That's another aspect of it is the flavor.
Call it medieval, call it pre-industrial or call it what you will. When settings are merely a reflection of our modern society with generic brand +1 swords at Sir Walgreen's Ye Olde Generale Store, it loses it for me quickly.
Wraithstrike and Mark Hoover have already addressed this, but I thought I'd give it one last shot since I'll be at the top of a page and guaranteed to be noticed.
Many people who go with the default item availability are not using 'Magemart' in a Walmart sense, but rather each town of sufficient size happens to have the item being searched for.
It's not that there is a store selling thousands of 'products' but rather that all these items have been commissioned (produced for use as you put it upthread) and have since fallen out of use for some reason or other.
The user found/commissioned something better, or retired and is looking for a ton of quick cash, or died and left it as an heirloom and the descendant needs money, or a thousand other possibilities.
The fact that the right item happens to be the one the players find is an abstraction, not a statement that every item withiprice limit is there at the same time.
Which is a good deal of how we deal with it at our table: depending on city size and the item, it might be there. It might not be there *today*, but if you are interacting with a big trade hub or an area that deals with a lot of adventurers, magic, wars, or whatever, there is a good chance that something similar to what you want will eventually come through town.
There's always a chance that some of the commissioned items for dead adventurers might be around as well, but you never know what you'll find or if they'll have any perks/defects that they may have.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The game is an abstraction so it will not simulate real life economics well. Actually, I don't know of any RP that does, but at least Pathfinder has gold spending limit depending on the size of the town.
I kind of recall Abraham Spalding's breakdown that the economy works fairly well as a self-contained, self-sustaining system. In other words, it kind of make sense (internally) how the PF system works for the most part.
As to the setting questions of "where does all this stuff come from" (stuff, in this case, being stuff that there's no demand for)? That's actually fairly easy, and has two main answers: 1) everywhere, but especially before you were ever born; and 2) you're not the only adventurers about right now.
Golarion is old. Like, ridiculously old.
There have been wars, adventures, prophecies, gods, spiritual powers, mages, ages, histories, and empires... all with much larger time frames than in our own history.
I mean, just comparing this history.
The age of enthronement lasted for 4,606 years. 4,606!
That's... enormous!
Absalom was founded in 1 AR... and then lasted for almost 5,000 years! I mean, holy cow, Taldor was founded 5,995 years ago.
For comparison, our first cities came into existence about 5,500 years ago.
The Age of Anguish, before that, was almost 3.5k years!
The (still-extant) empire of Osirion was being established 8,500 years ago... about the time we were just developing agriculture.
The (relatively short) age of Anguish preceded that, and the 1,000-year long Age of Darkness preceded that.
That's... a lot of time to develop magical goods. Not to mention Azlant before that!
But, of course, that's only the highest-end items. Most of the more common (lower-level) items would have been acquired already, and probably long-since been worn out or lost.
As for the rest... it's currently the Age of Lost Omens!
The need and pressure for adventuring types is actually pretty high.
Elves (known as craftsfolk of magical goods; fighters of demons and goblins) have returned the world.
Dwarves (known as craftsfolk of masterwork goods; fighters of orcs and other underground horrors) have been here since the Age of Darkness.
That will generate a large amount of magical arms and armor right there - there's always need to equip people.
The "how" is also answered - since it relies on feat-acquisition and spellcraft checks, human adept apprentices to dwarven or elven masters can suddenly crank out the magical gear. In a way, the Age of Lost Omens is kind of a fortunate confluence for the mass-production of magical elements adventurers rely on - between the warlike elements that demand constant creation of new stuff (old stuff breaks, is lost, stolen, fenced, and so on), the sudden plethora of potential masters to learn the various crafts, and the relatively large supply of students, it's not terribly hard to imagine (relatively) large amounts of magical goods being crafted.
This is, as others have noted, not likely to result in a singular magic mart (unless you want it to, of course; some do for various reasons), but rather in lots of shops that specialize in carrying various goods, some of which are magical.
Further, adventurer's do have commissioned pieces made for them. While most of the time, a crafter's going to work for commission, and they're not likely to see repeat business, making friends with a singular adventuring party is a huge boon: suddenly, they're making money hand-over-fist, and helping save the world, while staying safely at home. They love adventurers.
... and where money becomes prevalent for one person, others will seek to get "their share"... trying to get some of the business too.
While AD&D-based often strove for a medieval feel, Golarion does not.
Andoran, Galt, Qadira, and many other countries just drop-kick the medieval "feel" right out of existence, not to mention parade armor and full plate, and other pieces of equipment... I mean, advanced mechanical traps will do that for you right quickly as well.
