So I have seen two... rather contradictory responses regarding martials and items...
1) Martials can do al sorts of stuff! Ypu just need (insert shopping list here) and your good! And if your a (insert mundane here) ypu should use items!
2) I hate the idea of magic marts where you can get whatever you want tailor crafted for you!
The problem is... they tend yo be rather... contradictory.... without magic marts to get whatever you need on demand... the gear argument falls apart for the mundane...
Ironically these leads mundanes to be WORSE in low magic type games vs high magic games...
So what do you all think of this little conundrum? Are martials doomed in low magic/no item malls without giving away freebees?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In low magic worlds, martials can get by since there would be no high level mages that can wipe the floor with any non-caster that is at their same XP level.
As for magic malls, I tend to have the in-game theory that no mercenary magic item crafter would simply make random items and hope for the best. It is just too expensive. Most magic item makers should have the potential to divine if any specific item has a high chance of being requested by a paying customer. In other words, there is either a high demand for a particular item (cure light wound wands seem to be a very high demand item), or the shop owner would only make a high cost item if the crafter divines that such an item would be requested.
A truly low magic world would need some means to alter the casting classes (such as not having casters capable of utilizing more than 6th level spells). This makes items less needed, yet also might mean that certain creatures should not be utilized in said world.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yup. One of the reasons I don't have infinite patience with those who say they don't want any dirty magic use on their martial character; non-spellcasters need magic items more than the spellcasters.
This is mainly true at mid levels+ though. Those who mainly run low-level games (say, levels 1-6 not including E6) can get by with random stuff well enough.
That is another circulair conundrum I have found...
1) I want a guy with no magic or "weaboo" things. I want Aragorn or something!
2) The "fix mundanes with items".
The problem is, the mundane starts having so many items he looks like Mystogan from Fairy Tail... he has "no magic" but pretty much looks like a.mage with all his crap...
It depends on what replaces the magic mart. If the answer is 'no magic items', then yes, the mundanes are worse off.
If the answer is 'the GM decides what items you get', and the GM decides to give the Fighter an intelligent magic that allows him to do all kinds of cool things he wouldn't otherwise be able to do, then martial-caster disparity can be greatly reduced (at the price of mundanes becoming a bit wizardy, and reminding players that they succeed or fail as much by GM whim as their own efforts).
Really? So if you have a magic item that can cast, say, Fly, Dimension Door, Freedom of Movement, Resist Energy and Dispel Magic three times a day, suddenly you're playing that item and not the Fighter?
There's a weapon of roughly that power level in Jade Regent; it's useful, but it doesn't take over from your PC any more than a sack of potions would.
So I have seen two... rather contradictory responses regarding martials and items...
1) Martials can do al sorts of stuff! Ypu just need (insert shopping list here) and your good! And if your a (insert mundane here) ypu should use items!
2) I hate the idea of magic marts where you can get whatever you want tailor crafted for you!
The problem is... they tend yo be rather... contradictory.... without magic marts to get whatever you need on demand... the gear argument falls apart for the mundane...
Ironically these leads mundanes to be WORSE in low magic type games vs high magic games...
So what do you all think of this little conundrum? Are martials doomed in low magic/no item malls without giving away freebees?
Maybe you could reconcile the two with the assumption that magic items for mundane characters are much more in demand and hence made more often. So there's no need for a "magic mart" but the party will generally find the items the mundane characters need. It might work out okay in a game where individual WBL isn't tracked but rather WBL for the group (essentially balancing mundane PCs by giving them more wealth).
Maybe you could reconcile the two with the assumption that magic items for mundane characters are much more in demand and hence made more often. So there's no need for a "magic mart" but the party will generally find the items the mundane characters need. It might work out okay in a game where individual WBL isn't tracked but rather WBL for the group (essentially balancing mundane PCs by giving them more wealth).So I have seen two... rather contradictory responses regarding martials and items...
1) Martials can do al sorts of stuff! Ypu just need (insert shopping list here) and your good! And if your a (insert mundane here) ypu should use items!
2) I hate the idea of magic marts where you can get whatever you want tailor crafted for you!
The problem is... they tend yo be rather... contradictory.... without magic marts to get whatever you need on demand... the gear argument falls apart for the mundane...
Ironically these leads mundanes to be WORSE in low magic type games vs high magic games...
