Availability of spellcasting for hire - CRB vs GMG

[sgriobhadair]

Paizo has inconsistency between the CRB and Gamemastery Guide in the availability of spellcasting for hire.

crb wrote:

In addition, not every town or village has a spellcaster of sufficient level to cast any spell. In general, you must travel to a small town (or larger settlement) to be reasonably assured of finding a spellcaster capable of casting 1st-level spells, a large town for 2nd-level spells, a small city for 3rd- or 4th-level spells, a large city for 5th- or 6th-level spells, and a metropolis for 7th- or 8th-level spells. Even a metropolis isn't guaranteed to have a local spellcaster able to cast 9th-level spells.

However, the gamemastery guide completely disagrees at the lower levels:

gamemastery guide wrote:

Unlike magic items, spellcasting for hire is listed separately from the town's base value, since spellcasting is limited by the level of the available spellcasters in town. This line lists the highest-level spell available for purchase from spellcasters in town. A town's base spellcasting level depends on its type. (Type = Size}

And we have:
Thorp - <20 people - 1st level spellcasting
Hamlet - 21-60 people - 2nd level
Village - 61-200 people - 3rd level
Small Town - 201-2 000 - 4th level
Large Town - 2 001-5 000 - 5th level
Small City - 5 001 - 10 000 - 6th level
Large City - 10 001 - 25 000 - 7th level
Metropolis - 25 001 + - 8th level

We also have in the GMG some modifiers that alter the available spellcasting: Academic or Pious settlements add 1 level, Holy Sites and Magically Attuned settlements add 2 levels, Superstitious settlements reduces by 2 levels.

We have a huge variance then, from the CRB where at a Small City of say 7500 people you are 'reasonably assured' of finding someone who will cast 3rd-level spells for hire, to the Gamemastery Guide where it WILL have someone who will cast up to 6th level spells for hire.

OK, one issue here is that Paizo are somewhat inconsistent, how do you decide this factor when designing a city? By the book, or on an individual basis? Or just let players have access to what they can afford, no matter where?

I'm also wondering what the logical magical % population is here... To work that out, we need to know what proportion of spellcasters will offer their casting services for hire. A temple priest would probably do so, for a donation to the good cause. Most wizards in a town are probably professionals making a living. Let's say that the vast majority of casters in settlements are interested in selling casting.

However, the implication is that the players can find any spell they need with that level of casting, so if we can get first level spells, we must have the full range ... wizard/sorcerer, cleric and maybe druidic (just staying with core). So our thorp of < 20 people should contain at least one wizard, sorcerer or bard and one adept or cleric. Being a developing demographic, children should be about a third of the population. So, from a maximum of 12 adults, we need one divine and one arcane caster.

That means at least one in twelve people, logically following from the GMG, will have arcane abilities. Is that how people view their Pathfinder world (Personally, I think I prefer the CRB figures; I'd like PC spellcasters to be special, not as common as muck).

[Lincoln Hills]

A point that occurs to me... what if it's a level 4 paladin spell? Awful nice of those 15th-level paladins to spread out, settle in every mid-sized town, and sell their services. Strange that they can't demolish this week's adventure by riding off and saving the town singlehanded while the PCs are still in the 'pre-adventure shopping' stage!

In short I think both figures were just spitballing, and that the ones in the CRB are a lot more reflective of the intended frequency of magic.

As far as magical training, I tend to figure that even clerics (probably the most common) are less than 1% of the total population, but that's my figure - not Paizo's.

[Snow_Tiger]

Lol Lincoln... 15th level paladins in small towns... While only 8th level clerics. The evenness

[Deadmanwalking]

I personally, use my Level Demographics to figure this sort of thing out. Based on the settlement rules but not entirely beholden to them.

It tends to average with only one spellcaster high enough to cast the max spell level of a settlement, with another of the other type to cast spells a level lower (so a settlement with 9th level casting available might have a 17th level Wizard and a 15th level Cleric, and thus only 8th level Divine Spells)...but it works pretty well for me, and seems to reflect the setting as actually presented.

And I'd assume most spellcasters are willing to cast spells for hire when not doing anything pressing. Who turns down free money for using an easily replaceable resource?

[wraithstrike]

The CRB speaks of reasonably assuredness, which to mean means average level.

The GMG says highest level, which means "best you can hope for", so to me that is not a contradiction.

As an example the CRB says a small town gives you a reasonable chance to find first level spells, but the GMG says 4th level is the highest you can expect to find.

Basically that means you can get 1st level spells, but you might not find 4th level spells, however it is not impossible

[LazarX]

Lincoln Hills wrote:

A point that occurs to me... what if it's a level 4 paladin spell? Awful nice of those 15th-level paladins to spread out, settle in every mid-sized town, and sell their services. Strange that they can't demolish this week's adventure by riding off and saving the town singlehanded while the PCs are still in the 'pre-adventure shopping' stage!

The guidelines refer to full spell casters, wizard, cleric, druid and the like. Paladins and Rangers and other 4 level casters are hobby casters they have relatively few spells per day. They don't sit around hiring themselves for spell casting services, so they logically would not be included on this list.

[Lincoln Hills]

LazarX wrote:

...Paladins and Rangers and other 4 level casters are hobby casters they have relatively few spells per day. They don't sit around hiring themselves for spell casting services...

...because they, uh... they, uh... they just don't, eh?

You'd be on more solid ground pointing out that the spellcasting costs in the CRB almost ensure that anybody who can will go to a 3rd-level cleric or druid, not a 7th-level ranger, for their second-level-spell needs.

[thejeff]

Lincoln Hills wrote:

LazarX wrote:

...Paladins and Rangers and other 4 level casters are hobby casters they have relatively few spells per day. They don't sit around hiring themselves for spell casting services...

...because they, uh... they, uh... they just don't, eh?

You'd be on more solid ground pointing out that the spellcasting costs in the CRB almost ensure that anybody who can will go to a 3rd-level cleric or druid, not a 7th-level ranger, for their second-level-spell needs.

And it's probably a fair assumption that when the table says "3rd level" spell it really means 5th or 6th level caster. If you want specific Paladin/Ranger spells, you'll need to find a place that's big enough to have the high level ones.

[Matt Thomason]

sgriobhadair wrote:

OK, one issue here is that Paizo are somewhat inconsistent, how do you decide this factor when designing a city? By the book, or on an individual basis? Or just let players have access to what they can afford, no matter where?

One thing to bear in mind is that the majority of socioeconomic mechanics in RPG rulebooks tends to fall apart under scrutiny. It's designed to give a fairly reasonable feel rather than a sustainable working model. It's mostly there so a GM doesn't have to make things up off the top of their head, and to provide an end result that "feels right" at the time.

If anything, the inconsistency is a good thing, as it allows for a decent amount of GM variation without providing something that can be used to prove they're somehow "doing it wrong" when they tell a player that they can't find [insert random resource here] in a given settlement.

Even within a fairly-well defined setting such as Golarion, there's a lot of room for GM preference when it comes to things like spellcaster percentages. Personally I tend towards it being something like 1 in 100 people (or less) that has any casting ability whatsoever, while others prefer something closer to 5 or even 10 in 100. However, in actual play I go with "What answer would be best for the story right now? What would provide the more interesting array of choices for the players to choose from? What would give the richer experience for the table over the longer term of the campaign?" Mostly, I just take the numbers in the books as being something that I should be aiming roughly towards in order to get the correct feel, rather than something for adhering to.

[Abraham spalding]

Oh no Matt

You don't know it but you just uttered fateful words of dreadful eldritch power...

YOU HAVE SUMMONED IT!