Golarion doesn't run on medieval presumptions.
It also doesn't run on modern ones, or any that directly relate to a strictly historical precedent... though it does have some relation to various things.
I mean, we left actual medieval with the magical stuff, of course; but we left most fantastical version of "medieval" societies mores with multiple gods; and again with female gods; and again with Calistria, Desna, and Shelyn and not only their portfolios, but their very-easy-to-get insinuations which, when coupled with their alignment, means that medieval society is pretty much right out.
But what about industry?
Well, obviously, there's an agrarian culture, sure, but it's more like a highly spread sub-culture. There are plenty of ways around it, and there are a very, very large number of people that aren't part of it.
Plus, with all the need for equipment, and all the dangerous elements that I've mentioned before - I'm reminding you, this is the Age of Lost Omens - people are going to be cranking out all the magical stuff they can. And, with divine patrons like Torag, Nethys, and Shelyn pushing people to craft and build, you're bound to have a flourishing supply of artisans who create just for the art of it - those few who take on enormous projects regardless of the risks, "just because", which... sometimes later leads to jobs. The fact that it happens in real life, too makes it rather likely to me - especially since there are known potential buyers for this sort of thing.
Anyway, this post has taken long enough, and I'm feeling distracted.
^ I want to point out, that this isn't meant to be, "You need to do this." but rather, "This is a method (among many) of explaining where the magic items went with."
That's all.
Also, I'm kind of out of it.
:P
:D
:D
Simon: your way of playing isn't wrong - in fact, it's an awesome way to play.
I know that.
The way you posted up there? Terrible. You demand that people not denigrate your play style while denigrating the play style of others. Please, stop that.
To say I was denigrating people who play accountants in the game of Mathfinder is putting words in my mouth. I think it's a ridiculous way to play the game, I think the people who do it that way are weird. Weird does not equal bad or evil or wrong.
I get that you feel frustrated by similar treatment - it's wrong, but throwing the same attitude back isn't good either.
Thanks doctor.
If an mechanically weaker character faces a creature who is too powerful, there's a limit to how well that character can or will fair.
Sure, but so what? Does that mean players need to spend any amount of playtime running numbers to account for their odds of survival?
This doesn't invalidate your style of play.
I don't recall ever saying it did.
This just means that your style of play is different than some others. That is all: no more, no less.
Sure.
That a creature doesn't use their abilities to their fullest extent doesn't make you or your play-style wrong. If you feel your style is threatened by others' style of play somehow... I'm sorry. Don't.
I don't care how others play the game. It doesn't bother me unless they show up in my group and start telling us we're doing it wrong and whining about it.
Playing the game by numbers is a fine idea.
Playing the game by enjoying numbers if a fine idea.
Playing the game by ignoring the numbers if a fine idea.
Sure, play and let play should be the prevailing attitude. We can obviously see that it isn't by the fact that every thread on the Paizo board outside of rules questions has more than 3 replies.
Now, if you want to argue, "HEROICS" is all it takes, please feel free to begin running a game of commoners sans equipment against dragons. Could be fun. Could even be successful.
Insinuating that playing with less magic might as well be playing naked commoners, that's kinda sad. Maybe you didn't mean it that way, and if you didn't then that sentence structure leaves something to be desired.
If, somehow, you think that's a silly idea, you can see why others feel the same - the only difference is a matter of degrees.
Every difference between players and GMs in this game world is a matter of degrees. Every difference between character builds is a matter of degrees. Since that's the case, why don't we all just decide that we're going to accept that everyone else might not do it the way we do. Let's also take it a step further and decide that from now on when someone makes a thread about how they do something we don't go on to post on how we do it differently. After all, in the long run, it doesn't really matter.
Let me be clear. I've heard of people play the game of commoners. It sounds awesome. It's not the same game, though - either the creatures need to be played "down", or the CRs they face are lower.
Cool, I personally have never heard of such a thing happening. But as I said just above, let's all of us agree not to judge how they play.
Equipment is a part of your power in Pathfinder.
An exact value doesn't matter, but WLB generally presumes a certain amount spent on "semi-optimal" choices.
It doesn't necessarily have to be. I think that's a point others along this thread have been making. I think the only time my group uses the WBL table is if we're making characters at some level other than 1.
This fundamentally affects the CR of the encounters you can handle.
Now, terrain, tactics, and planning (or lack thereof; either functions on either or both sides) can also alter the CR of the encounters you can handle.
