Would it be ok for a crafter pg to make his allies pay full price for objects he crafts?


Advice

451 to 500 of 532 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Benjamin Medrano wrote:
And 'party loot', as in all of it belongs to the group? I will leave the gaming group over it. Because people screw me over every single time I've experienced it. When one PC has 8,000 gp worth of gear and I have 500, I get pretty irritable.

So don't agree to a split that is so lopsided.

It sounds like your problem is the people you play with.


thejeff wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:

I agree WBL is kinda dumb. I honestly ignore it, save when someone is building a replacement character. I don't audit it, I don't care about WBL, unless the party is so seriously out of whack there's a problem.

And 'party loot', as in all of it belongs to the group? I will leave the gaming group over it. Because people screw me over every single time I've experienced it. When one PC has 8,000 gp worth of gear and I have 500, I get pretty irritable.

Depends on the group I guess. I've never had a problem with that. Never seen a divide nearly that bad.

But just to be clear, you wouldn't have a problem with one PC having 7200gp worth and the other 3 having 4000gp each? As long as the difference was the result of crafting.

** spoiler omitted **

Correct. If the party agreed to it. If they didn't agree to it, it's unfair and needs to be fixed. And if the crafter is unhappy with that, I (as GM) let them swap their crafting feat for free.

And that was a literal example. I was in a Mummy's Mask campaign where at the end of book 1, I had a suit of masterwork armor and my starting gear. Because they give stuff to whoever could use it, and were loud and talked over me every time I tried to get a word in edgewise. I left the group over it.


dwayne germaine wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
And 'party loot', as in all of it belongs to the group? I will leave the gaming group over it. Because people screw me over every single time I've experienced it. When one PC has 8,000 gp worth of gear and I have 500, I get pretty irritable.

So don't agree to a split that is so lopsided.

It sounds like your problem is the people you play with.

This has happened every time I've done group loot, though this one was the worst of the lot. And it doesn't help when the people deciding this were grognards who'd been playing since I was born, and 'knew better' than my somewhat more hesitant younger self. It sucked, and I finally got out of those situations, and have gotten the confidence to actually argue back. But only when I can get in a word edgewise.

Grand Lodge

Benjamin Medrano wrote:
This has happened every time I've done group loot, though this one was the worst of the lot. And it doesn't help when the people deciding this were grognards who'd been playing since I was born, and 'knew better' than my somewhat more hesitant younger self. It sucked, and I finally got out of those situations, and have gotten the confidence to actually argue back. But only when I can get in a word edgewise.

I'm glad that you've moved on to playing with better people. If you weren't getting input on loot distribution then it wasn't a fair way of doing equipment.

Our group requires consensus before we split things up. That doesn't mean that everything is always equal, and sometimes I know I'm going to be behind a little on wealth. As long as everyone aims for what's best for the party instead of what's best for their own character, then everyone wins.

Some players may not be mature enough to handle a scheme like this, and some may not be willing to give up a little bit of freedom in exchange for a better party dynamic and increased security. The group I play with wasn't always this good, and it didn't happen overnight, but it has become the best way of doing things for us.


Benjamin Medrano wrote:
dwayne germaine wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
And 'party loot', as in all of it belongs to the group? I will leave the gaming group over it. Because people screw me over every single time I've experienced it. When one PC has 8,000 gp worth of gear and I have 500, I get pretty irritable.

So don't agree to a split that is so lopsided.

It sounds like your problem is the people you play with.

This has happened every time I've done group loot, though this one was the worst of the lot. And it doesn't help when the people deciding this were grognards who'd been playing since I was born, and 'knew better' than my somewhat more hesitant younger self. It sucked, and I finally got out of those situations, and have gotten the confidence to actually argue back. But only when I can get in a word edgewise.

I've definitely seen similar issues when it comes to divvying up the loot, though I think it's at least partially a group and interpersonal dynamics issue. When you've got one or two guys who are very assertive about getting what they want versus a couple players who don't have the confidence to speak up and/or don't want to be seen as causing issues, it's easy to end up with one guy grabbing all the loot.

thejeff wrote:
I do kind of wonder how much this divide reflects larger differences in gaming style. I suspect the sandboxy, heroes for hire, episodic, main focus is on character goals like "found kingdom" or "start wizard school" types lean one way, while the more plot oriented, epic quest types lean the other, but I'm not sure.

Yeah, availability and value of downtime seems to be one of the big sticking points in the discussion. One of the main arguments in favor of charging above material cost is that the crafter's time is valuable and making stuff for the party means they can't do other things.

How valuable their time is depends rather heavily on what else they could do with their time and how much of it they have. If their downtime is limited to the point where crafting for a party member means not crafting for themselves, that's a big tradeoff. Same deal if crafting for the party means missing out on founding a magic academy or some other cool downtime activity.

However, if downtime is pretty much just the characters killing time until the next adventure hook shows up, and they've got nothing better to do with their time than craft ... well that's a different matter.


I'm sure somebody else was bright enough to say this but I don't have the patience to read through 10 pages of comments and I will simply put in my two cents worth
You're looking at it wrong… The question is not the comparison between wizard a and Wizard b. The question should really be does wizard b want to charge his cleric for magic items… Then should be cleric turn around and say I'm going to start charging you for healing spells that is the question. And the obvious answer to that is no that's not the situation you want to be you don't want to alienate your cleric and have him charge you for healing spells you don't want to alienate your barbarian or your tank and have them withdraw their protection from you during a fight… The only reasonable way to handle this is to offer players magic items at Cost. You get the benefit of them keeping you alive in combat you get the benefit of them healing you you get the benefit of party cooperation… Yes the book says you don't have to cooperate but if you don't the party dies plain and simple I've seen it happen to many times… If your party does not cooperate it dies plain and simple


Besides. It's been pointed out by somebody else that you don't have a lot of downtime in pathfinder to begin with… And the only reason whatsoever for taking crafting abilities as a wizard is to make magic items cheaply for your party… That is the only reason you don't have enough spare time to make magic items for profit… Get that out of your head Right away. You don't have that much spare time the only real reason to take crafting skills is the make magic cheaply for your party that's it that's the only reason don't be a prick

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I've never done this myself, but here's my 2cp. If the crafter and an ally both want an item and there's enough time to make both, then doing so at cost saves money, improves your relationship, and makes your ally better at doing their role in the party which means everybody wins. However, if there's only time for one item to be made, the crafter should logically choose their own item to be made first with any requests for other items considered as paid commissions.

