or wine?

Alcohol is one of those items that (a) you can sell in mass quantities at a profit and (b) the price of the product is commensurate with the quality (i.e better quality beer sells for more).

also, it falls into the 10 ft^3/level rather than the 1 ft^3/level of metals and stone (which are all minerals or mineral derived).

You would need only a source of raw materials.

I'd like to drive a different part of the economy into the ground is all lol.

Liberty's Edge

hewhocaves wrote:

Could you fabricate beer... or wine?

Alcohol is one of those items that (a) you can sell in mass quantities at a profit and (b) the price of the product is commensurate with the quality (i.e better quality beer sells for more).

also, it falls into the 10 ft^3/level rather than the 1 ft^3/level of metals and stone (which are all minerals or mineral derived).

You would need only a source of raw materials.

I'd like to drive a different part of the economy into the ground is all lol.

Go for the distilled stuff if you really want to cause pain...and profit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

By my calculations I can get a 6th level expert using basic NPC stat array a+21 on craft armor. this assumes that he puts INT as his high stat and takes the following feats. Skill Focus (Craft Armor), Prodigy (Craft Armor and any other craft skill), Master Craftsman (Craft Armor), and Craft Magic Arms & Armor. Give him 5 commoners with a single rank in craft armor all taking 10 on their craft roll. So if he takes 10 he is getting a roll of 41 which means he is making 119 GP per week of progress. It is going to take him about 12 weeks to make an ordinary suit of full plate.

He has to pay 500 gold for the raw materials, and 42 gold for his 5 helpers. His living expenses for this time are 30 gold (average). So it cost him about 572 gold to make a suit of full plate. The list value of the armor is 1500 gold which means he should be able to make 928 gold profit. The craft rules say that you can make half your skill check for one week dedicated work. By those rules the smith will make 252 for the same 12 weeks. Now if he sells it for half the list price then it works out within 2 GP margin.

What does this all mean? Our characters are paying twice the real value of the armor. We have been systematically discriminated against just for being adventures. This is an outrage and I demand that a 3rd party investigation into this matter. If any wrong doing is found Paizo must be made to refund all the extra gold we have spent.


Aelryinth wrote:


It's just what people would do. Either get the law on their side, or take law into their own hands. Someone will be happy to get rid of the wizard, by one means or another.

==Aelryinth

Having inexpensive armor everywhere wouldn't put armorers out of business, it would change their business. They wouldn't be making armor anymore, but they would still be in the armor maintenance business. More armor around means more armor needs maintenance. Any guess as to how much of an armorer's business is already repair/modification rather than manufacturing?

Mending is actually a big threat to artisans. It reduces the replacement rate on most items and destroys the repair industry. Luckily it is limited to 1 lb/level, making it useless on most armors. Make Whole is a similar problem, but it's not an unlimited use cantrip.


EldonG wrote:


...and I still want to know why wizards don't hold an absolute monopoly.

Not enough Wizards. By RAW (specifically, spellcasting services in Core Rulebook), you can only find 5th level spellcasting in large cities. Each large city might have a couple 9th level or higher Wizards. Of those, only some of them will have craft skills to make stuff, and of those, only some of them will choose to dominate manufacturing. There are many ways for a 9th level Wizard to make money; Fabricate is simply a good way to make lots of money in a big hurry. Selling Make Whole at market rates (60gp min.) will provide a wizard enough money for all his needs and most of his wants.


Mysterious Stranger wrote:


What does this all mean? Our characters are paying twice the real value of the armor. We have been systematically discriminated against just for being adventures. This is an outrage and I demand that a 3rd party investigation into this matter. If any wrong doing is found Paizo must be made to refund all the extra gold we have spent.

Once upon I time I did the same math. My solution was to increase the cost of raw materials until the two matched (much math followed). Typically this meant that the % of raw materials rose as the DC rose, which sort of made sense. Higher DC = better items = more expensive inputs.


EldonG wrote:


Are there moderately evil wizards in the world? Think NPCs...you know, the guys that don't care about anyone else, but want their profits?

An NPC. How is this a problem since NPCs are entirely under the GM's control? If a GM is causing problems for his own campaign with an NPC abusing a powerful spell, he's got worse problems than the spel.


Aelryinth wrote:

sure, but the master smith can put on a headband, too. Everybody is equal that way.