So what do you all think of this little conundrum? Are martials doomed in low magic/no item malls without giving away freebees?
The problem with that is that the majority of items mundanes need are things that casters would like but can get by without due to spell casting being a substitute. There isn't really going to be an in-game reason for casters to hand over all this amazing super valuable stuff to the martials when they could very well get even better use out of it themselves. Since the party is a team, what is going to happen most of the time is that they are going to agree to split the loot roughly even between characters regardless of casting ability. Hence your plan isn't really workable, because it relies on characters making in-game decisions based on meta-game reasons (which is bad). That isn't even getting into the resentment caused when caster players get few to no magical shineys because the crappy mundane characters are sucking up all the wealth in order to function barely competently.
As a side note, WBL is an assumption of the CR system and is solely a GM side guide to treasure drops. By default, the PCs literally do not need to know a damn thing about wealth by level. Any solution that involves the PCs caring about WBL isn't a real solution unless it involves overhauling large parts of the system (like Kirthfinder does).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
Casters with a martial bent can use magic weapons and armor just as well as mundanes.
Save boosters are wanted by all classes.
Some caster classes enjoy ramping their AC into the stratosphere(like druids), so they will want AC boosters as well.
When you start doing things like giving flight items and magic adamantine full plate to the fighter or Mithril exotic finesse weapons and Shadow Mithril Kikko to the rogue, then as soon as a +4 cloak of resistance comes up the casters are likely to demand it, because they haven't gotten bubcus so far. If you try to counter that by being generous with the items that everybody would like, you then are going to find that the casters will take upgraded items they can use first and get the lions share of gold from sold items to make up for their lack of usable loot. You can stop that by making sure that they get some stuff too...but either it isn't as useful as the items the group need and they are going to still take the better items they can use first despite the martials needing it, or it is as useful and we have gone around in a circle where everybody ends up gets roughly the same and nothing has been addressed despite a whole bunch of changes.
In essence, due to the typical group dynamic you can expect the players that are getting the short end of the stick to fight uneven loot distribution, and the more uneven you try to make it, the more resentful the players getting the short end will feel and the harder they will fight. It isn't likely to get opposed much by other players either, because how are you going to argue with a legitimate claim of "it isn't fair that half of the party gets 90% of the loot". Consequently, if your solution involves unfair loot distribution then it needs to be able to handle half of the party fighting tooth and nail against it. It should also prevent the people getting the short end from hating the crappy classes others are playing and wishing the other PCs die so they can actually get some nice loot. It's a really bad dynamic to be creating, and for the solution to be reasonable it really shouldn't be created at all.
It does depend on attitudes within the group, though. If the GM says, "By the way, to reduce the martial-caster disparity of the game system, I'm going to put in some extra good loot specifically to boost the party members from the weaker classes," and the group accepts it, then you shouldn't have a problem.
Really? So if you have a magic item that can cast, say, Fly, Dimension Door, Freedom of Movement, Resist Energy and Dispel Magic three times a day, suddenly you're playing that item and not the Fighter?
There's a weapon of roughly that power level in Jade Regent; it's useful, but it doesn't take over from your PC any more than a sack of potions would.
In the Fighter 20/Mythic 10 v. Wizard 20 challenge, I always felt my real opponent was the Legendary Item with Undetectable, not the person using it. Had the Fighter 20 been replaced with a Commoner 20, it wouldn't have changed very much. So if your item is contributing more then your class, saying "you are playing the item" seems like a fair assessment of the situation.
If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
Make Wizards pay scroll prices for all new spells learned beyond their standard 2/level. This takes a pretty mean chunk out of the WBL for Wizards, and is completely within the rules.
Make Wizards pay scroll prices for all new spells learned beyond their standard 2/level. This takes a pretty mean chunk out of the WBL for Wizards, and is completely within the rules.If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
That creates weird setting issues where there are all these scrolls getting made but there aren't any wizards willing to let people scribe, despite it basically being free money for them. You can change the rules to fix that, but then there is a good chance that the wizard player will feel that you are intentionally going out to screw them with rules changes (which you more or less are, because making the wizard's life harder is the whole point of the rules change).
Not to mention that the only casters you significantly affected with this are prepared arcane full-casters. Nobody else needs to scribe - they all just get spells.
