| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because the OP cares?Still waiting on that page number.
Also, why do we care if something is or isn't a GM Fiat, a judgement call, Rule 0, or an Act of whatever deity that you choose? By a show of hands, does anyone care?
That just brings up more questions than it answers. I know a couple of people who, if their GM told something like that to them, would rather abandon whatever quest they were on and instead explore the physics of this particularily weird universe. Saying "oil can burn but not explode, no matter what you do with it" is worse than "sorry, I can't allow you to make a bomb, that would wreck every plan I had for this adventure and I can't come up with new ones on the spot" in pretty much every situation.
As for "no one in our world heals with lay on hands":sure they do, it just doesn't work. Google "Faith healing".
A lot of good responses here, though for some reason some people misunderstood the original question. It isn't "Why shouldn't this be a problem", it is "Suppose a player asked a question like this, and you don't want to tell them to metaphorically f&+@ off" sort of question. I understand that with handwaving you can explain pretty much anything, but, in my opinion, it should be used sparingly.Because once we're at the point of "this happens because I say it happens" the rest of the details are irrelevant? And, in fact, may end up complicating things further?
Basically, if the solution is some form of "the GM says it works this way because they say so", there's nothing to discuss. There's nothing we can possibly discuss. If the solution is some form of "the GM says it works that way because reasons", those reasons are something we can discuss. However, if the statement was supposed to be an absolute no then giving reasons just means we're going to go back and forth until we reach "because I say so" or the world has thoroughly been ripped to unrecognizable shreds.
So, I care if the solution is just GM fiat. That's a solution, not the solution, and not particularly imaginative. A blunt tool, best used sparingly or not at all.
Therein lies the problem. There is no the solution. The books aren't covering this; we've seen was to bend what exists to maybe-sort of cover some parts of this, but nothing that delves into the subject.
What you're going to come to is that the GM and usually the players -- but not always, because there are players that don't want to be involved in world building and GMs that don't want players involved -- but they are going to decide if this is the sort of world that they want. Do you want a world that mirrors what people believe a fantasy realm would look like? Do you want steam punk? Do you want magic to emulate technology, as someone mentioned above with the simulated cell phones?
These questions are ones that people work out during the world building stages, usually, if they deal with it at all. Maybe the Gods don't want you to have ray guns. The world was built on an ancient burial ground that prevents technology from being developed. The magical geegaw has put the universe in a stasis loop and nothing advances.
This sort of thing is something that can be handled with a few lines in your world building document. If players want to play scientist instead of adventurer and that is something the rest of the table is willing to indulge then you get the joy of dealing with something outside the rules. If you are lucky, you've thought about this ahead of time, or are quick on your feet.
Now, for me I've worked this out on various worlds I've run. Moreover, I'm not really interested in watching someone play Mr. Wizard, nor are most of the players I've dealt with over the years. They'd deal with it for a bit and then would frankly tell Player A "Hey. Are we going to play or should we leave you and the GM to map out the physics of our imaginary game world?"
Don't get me wrong, there are those that find this sort of thing utterly fascinating. In my experience, that number falls off once it starts eating up valuable game time and interferes with actually playing the game.
The answer is going to be some version of GM judgement call. There isn't a clear cut rule that covers this sort of thing, and while I can only speak for myself, if/when people try to rules lawyer some form of "RAW says this so it MUST happen" the game tends to grind to a halt as we have a polite or even not so polite conversation about it.
The rules guide. They do not control, they do not command, they are not a set of chains. If they don't make sense, you move into an area that some people dislike, that of Rule 0/Gm Judgement calls/house rules. Those are part of the game too.
|
All of which are Rule 0, introducing factors to the game that are not in the rules. The list was done extensively earlier.
1) Other gods have agents wandering around saving those people and driving progress forwards. It helps they are the 'good' folks, since they are saving lives and trying to make people's lives better.
2) And WHY do people keep on bringing up high level wizards? High level wizards don't drive this stuff. Low level spellcasters proliferating, probably by teaching one another since their 'betters' surely aren't going to do so, would do it.
3) 3 days for one wizard of any level to teach wizardry to a commoner/1 with the right Int score. You don't need 'best and brightest.' You need an 11 Int.
4) Technology is a long, arduous practice of using the scientific method and tens of thousands of man hours of fruitless experimentation and research to make minor advances. It advances best when you distribute that load over thousands of people.
Your language on mastering magic is pure Rule 0. And we aren't caring about 'mastering' magic. We're about 'apprenticing' magic. It's all that is required.
As for mobs and wizards...you can make the same argument with guns and grenades. Guess what? The mobs get guns and grenades. In this case, they'd go get magic, too.5) And then the perpetrators are brought to justice and executed for murder, and civilization advances on.
6) Uh, ever hear about a little thing called Chaos? Very strong in fantasy worlds. Drives change and conflict.
It's Law that adheres to tradition and advances slowly.
And it's Neutrality that reaps the benefit of both.
You're Rule 0'ing, 'because tradition'.7) Broad, low disbursement of a problem is often more effective then one genius. That genius will get powerful. Lots of okay smart people advance societies. Not every wizard is going to be Reed Richards and outthink the rest of hte people on the planet.
8) I have no idea what this is trying to say? WHo cares if non-thumb using creatures can't use a gun?
9) By...
You seem to be determined to ignore the basic point of my post. I'm not saying these things WILL happen I'm saying that they COULD. Even in our history technological development only happened in the last few centuries to a lot of opposition in several cases and it could have gone the other way with just a few things changed. In a world that contains magic there's a lot of forces not only opposing technological advancement but in some cases invalidating the very cause that drove it in the first place. Could a technological revolution happen in a magical world? Sure but that is not the same as saying its inevitable. All those suggestions I gave where just off the top of my head as to what could happen.