Think about it from my perspective as a player - I spent a feat slot and skill points so that I could spend my own downtime making magic items. Nobody else is paying anything for me to take this, so logically I should be the one to decide what I make and when. Now think about it from my character's perspective - I've likely spent years studying, perhaps apprenticing under an expert or learning at a university, practicing and honing my craft. I make items which are often worth thousands of gold, often more than your average person will make in their entire life. I share my crafts with a very limited number of people (how many Level 3+ NPC crafters do you think there are in the world?) and of those people I am likely among the better people doing it (since PCs tend towards higher levels, stats, and wealth than NPCs). My craft is likely my livelihood, and while I could justify making something at-cost for a close ally when I have spare time you'd better believe that I will consider requests to prioritize the items of others over my own when I have little time to spare as commissions with an expectation of some sort of payment. And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my wares being twice the cost of crafting them then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my craft.

That said, I'm not unreasonable - as a teammate providing you with expensive gear at a reduced cost helps us all. I may only decide to charge 10-15% of the market value in addition to the crafting cost - that doesn't disrespect or devalue my work and it's still a good discount for you. This also goes both ways - I will offer to pay allies who provide similar services because I want to show them that I respect them and value their work. That doesn't mean I'll pay clerics for channeling or casting cure spells. I may purchase them a wand or a couple low-level pearls of power because I know that dedicating spells to healing is often inefficient, but they deserve no more payment for channeling than a fighter does for hitting stuff, a wizard does for buffing allies, or a bard does for performing. Down that path lies madness.

Sovereign Court

LuniasM wrote:

I've never done this myself, but here's my 2cp. If the crafter and an ally both want an item and there's enough time to make both, then doing so at cost saves money, improves your relationship, and makes your ally better at doing their role in the party which means everybody wins. However, if there's only time for one item to be made, the crafter should logically choose their own item to be made first with any requests for other items considered as paid commissions.

Think about it from my perspective as a player - I spent a feat slot and skill points so that I could spend my own downtime making magic items. Nobody else is paying anything for me to take this, so logically I should be the one to decide what I make and when. Now think about it from my character's perspective - I've likely spent years studying, perhaps apprenticing under an expert or learning at a university, practicing and honing my craft. I make items which are often worth thousands of gold, often more than your average person will make in their entire life. I share my crafts with a very limited number of people (how many Level 3+ NPC crafters do you think there are in the world?) and of those people I am likely among the better people doing it (since PCs tend towards higher levels, stats, and wealth than NPCs). My craft is likely my livelihood, and while I could justify making something at-cost for a close ally when I have spare time you'd better believe that I will consider requests to prioritize the items of others over my own when I have little time to spare as commissions with an expectation of some sort of payment. And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my wares being twice the cost of crafting them then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my craft.

That said, I'm not unreasonable - as a teammate providing you with expensive gear at a reduced cost helps us all. I may only decide to charge 10-15% of the market value in addition to the crafting cost - that doesn't disrespect or devalue my work and it's still a good discount for you. This also goes both ways - I will offer to pay allies who provide similar services because I want to show them that I respect them and value their work. That doesn't mean I'll pay clerics for channeling or casting cure spells. I may purchase them a wand or a couple low-level pearls of power because I know that dedicating spells to healing is often inefficient, but they deserve no more payment for channeling than a fighter does for hitting stuff, a wizard does for buffing allies, or a bard does for performing. Down that path lies madness.

Very well said.


whew wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

...

Downtime is not some grand favor you grant a crafting PC. It's a fairly standard part of the game. It's a shopping trip, or hookers and booze, or waiting off the week cooldown on negative level recovery. There's a lot of ways it exists. If it doesn't exist at all then it's not a good idea to make someone who wants it.
Yes, normally downtime is not a grand favor. However, in this case, the crafter is trying to rip me off and is calling me rude names.
...what? We're talking about a hypothetical fictional crafter. How can they call you rude names? They can't say anything, they're purely hypothetical. Also, "I'll make it for you and only charge half for labor" is a discount, not a ripoff. If 75% is a ripoff what's 100%, highway robbery? Because that's the alternative (or take the feats yourself).
Alwaysangry61 wrote:

I'm sure somebody else was bright enough to say this but I don't have the patience to read through 10 pages of comments and I will simply put in my two cents worth

You're looking at it wrong… The question is not the comparison between wizard a and Wizard b. The question should really be does wizard b want to charge his cleric for magic items… Then should be cleric turn around and say I'm going to start charging you for healing spells that is the question. And the obvious answer to that is no that's not the situation you want to be you don't want to alienate your cleric and have him charge you for healing spells you don't want to alienate your barbarian or your tank and have them withdraw their protection from you during a fight… The only reasonable way to handle this is to offer players magic items at Cost. You get the benefit of them keeping you alive in combat you get the benefit of them healing you you get the benefit of party cooperation… Yes the book says you don't have to cooperate but if you don't the party dies plain and simple I've seen it happen to many times… If your party does not cooperate it dies plain and simple

This is just flat out bad. Your premise requires that the Wizard is only crafting. Presumably the Wizard is following the party along and also casting spells. They're (in theory) contributing just as much as the Cleric or Barbarian to actual adventuring. If they're just chilling in town crafting while everyone else is adventuring then absolutely, they shouldn't charge for it. That becomes their contribution to the party to get a share of the loot. But if they follow the party and help them as well as craft stuff in their downtime, absolutely, they can choose to charge if they want. They're contributing twice, once during working hours and once during their free time. If you want them to work during their free time (or there is no free time) then you better be out adventuring, otherwise you're making them work while you don't.