Make Wizards pay scroll prices for all new spells learned beyond their standard 2/level. This takes a pretty mean chunk out of the WBL for Wizards, and is completely within the rules.If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
If you start doing that often then people will just switch to Sorcerer...
If you start doing that often then people will just switch to Sorcerer...Make Wizards pay scroll prices for all new spells learned beyond their standard 2/level. This takes a pretty mean chunk out of the WBL for Wizards, and is completely within the rules.If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
That's fine. Sorcerers are generally much less problematic than Wizards.
If you really want to control the power of arcane casters, just ban all the prepared casting classes and get rid of scrolls (or make them rare things which can only be found, not bought).
In low magic worlds, martials can get by since there would be no high level mages that can wipe the floor with any non-caster that is at their same XP level.
But you see, it's not only a problem of the Fighter losing when he fights a Wizard. Even in the low-magic setting without many caster NPCs, the Fighter would still be utterly surpassed by the party Wizard and Cleric that have his same XP level. It's like playing Yamcha when your team-mates are SSJ Goku and Piccolo fused with Kami while the game wants you to believe that you are Vegeta only because the enemy today isn't Frieza.
Personally, I am going to assume that most people don't go into wizard school in order to fight balors and such.
A lot of them are there just so they can get training for a nice, high paying job. The magical equivilant of someone training to be an IT guy.
So with minor magical items, you will find them fairly easily, since there will be a lot of crafters with the training to make them.
It is when you get to the stuff that is beyond the basis +1 or +2 stuff that you begin to see scarcity. Where the needed training is higher than what you commonly find on the market. That is when you have to go through other sources- comissions from master crafters (which might need a quest for required materials), auction houses (which could be used as a quest hook since it is a place selling magic items; excellent for phantom thieves that the party has to stop), or they have to go straight up questing for it (a local bandit leader or head cultist is well known for his +8 sword of awesome)
Essentially, make small stuff easy enough to get, and then force the players through a hoop or two for the big, important stuff. That way, if you build requires some special item (lets say gloves of dueling for a fighter), you have to track that down (finding another, higher level fighter that you can murder hobo; hopefull he has a crew that you can loot to pay for the rest of the party's trouble)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But how does that help the feeling angst?
I doubt the whole party wants to constantly bounce around lookin for stuff specifically for the mundane guys with no real gain for everyone else... at a certain point the paty will tell him to suck it up and shove it..
Fighter: (Who looks like a christmass tree.of items) Hey guys! I heard this tyrant here has an awesome magical bow I could use! Lets go!
Wizard: (who has a magical staff... ad thats it) no...
Fighter: well why not!
Cleric : (who also looks like a hobo) because we spent the last 5 sessions running around fetching crap for u!
Really? So if you have a magic item that can cast, say, Fly, Dimension Door, Freedom of Movement, Resist Energy and Dispel Magic three times a day, suddenly you're playing that item and not the Fighter?
There's a weapon of roughly that power level in Jade Regent; it's useful, but it doesn't take over from your PC any more than a sack of potions would.
The Shinobi Fuhonsen coin from Jade Regent makes an superb counterexample to the notion that magic items define the character. That coin gradually converts its user to chaotic evil if she is not careful, so it has a greater influence than most items.
When I ran Jade Regent, my wife's ninja character, Ebony Blossom, claimed the Shinobi Fuhonsen. And my wife's roleplaying mastered the magic item, not the other way around. Though Ebony Blossom kept possession of all unclaimed party treasure to have it available for bribes, for herself she took only the magic items from her honored opponent ninja leader Omoyani from the second module, Night of Frozen Shadows. Those items, a bag of holding, and an amulet of natural armor were her only magic items until she acquired the Shinobi Fuhonsen in the fifth module, Tide of Honor.
The Shinobi Fuhonsen gave her the ability to cast seven different spells, some three times per day. Ebony Blossom used Misdirection and Mislead constantly, because it fit her character. Born to a ninja clan, Ebony Blossom practiced deception ever since her first day of training. Two other spells were redundant, because the arcane casters in the party would already cast them for the party. Spider Climb was redundant because she already had a ninja trick for climbing. Her clan specialized in the less flashy ninja skills, such as climbing, sneaking, and poisoning. The newest spell, the one the GM and player choose together, was a spell to enhance poisons. That left only Dimension Door as a very useful spell that did not fit a ninja. Ebony Blossom avoided using that spell routinely. Instead, twice in the game she used it deceivingly as an unexpected escape after luring an enemy into overconfidence.