I LITERALLY spent no time at all thinking about it beyond what could stop a technological reovolution and bam 9 possible reasons depending on the world. I'm not even a historian and I certainly don't have a detailed knowledge of the causes behind our own technological revolution but if you looked at it seriously I'm sure you'd find introducing magic and magical beings would causes a lot of problems and that if you looked at it properly you could come up with even more. At the very simplest level medical research for example would be immensely slowed by the fact nobles would be more likely to donate to their faith (cure disease) rather than fund doctors to study the causes of disease. Same with agriculture why research way's to get a better yield when most clerics/druids can achieve the same with simple spells. As for communication why develop a way to pass messages across the continent risking their interception when any mage can cast a message spell to instantly find out the ship carrying your oranges arrived safely?
Are they rule 0? Of course they're rule 0 and you know why? Because the game is made to provide a nice little game were we play wizards and warriors, pretend to be elves or dwarves or hengeyoki. Its not designed to simulate complex social and historical imperitives becase those kinds of games are a very different set up. Look at the lightning bolt spell I'm fairly sure there's no table X to show how they ground out to the nearest earth when you hurl them or disperse into an AOE when hitting water. That would be realistic but its not of interest to players who want to hit what they cast lightning bolt at.
Are they rule 0? Of course they're rule 0 and you know why? Because the game is made to provide a nice little game were we play wizards and warriors, pretend to be elves or dwarves or hengeyoki. Its not designed to simulate complex social and historical imperatives because those kinds of games are a very different set up. Look at the lightning bolt spell I'm fairly sure there's no table X to show how they ground out to the nearest earth when you hurl them or disperse into an AOE when hitting water. That would be realistic but its not of interest to players who want to hit what they cast lightning bolt at.
In short: Yes.
In more detail: You've hit upon the primary reason that world-simulation rules aren't part of the Pathfinder publications: Because such things are so incredibly niche as to guarantee poor performance - it's just not worth their time.
Looking at it from a non-commercial standpoint... it's actually not a good idea to include too much world-building rules into a game system, because they're either going to be ludicrously user-unfriendly or will need to focus on a particular model - typically medieval Europe, as it is largely the basis for most D&D and Pathfinder settings. Less rules about world-building gives those creating content vastly more freedom in which to create unique and interesting places.
Which brings to mind a case in question: Eberron.
Eberron has some great ideas, but is absurdly flawed as a setting, and other than some wacky decisions regarding scale, one of the main issues I've had with the system is that it tries to shoehorn standard 3.5 Edition rules and world mechanics into a setting where they simply don't fit. Cities were designed using "standard" D&D mechanics and made a little bigger than normal... but the setting demanded populations in the millions, and even the largest city is only a fraction of that. This trend continues on, as one reads the fluff and finds the crunch frequently contradicting it.
Some guidelines and suggestions for how to throw something together quickly for a specific style of location? Awesome. Hard rules about what world is and isn't permitted to be made? No thanks.
|
Is it really worth all the back and forth that is going on?
New question;
Why not have a tech explosion? There are a few areas that would be great to have it in and see how far they could push out.
The Mana Wastes works well because Arcane magic doesn't work well there ( I would rule spells don't scale because the area is "sapped" of all untapped magic) I think the area is awesome and they could try to annex themselves further from Geb and Nex, maybe even putting some fear into the wizards because The Mana Wastes doesn't play ball the way other countries do.
Stuff!
I have no objections about the reasons you posited as for why a magitech explosion wouldn't happen.
But they are all Rule 0. You actually have to go and rule 0 that this is the reason why, with the default rules being what they are, that a magitech explosion hasn't occured. In other words, you must take steps outside the core rules to rein in the possibilities of the core rules.
I immediately made counter-examples that effectively neutralized all your points, off the top of my head, to show that Rule 0 works in both directions, and logically.
So, the point is NOT that you can't rule 0 your world so it works. It is that you MUST do so. There isn't anything in the core rules to stop the proliferation.
So acknowledge that you are changing or adding rules to the game, and do what you have to do.
================
Raltus, the original question is about a 'magitech' explosion, not a 'tech' explosion. hence why all the commentary about proliferation of low level spellcasting and what not.
Generally, we're not worried about a tech explosion because of the existence of magical alternatives. The sheer amount of infrastructure advancement required for high technology, and how easily it could be disrupted, means that from a 'logical' standpoint, it would be very hard to get into the computer and information age, and tech would probably stagnate somewhere in the steampunk era with magical hybridization and proliferation picking up the slack.
Also, the rules are pretty much silent on the proliferation and advancement of tech. Where they exist (Iron Gods AP), they are severely restricted by the existence of pre-existing technology (i.e. you need the Iron God tech to make more Iron God tech). Technology in that AP is more about cannibalizing and retasking tech, not understanding it from ground zero and rebuilding it from scratch.
Gunpowder, on the other hand, does NOT require a massive investment in infrastructure, and even making better cannons isn't going to be that intensive, more an investment in metallurgical knowledge then needing massive amounts of iron. It is also extremely viable as a weapon for those who don't have magic, which would drive research forwards.
Literally, to start on the gunpowder road, you need to know the proper ratio of 3 chemicals, and then just experiment on different refining procedures. You don't need a massive amount of raw materials like you would for, say, starting on the age of Rails, or making steam ships, or a steampunk/clockworks world. Since not everyone is a caster, the ability to reach out and touch someone at a great distance with force, explosive blasts, and armor-punching ability is VERY attractive. Non-casters will throw tons of money at such to get that kind of power.
=============
Eberron worked as well as any other fantasy setting that ignored elements of the rules that didn't fit together. It was more a case of rules not actually modeling then the world not being functional. Heck, they even introduced the magewright NPC class to explain the proliferation of low magic in numbers, so you didn't have to train wizards from commoners.