It's basically the difference between salaried (exempt) and hourly/nonexempt employees, come to think of it. If you make an hourly or nonexempt employee work extra, they get paid overtime. Exempt employees do not, but in part that's because the salary includes that kind of expectation. Not every party treats their members like salaried (exempt).

Not every party says that everything the party does is party property and the party votes on everything. Some have players make their own independent choices and actions. They might even spend time away from the party, off doing their own thing. Those parties will answer the OP's question much differently. Thus the answer to the question "is this okay" is "depends on the party". Same answer from page one, I'm pretty sure.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

They're contributing twice, once during working hours and once during their free time. If you want them to work during their free time (or there is no free time) then you better be out adventuring, otherwise you're making them work while you don't.

It's basically the difference between salaried (exempt) and hourly/nonexempt employees, come to think of it. If you make an hourly or nonexempt employee work extra, they get paid overtime. Exempt employees do not, but in part that's because the salary includes that kind of expectation. Not every party treats their members like salaried (exempt).

I suspect this is where the root of the difference lies.

Not every group treats their game as a profit making venture.


thejeff wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

They're contributing twice, once during working hours and once during their free time. If you want them to work during their free time (or there is no free time) then you better be out adventuring, otherwise you're making them work while you don't.

It's basically the difference between salaried (exempt) and hourly/nonexempt employees, come to think of it. If you make an hourly or nonexempt employee work extra, they get paid overtime. Exempt employees do not, but in part that's because the salary includes that kind of expectation. Not every party treats their members like salaried (exempt).

I suspect this is where the root of the difference lies.

Not every group treats their game as a profit making venture.

Yes, not every party cares about money. Some do. Thus the answer to "Is it okay to charge players to craft for them?" is "Depends on the group". Or as I said on what you quoted:
the part you cut off wrote:
Not every party says that everything the party does is party property and the party votes on everything. Some have players make their own independent choices and actions. They might even spend time away from the party, off doing their own thing. Those parties will answer the OP's question much differently. Thus the answer to the question "is this okay" is "depends on the party". Same answer from page one, I'm pretty sure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Give me a break you're acting like you're a fictional characters downtime is real money and you're comparing it to the real world doesn't work that way… I'm not saying you don't charge at all. Sure you do. You charge them what it cost to make the item. And please don't give me that s@~& about how your character spent years training and learning at school to learn these skills. Your character spent about 30 seconds learning these abilities as you wrote them down on a piece of paper you're making it out like you're actually invested for real in your characters background as far as money and time goes which is hogwash
Yes there's a fair amount of reasons for downtime in any normal campaign but it's not enough to sit around crafting for fun and profit if you want to do that congratulations you're an NPC The only real reason for taking crafting skills is because you have a referee that is really cheap bastard that doesn't like to sell magic items to the characters and the only way you're going to get those items is if you make them yourself… Therefore somebody in the party has to make magic items for the entire party


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So I'll put this nice and big since everyone seems to keep missing it.

Not everyone plays the same way as you.

Alwaysangry61 wrote:

Give me a break you're acting like you're a fictional characters downtime is real money and you're comparing it to the real world doesn't work that way… I'm not saying you don't charge at all. Sure you do. You charge them what it cost to make the item. And please don't give me that s%%# about how your character spent years training and learning at school to learn these skills. Your character spent about 30 seconds learning these abilities as you wrote them down on a piece of paper you're making it out like you're actually invested for real in your characters background as far as money and time goes which is hogwash

Yes there's a fair amount of reasons for downtime in any normal campaign but it's not enough to sit around crafting for fun and profit if you want to do that congratulations you're an NPC The only real reason for taking crafting skills is because you have a referee that is really cheap bastard that doesn't like to sell magic items to the characters and the only way you're going to get those items is if you make them yourself… Therefore somebody in the party has to make magic items for the entire party

If someone says that their character charges for crafting because they (the character) spent years learning a specialized skill, that's not wrong. If you say that you don't charge for crafting because it's just a thing you wrote on your character sheet, that's also not wrong. Simulationist vs Gamist, basically? And while neither is wrong, neither is unequivocally right either. They're "right for you".


I have to admit I did not read all 10 pages, so it's possible someone else mentioned this. However, in regards to the original post:

Gray Warden wrote:

I'd like to start with an example. Let's consider two identical, non-human, allied 1st level Wizards: A wants to be a dedicated summoner, B wants to be a dedicated crafter. Let's assume B doesn't charge A for the items he crafts.

- At 1st level, they both take Spell Focus (Conj): now their Conj spells will be identically harder to resist.
- At 3rd level, A takes Augment Summoning, while B takes Craft Wondrous Items: A's summoned creatures are now much more powerful than before AND A also benefits from discounted magic items (crafted by B); B on the other hand only benefits from cheaper magic items.
- At 5th level, B takes Superior Summoning and Balanced Summoning, while B takes Craft Magic Arms and Armors and Craft Wands: B is now able to reliably summon 3 strong creatures (SupSumm and BalSumm should stack imo; it doesn't matter if they don't though, it's just an example, please don't go off topic), and he also gets a wand of Mage Armor and an enhanced mithril shield at half the price. B, again, only benefits from discounted items.