It's also a GMs right to adjust, either up or down, creature stats to alter CRs. It's a completely subjective opinion to say creature X would or would not act a particular way.
What this means is PF is a game of many moving parts.
Sure it is, but I'm not seeing how this fits in the context of everything around it.
If you presume any sort of optimization on the part of the enemies (if not with items, than with tactics, terrain, or planning) with a CR higher than your own, than if you do not have the equipment you need (and you don't have extra characters), than absolutely, yes, you will fail.
This is an opinion and not a statement of fact. Thanks to the fact that we all roll dice, there is an element of chance in everything we do. Maybe the GM just can't roll above a 4, maybe the players are throwing 20s all over the place. Success or failure is never guaranteed.
Now, however, here's the thing: the tactics, terrain, and planning are extremely fluid, extremely variable. These are things that can be harder to optimize "in character" - when role-playing a creature, it's easy to (metaphorically speaking) "paint yourself into a corner"... in other words, you can easily describe the dragon as too arrogant, to petty, or too angry to think clearly, and thinking is definitely what's required for those sorts of things. But if so, that's a choice - conscious or not - on the GMs part that the creature is that way.
OK, and that's all within the GMs right to do. Creatures are just other NPCs in the hands of the GM. To say that a GM is playing a monster wrong or taking it easy on the PCs is just another opinion and should never be stated as fact.
Let me repeat this: this does not make anyone an inferior player or any style inferior.
Thanks again doctor.
But it is entirely true that, "just heroics" doesn't cover it.
This is an opinion and not a fact. Also, I don't recall saying anything about "just heroics." It appears to me that you've taken my comment about heroes acting heroically a bit out of context.
Numbers don't tell everything.
But they do tell some things.I really wish people would get this.
Who doesn't get this? Maybe there are people who do get this and simply don't care? You're right, the numbers aren't the entirety of the game and shouldn't be taken as such. Anybody who determines every action their character is going to take based on the numbers, odds, average DPR, etc, is playing in a way that is almost completely opposite to the way I play.
There isn't a bad style of play*. At all. There are different play styles.
* Well, okay, there may be bad styles, but those presented here aren't them.
Agreed. So how about we let this thread go instead of having a continuing back-and-forth about how any particular group isn't playing right or following the rules right?
With all this going on now, I think I finally see the end of this thread. I can only imagine this will be locked before too long unless someone shows up to somehow drag it back on track.
Two hours of slowly working on a post while distracted and sick means that I'm badly ninja'd.
I'm dropping out for now. Everyone's taking up arms.
"Weird" when applied to people or the things they like, is an insult from most people most of the time. Ignoring common use and saying, "You shouldn't get insulted." is poor form.
Anyway, I'm stopping this because my family is calling.
I'm spoilering what I already wrote because, you know, it's a lot of work (so I don't want to delete it all), but it's going to be ignored or taken out of context, or just rejected. So... nevermind.
I will respond:
1) if I misunderstood how you presented something, my apologies
2) "are weird", "and shouldn't be taken as such", "doctor" and similar seem sarcastic and biting; these sorts of things are the source of perceived frustration on your part; if they are not, see number 1. However, at the same time, you need to be aware that by the way you say things, intentionally or not, you're implying something to those that read it, like me. Having seen this response and re-reading your post, I can see the different tone, but it wasn't what I read when taking your post in context of the thread or by itself. Thus my points.
3)
This doesn't invalidate your style of play.
I don't recall ever saying it did.
Okay, but,...
What rubs me the wrong way is people trying to suggest or infer that the way I play is wrong somehow or if my characters survive adventures it's only because the GM is fudging rolls and playing with kid gloves on.
... thus, I was clarifying.
Equipment is a part of your power in Pathfinder.
It doesn't necessarily have to be.
This is saying something different than what I was saying. Probably because you coupled it too tightly to the phrase I used below.
Magic items (and mundane items) are a part of your character's power, for or against, present or not. They alter your character's abilities by their nature.
To show this, let's pit two characters against each other.
1) A first level commoner with average (10) scores.
2) A first level fighter with an elite array (probably focusing in strength then CON and/or DEX, I dunno, seems "right" somehow).
First run-through, let's give them both the same equipment, not optimized or anything, but decent: leather armor and heavy mace. No frills, no penalties, just duking it out.
Commoner: 6 hp, attack +0, dmg 1d8+0, AC 12, initiative +0
Fighter: 12 hp, attack +4, dmg 1d8+3, AC 14, initiative +2
Those numbers tell a story. They tell a very clear one. Unless the commoner crits on his first blow, or the fighter rolls a spectacular series of whiffs, the fighter is going to win, probably in one hit, probably on the first round.