Giving a ninja the powers of a sorcerer resulted in the ninja still acting like a ninja.
Or perhaps Matthew Downie meant the intelligent magic sword Suishen? The NPC who claimed that sword, because it was a lost family heirloom, sheathed it and forgot about it, because it talked too much.
A more obvious example of a magic item changing the behavior of a character in my Jade Regent campaign was the fighter buying Winged Boots. He used them to fiy into combat with oni who had flight as a supernatural ability. Having access to arcane flight did not make him act like a wizard; rather, it made him act like a fighter with greater mobility.
I allowed the party as many opportunities to gain magic items of their choice as the adventure path allowed: crafting magic items during long caravan journeys, gifts from a wizard friend, prizes from the Ruby Phoenix Tournament, and shopping sprees in cities with magic marts (or some similar source of magic items: we never roleplayed that particular detail). The fighter took the most advantage of the opportunities, but he did not look like a Christmas tree. He bought a well-enchanted adamantine greatsword, protective rings, and Winged Boots.
What? And the wizard doesn't want a new metamagic rod or more powerful bracers of armor? A ring of freedom of movement? Hell, casters tend to have more specific needs than martials half the time.
All members of the party have equipment. Many have equipment options available only to a few positions.
And I doubt there are too many unique items you would be looking for. Most of the stuff people use comes from the big 7, and usually only the weapon is troublesome enough that you need to go looking.
So for general stuff like that, you could have them as occasional drops (because both you and the enemy would enjoy a high level cloak of resistence). Heck, you could have that as tertiary loot gained while going after the main item.
Sadly, with as low mental stats fighters are known to jave, you could VERY WELL be playing the weapon. You fail those Ego checks... it sucka lol
You mean the guy with the cloak of elvenkind, a magic brooch, and an artifact sword? And lets not forget command of healing magic known only to the High Kings of the Dunedain?That is another circulair conundrum I have found...
1) I want a guy with no magic or "weaboo" things. I want Aragorn or something!
Hey im not the one making the argument lol. Im just simply stating something I have seen touted a lot. Me? I like a little magic. The 2/3 casters are some of my favorite class. Alchemist, Magus, hunter, investigator ans (oddly enough) ninja are my favorite.classes, with the odd Inquisitor here or there.
In essence, due to the typical group dynamic you can expect the players that are getting the short end of the stick to fight uneven loot distribution, and the more uneven you try to make it, the more resentful the players getting the short end will feel and the harder they will fight. It isn't likely to get opposed much by other players either, because how are you going to argue with a legitimate claim of "it isn't fair that half of the party gets 90% of the loot". Consequently, if your solution involves unfair loot distribution then it needs to be able to handle half of the party fighting tooth and nail against it. It should also prevent the people getting the short end from hating the crappy classes others are playing and wishing the other PCs die so they can actually get some nice loot. It's a really bad dynamic to be creating, and for the solution to be reasonable it really shouldn't be created at all.
I don't think it should be imposed on a group after the fact. If one were going to "balance" mundane characters and magical characters by way of increased wealth, it would need to be explicitly made clear upfront (before the party chose their class) just like any, substantive houserule. I'm also presuming the group are on the same page as to how much disparity is needed.
If you've chosen fighter in such a campaign, ypu're choosing a weaker class that will receive lots of loot. If you've chosen wizard you've chosen an inherently stronger class that won't receive as much tailored loot. It might not suit everyone (I wouldn't like it, I'm ptetty sure) but surely the "typical group" aren't going to undermine the rules they've explicitly chosen to play under?
If you start doing that often then people will just switch to Sorcerer...Make Wizards pay scroll prices for all new spells learned beyond their standard 2/level. This takes a pretty mean chunk out of the WBL for Wizards, and is completely within the rules.If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
That's fine. Sorcerers are generally much less problematic than Wizards.
If you really want to control the power of arcane casters, just ban all the prepared casting classes and get rid of scrolls (or make them rare things which can only be found, not bought).
Because the Magus, Warpriest and Alchemist are all so problematic.
Do remember that "prepared caster" encompasses more than just Wizards, Clerics and Druids.
