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


Advice

401 to 450 of 532 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
I suspect that the particular group's implementation of those rules is what's broken.
Entirely possible. I went through the math, but it's been too long for me to be entirely sure of exact details. At a guess, I'm betting I didn't take construction times and max expended capital per day/week into account. But on the other hand, Deveran's reconstruction didn't exactly take that into account either, so... *shrugs* It worked for my group.
Wrath of the Righteous isn't Kingmaker. The focus on the campaign is mythic heroes doing mythic things in Xena/Hercules Action Pack Dramatic Style!.. not managing the mundane nuts and bolts of a town rebuilding itself. The only time the TV shows would explore such things would be for fodder in a comedy episode.

Correct. And my group wanted to look at the nuts and bolts. The sorcerer bought a lyre of building just so she could rebuild buildings and roads. Because this isn't a TV show, and in that particular module, it is a large part of the plot. I mean, Part 1 of Demon's Heresy is titled 'Rebuilding Drezen' (Why did I call it Deveran? No idea. Name warped in memory, so my numbers might be even more off than I thought.)

And the module even referenced the rules.

Demon's Heresy wrote:

but as a basic rule, you should assume the PCs have at least a couple months before things get this bad.

How the PCs spend their downtime is up to them, but Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Campaign presents a detailed system by which the PCs can retrain, craft items, build structures, establish groups, gather information, and more. Downtime activities typically consume capital in the form of Goods, Influence, Labor, Magic, and of course time—the PCs have likely already earned some Goods in the previous adventure, and several encounters in this adventure award them more capital. If you’re not interested in using the downtime system in your game, simply ignore references in the adventure to rewards of Goods, Influence, Labor, and Magic.'


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

It's possible to craft magical items while only spending an amount roughly equal to ~10% of their total market value.

I've been able to create a loop where I would craft a pair of +1 cloaks of resistance* every day, sell them for 500gp each (1,000 total) for about 900gp profit daily, which was then used to earn more magic capital to continue funding my crafting projects.

Think about it. One day nets me ~900gp. That's 36 magic capital with the right feats. Magic capital which can be put towards your CRAFTING costs at 100gp each. If your crafting costs are only ~20% of normal crafters though...well, you do the math.

It was crazy how much money I could earn and how much I could craft with the downtime rules.

You just use all that profit to expand your business empire to the point where it can continuously fund your crafting without you having to manage it anymore.

** spoiler omitted **

I've read enough of your posts to suspect that you're operating under at best... sketchy premises and questionable logic. Magic items are expensive purchases for folks who aren't hauling out chestfuls of loot on a regular basis.


I haven't seen anything in an extra 250 posts to change what I said originally. Follow the flowchart. Specifically: Friend->brother from another mother->owe them a kidney->did they promise you a kidney->will they flake. Entirely possible to fail on an earlier point too. Not every party does everything for the good of the party. Sometimes they're just a loose group of like-minded mercenaries. That party will work much differently than one in which they all work towards the collective good of the party.

I've also seen brought up several times (and never refuted) the other issue I mentioned, which is that the crafter is being expected to work while the rest of the party is not. That's not equitable or fair. If the crafter is working on crafting for the party, why isn't the party required to be out adventuring/making money? If the crafter is required to be working for the good of the party, why isn't everyone else? Why do other people get free time and the crafter does not?


Bob Bob Bob wrote:

I haven't seen anything in an extra 250 posts to change what I said originally. Follow the flowchart. Specifically: Friend->brother from another mother->owe them a kidney->did they promise you a kidney->will they flake. Entirely possible to fail on an earlier point too. Not every party does everything for the good of the party. Sometimes they're just a loose group of like-minded mercenaries. That party will work much differently than one in which they all work towards the collective good of the party.

I've also seen brought up several times (and never refuted) the other issue I mentioned, which is that the crafter is being expected to work while the rest of the party is not. That's not equitable or fair. If the crafter is working on crafting for the party, why isn't the party required to be out adventuring/making money? If the crafter is required to be working for the good of the party, why isn't everyone else? Why do other people get free time and the crafter does not?

Why is the DM forcing the party to take free time? My PCs will happily leave the jerk caster behind to craft and go out adventuring without him.