Eberron did good for a broad, low magic everywhere society. It lacked the high end wizardry of most other settings, so the dominant feature was not powerful NPC's and an archmage in every city, but the fact magic was in use everywhere routinely. I thought it did a fairly good job of holding to that trope.
they did screw up the warforged and how strong they were viz other races, but, eh. SHould've had a +LA on them, but that would be all.
==Aelryinth
|
|
They don't really have any sort of Anti Magic equipment when outside of the Mana Wastes though, so mages would be able to content.
I mean to put magi tech but being at work I wasn't really looking before I sent the email. I did play a bunch in Eberron and loved it, I would use ideas from that if I were to do a magi tech campaign.
Stuff!I have no objections about the reasons you posited as for why a magitech explosion wouldn't happen.
But they are all Rule 0. You actually have to go and rule 0 that this is the reason why, with the default rules being what they are, that a magitech explosion hasn't occured. In other words, you must take steps outside the core rules to rein in the possibilities of the core rules.
I immediately made counter-examples that effectively neutralized all your points, off the top of my head, to show that Rule 0 works in both directions, and logically.
So, the point is NOT that you can't rule 0 your world so it works. It is that you MUST do so. There isn't anything in the core rules to stop the proliferation.
So acknowledge that you are changing or adding rules to the game, and do what you have to do.
I hope this doesn't sound too argumentative, but a lot of the reasons you posit as for why a magitech explosion would happen are Rule 0, too. Well, not Rule 0 so much as world design; I honesty can't imagine playing more than once with someone who's behavior demanded that I invoke Rule 0 while describing a setting I'd designed. I feel like you're saying Rule 0 when you're talking about what I call world building.
I'm perfectly happy with player/GM collaboration in world building, but having a player tell the GM that there's been a magitech industrial revolution according to RAW so the GM is in a position where he has to say, "Rule 0 says I'm always right. Like, ALWAYS, especially right now." seems like a horrible play environment.
Please, please, please understand that I have no problem with magitech campaigns. Given the similarity between 3.5 and PF, I fully support just fricken' using Eberron books with the PF CRB and not sweating the small stuff. That's doesn't mean a magitech industrial revolution is required on Oerth according to RAW.
It's not about preference. It's about certain elements of the rules allowing you to do unlimited amounts of magic, or extremely disruptive things, so why hasn't it happened?
Cantrips revolutionizing hygiene and time-saving to lift people out of drudgery is one example. YOu need one level of any class that gets orisons or cantrips! A basic education...or training that takes 3 days!
Being able to light up a city in ONE NIGHT by Calling in a Lantern Archon that can use Continual Flame at will as an SLA. Bing! Light 24/7, the single greatest security advance in the history of the human race.
The for or against elements you're referencing are outside of what the rules actually allow, and are basically the foundation elements of a magitech revolution.
So, WHY hasn't it happened? You have to rule 0, defy logic, dumb down the setting, usually by gentlemen's agreements that ignore the fact that any 5th level cleric could Call in a Lantern Archon, pay him a minor fee, and literally light up an entire kingdom over the course of a week or month, making lighting that will last forever and cost nothing more. Any Good church would do this as a matter of course. Donations would flood the church in thanks for the gift of light and easily pay for it all, even if it was just coppers per family.
You have to defy the logic that if you could learn magic to make your life easier in merely 3 days...you would! Low level casters would be everywhere!
All stuff that is part of the rules. You have to explain why it all hasn't happened, and that is Rule 0.
I did post my rules against a technology explosion, simply by making it nigh-impossible for tech to exist alongside magic. Making chemistry explosive, electricity not obligated to follow the path of least resistance, and advanced tech tending to attract Axiomatic influences and animate as an uncontrolled construct will put the kabosh on advanced tech right off the bat.
Most of my humans are Homo Sapiens Primos and have no magical ability. Anti-magic is a huge thing. If you're human and have magical ability, something got into your bloodline back behind you and is manifesting. As Primos humans refuse to knuckle under to Powered humans, they've taken steps to compete. Forsaken human rogues and fighters are terrifying opponents to casters, and keep casters very firmly in check...Powered throwing their weight around tend to die messily.
It also explains why the Fighter and a Rogue relatively suck. Once you remove the magical elements from all other classes...Fighters and Rogues rock hard.
I rule 0 hard. And I call it that. It is a part of world-building, and what I do definitely isn't in the core rules.
==Aelryinth
oh, the players can get clever, no doubt about it.
But the Rule 0.1 is IMC, 'tech and magic don't get along well.' So, if they try something on the tech side that's wonky, I can point at the established rule I've already made and figure out a reason why it doesn't happen.
As for the magic spells corner rules...some I let slide, some don't. Since most humans cannot use wizardry, period, the whole idea of 'low, broad magic' has been retasked to 'low, broad magic that runesmiths can pull off by making Craft', since no-magic humans that can craft vastly outnumbers the Powered, who are generally concerned with getting more powerful and not making a living. Infinite spellcasting isn't a problem. There's tons of competition in crafting magic items, PC's have literally no advantage, and the average joe trusts runecraft better then Powercraft, anyways.
Problem spells like Fabricate and the like work slightly differently, including the fact they can be dispelled (like geniecraft stuff)...which means nobody trusts Fabricated or Created stuff, and trying to sell it is like passing off Fool's Gold. It's also very restricted in what you can make, since it can't hit high Mastercraft DC's, so it's often an inferior product that doesn't satisfy the demands for making powerful magical stuff.
Etc etc. Anti-magical stuff is everywhere, summoners and conjurors are called 'slavemages', enchanters are called 'mindbenders', and necromancers 'deadheads', all of which sum up the general perception of them. Using that kind of magic in a hostile manner stirs up incredible amounts of trouble for the caster.