But the master smith with a trait, masterwork items, skilled apprentices, two feats to up his craft mod, and maybe a magic item or two simply CANNOT hope to craft anywhere near as fast as a wizard with this spell.

It's ridiculous.

==Aelryinth

The wizard went to school for years to learn how to warp the very fabric of reality to his whims. I'm cool with it.

EldonG wrote:
...and I still want to know why wizards don't hold an absolute monopoly.

If we ignore the murder option, there are others as well. At the least, someone who is having a massive detrimental effect on the economy might find themselves censured politically or by a religion that focuses on the well being of society or the community.

Kings might levy major taxes on the individual's wares while the religion might institute a mandatory boycott or possibly even go to the extreme of stopping the detrimental element by main force.

And even without the efforts of a religious or political organization, a trade guild might rally its friends to get people to stop buying the wizard's goods.

And if wizards get disruptive enough as a whole, things could end up going Dragon Age in a hurry, though simply fabricating probably isn't enough to cause that.


Bill Dunn wrote:


EldonG wrote:


Are there moderately evil wizards in the world? Think NPCs...you know, the guys that don't care about anyone else, but want their profits?

An NPC. How is this a problem since NPCs are entirely under the GM's control? If a GM is causing problems for his own campaign with an NPC abusing a powerful spell, he's got worse problems than the spel.

The "it's a game" view. The other side wants a rational reason for world building / simulation purposes I believe. And, what does the DM do if a PC decides to dominate the economy this way? Various methods have been suggested, often involving coercion or murder, but why wouldn't an NPC Wizard, or another PC Wizard, decide to fight fire with fire? Allowing this to happen could get... silly. Of course there is DM fiat... but some people want a rules system reason.

*edit* You'll note the argument has been phrased, and is being paraphrased by me, as "why wouldn't a Wizard do this?" It's from a theoretical framework. If spell "X" works like this why wouldn't people do "Y"? The answers have ranged from GM fiat, to social game world reasons, to the spell doesn't work like that, to who cares if it does work like that.


EldonG wrote:
Ilja wrote:
The simplest house rule solution to Fabricate is having it require resources of the market value of the item to be made. And of course, explicitly stating that the raw materials are the _target_ of the spell, not a spell component (so there's no arguing you can bypass it).
I'm not really sure what you're saying here...it requires the materials in the quantities that are needed...what change are you suggesting?

That it would require the market value in materials as a target. So if you want to make a full plate, you need 1500 gp worth of material, rather than the 500 it would cost to craft it the regular way.

That way, fabricate doesn't allow you get stuff cheap, but it allows you to quickly get access to equipment if you have the raw materials for them.

In other words, it becomes a spell for versatility rather than economic gain.

Also, right now the materials are spelled out in the "component" section. Some people argue that because of that it can be bypassed with Blood Money and similar stuff - so creating a full plate is just casting the spell and taking 1d6 damage and 4 strength damage (which are easily cured with a 750 gp wand of lesser restoration). Now, this of course is not RAI, but from a RAWy-RAW RAWiness perspective it isn't an impossible interpretation, which means some munchkins will argue it.

If it did not appear in the component line and instead just appeared in the target line, this would be impossible.

EDIT: This is how I'd word it, roughly:

Fabricate v. 1.I:

Fabricate
School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 5; Domain artifice 5

CASTING
Casting Time see text
Components V, S

EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target Materials up to 10 cu. ft./level; see text
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

DESCRIPTION

You convert material of one sort into products of the same material. You gain finished products of a market value equal to the market value of the materials used. Creatures or magic items cannot be created or transmuted by the fabricate spell. The quality of items made by this spell is commensurate with the quality of material used as the basis for the new fabrication. If you work with a mineral, the target is reduced to 1 cubic foot per level instead of 10 cubic feet.

You must make an appropriate Craft check to fabricate articles requiring a high degree of craftsmanship.

Casting requires 1 round per 10 cubic feet of material to be affected by the spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
EldonG wrote:
seebs wrote:
So, yes, of course you can make masterwork items with it, just like the man said.
...and I still want to know why wizards don't hold an absolute monopoly.

For the same reason that not every mid-sized kingdom has a permanent magic item which performs a True Resurrection every 10 minutes.

What magic can do, according to RAW, and what people actually do with magic, are not the same. Why? Because it would be boring if they were.