Yes, A gets a direct benefit to their casting with his feats as well as benefiting from B's ability to create magical gear for him. However, B can also benefit from A's choices, meaning he gets more than just gear from his own feats.

B can now use A as an assistant in the creation of magical items that require feats, skills, or abilities that he did not choose. Yes, Augment Summoning probably isn't a requirement for a lot of items in this example, and Superior and Balanced Summoning probably aren't used in any. Regardless of that, B could certainly develop or create such an item and benefit from A's assistance.

Also true, such an item could be made without the feats (by adding +5 to the Spellcraft DC for creation) but by taking advantage of his allies feats (just as they benefit from his) he can instead use that +5 towards accelerated crafting, doubling his efficiency and thus, being able to create twice the items that he otherwise could in the same amount of time, for instance two 2,000 gp magic items in 2 days instead of one. Since a lot of people like to point out how valuable or apparently non-existent downtime can be, they would agree that a 100% increase just because your friend took a handy feat which you didn't have to is pretty huge.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's clear that a lot of players will hate it if they think you are trying to exploit your abilities to take advantage of them. The chances are there will be at least one player in the majority of gaming groups who think that way. So my general advice would be, make sure you know your group really well before trying anything like this. It usually isn't worth the hassle.


LuniasM wrote:

I

Think about it from my perspective as a player - I spent a feat slot and skill points so that I could spend my own downtime making magic items. Nobody else is paying anything for me to take this, so logically I should be the one to decide what I make and when. Now think about it from my character's perspective - I've likely spent years studying, perhaps apprenticing under an expert or learning at a university, practicing and honing my craft. I make items which are often worth thousands of gold, often more than your average person will make in their entire life. I share my crafts with a very limited number of people (how many Level 3+ NPC crafters do you think there are in the world?) and of those people I am likely among the better people doing it (since PCs tend towards higher levels, stats, and wealth than NPCs). My craft is likely my livelihood, and while I could justify making something at-cost for a close ally when I have spare time you'd better believe that I will consider requests to prioritize the items of others over my own when I have little time to spare as commissions with an expectation of some sort of payment. And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my wares being twice the cost of crafting them then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my craft.
..

Think about it from my perspective as a player - I spent a spell slot and other stuffs so that I could spend my own downtime removing conditions or healing or raising dead. Nobody else is paying anything for me to take this, so logically I should be the one to decide who I cure and when.

Now think about it from my character's perspective - I've likely spent years studying, perhaps apprenticing under an expert or learning at a temple, practicing and honing my payers. I cast spells which are often worth thousands of gold, often more than your average person will make in their entire life. I share my spells with a very limited number of people and of those people I am likely among the better people doing it ( My livelihood is adventuring, not crafting, since i am a PC, not a NPC., and while I could justify casting something at-cost for a close ally when I have spare time you'd better believe that I will consider requests to prioritize the spells of others over my own when I have little time to spare as commissions with an expectation of some sort of payment. And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my spells being worth as much as NPC or scrolls- then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my religion..

Caster level × spell level × 10 gp, please, or stay blind.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:

So I'll put this nice and big since everyone seems to keep missing it.

Not everyone plays the same way as you.[If someone says that their character charges for crafting because they (the character) spent years learning a specialized skill, that's not wrong. If you say that you don't charge for crafting because it's just a thing you wrote on your character sheet, that's also not wrong. Simulationist vs Gamist, basically? And while neither is wrong, neither is unequivocally right either. They're "right for you".

So the party cleric charging you for spells is OK?


DrDeth wrote:
LuniasM wrote:

I

Think about it from my perspective as a player - I spent a feat slot and skill points so that I could spend my own downtime making magic items. Nobody else is paying anything for me to take this, so logically I should be the one to decide what I make and when. Now think about it from my character's perspective - I've likely spent years studying, perhaps apprenticing under an expert or learning at a university, practicing and honing my craft. I make items which are often worth thousands of gold, often more than your average person will make in their entire life. I share my crafts with a very limited number of people (how many Level 3+ NPC crafters do you think there are in the world?) and of those people I am likely among the better people doing it (since PCs tend towards higher levels, stats, and wealth than NPCs). My craft is likely my livelihood, and while I could justify making something at-cost for a close ally when I have spare time you'd better believe that I will consider requests to prioritize the items of others over my own when I have little time to spare as commissions with an expectation of some sort of payment. And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my wares being twice the cost of crafting them then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my craft.
..

Think about it from my perspective as a player - I spent a spell slot and other stuffs so that I could spend my own downtime removing conditions or healing or raising dead. Nobody else is paying anything for me to take this, so logically I should be the one to decide who I cure and when.

Now think about it from my character's perspective - I've likely spent years studying, perhaps apprenticing under an expert or learning at a temple, practicing and honing my payers. I cast spells which are often worth thousands of gold, often more than your average person will make in their entire life. I share my spells with a very limited number...

What's the opportunity cost for casting a spell during your downtime?

Nothing.

Why do people keeping on insisting that different things are the same?


_Ozy_ wrote:

What's the opportunity cost for casting a spell during your downtime?

Nothing.

Or, a third level spell slot and the 10 minute casting time it takes, both of which could be used more profitably for the character elsewhere.

Both of them are pretty negligible, but it takes the same 10 seconds of game time as saying "Wizard crafts, Rogue goes out drinking, Cleric removes Fighter's blindess, it's tomorrow".


Reverse wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

What's the opportunity cost for casting a spell during your downtime?

Nothing.

Or, a third level spell slot and the 10 minute casting time it takes, both of which could be used more profitably for the character elsewhere.

Both of them are pretty negligible, but it takes the same 10 seconds of game time as saying "Wizard crafts, Rogue goes out drinking, Cleric removes Fighter's blindess, it's tomorrow".