And so forth, and so on.
==Aelryinth
stuff!
The OP isn't asking about a gentlemen's agreement. He was asking about a player who asks about stuff that would take advantage of what the rules can do. In short, the player learned the rules, and the 'agreement' that was there because he didn't know the rules, was in danger of collapsing.
So, what does the DM do at that point?
That's the whole issue of the thread.
==Aelryinth
You say, "That is a very interesting idea, Player, but that isn't the sort of game that I and/or the other players are interested in."
If the GM has already dealt with this sort of thing, refer them to the world document (that they should have read) and move on with game play.
If they haven't, be prepared to think on your feet as a GM or be willing to either let them do it (and deal with the consequences that comes with it for your game) or say no (and deal with the consequences of possible hurt feelings).
|
|
Well there's three flaws with your argument I can see right off the bat.
1) A lantern Archon is not some magical battery you order around or pay a monthly fee to. Its an agent of HEAVEN it doesn't really matter if its a low ranking member its still an angel. Summoning one and telling it to go round and light up your city/country really doesn't sound like something any self respecting priest would do or tolerate. Take a moment to think about that in world where gods and demons aren't just a matter of belief they're a matter of fact what priest after years of taining to revere and worship them would summon a member of heaven and tell them to go create lighting in their kingdom?
2)You keep coming at it from the perspective of a modern educated person and that's simply not the case. The vast majority of this world is uneducated peasants. That is a HUGE gulf between a culture where universal education is the norm and any high school graduate is going to have at least a basic idea of chemistry, reading, writing, mathmatics and a culture where only the wealthy elite get that and most people are still likely to believe thunder causes milk to go sour. There's an even bigger gap when that could have a certain validity because magic.
3) As part of two you seem to believe just because something could happen it must happen. To use your cantrips revolutionizing hygene and picking people out of drugery. One how many mages do you think are really going to spend their time using their mystical powers to do that for free I mean really? Two even if you have enough to genuinely change the hygene of an entire class of people what do think is going to happen as a result of that? Well a lot of medical research isn't going to happen because everyones happy and healthy and secondly there's going to be a lot less drive to work because magic and those generous, selfless mages will just take care of you for nothing so people will sit around doing nothing.
You say you have no objections to all my arguments being rule 0 but if they're rule 0 then so is all your aguments about why something must happen. It is written into the racial description that elves value their traditions which include a care for the environment that they bond with to the point it affects their apperance yet you insist their acting to protect that environment against things like clear cutting is rule 0 while the clear cutting isn't. You can't have it both way's either all your own personal must happen changes are rule 0 as well or my arguments based on historical facts and the world as its set up isn't.
You say I have to rule 0 why a magitech explosion hasn't occured but isn't it more of a rule 0 to say "Those highly traditional elves with magical bond to the land don't object to the humans clear cutting the forest they live in." or "That noble who's son was saved by a cure disease spell suddenly funds a large number of doctors to research a mundane cure rather than just donating them to the church."? Even your magical culture change is more of a rule zero as right now as presented in the rules wizards aren't exactly beating down the doors to change the world yet you want to rule 0 "Bob the apprentice gets all his friends together and goes down to random village X where they all out of the goodness of their heart cast cantrips to make everyone happy and healthy." without any explanation of just why they'd act so much against basic human nature that they can change the entire world?
I could immediately make counter examples to neutralize all your examples in fact I initially did just that then edited my post to stick to the core point of my argument rather than getting into a A is countered by B countered by C countered by D situation. This is the point I'm making there is no fundamental explosion of magictech that must happen unless you start rule 0ing in extra rules to make it so.
I don't have to do any such thing so because while you might occasionally get a player who likes that style of gameplay you know what most of them do? They do what most PEOPLE do which is carry on with the status quo quite happily. Its not that they try to spawn a technological/magical revolution altering the world beyond all recognition its that they don't even TRY. I've seen groups who when awarded a plot of land to build their stronghold on just turf out the people living there because their squatters with no right to the land. No protests they were there first, that they had children, even that they're NPC's who don't matter. No all that mattered to them was they had the legal document to the land so it was there's and that's what most adventurers are going to be. There is no need to rule 0 anything because no one is actually doing something that might require it. On the other hand if you do want to suddenly spawn technology and magitech revolutions you do start needing to rule 0 fundamental changes not only in the cultures of the time but in what is actually happening in the specific world.
Even on the occasions where I have had players who do want their continual light torches and their flying carpet cars with transparisteel cockpits and magical cellphones and all the other wonderful technology they can spawn my rule 0 has really only needed two rules.
1) If your going to introduce something you have to provide me with a reason your character would actually come up with something like this.
2) You have to live with the consequences of it and can't change your behaviour because you know something out of character about what could happen.
For example coming up with the concept of a torch is fairly easy lighting sources exist and its not hard to see a mage inventing a conntinual light source in a closeable case but coming up with the idea of the 3 field system for their peasants off the top of their head with no background not so much especially if they have to justify WHY said mage who's normally not even considered said peasants worth witholding a fireball now wants to improve their lot in life. Same with the fact if you come up with concepts of firearms I'm not going to let you jump to the latest assault rifle model your going to start off with cannons and matchlocks and work our way up.
Sure there's nothing in the rules to stop the proliferation but there's nothing in there to insist it happens either.
You seem to have two standards where anything that could prevent a technology revolution such as a cultural resistance to it (something that really happened in our own world by all classes of society) is rule 0ing it but the most bizzare, convuluted explanation of why it would happen is just "natural" when it isn't. Such as your low level wizards all sharing their knowledge and working together to make the world a better place. I've not seen anything in the rules that would support such a belief, I have seen a lot of medival fantasy worlds and that's just not what happens in them. They don't operate on a free sharing of knowledge between low level journeyman they have a master and apprentice relationship. You have just rule zero'd a massive change in the world and insist its what would happen.