If you start doing that often then people will just switch to Sorcerer...Make Wizards pay scroll prices for all new spells learned beyond their standard 2/level. This takes a pretty mean chunk out of the WBL for Wizards, and is completely within the rules.If loot comes in the form of magic weapons and armor, it's not meta-gaming to give the martials first pick.
If there's an item that gives permanent flight, a sensible group will give it to the guy with the big sword, and not the guy who can cast Overland Flight on himself whenever he wants.
It can be done - though it does require the GM to construct available loot around specific needs.
But then you start getting resentment among your players as ypu got one guy with a mountain of bling and the wizard player sitting at 3k effective wealth at level 10....
Turns out players are people and they want to enjoy getting stuff too
That's fine. Sorcerers are generally much less problematic than Wizards.
If you really want to control the power of arcane casters, just ban all the prepared casting classes and get rid of scrolls (or make them rare things which can only be found, not bought).
Because the Magus, Warpriest and Alchemist are all so problematic.
Do remember that "prepared caster" encompasses more than just Wizards, Clerics and Druids.
I like the Alchemist quite a lot, but he's not a "caster", and his extract list is sufficiently narrow that it does not disrupt the game.
The Magus and Warpriest simply aren't necessary. Both of these concepts can be covered by an Eldritch Knight. These classes are just splat that Paizo conjured up as a justification for selling more books. The Magus, in particular, is in my experience an annoyingly narrow class with just a couple of TRUE BUILDS and a lot of cookie-cutterism. Bah.
I don't see much overlap between Eldritch Knight and Warpriest.
Eldritch Knight is a prestige class anyway, and as such fairly pointless. If I want to play a magical warrior, I want to be one from level 1, not have to wait until I've been playing for months before I can start being the character I envisaged, assuming I survive that long.
(I don't really like the Magus either.)
Also the EK kinda sucks at trying to be a magus... the EK is a VERY different beast... ita meant to out magic fighters and put martial.mages... but not do both simultaneously... also its just a bad prestige class without the early entry rules...
What? And the wizard doesn't want a new metamagic rod or more powerful bracers of armor? A ring of freedom of movement? Hell, casters tend to have more specific needs than martials half the time.
So for general stuff like that, you could have them as occasional drops (because both you and the enemy would enjoy a high level cloak of resistence). Heck, you could have that as tertiary loot gained while going after the main item.
The caster would *like* a new metamagic rod, but without it, he will just cast a less effective spell. He would *like* a ring of freedom of movement and some winged boots, but if he doesn't get them...he can just cast some spells. Meanwhile, the Fighter is standing around with his dick in his hand because he *needs* his equipment.
Also the EK kinda sucks at trying to be a magus... the EK is a VERY different beast... ita meant to out magic fighters and put martial.mages... but not do both simultaneously... also its just a bad prestige class without the early entry rules...
Yeah...I clean up the EK a bit in my games by making it require 2nd level spells to enter (so 4th level for Sorcerer/Oracle), and I take away the swift action tax for Arcane Armor Training/Mastery. I don't think a gish class that loses 2 caster levels and two points in BAB is bad, at all.
As far as the whole casting spells and hitting people at the same time thing...well, that's what Quicken and swift actions are for, but at any rate I don't think spell combat is so important as to justify building a whole base class around it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You mean the guy with the cloak of elvenkind, a magic brooch, and an artifact sword? And lets not forget command of healing magic known only to the High Kings of the Dunedain?That is another circulair conundrum I have found...
1) I want a guy with no magic or "weaboo" things. I want Aragorn or something!
You mean the Ranger 3/Paladin 2 with the Cloak of Elvenkind, +2 sword, and brooch granting a +5 insight bonus on heal checks?
Lord of the Rings is by Pathfinder standards a low-magic, low-level game. The characters mostly fight orcs and goblins. The scariest enemies are wraiths (which they often run from), "trolls" (ogres with sunlight vulnerability), and a huge spider. With those sorts of enemies, you can do just fine without flight, freedom of movement, or the other dramatic magical effects that high-level martials tend to eventually rely on.
|
To balance the disparity I tend to give automatic bonus progression to non-casters(and have the abilities unable to be dispelled) while requiring casters to craft/find the items like normal. It actually works out pretty well as I tend to have them fight intelligent enemies that realize an item that can cast greater dispel magic 4/day is a lot better against the PC's than everyone getting a +1 chain shirt.