I should expand on this, because the fact is, I often do play in games where we end up doing ... things that are not exactly adventuring. I've done the thing where my wizard earns money using things like stone to mud to help with construction projects.

Fabricate has a great deal of utility, but I am not sure it has all the utility ever. A few things to consider:

1. Some people would rather buy something hand-made than something made by machines. I bet that applies to magic, too.
2. There are a lot of other things high-level wizards can do with their time.

There was a thread on this a while back (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2moaq?Fabricate-vs-the-sword-smith) where Diego Rossi posted an analysis I find persuasive. First off, the spell creates one item. So, one casting, one masterwork sword. Materials cost 1/3 of item price, but sale value in general is half of item price. Yes, that's sort of arbitrary, but hey, RAW. So your profit per casting is 50gp or so. But you could make a ton more than that just selling spell-casting services. An NPC would charge 450gp minimum for a casting of a 5th level spell. Even if the PCs can somehow only charge half of that, 250gp is better than the profit on a masterwork sword.

There might be cases where you could do significantly better; the obvious case might be jewelry, where the potential upside for a really skilled crafter is huge. But... At that point, why bother? You're going to have more fun going out and killing stuff and taking its money.

I don't think Fabricate is all that powerful to begin with, and in practice, it's more useful as an adventuring spell than a money-making spell. If you wanna make money, take mending and make whole and go wild. Or maybe don't; mending restores 1d4 hit points, make whole restores 1d6 per level up to 5d6 when cast on a construct, but it's not obvious that it works any better than mending on objects. But I'd expect it to as a matter of common sense. And the thing is, lots of items are valuable and hard to repair cost-wise, but have few hit points. Broken jewelry? Mending. Compare to the cost of a crafter replacing it. And if you really wanna go wild, remember that in theory cantrips aren't even used up by casting. First level wizard can put every jeweler in the city out of the repair business.

But no one cares, because it's a game and ultimately the GM decides that the NPCs, even the evil ones, don't do things that make the game boring and unfun. If you wanna play a crafting-themed campaign, then you have to start caring about this, but in practice at that point you need house rules galore if you want stuff to make any sense at all.

Liberty's Edge

Poldaran wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

sure, but the master smith can put on a headband, too. Everybody is equal that way.

But the master smith with a trait, masterwork items, skilled apprentices, two feats to up his craft mod, and maybe a magic item or two simply CANNOT hope to craft anywhere near as fast as a wizard with this spell.

It's ridiculous.

==Aelryinth

The wizard went to school for years to learn how to warp the very fabric of reality to his whims. I'm cool with it.

EldonG wrote:
...and I still want to know why wizards don't hold an absolute monopoly.

If we ignore the murder option, there are others as well. At the least, someone who is having a massive detrimental effect on the economy might find themselves censured politically or by a religion that focuses on the well being of society or the community.

Kings might levy major taxes on the individual's wares while the religion might institute a mandatory boycott or possibly even go to the extreme of stopping the detrimental element by main force.

And even without the efforts of a religious or political organization, a trade guild might rally its friends to get people to stop buying the wizard's goods.

And if wizards get disruptive enough as a whole, things could end up going Dragon Age in a hurry, though simply fabricating probably isn't enough to cause that.

Cool. You're thinking about it, rather than handwaving it. If I play in a game world, I want it to make sense. Even though I made that point several times, I don't think many people really thought about it.

Now...I would insist that a guild of wizards would stomp over just about any opposition, if they were numerous and active enough...and it wouldn't take many...especially seeing as they'd be rich, too.

Now...why would there really be that much opposition to the wizards, really? I admit, I've come up with some extreme scenarios in defense of my concept...but frankly, 9 of 10 adventurers will LOVE the wizard who cranks out in one day what they expected to take half a year.

Who needs those damn greedy kings, anyhow?

Liberty's Edge

Ilja wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Ilja wrote:
The simplest house rule solution to Fabricate is having it require resources of the market value of the item to be made. And of course, explicitly stating that the raw materials are the _target_ of the spell, not a spell component (so there's no arguing you can bypass it).
I'm not really sure what you're saying here...it requires the materials in the quantities that are needed...what change are you suggesting?

That it would require the market value in materials as a target. So if you want to make a full plate, you need 1500 gp worth of material, rather than the 500 it would cost to craft it the regular way.