Also I have to ask where do you keep getting this 3 day's to train anyone as a wizard from? The wizard class has one of the highest starting ages in the RULES. That is their random starting age for a human is +2d6 YEARS. In fact cleric has the same so by these rules you love so much it seems that magical training depending on the person would take anywhere from 2 to 12 years beyond the basic training that everyone gets. That's full time training too not a couple of hours a week its going to be day in, day out for potentially the next decade for each peasant you want to turn into a wizard.
1) A lantern Archon is not some magical battery you order around or pay a monthly fee to. Its an agent of HEAVEN it doesn't really matter if its a low ranking member its still an angel. Summoning one and telling it to go round and light up your city/country really doesn't sound like something any self respecting priest would do or tolerate.
I'm not sure why wizards or priests of gods associated with light would have an issue with this.
Also I have to ask where do you keep getting this 3 day's to train anyone as a wizard from?
The retraining rules which have specific rules if you try to give an NPC levels in a PC class such as wizard.
I believe that the counter argument will be that you can train to be a new class in virtually no time -- by the rules -- and so therefore our peasants will thus be able to train without incurring the starting age rules.
I don't personally like that and have made adjustments to my own game to cut that off at the knees, but as I recall this came up a few pages ago.
|
|
1) A lantern Archon is not some magical battery you order around or pay a monthly fee to. Its an agent of HEAVEN it doesn't really matter if its a low ranking member its still an angel. Summoning one and telling it to go round and light up your city/country really doesn't sound like something any self respecting priest would do or tolerate.I'm not sure why wizards or priests of gods associated with light would have an issue with this.
Which is why I edited my post you wind up in an A counters B counters C situation. In this case gods of light support their clerics summoning archon's and asking this favour while gods of darkness support their clerics countering it or the gods don't grant it because they see some long term consequences mortals don't. In this case your dealing with the case of gods of light while I was talking about the general attitude that all priests would have no problem ordering around what's essentially an angel for their own convenience. In fact you rather supported my point there in why I didn't want to get bogged down on specific cases because you can spend all day just posting counter examples
@KnightnDay
I don't personally like that either but even so as I said using those rules (which is what they're insistent on) you're looking at a week for retraining 1 level or 5 day's if its a similar class with commoner to wizard isn't. So if its a new class you're looking at either 1k experience without the commoner dying or 2-12 years by the starting ages. If you're talking about retraining that's still a week to turn a first level commoner into a first level wizard without touching any skills or feats and you need a 2nd level wizard willing to do said teaching. Yet they keep saying 3 day's which is not in any of the rules at all. Sure a week vs 3 day's isn't much but I'd like to know where they're getting that figure from.
Yet they keep saying 3 day's which is not in any of the rules at all. Sure a week vs 3 day's isn't much but I'd like to know where they're getting that figure from.
Ugh... How many time will we have to quote this:
If you are retraining a level in an NPC class (adept, aristocrat, commoner, or expert) to a level in any other class, the training takes only 3 days.
In this case your dealing with the case of gods of light while I was talking about the general attitude that all priests would have no problem ordering around what's essentially an angel for their own convenience.
To be honest, I sincerely don't understand what's wrong with using planar ally to get an allied being to help you do something that is in their area of power and specifically helps their cosmological agenda...
Some may consider it demeaning to the celestial being in question. One might also wonder if it were that easy to do, why hasn't anyone done it before? It isn't like the devs aren't aware of these capabilities as well.
For that matter, what are the ramifications of doing this? There are always reactions to everything.
These are the sorts of things that you have to work out when you go off the normal realm of the game and wander into grey and/or new areas.
|
|
As Knigthnday said I'm not particularly religious but I'd balk at summoning an angel and asking it to make my life easier if I had that ability but again this is getting into an A counters B specifics situation I'm trying to avoid. However I will again ask if this is such a good thing for that being why hasn't it ALREADY done so of its own free will? Its not the being that's chosing to do this its you telling it to. However could we please just drop the focus on specifics or well be all day going "But A means X" "But X means Y." "But Y means D."
Also I did actually find that 3 day rule and just spent ages typing out a post it ate because I'd backtracked to far really need to remember to copy before posting.
However I will point out that the 3 day's is ONLY for the level retraining if you want to retrain a feat/s or skill point/s your adding more time onto that and level retraining DOESN'T retrain those automatically in fact it specifically say's it doesn't do feats gained at odd levels i.e the first level ones. On top of which you still need to pay 10 gold per your level per day of retraining so at the bare minimum someone (either the first level commoner being retrained or the 2nd level wizard doing it) has to pay anywhere from 15-45 gold with a base of 30. That's a LOT of money for a commoner and while its not unmanageble for a 2nd level character you do have to ask why they'd accept this cost in the first place for someone else. If the first level commoner with 11 int wants 1 rank of spellcraft and to change a feat its now 13 day's training with a gold cost ranging from 65 to 260 gold. Then there's the gray area of the spellbook a 1st level wizard gets one with all the cantrips and 3 + int mod 1st level spells. However retraining out of wizard levels doesn't take spells out of your spellbook (for most) so why would someone retraining into wizard get them? Then again why wouldn't they? We're looking at rule zero here I think as I can't find any developer posts on the subject.
Either way even without the spellbook as an extra cost in gold/time each first level commoner become wizard potentially costs you anywhere from 15 to 260 gold and 3 to 13 day's of training if you allow the retraining rules. They are in the ultimate campaign guide I believe not the core rulebook. So if your playing a core game no retraining at all and the only rules there state 1st level magic users add 2-12 years to the random starting age.