To balance the disparity I tend to give automatic bonus progression to non-casters(and have the abilities unable to be dispelled) while requiring casters to craft/find the items like normal. It actually works out pretty well as I tend to have them fight intelligent enemies that realize an item that can cast greater dispel magic 4/day is a lot better against the PC's than everyone getting a +1 chain shirt.
That might be due to the fact that roughly 50 000gp custom magic items will tend to beat out 1200gp upgraded light armor.
Shockingly enough...
That's fine. Sorcerers are generally much less problematic than Wizards.
If you really want to control the power of arcane casters, just ban all the prepared casting classes and get rid of scrolls (or make them rare things which can only be found, not bought).
Because the Magus, Warpriest and Alchemist are all so problematic.
Do remember that "prepared caster" encompasses more than just Wizards, Clerics and Druids.
I like the Alchemist quite a lot, but he's not a "caster", and his extract list is sufficiently narrow that it does not disrupt the game.
The Magus and Warpriest simply aren't necessary. Both of these concepts can be covered by an Eldritch Knight. These classes are just splat that Paizo conjured up as a justification for selling more books. The Magus, in particular, is in my experience an annoyingly narrow class with just a couple of TRUE BUILDS and a lot of cookie-cutterism. Bah.
I view the Alchemist and Magus as classes that teach obscure rules. The Alchemist's bombs teach about splash weapons and the Magus' Spellstrike teaches about delivering touch spells via non-touch attacks, though most casters can do that only with unarmed strikes. Because of this, the classes naturally have a narrow focus.
I have not yet seen anyone play a Warpriest, so I don't have an opinion on that class.
The prepared-spell full-caster classes are problematic because they exist to show off all the spells. Preparing a spell is a way of limiting the daily versatility of a wizard, cleric, or druid while still providing them with an enormous list of spells they can cast. Throw in a fifteen-minute workday and that limitation disappears.
And this gives us an analogy for the original topic: mundanes and the magic mart. The enormous inventory of magic items in the magic mart is like the wizard's enormous spell list. A martial character has only enough gold to buy a few of those items, which is like the wizard choosing a few spells to prepare for the day. Except that the economics do not favor changing the choice each day, so the martial character is more like a sorcerer in being stuck with his choice for a long time.
Plausibly, if a city has a very limited selection of magic items for the fighter to buy, then it should also have a very limited selection of spells for the wizard to learn. Yet Pathfinder gives a wizard two free spells per level without having to explain their origin, presumably by research. I vaguely recall that in Advanced Dungeons & Dragons a wizard was stuck with random availability for spells to learn. Which calls for an Order of the Stick example! However, randomizing the spell selection for a wizard's spellbook would still leave the cleric and druid unrestrained.
To balance the disparity I tend to give automatic bonus progression to non-casters(and have the abilities unable to be dispelled) while requiring casters to craft/find the items like normal.
The analogy suggests that that would match the wizard's two free spells learned at each level. Imagine if a fighter possessed a class ability that let him or her improve one weapon and one armor or shield every level to level-appropriate effectiveness without having to explain the origin of the improvement. Then we could abandon the magic mart.
The downside of loot is that sometimes it's useful, sometimes it's not.
Right now the party I'm in has a barbarian, a bard, a sorceror, a cleric (using a mace), and a rogue. The barb's been loaded down with most of the martial weapon goodies simply because ... who else can use them? (The bard did nick our first +1 longsword, tho, and also a masterwork shortbow. With no objections.)
And then let's say that at the end of this scene, we find some +1 weapons. Do they count as the full 2,000 gold, or should they only count as 1,000 if they end up dumped at the first chance? A +1 heavy mace would be snapped up by our cleric in no time. A +1 falcata? Not so much.
Downtime + Crafting
The downside of loot is that sometimes it's useful, sometimes it's not.
Right now the party I'm in has a barbarian, a bard, a sorceror, a cleric (using a mace), and a rogue. The barb's been loaded down with most of the martial weapon goodies simply because ... who else can use them? (The bard did nick our first +1 longsword, tho, and also a masterwork shortbow. With no objections.)
And then let's say that at the end of this scene, we find some +1 weapons. Do they count as the full 2,000 gold, or should they only count as 1,000 if they end up dumped at the first chance? A +1 heavy mace would be snapped up by our cleric in no time. A +1 falcata? Not so much.