Wrong. You can cast that spell anytime during downtime without interfering with any other downtime activities.

The same is not true for crafting.

Different things are not the same.

Cleric retrains a feat, casts remove blindness
Rogue retrains a feat, goes out drinking
Fighter gets his sight back, retrains a feat

Wizard crafts, can't retrain a feat.

Seriously, why even try to argue that these are the same? What's your thinking here? Do you understand what opportunity cost actually is?


LuniasM wrote:
And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my wares being twice the cost of crafting them then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my craft.

Well, a regular skilled worker will make about 1 gold per day (unskilled would make one silver). You're not happy with twice that, so how about even 20 times that? 20 gold per day sound fair? Twenty times what someone skilled in a profession would make?

So if you spend two days crafting a belt of giant strength +2 worth 2000 gold, the fighter pays you 2020 gold?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

So I'll put this nice and big since everyone seems to keep missing it.

Not everyone plays the same way as you.[If someone says that their character charges for crafting because they (the character) spent years learning a specialized skill, that's not wrong. If you say that you don't charge for crafting because it's just a thing you wrote on your character sheet, that's also not wrong. Simulationist vs Gamist, basically? And while neither is wrong, neither is unequivocally right either. They're "right for you".

So the party cleric charging you for spells is OK?

During adventuring literally everyone charges for their contribution to the party. It's why they get a share of treasure instead of nothing. But said share of treasure is their payment. You don't itemize. You can (or maybe some kind of sliding scale?) but it's usually more hassle than it's worth calculating. If a group really wants to though, that's their prerogative. As I said, Cleric of Abadar might.

Outside of adventuring it depends on how and where the affliction happened. Fighter wounded/killed/level drained/poisoned/diseased while adventuring? Still covered under adventuring. Everyone takes a weekend in town and the fighter comes back with every disease from the brothel? Yeah, absolutely charge them. Or as I said last time:

RECURSION! wrote:

...

For a better example we can probably look at Remove Disease. If the Fighter ended the last job clean and shows up for the next job with a crippling disease, is it the Cleric's job to fix him? It doesn't cost the Cleric anything except the spell slot, but depending on your level that might be a pretty important spell slot. The whole party would be going into the next job down a spell, which could absolutely make or break it. So, yeah, I'd make the Fighter pay for the Remove Disease if they got it on personal time. It's their responsibility to fix it, not the party's.

What form the payment takes depends on the party (docking their cut of the treasure versus paying the Cleric directly) but absolutely the Fighter should pay.

You want a situation where a Remove Disease isn't negligible? Then the Cleric is 5th level making a magic item that requires their 3rd level slot (and not the domain spell). Wisdom of 14. They can't cast Remove Disease for the Fighter without adding +5 to the DC of their item which would then make them unable to take 10. There, "not negligible".

If you're going to try arguing for alternate payment methods you have to start with the most expensive. A good lawyer or hooker will cost you 10 gp. I don't know if that's per day or per session. But the most expensive thing is spellcasting, which is 10*CL*SL gp. Also the closest analog to making magic items, what with the magic and all. But now you're negotiating an actual price with a specific person, which is within the scope of the question but sort of irrelevant (unless the two of you represent like, thousands of players).

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Balkoth wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
And if you seriously think my work is only worth as much pay as a regular skilled worker despite the market value of my wares being twice the cost of crafting them then you are not just wrong, you are insulting my craft.

Well, a regular skilled worker will make about 1 gold per day (unskilled would make one silver). You're not happy with twice that, so how about even 20 times that? 20 gold per day sound fair? Twenty times what someone skilled in a profession would make?

So if you spend two days crafting a belt of giant strength +2 worth 2000 gold, the fighter pays you 2020 gold?

Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets. Now take my post in context - if I have the free time to do it I'll do it for free. In this case I have another project planned, and making your item means postponing my own. Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project, to make you an item I could sell for 2000gp when you're only willing to compensate me for the amount I could make selling a single trinket on the street? And you're implying that I'm being unreasonable?

My suggestion was 10-15%, or in this case between 200 and 300 gold. I'm saving you between 1700 and 1800 gold while giving up my own character's goal. I took a crafting feat so I could craft items, not to take orders and be some kind of machine. If you want an ally who will neglect their own goals for your benefit with no compensation, go Dominate one.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Reverse wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

What's the opportunity cost for casting a spell during your downtime?

Nothing.

Or, a third level spell slot and the 10 minute casting time it takes, both of which could be used more profitably for the character elsewhere.

Both of them are pretty negligible, but it takes the same 10 seconds of game time as saying "Wizard crafts, Rogue goes out drinking, Cleric removes Fighter's blindess, it's tomorrow".

Because 10 minutes and a spell slot is somehow comparable to a minimum of 8 hours of work.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Oh, cool! I've been snarked at by DrDeth! That's another space on my Forums Bingo card!

Now I just need to subtly derail a thread by mentioning paladins or have BARBARIANAMSMASH respond to one of my posts and I'll win a brand spanking new set of dice!


LuniasM wrote:

Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets. Now take my post in context - if I have the free time to do it I'll do it for free. In this case I have another project planned, and making your item means postponing my own. Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project, to make you an item I could sell for 2000gp when you're only willing to compensate me for the amount I could make selling a single trinket on the street? And you're implying that I'm being unreasonable?

My suggestion was 10-15%, or in this case between 200 and 300 gold. I'm saving you between 1700 and 1800 gold while giving up my own character's goal. I took a crafting feat so I could craft items, not to take orders and be some kind of machine. If you want an ally who will neglect their own goals for your benefit with no compensation, go Dominate one.

For the record, you can't actually sell is for a 25gp profit. Normally, you can sell it for cost - no profit. With the right investment in character abilities, you can actually make a few percent profit on it.