That way, fabricate doesn't allow you get stuff cheap, but it allows you to quickly get access to equipment if you have the raw materials for them.

In other words, it becomes a spell for versatility rather than economic gain.

Also, right now the materials are spelled out in the "component" section. Some people argue that because of that it can be bypassed with Blood Money and similar stuff - so creating a full plate is just casting the spell and taking 1d6 damage and 4 strength damage (which are easily cured with a 750 gp wand of lesser restoration). Now, this of course is not RAI, but from a RAWy-RAW RAWiness perspective it isn't an impossible interpretation, which means some munchkins will argue it.

If it did not appear in the component line and instead just appeared in the target line, this would be impossible.

EDIT: This is how I'd word it, roughly:

** spoiler omitted **...

I'm sorry...I'm still failing to see the real change...it could be that I'm just tired after work. :p


EldonG wrote:
Ilja wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Ilja wrote:
The simplest house rule solution to Fabricate is having it require resources of the market value of the item to be made. And of course, explicitly stating that the raw materials are the _target_ of the spell, not a spell component (so there's no arguing you can bypass it).
I'm not really sure what you're saying here...it requires the materials in the quantities that are needed...what change are you suggesting?

That it would require the market value in materials as a target. So if you want to make a full plate, you need 1500 gp worth of material, rather than the 500 it would cost to craft it the regular way.

That way, fabricate doesn't allow you get stuff cheap, but it allows you to quickly get access to equipment if you have the raw materials for them.

In other words, it becomes a spell for versatility rather than economic gain.

Also, right now the materials are spelled out in the "component" section. Some people argue that because of that it can be bypassed with Blood Money and similar stuff - so creating a full plate is just casting the spell and taking 1d6 damage and 4 strength damage (which are easily cured with a 750 gp wand of lesser restoration). Now, this of course is not RAI, but from a RAWy-RAW RAWiness perspective it isn't an impossible interpretation, which means some munchkins will argue it.

If it did not appear in the component line and instead just appeared in the target line, this would be impossible.

EDIT: This is how I'd word it, roughly:

** spoiler omitted **...

I'm sorry...I'm still failing to see the real change...it could be that I'm just tired after work. :p

Basically : he changed the material from 1/3 of the final price of the item to the final price of the item. And he removed it from the Material line, in order to prevent the use of the spell that create component out of blood.

Liberty's Edge

Avh wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Ilja wrote:
EldonG wrote:
Ilja wrote:
The simplest house rule solution to Fabricate is having it require resources of the market value of the item to be made. And of course, explicitly stating that the raw materials are the _target_ of the spell, not a spell component (so there's no arguing you can bypass it).
I'm not really sure what you're saying here...it requires the materials in the quantities that are needed...what change are you suggesting?

That it would require the market value in materials as a target. So if you want to make a full plate, you need 1500 gp worth of material, rather than the 500 it would cost to craft it the regular way.

That way, fabricate doesn't allow you get stuff cheap, but it allows you to quickly get access to equipment if you have the raw materials for them.

In other words, it becomes a spell for versatility rather than economic gain.

Also, right now the materials are spelled out in the "component" section. Some people argue that because of that it can be bypassed with Blood Money and similar stuff - so creating a full plate is just casting the spell and taking 1d6 damage and 4 strength damage (which are easily cured with a 750 gp wand of lesser restoration). Now, this of course is not RAI, but from a RAWy-RAW RAWiness perspective it isn't an impossible interpretation, which means some munchkins will argue it.

If it did not appear in the component line and instead just appeared in the target line, this would be impossible.

EDIT: This is how I'd word it, roughly:

** spoiler omitted **...

I'm sorry...I'm still failing to see the real change...it could be that I'm just tired after work. :p
Basically : he changed the material from 1/3 of the final price of the item to the final price of the item. And he removed it from the Material line, in order to prevent the use of the spell that create component out of blood.

Ah, thank you sir. :)


EldonG wrote:


Cool. You're thinking about it, rather than handwaving it. If I play in a game world, I want it to make sense. Even though I made that point several times, I don't think many people really thought about it.

Now...I would insist that a guild of wizards would stomp over just about any opposition, if they were numerous and active enough...and it wouldn't take many...especially seeing as they'd be rich, too.