My wife once played in a D&D group that believed in an absolutely even split of treasure. Their method illustrated the paradoxical difference between purchase price and selling price.
All the magic items were identified and their full purchase prices were added to the cash value of the treasure, which was split evenly down to the nearest copper piece. If a PC claimed a magic item, then its purchase price counted as part of his or her share of treasure. If an item was not claimed, its value was recalculated as half purchase price and all shares of treasure were reduced accordingly. A PC was allowed to go into debt to the party to claim a magic item.
This method seemed counterproductive to me, because it discouraged claiming magic items. Why claim a +2 club when your cleric would prefer a +2 mace and could instead claim cash to buy it at the magic mart? Claiming the club would prevent a decrease in party treasure by 4000 gp (half the price of the +2 club), so net the cleric an extra 1000 gp. Thus, the cleric's real choice is exchanging 7000 gp for a less-than-ideal weapon with selling price 4000 gp or keeping the cash.
In an old paradox, a painter used $30 of materials and his own labor and talents to create a painting that he sold for $100. Later he purchased the painting back for $80 and sold it for $90. What is the painter's profit, counting the labor and talent as an expense? The answer is $30, $20, or $10, depending on which of the three market values, $80, $90, or $100, is used as the value of the painting. The paradox is that the cash value of the painting is undefined.
The value of a +1 falcata that no-one in the party can or wants to use is dead weight with an expected future selling value. The value of the +1 longsword in the hands of the bard is its usefulness in defeating enemies. Cash value exists only at a market. The magic mart provides a market.
The downside of loot is that sometimes it's useful, sometimes it's not.
Right now the party I'm in has a barbarian, a bard, a sorceror, a cleric (using a mace), and a rogue. The barb's been loaded down with most of the martial weapon goodies simply because ... who else can use them? (The bard did nick our first +1 longsword, tho, and also a masterwork shortbow. With no objections.)
And then let's say that at the end of this scene, we find some +1 weapons. Do they count as the full 2,000 gold, or should they only count as 1,000 if they end up dumped at the first chance? A +1 heavy mace would be snapped up by our cleric in no time. A +1 falcata? Not so much.
My wife once played in a D&D group that believed in an absolutely even split of treasure. Their method illustrated the paradoxical difference between purchase price and selling price.
All the magic items were identified and their full purchase prices were added to the cash value of the treasure, which was split evenly down to the nearest copper piece. If a PC claimed a magic item, then its purchase price counted as part of his or her share of treasure. If an item was not claimed, its value was recalculated as half purchase price and all shares of treasure were reduced accordingly. A PC was allowed to go into debt to the party to claim a magic item.
This method seemed counterproductive to me, because it discouraged claiming magic items. Why claim a +2 club when your cleric would prefer a +2 mace and could instead claim cash to buy it at the magic mart? Claiming the club would prevent a decrease in party treasure by 4000 gp (half the price of the +2 club), so net the cleric an extra 1000 gp. Thus, the cleric's real choice is exchanging 7000 gp for a less-than-ideal weapon with selling price 4000 gp or keeping the cash.
In an old paradox, a painter used $30 of materials and his own labor and talents to create a painting that he sold for $100. Later he purchased the painting back for $80 and sold it for $90. What...
That seems weird, why have the purchase value of the item counted in the cash value of the treasure? That way you have count treasure that you simply don't have.
In my party we do the following:
1) We add up the selling value of all* the treasure we have.
2) We divide the number we got in 1) by 4 (the number of PCs in the party) and that new number is each PCs "cache".
3) If a player wants to keep an item from the treasure then he simply subtracts the item's selling value from his cache.
4) If two (or more) PCs want the same then one of them gets it (by doing 3)) and then both of them split the cost of buying a new one for the other PC.
We think that this is the most fair way to distribute loot among the party, of course a PC might ask to borrow or "borrow" money from other PCs to cover a cost, after all the PCs are (usually) very good friends.
*some things might be left out of that (assuming the party agrees), these items are usually status removal scrolls etc.
A paradox is a situation where common sense gives one answer, formal analysis gives another, and the choice between the two is not obvious. thejeff's common sense was too smart to be fooled, so he could not see the paradox.