Unless of course, you're an NPC merchant not a PC crafter. Or the GM has decided to ignore the rules and supply NPCs in desperate need of things you can craft. By the same token of course, the GM could introduce NPCs desperate to buy the party's found items at full price. Neither of these is considered a good idea as a general rule.


_Ozy_ wrote:

Different things are not the same.

Cleric retrains a feat, casts remove blindness
Rogue retrains a feat, goes out drinking
Fighter gets his sight back, retrains a feat

Wizard crafts, can't retrain a feat.

Seriously, why even try to argue that these are the same? What's your thinking here? Do you understand what opportunity cost actually is?

Couldn't the party just wait an extra day for the Wizard to retrain his feat?

These things are the same, in the amount of table time they take up - which is a negligible sentence "Time passes".


thejeff wrote:
LuniasM wrote:

Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets. Now take my post in context - if I have the free time to do it I'll do it for free. In this case I have another project planned, and making your item means postponing my own. Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project, to make you an item I could sell for 2000gp when you're only willing to compensate me for the amount I could make selling a single trinket on the street? And you're implying that I'm being unreasonable?

My suggestion was 10-15%, or in this case between 200 and 300 gold. I'm saving you between 1700 and 1800 gold while giving up my own character's goal. I took a crafting feat so I could craft items, not to take orders and be some kind of machine. If you want an ally who will neglect their own goals for your benefit with no compensation, go Dominate one.

For the record, you can't actually sell is for a 25gp profit. Normally, you can sell it for cost - no profit. With the right investment in character abilities, you can actually make a few percent profit on it.

Unless of course, you're an NPC merchant not a PC crafter. Or the GM has decided to ignore the rules and supply NPCs in desperate need of things you can craft. By the same token of course, the GM could introduce NPCs desperate to buy the party's found items at full price. Neither of these is considered a good idea as a general rule.

Or you use the as-written downtime rules which net you 25% profit.


Reverse wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

Different things are not the same.

Cleric retrains a feat, casts remove blindness
Rogue retrains a feat, goes out drinking
Fighter gets his sight back, retrains a feat

Wizard crafts, can't retrain a feat.

Seriously, why even try to argue that these are the same? What's your thinking here? Do you understand what opportunity cost actually is?

Couldn't the party just wait an extra day for the Wizard to retrain his feat?

These things are the same, in the amount of table time they take up - which is a negligible sentence "Time passes".

If the party truly has an infinite amount of time, then yes the opportunity cost goes to zero. If the party has an infinite amount of time, the fighter can use downtime to retrain and get crafting feats, craft the item, and then retrain them back. The fighter can also use profession checks to earn a few gp per day to eventually pay for the difference in cost anyways.

Ridiculous? Sure, that's why most GMs don't provide infinite downtime.

But it's not just 'an extra day', unless the item being crafted is super cheap. And that downtime can always be put to use by the wizard, even if it's just earning Magic capital, retraining hit points, researching spells, etc...


_Ozy_ wrote:
thejeff wrote:
LuniasM wrote:

Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets. Now take my post in context - if I have the free time to do it I'll do it for free. In this case I have another project planned, and making your item means postponing my own. Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project, to make you an item I could sell for 2000gp when you're only willing to compensate me for the amount I could make selling a single trinket on the street? And you're implying that I'm being unreasonable?

My suggestion was 10-15%, or in this case between 200 and 300 gold. I'm saving you between 1700 and 1800 gold while giving up my own character's goal. I took a crafting feat so I could craft items, not to take orders and be some kind of machine. If you want an ally who will neglect their own goals for your benefit with no compensation, go Dominate one.

For the record, you can't actually sell is for a 25gp profit. Normally, you can sell it for cost - no profit. With the right investment in character abilities, you can actually make a few percent profit on it.

Unless of course, you're an NPC merchant not a PC crafter. Or the GM has decided to ignore the rules and supply NPCs in desperate need of things you can craft. By the same token of course, the GM could introduce NPCs desperate to buy the party's found items at full price. Neither of these is considered a good idea as a general rule.

Or you use the as-written downtime rules which net you 25% profit.

I'm not going to say it's not possible, but I don't see anything that says "Craft and sell items for a 25% profit". I assume there's some clever way of arranging that?


_Ozy_ wrote:
thejeff wrote:
LuniasM wrote:

Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets. Now take my post in context - if I have the free time to do it I'll do it for free. In this case I have another project planned, and making your item means postponing my own. Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project, to make you an item I could sell for 2000gp when you're only willing to compensate me for the amount I could make selling a single trinket on the street? And you're implying that I'm being unreasonable?

My suggestion was 10-15%, or in this case between 200 and 300 gold. I'm saving you between 1700 and 1800 gold while giving up my own character's goal. I took a crafting feat so I could craft items, not to take orders and be some kind of machine. If you want an ally who will neglect their own goals for your benefit with no compensation, go Dominate one.

For the record, you can't actually sell is for a 25gp profit. Normally, you can sell it for cost - no profit. With the right investment in character abilities, you can actually make a few percent profit on it.

Unless of course, you're an NPC merchant not a PC crafter. Or the GM has decided to ignore the rules and supply NPCs in desperate need of things you can craft. By the same token of course, the GM could introduce NPCs desperate to buy the party's found items at full price. Neither of these is considered a good idea as a general rule.

Or you use the as-written downtime rules which net you 25% profit.

If you are actually in a campaign where you can craft stuff and sell it to NPCs for a profit, then it is much more reasonable to charge some fraction of that lost profit to your fellow PCs. However, I've never seen or been in a campaign like that and don't expect to anytime soon, which is why my previous responses have been different.


Guys, you can use Magic capital to pay for crafting cost, by RAW. You earn Magic capital by paying half the value (and spending time).