Well, one of the first ramifications of the lantern archon lamplighting is likely that people will steal your lights and sell them. Everburning torches sell for as much as an untrained laborer would make in a year and a half of work; you're going to have to attach the flames to very immobile structures or they're going to get smashed apart for sale.
A more immediate question might be, what happens when a PC summons a lantern archon and uses it to turn a ton of torches into everburning torches for sale? Money loops like this are all over the place in pathfinder where developers missed a rules interaction of some sort, which is why pathfinder society added the rule where you just can't ever sell something for more than you paid to get it. Honestly, the planar binding/calling spells should probably just say that you have to pay the creature the value of the material components for the equivalent spell for any spell like abilities or casting you request it to do. It would 'fix' summoning efreeti for wishes at the same time as dealing with loopholes like this.
Personally, I find the retraining rules kind of silly by RAW. You would have an (even bigger) technological explosion than we already have in real life if anyone could retrain to Engineer for $3000 and a three day seminar. Letting people pick up classes in less than a week that should theoretically have significant training behind them is highly unrealistic, which results in highly unrealistic results when widely applied on a world building scale.
Some may consider it demeaning to the celestial being in question.
But how? You're asking a being of good and law that is literally a light, to make light, which does things that lower crime and can improve peoples lives. How is it demeaning rather than "something that the archon would 100% approve of"?
What can you ask it do to? If doing something that perfectly fits it's ethos is "demeaning", what possible use would planar allying a lantern archon be.
Some may consider it demeaning to the celestial being in question.But how? You're asking a being of good and law that is literally a light, to make light, which does things that lower crime and can improve peoples lives. How is it demeaning rather than "something that the archon would 100% approve of"?
There are people in real life that think asking their deity to answer prayers is demeaning or otherwise questioning the Grand Plan.
Humanity and the other races have been around a very long time. No one thought about this until the player characters show up? Why haven't the forces of Good done something about this before, or more? Why don't the gods interact more? Why haven't they solved all of the problems out there?
There are people in real life that think asking their deity to answer prayers is demeaning or otherwise questioning the Grand Plan.
Considering that is exactly how cleric magic works, it's ridiculously obviously that is not how clerics view things.
Humanity and the other races have been around a very long time. No one thought about this until the player characters show up?
My view is that it should have probably happened before the PC's show up, though it's theoretically possible they didn't since new ideas don't immediately come into existence just because the components are there.
Why haven't the forces of Good done something about this before, or more?
I think they should have.
Why don't the gods interact more? Why haven't they solved all of the problems out there?
"RAW", it might be because Gods don't actually get any special abilities beyond being able to cast some domain spells (see mythic rules). Meaning that they'd probably use divine casters as their method of acting on planes they cannot physically interact with. By "RAW" Gods are not omnipotent.
Note: When I say RAW in that I'm refering to the fact the only "rules" for gods we have are some creatures in the bestiary and the mythic power that makes you a god, as a result of PFRPG generally staying away from Gods under the assumption that they should be too powerful to have rules.
There are people in real life that think asking their deity to answer prayers is demeaning or otherwise questioning the Grand Plan.Considering that how cleric magic works, it's ridiculously obviously that is not how clerics view things.
Perhaps so. But why isn't Inner Sea Gods full of mandates for the Good clerics to run around lighting up the cities and healing everyone? What is the Grand Plan for the good deities? Did any such plan die out with Aroden?
But why isn't Inner Sea Gods full of mandates for the Good clerics to run around lighting up the cities and healing everyone? What is the Grand Plan for the good deities? Did any such plan die out with Aroden?
Considering I dislike the Golarion setting because thing just seem the way they are because fiat rather than sense.... so "Because James Jacobs says so?" would be the why.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are people in real life that think asking their deity to answer prayers is demeaning or otherwise questioning the Grand Plan.Considering that how cleric magic works, it's ridiculously obviously that is not how clerics view things.
Depends on how you treat cleric magic I'm not a fan of playing them myself but I've known GM's who would not hesitate to use the "You're god stops granting your prayers" bit which used to be part of their class if the player stopped behaving appropriately for a priest. I've known players who were more likely to rely on the clerics martial prowess over their spells because each one was a prayer the god choses whether to answer or not and they don't want to be disrespectful by using it for every little thing. They'd rather pay money for healing potions than cast heal spells if they could. While all clerics are priests not all priests are clerics. Then of course you have the fact that gods take a much larger view of things than mortals if you play them right.
You want actual examples though so how about these . . .
1) The religion is one that includes teaching of balance so the god of light surrenders each night to the god of darkness each has their place and creating these glowing permanent lights that defy the god of darkness could trigger a religious war.
2) The god of light is aware that permanent 24 hour light actually has a harmful effect on living organisms and doesn't wish that to happen.
3) Its a god of light all light bright and dim, even the night is not completely dark just another aspect of them.
4) Your god has bestowed their divine powers on you for their own reasons to guide and gather more to its flock. You respect that and call on them in times of great need at others merely praying like any devout worshiper. So while your happy to pray the god see's fit to light your town you wont abuse your powers by calling an angel down to earth and asking it to perform tasks you can pay a wizard to do more slowly but no less surely.
5) Because the great overdeity Jazmes JAcos has decreed the gods must step back and not interfere to greatly in mortal destinies.
There's 5 reasons off the top of my head and I'm 100% sure someone can now come up with 5 counter reasons.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, again, the whole point isn't that the GM can stop this. The point is that the GM needs to have something prepared to stop this, because any individual player with Planar Ally/Binding can choose to summon a ball of light and light up the world. And if some player can think it up, it makes sense someone else in the world already did (barring specialized knowledge). Streetlights are not a modern idea. They date back to the Romans (that we know of).
Oh, and every argument about cleric spells and gods comes to a screeching halt with the oracle. So, bad argument to use.