EDIT: The non-crafting PCs are doing the crafter a favor by foregoing adventuring so that he has time to craft.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Baval wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Baval wrote:
And quite frankly, its a jerk railroading DM who decides that "because youre a PC no one will buy your dagger any higher than the price you paid to forge it, even if they will buy inferior dagger at twice the price from the blacksmith next door"

The reason you're not going to get full price is because you're not going to take the time to open up your shop and wait for customers. If you did, you wouldn't have the time for adventuring, and you'd be that NPC next door.

A PC selling a sword he looted from the dungeon isn't a buisness set up for customers, he's essentially dealing with someone who's fencing his loot. And usually half price is the best they can get.

Who says I didnt? I do in fact have a caravan I adventure in just so I can keep choice goods with me that sell well on the road, and I do in fact maintain a fairly large shop manned by my cohort and some of my constructs.
Being on the road really doesn't count. You're moving from point to point, you're not at a single spot where you can be found by people looking to do buisness. As for the large shop you leave behind, the only way I'd allow a player to do that would be to use the Ultimate Campaign rules. And that's assuming they've made the investment possible. You really can't just go to a spot and hang a shingle.

Why exactly does moving invalidate my shop? Lots of merchants do nothing but move around selling wares. In fact, its often easier to find customers who want to buy a bunch of swords if youre traveling around looking for people who want to buy swords rather than trying to sell swords to the same town day in and out.

And ok? So Id have to use the Ultimate Campaign rules. I used a similar third party rule set, but id be happy to use those instead. Whats your point? If I have a shop, I can sell my wares. That said, a shop can be as simple as a blanket laid on the ground with wares spread out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
I just disagree with the people who seem to think that if I'm not crafting for free for party members, I'm screwing the other PCs over.

Okay, let's work out a reasonable rate, then.

A profession check earns you a weekly wage of half your check. Let's even say you have a total of 20 in your profession and roll a natural 20, for 40. That's 20 gold per week. Assuming a 40 hour work week (with 5 days and 8 hours per day) that's 4 gold per day.

But really, you're more than a mere blacksmith, tailor, tanner, etc. You're probably at least in demand as a highly skilled bard who can take 10 and get a 30 on his perform check. In a prosperous city, that bard can earn an average of 10.5 gold pieces per day. So if it takes you two days to craft a belt of +2 strength, and we assume your time is worth as much as that highly, highly skilled bard who "may draw attention from distant patrons, or even from extraplanar beings" then the total price to the fighter should be 2,021 gold. You earn 21 gold for two days time.

But let's even say you're worth nearly five times what that bard is. Somehow. Even though a level 3 wizard or cleric can make a belt like that. So you get 100 gold for two days of labor in wages, which brings the total to 2,100 gold.

That's...quite a bit shy of 3,000 gold. One is charging 5% more to cover lost profession/perform/etc checks. The other is charging 50% more for...reasons.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
I've read enough of your posts to suspect that you're operating under at best... sketchy premises and questionable logic. Magic items are expensive purchases for folks who aren't hauling out chestfuls of loot on a regular basis.

Nothing sketchy about it, and I resent the tone of your post. The rules are quite clear on the matter: if you are in a settlement of appropriate size, you can sell as much of your stuff as you want, automatically, up to its purchase limit.

Rules for selling stuff:

Selling Treasure
In general, a character can sell something for half its listed price, including weapons, armor, gear, and magic items. This also includes character-created items.

Trade goods are the exception to the half-price rule. A trade good, in this sense, is a valuable good that can be easily exchanged almost as if it were cash itself.

SOURCE

Base Value and Purchase Limit: This section lists the community's base value for available magic items in gp. There is a 75% chance that any item of this value or lower can be found for sale in the community with little effort. If an item is not available, a new check to determine if the item has become available can be made in 1 week. A settlement's purchase limit is the most money a shop in the settlement can spend to purchase any single item from the PCs. If the PCs wish to sell an item worth more than a settlement's purchase limit, they'll either need to settle for a lower price, travel to a larger city, or (with the GM's permission) search for a specific buyer in the city with deeper pockets. A settlement's type sets its purchase limit.

SOURCE

And sure, the GM could totally screw me on selling items, but not without changing the rules of the game.

whew wrote:
The non-crafting PCs are doing the crafter a favor by foregoing adventuring so that he has time to craft.

Bullpucky. There's tons of valuable downtime stuff they can be doing for themselves too. Odds are no one is pressuring anyone.