So, for example, let's say I earn 4 magic capital per day, each is worth 100gp, and I pay 50gp per capital earned. So, over 5 days I've earned 2000gp worth of magic capital and paid 1000gp. That magic capital can be spent to craft an item worth 4k with a craft cost of 2k.

Therefore, I've spent 1k, and can sell for 2k. 1k profit on a 4k item.

All by the book.


Yeah. Not ever using the downtime rules. That's pretty damn certain.


thejeff wrote:
Yeah. Not ever using the downtime rules. That's pretty damn certain.

*shrug* GMs are free to choose as they like, but it's hardly a 'clever' way of doing it, or using some loophole. It's built right into the ruleset.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

My issue comes from the idea that one player wants another to craft for them during down time.

This now takes up the down time of one character, while the other is free to do their own downtime activities to do what ever they want.

If I was the crafting PC player I would ask for compensation. Probably charge 60-75% of full cost, most of which is going directly into crafting the item and my PC will make 10-25% profit.

I had to delay my own objectives it is the least that could be done to compensate me for that.


_Ozy_ wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Yeah. Not ever using the downtime rules. That's pretty damn certain.
*shrug* GMs are free to choose as they like, but it's hardly a 'clever' way of doing it, or using some loophole. It's built right into the ruleset.

There's a bunch of cool stuff in those rules, but if it just turns into a way to break WBL, it's not something I want to deal with.

We've also just pushed it to: For a 1000g item, I'll charge the other PC 600gp of the price, use 250gp to earn Magic, with which I craft the item, leaving me with 350gp of the price in profit - which I can use to craft a 1400gp item for myself. And that's not even touching my share of the loot.
Granted, there's some time invested there. :)

Actually the practical way to do this would be for the other PC to use their time and money to earn Magic which the crafter then uses to make the item. And then continues to use their time to help the Crafter convert gold to Magic for the crafter's item.

Edit: Meanwhile, as GM, I'm cutting down on the loot they find to keep them somewhere near expectations. :)


Yup, there are multiple ways to keep this in check (other than outright banning), such as limiting access to time and/or money.

If you feel the PCs are breaking WBL too much, you can also talk to them out of game and suggest they put their effort towards other goals. Also, there's WBL, and then there's WBL.

A lyre of building isn't going to impact combat as much as boots of haste, so just looking at the overall crafted wealth isn't telling the entire story either.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
LuniasM wrote:

Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets. Now take my post in context - if I have the free time to do it I'll do it for free. In this case I have another project planned, and making your item means postponing my own. Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project, to make you an item I could sell for 2000gp when you're only willing to compensate me for the amount I could make selling a single trinket on the street? And you're implying that I'm being unreasonable?

My suggestion was 10-15%, or in this case between 200 and 300 gold. I'm saving you between 1700 and 1800 gold while giving up my own character's goal. I took a crafting feat so I could craft items, not to take orders and be some kind of machine. If you want an ally who will neglect their own goals for your benefit with no compensation, go Dominate one.

For the record, you can't actually sell is for a 25gp profit. Normally, you can sell it for cost - no profit. With the right investment in character abilities, you can actually make a few percent profit on it.

Unless of course, you're an NPC merchant not a PC crafter. Or the GM has decided to ignore the rules and supply NPCs in desperate need of things you can craft. By the same token of course, the GM could introduce NPCs desperate to buy the party's found items at full price. Neither of these is considered a good idea as a general rule.

Ugh. I get that the rules are like this for balance reasons, but come on. How does that make sense in-universe? Some people are just magically cursed to never be capable of selling items for more than half their market value? Why is it that Joe Schmoe down the street who dropped out of the university can sell his feather tokens at full price but Mr. Awesome McCoolguy who graduated with honors and is "going places" is incapable of selling one at more than its crafting cost?

Game logic baffles me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The reasoning is thus: PCs are adventurers, so don't have the time to set up a shop, stock it, and prepare to wait the months and years it takes to sell items at full cost.

They are unloading their goods on a middle-man who will buy the stuff quick, for half price. That middle-man will then probably find an interested merchant somewhere and sell for 75%. Then the merchant puts it on the market at full cost.

Obviously this is a simplified view of things, but it's not too unreasonable to expect that you can't immediately find the end-use buyers for all of your gear in a day or two.

If some NPC comes up to specifically to commission an item, there's no reason you couldn't sell to him at full price. Unfortunately, DMs don't send those sorts of NPCs around too often.


LuniasM wrote:
Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets.

What thejeff said. Can't do that.

LuniasM wrote:
Ugh. I get that the rules are like this for balance reasons, but come on. How does that make sense in-universe?

What _Ozy_ said.

Also, how does it make sense in-universe that you can walk into a town with 60 Fire Giant Greatswords and find someone who wants to buy all of them? :P

Ditto crafting 30 Amulets of Natural Armor +1 while adventuring and trying to sell all of those at once.

LuniasM wrote:
Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project

Nope, your own project takes priority, you have the crafting feats. The question is "What do you do once you're done crafting your own stuff?"

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Balkoth wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
Let's say I'm making a universal solvent, one of the cheapest wondrous items which costs 50gp. In a day I can craft and sell that for a 25gp profit. I'm making 25 times that of a skilled laborer making what are essentially trinkets.

What thejeff said. Can't do that.

LuniasM wrote:
Ugh. I get that the rules are like this for balance reasons, but come on. How does that make sense in-universe?

What _Ozy_ said.

Also, how does it make sense in-universe that you can walk into a town with 60 Fire Giant Greatswords and find someone who wants to buy all of them? :P

Ditto crafting 30 Amulets of Natural Armor +1 while adventuring and trying to sell all of those at once.

LuniasM wrote:
Do you seriously think I should spend my time, giving up my own project
Nope, your own project takes priority, you have the crafting feats. The question is "What do you do once you're done crafting your own stuff?"