Now...why would there really be that much opposition to the wizards, really? I admit, I've come up with some extreme scenarios in defense of my concept...but frankly, 9 of 10 adventurers will LOVE the wizard who cranks out in one day what they expected to take half a year.

Who needs those damn greedy kings, anyhow?

Personally I homebrewed Fabricate and ended my problem. I gave it a duration :) Duration expires and 'Poof', you have a pile of (ruined) raw materials. Nobody buys ordinary goods from Wizards as a result and Wizards don't fabricate using expensive raw materials :D And to those who say "but it's 5th level!" I can point out any number of 5th level spells which do as much or more and have durations. As well as others that are "instantaneous" and don't have a real duration.

In game reasons for lack of abuse of RAW spell... higher powers object to it's mass use (but not private use). Others have touched on these same things. Higher powers might include gods of craft who consider the labor involved worship... kings who have to deal with the economic chaos that results. Craft guilds, assassin's guilds, other deities unwilling to irritate their fellow deities by resurrecting trouble makers who run afoul of craft deities and assassins, Wizard's guilds / colleges who are aware of the problems it can cause (for them, not just you). These are, however, all in game social reasons. The only way, imo, to create a rules system reason is to modify the spell / craft rules (and yes, I've beaten the craft rules up and altered them too)...

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

seebs wrote:

I should expand on this, because the fact is, I often do play in games where we end up doing ... things that are not exactly adventuring. I've done the thing where my wizard earns money using things like stone to mud to help with construction projects.

Fabricate has a great deal of utility, but I am not sure it has all the utility ever. A few things to consider:

1. Some people would rather buy something hand-made than something made by machines. I bet that applies to magic, too.
2. There are a lot of other things high-level wizards can do with their time.

There was a thread on this a while back (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2moaq?Fabricate-vs-the-sword-smith) where Diego Rossi posted an analysis I find persuasive. First off, the spell creates one item. So, one casting, one masterwork sword. Materials cost 1/3 of item price, but sale value in general is half of item price. Yes, that's sort of arbitrary, but hey, RAW. So your profit per casting is 50gp or so. But you could make a ton more than that just selling spell-casting services. An NPC would charge 450gp minimum for a casting of a 5th level spell. Even if the PCs can somehow only charge half of that, 250gp is better than the profit on a masterwork sword.

There might be cases where you could do significantly better; the obvious case might be jewelry, where the potential upside for a really skilled crafter is huge. But... At that point, why bother? You're going to have more fun going out and killing stuff and taking its money.

I don't think Fabricate is all that powerful to begin with, and in practice, it's more useful as an adventuring spell than a money-making spell. If you wanna make money, take mending and make whole and go wild. Or maybe don't; mending restores 1d4 hit points, make whole restores 1d6 per level up to 5d6 when cast on a construct, but it's not obvious that it works any better than mending on objects. But I'd expect it to as a matter of common sense. And the thing is, lots of items are valuable and hard to repair...

Seebs, I've already pointed out that casting spells for others is dependent on having others who want spells cast for you.

Fabricate is about solid, reliable production even if nobody wants to buy a spell for you. Yes, casting a Teleport nets you more. No, you aren't going to have someone asking for it every day.

Fabricate lets you make money from spell slots every day, even if nobody hires you.

I personally have Fabricate sub for one day's craft check. Poof, done. The focus is now on saving time, and not making money.
I'd probably let Heightened versions add +2 days of Crafting per Heighten.
I still wouldn't let it be masterwork.

Although I have to say, simply giving things a duration solves the problem ENTIRELY. Really, Fabricate is just a Minor Creation variant, and it's not out of place.

making it use raw materials equal to final price would make it a hugely inefficient spell to use for crafting, you'd only use it if you really, really needed something fast. Not a bad idea, just hard to fathom why making a suit of armor with Fabricate takes as much raw material as three other suits.

==Aelryinth


@Aelryinth, what about turning Fabricate into a spell that simply shortens the time it takes to craft an item into one day, requires you to actually make any/all craft checks (same chance to ruin/fail/pass as normal, but only one roll), allow creation of items on the Magic Item list as long as they're nonmagical items, and forget the masterwork issue, because there's another spell that ignores that problem, and allow the user to work with special materials, such as adamantine, granting that they can procure it.