Don't actually know a thing about that class however AGAIN this is why I'm trying not to get dragged into specific arguments because EVERY. SINGLE. ARGUMENT. someone uses someone else can come up with a counter argument for and then the same the other way.
Also no my point wasn't the GM can stop this or needs an argument ready to do so, my argument was 1 this is not a world of players even your own PC's have a massive gulf between their knowledge and expereinces and yours. Two that most people don't run around trying to spawn a technolgoical revolution not that they fail but they don't even try. Iv'e had a few players making "magitech' that assumes a viewpoint that's frankly alien to any PC but not even they have done something that would change the world and spark change. Its not that they fail its they don't even try.
If these change and revolutions are so inevitable then why did our world not have one for MILLENIA, why has our own technology largely stalled in the past few decades? We reached the moon in the 60's, do we have a permanent settlement there 70 years later? No we don't. Is computer technology leaping ahead since we got solid state drives years ago? No we still have larger older ones. We've started to get 3d movies decades after 3d technology was first invented. The simple fact is that a technological revolution is not inevitable and entire cultures can have things that would change things masively and either not use them or use them differntly. The chinese and gun powder is the common example but its hardly the only one. Another Chinese one was they invented drills capable of digging to over 400 feet for salt. The Lycurgus goblet changes colour depending on where its lit from but no one remembers the romans for the knowledge of the colour spectrum. The greeks had a programable device that using timed weights and pulleys could move around and even turn corners. Strangely it didn't catch on and trigger a robotic cleaning revolution.
The problem with most of these "inevitable tech revolution" is that they aren't. Historical societies had very different social structures and views than their modern day equivilents and even when someone did come up with something unique and interesting the use they put it to could be massively different to what you think its should be.
stamping your foot down on tech in your game is just limiting what can be done in your world.
You say it like it's a bad thing. Limits are what define worlds. Wizards may be smart folks but that doesn't make them infinite geniuses. Leonardo da Vinci was an imaginative genius, but not even he could have built an automobile, or a DC3, because the fundamental pre-requistes to even imagine such things did not exist at the time.
When you're talking about making fundamental revolutionary changes to the tech, magic level, or worse magitech level, you're talking about things that take up most of a lifetime for very smart people, not something that can be rushed out during weekend hobby activities.
The problem with most of these "inevitable tech revolution" is that they aren't. Historical societies had very different social structures and views than their modern day equivilents and even when someone did come up with something unique and interesting the use they put it to could be massively different to what you think its should be.
The very Internet we are using to share these messages is a prime example of the idiosyncratic nature of progress. It is as much of a matter of the intervention of political personalities, such as the backing of a certain U.S. Senator, that made Vince Cerf's invention of the tcp protocol something other than just a military communications tool.
The Incans independently invented the wheel, but never used them for other than children's toys on their roads because of the nature of their terrain made them useless for anything else.
5) Because the great overdeity Jazmes JAcos has decreed the gods must step back and not interfere to greatly in mortal destinies.
Doesn't take an over diety. You have two dozen or more nigh omnipotent beings, each with different agendas, often at cross purposes. If they don't come to a "gentleman's agreement" they'll destroy the chessboard they're fighting over.
In essence, that's why they banded together against Rovagug, because he threatened to do exactly that. On a lessor scale, it's why Iomedae herself doesn't descend to the Worldwound and close it personally. Or why Cayden isn't personally disrupting every slave operation in the Inner Sea. Or why the United States and the U.S.S.R didn't take things up to the in your face atomic warfare scale during the Cold War. In all these cases, they chose to act through proxies instead.
You don't need to know much about oracles. They are to clerics what sorcerers are to wizards (a bit better designed, I think). But they have full cleric spellcasting and absolutely no requirement of a god. In fact, let me quote the Iconic here.
Correct... there is no requirement that an oracle worship a diety. Because unlike clerics who volounteered for their positions, oracles are drafted. Dieties are still involved, they are the ones that sponsor the Oracle's mystery, but she's not required to worship, or even like any of them.
Taking a step back, let's look at the "RAW says it's inevitable" argument as a whole.
Proposition: If something is permissible by the Rules-As-Written (RAW), and grants benefit/advantage to the individual so utilizing the RAW, then that course of action will take place.
Let's investigate what this could mean:
Spellcasting Proliferation: By the RAW, 1st level commoners can retrain themselves into any other class in 6 days for 30gp, which is within their expected wealth allotment of 260gp. This permits for the entire world's population of 1st level commoners (or warriors) to instead possess PC levels, granting cantrips and 1st level spells to a vast number of people. While many of the benefits of broad access to 1st level spells lie in the rather ambiguous realm of GM judgement and circumstance bonuses (can of worms in and of itself), at the very least life will be substantially more convenient overall, though ultimately this is not the most world-shaking path that we can take.
Monster Ability Exploitation: Between simulacrum and the various planar spells high level spellcasters can gain and control the abilities of the vast majority of published monsters, whose abilities (especially at-will spell-like abilities) can at times be dramatically more valuable than the cost to obtain them. Examples include the torch archon, the simulacrum dragon food dispensers and, in all likelihood, hundreds of other potential uses of their abilities. This is certainly powerful, and if undertaken would have a profound effect on a region, but is still not the most potent and thus dominant world state.
Unlimited Wishes: A version of monster exploitation is the candle of invocation exploit. This is different in Pathfinder as wish is not as powerful as it used to be, but still effective: Use an 8,400gp LE candle to gate in an efreeti, ask for three wishes, with each wish being for fabricate to create 30,000gp of platinum and diamond jewelry at no cost (material component of fabricate is the material to be transformed), which can then be traded off at-value for 90,000gp, and used to buy an additional 10 candles, or craft an additional 20. Repeat as required (RAW does not have a reactive economy) until you have an appropriately obscene amount of wealth and candles and can wish your way along, or afford any magic item one can think of through infinite wealth.