I guess I understand the first and second points now, although I'm not the kind of guy who'd suggest mass-producing and selling magic items to be a viable strategy - supply and demand is in full swing, and there's no way there's enough people walking around with that kinda money to sell at market value. No, as an adventurer I'd stick to commissions at a slightly reduced rate from market value to attract customers by "cutting out the middle man" as it were - maybe 80-85%, crafting cost up front and additional payment once the product is finished.

As for the last quoted portion, that's literally what I was saying in my original post:

LuniasM" wrote:
If the crafter and an ally both want an item and there's enough time to make both, then doing so at cost saves money, improves your relationship, and makes your ally better at doing their role in the party which means everybody wins. However, if there's only time for one item to be made, the crafter should logically choose their own item to be made first with any requests for other items considered as paid commissions [at a rate of 10-15% of the market value].

I'm not advocating demanding payment at all times from allied PCs, and I never was. That's preposterous. I'm saying that my projects take precedence and anyone who wants me to drop everything to work on theirs has to make it worth postponing my own work.


Balkoth wrote:


LuniasM wrote:
Ugh. I get that the rules are like this for balance reasons, but come on. How does that make sense in-universe?

What _Ozy_ said.

Also, how does it make sense in-universe that you can walk into a town with 60 Fire Giant Greatswords and find someone who wants to buy all of them? :P

Ditto crafting 30 Amulets of Natural Armor +1 while adventuring and trying to sell all of those at once.

Yeah, that's the flip side. On the one hand, you can't sell your stuff for full price. On the other, you can sell it all, even if that doesn't make any sense.

It's a game mechanic, in lieu of having rules for a fully fleshed out supply and demand magic item economy - which would be impossible. We can't begin to simulate a real economy with our best mathematical models, much less do so simply enough for a game.


thejeff wrote:
Balkoth wrote:


LuniasM wrote:
Ugh. I get that the rules are like this for balance reasons, but come on. How does that make sense in-universe?

What _Ozy_ said.

Also, how does it make sense in-universe that you can walk into a town with 60 Fire Giant Greatswords and find someone who wants to buy all of them? :P

Ditto crafting 30 Amulets of Natural Armor +1 while adventuring and trying to sell all of those at once.

Yeah, that's the flip side. On the one hand, you can't sell your stuff for full price. On the other, you can sell it all, even if that doesn't make any sense.

It's a game mechanic, in lieu of having rules for a fully fleshed out supply and demand magic item economy - which would be impossible. We can't begin to simulate a real economy with our best mathematical models, much less do so simply enough for a game.

Not until Pathfinder starts selling supercomputers along with their hardcovers.


LuniasM wrote:
No, as an adventurer I'd stick to commissions at a slightly reduced rate from market value to attract customers by "cutting out the middle man" as it were - maybe 80-85%, crafting cost up front and additional payment once the product is finished.

Which in this context boils down to "GM discretion." AFAIK. Not saying that's a good thing (or a bad thing), that's just what it is.

LuniasM wrote:
I'm not advocating demanding payment at all times from allied PCs, and I never was. That's preposterous.

Then by your definition there are quite a few preposterous people who have been posting in this thread. But hey, you said it, not me!


Dastis wrote:

1st. Its perfectly ok from a roleplay perspective. I write apps but that doesn't mean I'm going to sit there all day making some for my buddies for no cost

As for how much WBL increase he should have I would compare it to how much it costs to buy a feat. Problem is feats vary in price. Also items do not count for meeting perquisites

8301 will buy a combat feat in the form of a +1 training gauntlet
10000 will buy an Ioun stone with alertness or endurance
etc.

Another method would be looking at the best case scenario then breaking down how many feats you would need. I am going to be a bit liberal with the numbers to show how much the craft feats are worth in good conditions. Lets say you can cover roughly 95% of your items costs max with all the crafting feats you need. That would give you a WBL of 190% max. Of course this assumes you get everything in GP. This would be reduced significantly by getting loot in items. IE: compare 4000gp vs a 4000gp item. With crafting 4000gp is basically 8000gp but the item is still 4000gp. I am going to assume 50% in items and 50% in gp for simplicity. So assuming you can craft 95% of items you want you end up with 47.5%

Obviously for this we would need Craft Wondrous items. If you are a caster you would want Craft Rod. If you are anyone else you would probably want craft magical arms and armor. Assuming you never need revival magic and are extremely frugal with other items you can reasonably end up with that 47.5% extra WBL for 2 or 3 feats. Breaking that down is hopeless though Craft Wondrous would probably be carrying most of that %

As a dm I'm cool with an extra 25% per feat. It gets a bit wonky at high levels but high levels were made to be broken

Do you go on daring life or death raids with your buddies where the presence or absence of an ap could mean the difference in life and death for all of you? I'm not entirely sure the situations are parallel.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Balkoth wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
No, as an adventurer I'd stick to commissions at a slightly reduced rate from market value to attract customers by "cutting out the middle man" as it were - maybe 80-85%, crafting cost up front and additional payment once the product is finished.
Which in this context boils down to "GM discretion." AFAIK. Not saying that's a good thing (or a bad thing), that's just what it is.

...okay?

Balkoth][QUOTE="LuniasM wrote:
I'm not advocating demanding payment at all times from allied PCs, and I never was. That's preposterous.
Then by your definition there are quite a few preposterous people who have been posting in this thread. But hey, you said it, not me!

That was in reference to the idea that I had been advocating for allies paying me all the time, not referring to people who do play that way. Whatever works for their group is fine, obviously.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Surprised this hasn't come up yet.
Or this one, for that matter.

451 to 500 of 532 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Would it be ok for a crafter pg to make his allies pay full price for objects he crafts? All Messageboards