In an old paradox, a painter used $30 of materials and his own labor and talents to create a painting that he sold for $100. Later he purchased the painting back for $80 and sold it for $90. What is the painter's profit, counting the labor and talent as an expense? The answer is $30, $20, or $10, depending on which of the three market values, $80, $90, or $100, is used as the value of the painting. The paradox is that the cash value of the painting is undefined.I don't see the paradox or how you get any of those answers. He starts by spending $30, makes $100 (net $70), buys it back for $80 (net -$10), sells it again for $90 = $80 profit.
Cash value of the painting is irrelevant, since he doesn't end with it. What's not defined is the value of his labor & talent. Unless you're trying to back calculate that from the sale price of the painting, but then I still don't see where the answers come from. For example, if labor + talent = first sale price ($100) - materials ($30), then they equal $70 and profit is 0 by definition.
I messed up the paradox a little by mentioning the cost of materials. The paradox is "The Elusive Profit" from Martin Garder's book, Aha! Gotcha.
Dennis the Painter thinks, "First I sold the picture for $100. That just covered my time and materials, so it was an even trade. Then I bought it back for $80 and sold it for $90, so I'm $10 ahead."
George the First Buyer thinks, "By George, that artist sold his picture for $100 and bought it back for $80. That's a clear profit of $20. We can forget the next sale because $90 is about what the picture is worth."
Gerry the Second Buyer thinks, "The artist made $20 when he sold his picture for $100 and bought it back for back for $80. Then he made another $10 when he paid $80 for it and sold it to me for $90. So his total profit is $30."
The formal analysis is that Profit = Revenue - Cost and and the Cost is the value of the picture. Common sense, as illustrated by thejeff, is correct and the formal analysis that attempts to define the value of the picture as one of its selling prices is wrong.
The paradox is about the difficulty of interpreting wealth, but I see now that my argument was too indirect. Let me try again.
A character's gear enhances some effectiveness of the character. In Pathfinder, we have an expected Wealth by Level that measures the value of the gear in a crude attempt to measure the effectiveness gained from the gear. But that measurement can be far off. If the party found a chest of gold and gems worth 100,000 gp deep in the wilderness, but spent their next two levels trying to leave the wilderness, the value of the chest does not enhance the effectiveness of the characters. Likewise, a spare Ring of Protection +1 when everyone already has a Ring of Protection +1 is wealth without effectiveness. The magic mart is a tool for converting wealth into effectiveness.
However, in some favors of campaign, converting wealth into effectiveness is part of the challenge, and a magic mart ruins the challenge. The GM has to run a careful balance and remember that if wealth cannot be easily converted into effectiveness, then wealth is not a good measure of effectiveness.
However, in some favors of campaign, converting wealth into effectiveness is part of the challenge, and a magic mart ruins the challenge. The GM has to run a careful balance and remember that if wealth cannot be easily converted into effectiveness, then wealth is not a good measure of effectiveness.Such campaigns do not work in Pathfinder because wealth effectiveness isn't extra, it's the baseline. You might be able to compensate for lacking magic weapons and stat boosters if you optimize the hell out of your character and have the usually overlapped buff spells available, but AC scaling for non-monks comes almost exclusively from magic, as does almost half of the scaling for weak saves.
I mean that in such a campaign the GM has to make calculations such as, "This 8th-level party has not updated their magic items since 5th level, so they are only as effective as a 7th-level party; therefore, I should use a CR 9 monster instead of a CR 10 monster." And avoid encounters where victory depends on magic items that they lack.
Remember the Jade Regent party I mentioned in the 24th post in this thread? Due to a six-member party, good stats (rolled 4d6, kept the best 3), good optimization, and amazing teamwork, the party would have functioned four levels above the party level. But they passed up many opportunities to claim treasure, preferring to return stolen wealth to its original owners and to avoid certain lucrative encounters as not part of their mission, so they were behind in their magic items. (The party was not particularly Good in their alignment, but gaining a reputation as selfless heroes was part of their plan.) That reduced them to functioning only three levels above their party level.
Redesigning the modules' encounters to be challenging was nerve-wracking, because as Atarlost pointed out, the party had particular weaknesses from their lack of magic items and their low level that could lead to a TPK. Fortunately, they fought oni, who do not exploit low saves, so I mostly threw higher-level oni at them. The high-level cleric I threw at them depended on battlefield control and her oni minions rather than on save-or-die spells.