And by this point, technology and revolutions are irrelevant: With unlimited wealth and unlimited wish society has literally no need to progress, develop or... do much of anything really. There is the argument that you need to find a creator to make the candles, but strictly by RAW, that is not true: You need only a metropolis - or several thousand, as urbanization can hit close to 100% and the population distributes itself into neat 30,000 settlements to maximize candle availability. If you use the kingdom building rules from Ultimate Campaign candle availability skyrockets further. Alternatively, an army of simulacrum with Master Craftsmen and appropriately ludicrous skill boosts could do the trick.
=======
All of the above are legal under the rules, but that isn't to say that there will be any one specific scenario that is inevitable, nor is it even implied that it would be the core races who win the wish race.
What we also see is that the published campaign settings do not have this in place, which makes an extremely strong argument for the case that while the Rules-As-Written may permit it, the Rules-As-Intended (RAI) do not support it. Those scenarios are, then, anomalies of an imperfect rule system.
To elaborate (the horse might just be sleeping) further: Pun-Pun was legal by 3.5 RAW, and by the above proposition would therefore be inevitable that he would appear, elevate his kobold kin and eradicate/subjugate all other races, beings and gods. But he never did in any published campaign setting, as he remained an interesting thought experiment that was legal per RAW, but decidedly against RAI.
Could the rules be fixed? Well. Yes. But there's an entire profession based on attempting to write, twist, rewrite and adjudicate rules in the real world, and trying to apply the same philosophy to a game is not necessarily a recipe for fun. Thus, we fall to the compromise that we need to accept that the mechanics of Pathfinder are not perfect, and as further material (e.g. monsters) is published, it creates even more potential for exploits that break the intent of the system: To have fun playing make believe with our friends and telling stories of heroic (or villainous) PCs adventuring in a fantasy realm.
|
|
Taking a step back, let's look at the "RAW says it's inevitable" argument as a whole.
Proposition: If something is permissible by the Rules-As-Written (RAW), and grants benefit/advantage to the individual so utilizing the RAW, then that course of action will take place.
Let's investigate what this could mean:
Spellcasting Proliferation: By the RAW, 1st level commoners can retrain themselves into any other class in 6 days for 30gp, which is within their expected wealth allotment of 260gp. This permits for the entire world's population of 1st level commoners (or warriors) to instead possess PC levels, granting cantrips and 1st level spells to a vast number of people. While many of the benefits of broad access to 1st level spells lie in the rather ambiguous realm of GM judgement and circumstance bonuses (can of worms in and of itself), at the very least life will be substantially more convenient overall, though ultimately this is not the most world-shaking path that we can take.
Monster Ability Exploitation: Between simulacrum and the various planar spells high level spellcasters can gain and control the abilities of the vast majority of published monsters, whose abilities (especially at-will spell-like abilities) can at times be dramatically more valuable than the cost to obtain them. Examples include the torch archon, the simulacrum dragon food dispensers and, in all likelihood, hundreds of other potential uses of their abilities. This is certainly powerful, and if undertaken would have a profound effect on a region, but is still not the most potent and thus dominant world state.
Unlimited Wishes: A version of monster exploitation is the candle of invocation exploit. This is different in Pathfinder as wish is not as powerful as it used to be, but still effective: Use an 8,400gp LE candle to gate in an efreeti, ask for three wishes, with each wish being for fabricate to create 30,000gp of platinum and...
You fool, you used actual examples in your attempt to look at the argument as a whole. Now they'll do to you what they did to me and ignore the intent of your post to prove why those specific examples either don't apply because RULE 0 or support their arguments that such things are inventiable.
More seriously its exactly what I was trying to say just because something could happen it doesn't mean it must.
Eh, no. He's clearly making a line between RAW and RAI, and graphically demonstrating that a Gentlemen's Agreement (i.e. Rule 0) is in effect to stop the shenanigans from taking place.
So, it is inevitable...but you're GA'ing to ignore it/downplay it/behind the screens it, which is Rule 0.
Your argument was that they wouldn't take place because none of the settings are like that. In other words, the problem was solved because it was never addressed, which is not a solution, it's ignoring it. Just because you're ignoring what the rules say, doesn't mean anything.
His Fabricate trick wouldn't work either. The material component is also the target of the spell. With no material component, i.e. no target, there's nothing there to be turned into a finished product. So he'd Fabricate nothing and end up with nothing. Creating something out of nothing is Creation, not Fabricate. All the DM has to ask is "What's the value of the raw materials you are Fabricating?" and his Wish triples the zero and ends at zero.
Plus, it only creates one object at a time, and you do have to make the crafting check. I don't see that skill on an Efreet. What IS the DC of a 30k single piece of jewelry, anyways?
It also ignores the fact that negotiating with Efreet for Wishes is, by RAW and RAI, a rather perilous task, not an obedient handing over of the most powerful magic in the game. Only house-ruling this to be a painless process advances the agenda of Wish-abusers.
Which is not to say Candle of Invocation abuse has not been around since the very start of 3e, since you could use one of the Wishes to get another Candle of Invocation and make an infinite loop of wishes.
Also, I believe the latest iteration of Pun-Pun was based on having early access to Pazuzu wishes (and being a level 1 paladin) and that horrendously overpowered Serpent Folk spell from FR. If Pazuzu doesn't grant the wish...or it hasn't been countered already by divine fiat...blah blah blah.
See the heart of the problem must be Wishes. Or maybe just early access to high level magic (which Candles of Invocation giving Gate spells is!)
==Aelryinth
The heart of the problem is not applying "no" liberally, possibly followed by thrown objects.