@Ilja, I'd go a step further and change the wording a little more drastically (in-line with speeding up the crafting process), what do you think?

Fabricate:

School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 5; Domain artifice 5

CASTING
Casting Time see text
Components V, S

EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target Materials up to 10 cu. ft./level; see text
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

DESCRIPTION

You convert material of one sort into products of the same material.
You gain finished products of a market value equal to the market value of the materials used. Creatures and Magical Items cannot be created or transmuted by the fabricate spell, except items that are nonmagical. Special materials that normally subsume the cost of creating a masterwork weapon, armour or tool also creates masterwork products. If you work with a mineral, the target is reduced to 1 cubic foot per level instead of 10 cubic feet.

You must make any and all appropriate Craft checks to fabricate articles requiring a high degree of craftsmanship, that is, with a craft DC of 15 or higher, including the masterwork component. Multiple items can be made with one casting, if there is enough raw material, but a Craft check must be made for each item with any craft DCs over 15.

Casting requires 1 round per 10 cubic feet of material to be affected by the spell.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Shortening the crafting time to one day isn't a solution. For purposes of economics,it's exactly the same as casting 1 spell a day that resolves in ten seconds.

You have to get rid of the ability to make tons of money Crafting hundreds of times faster then anyone else. The only way to do that is slow it down immensely or make the Craft not permanent.

==Aelryinth


EldonG wrote:

Cool. You're thinking about it, rather than handwaving it. If I play in a game world, I want it to make sense. Even though I made that point several times, I don't think many people really thought about it.

Now...I would insist that a guild of wizards would stomp over just about any opposition, if they were numerous and active enough...and it wouldn't take many...especially seeing as they'd be rich, too.

Now...why would there really be that much opposition to the wizards, really? I admit, I've come up with some extreme scenarios in defense of my concept...but frankly, 9 of 10 adventurers will LOVE the wizard who cranks out in...

Do you put this much effort into thinking about how the general stuff is crafted in your game world? Honestly, I handwave all of that. Why? Because it isn't worth the time. Does the book address why fabricate does or does not impact economies? No? Then it isn't important enough to waste time deciding.


O dear are we really arguing over an insignificant rule menusha? Yes it is insignificant WAIT no it is even worse because this kind of argument over item creation time destroys RP groups. I have seen it more than once. There is always that one guy who slams his fist on the table and will not let a rule slide because they want to be right. Suddenly everyone is awkwardly quiet, the DM is pulling his hair, and half the group gets up and leaves.

Cast fabricate once to form the basic shapes of the item then cast the spell again to make it masterwork. Do you think a blacksmith makes the whole suit in one hammer stroke that just takes a really long time to finish? no he does it in pieces. Anyway allowing a party to make full plate quickly is not going to break anything. Most people know that AC at mid to high levels starts to lose meaning unless you really specialize in it and spend gobs of money for the really good enchants.

Liberty's Edge

Tarantula wrote:
EldonG wrote:

Cool. You're thinking about it, rather than handwaving it. If I play in a game world, I want it to make sense. Even though I made that point several times, I don't think many people really thought about it.

Now...I would insist that a guild of wizards would stomp over just about any opposition, if they were numerous and active enough...and it wouldn't take many...especially seeing as they'd be rich, too.

Now...why would there really be that much opposition to the wizards, really? I admit, I've come up with some extreme scenarios in defense of my concept...but frankly, 9 of 10 adventurers will LOVE the wizard who cranks out in...

Do you put this much effort into thinking about how the general stuff is crafted in your game world? Honestly, I handwave all of that. Why? Because it isn't worth the time. Does the book address why fabricate does or does not impact economies? No? Then it isn't important enough to waste time deciding.

You go ahead and feel free.

I have people who actually have character concepts like 'great dwarven smith/warrior'...and you just handwaved him into insignificance.

I don't do that.


EldonG wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
EldonG wrote:

Cool. You're thinking about it, rather than handwaving it. If I play in a game world, I want it to make sense. Even though I made that point several times, I don't think many people really thought about it.

Now...I would insist that a guild of wizards would stomp over just about any opposition, if they were numerous and active enough...and it wouldn't take many...especially seeing as they'd be rich, too.

Now...why would there really be that much opposition to the wizards, really? I admit, I've come up with some extreme scenarios in defense of my concept...but frankly, 9 of 10 adventurers will LOVE the wizard who cranks out in...