Balkoth wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
I just disagree with the people who seem to think that if I'm not crafting for free for party members, I'm screwing the other PCs over.

Okay, let's work out a reasonable rate, then.

A profession check earns you a weekly wage of half your check. Let's even say you have a total of 20 in your profession and roll a natural 20, for 40. That's 20 gold per week. Assuming a 40 hour work week (with 5 days and 8 hours per day) that's 4 gold per day.

But really, you're more than a mere blacksmith, tailor, tanner, etc. You're probably at least in demand as a highly skilled bard who can take 10 and get a 30 on his perform check. In a prosperous city, that bard can earn an average of 10.5 gold pieces per day. So if it takes you two days to craft a belt of +2 strength, and we assume your time is worth as much as that highly, highly skilled bard who "may draw attention from distant patrons, or even from extraplanar beings" then the total price to the fighter should be 2,021 gold. You earn 21 gold for two days time.

But let's even say you're worth nearly five times what that bard is. Somehow. Even though a level 3 wizard or cleric can make a belt like that. So you get 100 gold for two days of labor in wages, which brings the total to 2,100 gold.

That's...quite a bit shy of 3,000 gold. One is charging 5% more to cover lost profession/perform/etc checks. The other is charging 50% more for...reasons.

So, the fighter should be happy if I offer him 10gp per day to dig latrines for my wizard academy, eh?

Or how's this...how much is a feat worth, because the time I spend crafting I could spend retraining a feat. It takes 5 days to retrain a feat. Call a general feat value around 20k, so each day I craft for someone else should add a surcharge of 4k? Or maybe half that...2k?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
So, the fighter should be happy if I offer him 10gp per day to dig latrines for my wizard academy, eh?

Well, that's 200 gold a month assuming 4 weeks and 5 days per week. What does that buy him?...

"Poor (3 gp/month): The PC lives in common rooms of taverns, with his parents, or in some other communal situation—this is the lifestyle of most untrained laborers and commoners. He need not track purchases of meals or taxes that cost 1 sp or less.

Average (10 gp/month): The PC lives in his own apartment, small house, or similar location—this is the lifestyle of most trained or skilled experts or warriors. He can secure any nonmagical item worth 1 gp or less from his home in 1d10 minutes, and need not track purchases of common meals or taxes that cost 1 gp or less.

Wealthy (100 gp/month): The PC has a sizable home or a nice suite of rooms in a fine inn. He can secure any nonmagical item worth 5 gp or less from his belongings in his home in 1d10 minutes, and need only track purchases of meals or taxes in excess of 10 gp."

In other words, most laborers would be thrilled to earn 10 gold in a MONTH. Even trained/skilled experts and warriors living an average lifestyle could make a month's of expenses in a day. Or latrine digger could afford a wealthy lifestyle and still have 50% of his gold for other expenses.


whew wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

I haven't seen anything in an extra 250 posts to change what I said originally. Follow the flowchart. Specifically: Friend->brother from another mother->owe them a kidney->did they promise you a kidney->will they flake. Entirely possible to fail on an earlier point too. Not every party does everything for the good of the party. Sometimes they're just a loose group of like-minded mercenaries. That party will work much differently than one in which they all work towards the collective good of the party.

I've also seen brought up several times (and never refuted) the other issue I mentioned, which is that the crafter is being expected to work while the rest of the party is not. That's not equitable or fair. If the crafter is working on crafting for the party, why isn't the party required to be out adventuring/making money? If the crafter is required to be working for the good of the party, why isn't everyone else? Why do other people get free time and the crafter does not?

Why is the DM forcing the party to take free time? My PCs will happily leave the jerk caster behind to craft and go out adventuring without him.

EDIT: The non-crafting PCs are doing the crafter a favor by foregoing adventuring so that he has time to craft.

If the party never has any free time then it's a bad idea to play a crafter. If the party is only making free time so the crafter can craft then it's both a bad idea to play a crafter and an even worse idea to craft anything for the party (since you want to finish stuff as soon as possible to keep adventuring). So I'm working off of the situation in which the party already has free time (for whatever reason).

Your PC is not the party unless you only have one PC in the party. If everyone else votes downtime, is your PC adventuring alone?