Now, let's take our commoner and then load him up with magical equipment. Let's make it a +5 vorpal nodachi, a +5 invulnerable mithril chain shirt, one +1 heavy fortification arrow deflection mithril buckler, a +5 blinding animated heavy shield, all six books of +5 to all ability scores (almost giving him the Advanced template, which... increases the CR of a creature), a ring of protection +5, an amulet of natural armor +5, a belt of physical perfection +6, and... oh, I dunno... let's say... a potion of mirror image and cure moderate wounds.
Let's take our fighter and give him better (but still mundane) equipment and two whole class levels!
The commoner is going to attack with a +5 bonus (+5 from weapon, +5 from increased ability scores, -4 non-proficiency, -1 buckler), but will have an AC of, what, 41 on quick count (10 base, +5 enhance shield, +5 enhance armor, +4 armor, +2 shield, +5 deflection, +5 natural, +5 ability score), and immunity to critical hits; further, he has the ability to potentially blind the fighter (DC 14 is decent against an elite array fighter), and DR 5/magic (which the fighter can't ignore, so he eats the reduction). He's got 11 hit points. He deals about 5 damage per hit.
A third level fighter with the elite array is going to have somewhere in the vicinity of a... +7 attack (+3 base attack +3 ability +1 focus) which isn't going to hit that AC on anything other than a 20 (although that 20 is treated as a normal hit, instead of a critical), presuming his best attack category (ranged or melee). Let's be nice and say he's wielding an earthbreaker (or greatsword - it doesn't matter, really) since he knows, somehow, that the commoner's immune to criticals and it doesn't matter if he hits him spectacularly. So... 10 damage on average. Two hits to kill our commoner... but our commoner also has damage reduction, so about 5 damage, but that's still three hits. He'll have 26 or so hit points, so about five hits from our commoner. He'll have an AC of around 18 - it'll take our commoner a 13 or higher to hit him!
So... only hitting on a 20 (5% chance) v. hitting on a 13 or higher (35% chance). How will this suss out in general? First round misses. Second round misses. Third round hit v. fighter by commoner (1/5). Fourth round misses. Fifth round hit by the v. commoner by the fighter (1/3). Sixth round hit by the commoner v. the fighter (2/5). Seventh, and eighth round are misses. Ninth round hit by the commoner v. the fighter (3/5). Tenth hit by the fighter v. the commoner (2/3). Eleventh round is a miss, while the twelfth is another by the commoner v. the fighter (4/5). Thirteen and fourteen are a miss. Fifteenth round: everyone hits! Holy cow! It's a two-way tie! Just like in Rocky II! ... or at least it would be if PF didn't have the initiative system. So... who goes first? Barring improved initiative by the fighter, the commoner. With improved initiative by the fighter, the fighter. It's a split decision! Just like in Rocky!
Either way, though, it's obvious that the magical equipment had an effect on the commoner's power - instead of going down in the first round against a fighter, he lasted until the fifteenth... and might have even won!
And that is what I meant about equipment automatically affecting your power. If it doesn't... it doesn't. At all. But, in fact, it does.
Too much magic equipment for you? Okay, sure.
How about a first level rogue with a potion of greater invisibility and daggers v. a third level fighter who are otherwise built similarly? Stand about 30 ft away and enjoy winning the fight via flinging daggers.
Too specific? How about in Damien's case?
Potions of invisibility, a single Evard's black tentacles spell, glitterdust... the list goes on for items that could have this much, much easier for them.
An exact value doesn't matter, but WLB generally presumes a certain amount spent on "semi-optimal" choices.
I think that's a point others along this thread have been making. I think the only time my group uses the WBL table is if we're making characters at some level other than 1.
That's fine - in fact, I don't really pay attention to WBL either in games I run.
However, my point is that the baseline game does make a number of presumptions about the amount of money you have and what you spend it on. Those presumptions are vague, but it's presumed on average.
This is an opinion and not a statement of fact. Thanks to the fact that we all roll dice, there is an element of chance in everything we do. Maybe the GM just can't roll above a 4, maybe the players are throwing 20s all over the place. Success or failure is never guaranteed.
At which point your argument becomes, "chance wins!" and that's really meaningless. Level 1 commoners with phenomenal could win against old dragons doing stupid things and rolling badly, too. However, "the GM is fudging rolls and playing with kid gloves on" was something I thought you wanted to avoid, and something with that degree of good/bad luck would suspend the heck out of my disbelief (feeling remarkably suspicious to me) just as much as the other.