Do you put this much effort into thinking about how the general stuff is crafted in your game world? Honestly, I handwave all of that. Why? Because it isn't worth the time. Does the book address why fabricate does or does not impact economies? No? Then it isn't important enough to waste time deciding.

You go ahead and feel free.

I have people who actually have character concepts like 'great dwarven smith/warrior'...and you just handwaved him into insignificance.

I don't do that.

If you're using Craft rules as normal, then you just did.

Also, Aelryinth, we /did/ get rid of the ability to make money out of craft, in fact, the proposed Fabricate 1.1 change made it cost more (which in retrospect makes it worthless as a spell. Hmm). I kept in the modified line that said you have to actually have raw material equal to the cost of -buying- the item, and if "You gain finished products of a market value equal to the market value of the materials used." isn't explicit or rude enough (costs you 2x to fabricate than to Craft, thus negligible benefit to using this spell, over buying the items), then replace that line to say "You must provide raw materials equal to 1/2 the market price of the sum of finished products", for a kinder, and more clear wording that negates all profit, except time. You still need to invest ranks in Craft with my version, and this way, the spell accommodates any changes to fix Crafting rules, at the same time.

Problem. Solved.

Honestly, if the outcry is about how it can be used to generate value from nothing, and ruin economy in a game in which the prices of items never change, and are always stacked against the players, then I think you're overthinking one problem and ignoring everything else that's wrong. Like I said, if you're this worried about fabricate, you're playing Markets and Merchants, and the entire Crafting/Buying/Selling system is not your friend, and isn't meant to be. Fact: PCs net 0 gold for the best craft process they can manage (no failures). Fact: NPCs net 100% profit for the very same things (market price is always 2x craft costs).
Every piece of Full Plate that costs you 750 to make should also cost the NPCs the same thing, right? so how's it fair you're always paying 1500, but always selling it at 750 - even when it's never been used? That's not realistic! I demand that my character be able to acquire a merchant's license and peddle wares he's crafted at 90% market price, undercutting all merchants, and netting myself 95% profit margins.


EldonG wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
EldonG wrote:

Cool. You're thinking about it, rather than handwaving it. If I play in a game world, I want it to make sense. Even though I made that point several times, I don't think many people really thought about it.

Now...I would insist that a guild of wizards would stomp over just about any opposition, if they were numerous and active enough...and it wouldn't take many...especially seeing as they'd be rich, too.

Now...why would there really be that much opposition to the wizards, really? I admit, I've come up with some extreme scenarios in defense of my concept...but frankly, 9 of 10 adventurers will LOVE the wizard who cranks out in...

Do you put this much effort into thinking about how the general stuff is crafted in your game world? Honestly, I handwave all of that. Why? Because it isn't worth the time. Does the book address why fabricate does or does not impact economies? No? Then it isn't important enough to waste time deciding.

You go ahead and feel free.

I have people who actually have character concepts like 'great dwarven smith/warrior'...and you just handwaved him into insignificance.

I don't do that.

Because I don't spend time figuring out which NPC in town makes a living spinning hemp rope, I have now handwaved your dwarven smith into insignificance?

Really, what does he lose out on? He still made his armor. He spent time in it. If anything, I would say the armor he made himself has more sentimental value for him and for someone he made it for than any armor a wizard fabricated on the spot would.

He could also just go to a shop and BUY that armor he wants. It is the players choice that he wants the character to be a smith and make his own things. Does having fabricate exist mean that there is nobody in the game world that crafts things by hand? No, it isn't stated. That is for you as the GM to decide and make appropriate if you want to. You control all the NPCs. You decide if they all use fabricate, or not and can make your smith insignificant or not. I choose that like most fantasy settings, most items are not made via magic, but by craftsman, using the craft skill. Guess what, suddenly, the dwarf isn't humbled. And yes, if the party wizard wants to be a jerk, he can learn fabricate, get the parts together, and fabricate a suit of armor. Just like he could also learn fly, and laugh at the poor grounded dwarf. Magic lets you do things you can't otherwise do. Can the dwarf smith build a portal to another plane? No. Can the wizard cast a spell and make a portal to another plane? Yes. "Its magic."

201 to 250 of 350 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Is Craft really that slow? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.