Chance is great. But if you're going to rely on chance, why bother with anything?
Also, there are lots and lots of ways that we don't have to really rely on dice - the strategy and tactics I mentioned earlier.
Let's take that adult black dragon from before.
Rolling a 4 means it's got an attack of 25 on its bite, 24 on its claws, and 19 on each of its other attacks. That means a 24 stealth check.
It has an 80 ft breath weapon for 12d6 damage (DC 22 reflex, for half).
It has a fly speed of 200.
If you presume good tactics on its part?
It'll re-assess the danger anything poses against it every round - except for teleporters or other dragons (maybe a few other creatures) it's got the fastest speed there is - it doesn't have to worry about getting away. The largest range increment I can find is a heavy crossbow (plus repeating and underwater varieties) at 120 feet; after that is the composite longbow at 110. Those can go out to 10 range increments. Presuming all natural 20s (which is rather unusual), they'll be able to hit him up to 1,200 feet. If he runs (x4 speed), that's going to be two rounds and he's out. At 161 hit points, if he flees when he's about half down (80 or so), he'll be able to take about eight hits (or, if we're presuming maximum damage, too, he'll take four).
If he attacks at night, when it's smart for him to do so, only those with lowlight or darkvision are going to be a threat to him. With darkness in place on himself, only those with darkvision. They will have, at best, 60 ft in which they can attack him and see him, otherwise inflicting a 50% penalty on themselves. If he decides to flee, by dropping darkness on any two (or three) carrying a bow, or near thereabouts - especially if they don't look like they've got darkvision - the probability is so staggeringly low that you've got just as good odds as if you were level 1 human commoners firing crossbows in the darkness.
Sleeping? Do it in a cave under water.
Damien rightly said that they won due to tactics.
But had the dragon been playing to its strengths instead of succumbing to their bluffs and taunts? It would have been terrible.
Being heroic is great... unless you're not into that sort of thing.
Being foolish isn't... unless you're into that sort of thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two hours of slowly working on a post while distracted and sick means that I'm badly ninja'd.
I'm dropping out for now. Everyone's taking up arms.
"Weird" when applied to people or the things they like, is an insult from most people most of the time. Ignoring common use and saying, "You shouldn't get insulted." is poor form.
Anyway, I'm stopping this because my family is calling.
I'm spoilering what I already wrote because, you know, it's a lot of work (so I don't want to delete it all), but it's going to be ignored or taken out of context, or just rejected. So... nevermind.
** spoiler omitted **...
To keep it short, I'm going to respond to just a few points.
Saying that the common usage of the word 'weird' is as an insult just totally blows my mind. Seriously, it does. I would chalk this up to the fact that the aggrievement industry has truly taken over the language.
At which point your argument becomes, "chance wins!" and that's really meaningless. Level 1 commoners with phenomenal could win against old dragons doing stupid things and rolling badly, too. However, "the GM is fudging rolls and playing with kid gloves on" was something I thought you wanted to avoid, and something with that degree of good/bad luck would suspend the heck out of my disbelief (feeling remarkably suspicious to me) just as much as the other.
All I can say is, you've never seen the days we've had at our table. I love when my father GMs because his dice betray him every time. We roll in the open and can see it with our own eyes. Experience, actual real-life gameplay experience, tells me that chance does indeed rule.
Chance is great. But if you're going to rely on chance, why bother with anything?
This question honestly presents an alien way of thinking to me. Chance is EVERYTHING. Chance is what makes the game worth playing. Certainly the game could be played using only calculators and average statistics. The fact that dice are involved is what keeps me playing.
Being heroic is great... unless you're not into that sort of thing.
Being foolish isn't... unless you're into that sort of thing.
Honestly, I can't see why someone who doesn't want to be heroic and sometimes take foolish risks would play this game at all. That is almost directly opposite to what I want to get out of the game.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two hours of slowly working on a post while distracted and sick means that I'm badly ninja'd.
I'm dropping out for now. Everyone's taking up arms.
"Weird" when applied to people or the things they like, is an insult from most people most of the time. Ignoring common use and saying, "You shouldn't get insulted." is poor form.
Anyway, I'm stopping this because my family is calling.
I'm spoilering what I already wrote because, you know, it's a lot of work (so I don't want to delete it all), but it's going to be ignored or taken out of context, or just rejected. So... nevermind.
** spoiler omitted **...
We aee all f$$@ing wierd. We like PnP RPGs.