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For those of you who argue that a person's crafting feats should benefit the entire party I have a question. What if the party benefited more by the wizard had extra gold more than they would if the other party member?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dastis wrote:
For those of you who argue that a person's crafting feats should benefit the entire party I have a question. What if the party benefited more by the wizard had extra gold more than they would if the other party member?

The party could agree to give the wizard a larger share.

What if the party benefited more if the fighter had extra gold than some other party member? Oh well, the fighter doesn't craft, so can't do it anyway.

This sounds like "The wizard is more important than the others, so he should get a larger cut."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cavall wrote:

I'll be flagging you for personal abuse, Brain in a Jar.

People that disagree with you aren't idiots.

Please use the guidelines for the site or don't post.

Please try to understand what people are saying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost


thejeff wrote:
Dastis wrote:
For those of you who argue that a person's crafting feats should benefit the entire party I have a question. What if the party benefited more by the wizard had extra gold more than they would if the other party member?

The party could agree to give the wizard a larger share.

What if the party benefited more if the fighter had extra gold than some other party member? Oh well, the fighter doesn't craft, so can't do it anyway.

This sounds like "The wizard is more important than the others, so he should get a larger cut."

A. So you would opt for a solution that has the exact same outcome?

B. Fighter can craft. In fact he actually has more feats to do so
C. There is more than one way to generate a gold surplus
D. Able to more effectively use gold does not mean more important
E. Responded but never answered my question


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dastis wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Dastis wrote:
For those of you who argue that a person's crafting feats should benefit the entire party I have a question. What if the party benefited more by the wizard had extra gold more than they would if the other party member?

The party could agree to give the wizard a larger share.

What if the party benefited more if the fighter had extra gold than some other party member? Oh well, the fighter doesn't craft, so can't do it anyway.

This sounds like "The wizard is more important than the others, so he should get a larger cut."

A. So you would opt for a solution that has the exact same outcome?

B. Fighter can craft. In fact he actually has more feats to do so
C. There is more than one way to generate a gold surplus
D. Able to more effectively use gold does not mean more important
E. Responded but never answered my question

A) Yes, but I would do so explicitly rather than by setting it up through builds. If you want the wizard to have more gold, give the wizard more gold. If you want the fighter to have more gold, give the fighter more gold. Don't decide you want character X to have more gold, so character X has to take the crafting feats and then if at a later date the group agrees a different character needs more gold, then everyone has to retrain feats so that they're the crafter. Just give them more gold. Much easier.

Liberty's Edge

Ierox wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
Knight Magenta wrote:
I think that this has come down to "my build is better then your build, pay me for it!"

This is something that only you and a couple of other people have thought, despite having been said repeatedly that it has NEVER been the point of the thread. I agree that measuring the contribution of different characters is nonsensical, that's why I've never tried to do so.

So, could you please just stop using this to support you argument? It's getting boring.

Moreover, you still continue comparing a lesser discount to an extra charge. If I had to play with someone like you, I would have just give up instantly and played a Juju Oracle instead. In this way, I would have had my minions for (almost) free, despite being a bit unsatisfied since I don't like undeads, and everybody would have paid full price for anything anyway.

Apparently, you (generic) prefer this to getting a 25% discount on everything and letting me play what I like.

People keep making the argument because you have not refuted it.

Spellcasting has a defined value under the system. A spell costs 10*cl*spell lvl, double that if it happens in dangerous situations.

You believe that a crafting character (say jack, the 3rd level wizard), should recieve some % of the market price for creating items for his allies, because he has expended resources(feats) to do so.

Yet you do not believe that a healing character (say joe, the 3rd level cleric), should recieve a similar percentage of the market price of his spells for casting spells for his allies. In fact you think that'd be petty retaliation.

Why?

Especially considering that, to the entire rest of the world, the value of jack's items are their cost.

That's not the case for the Joe. Joe could in principle sell his cures at half price instead of giving them, for free, to Jack.

Joe's cures can make him money beyond cost. Jack's item crafting cannot.

Yet Jack should be the one to be recompensed by his allies?...

First let me say, good argument, faved it.

Now most groups where I have played a cleric of Abadar (and in my group now everyone dreads it) I ask for payment for spellcasting. It took some work, but the group finally buckled down into a heal us on the adventure and you get first pick out of treasures to pay for keeping us alive and thus you alive. This didn't count for some spells unless someone in the group asked me to cast it. which was primarily healing spells. I got extra experience for role playing and lots of wealth, but generally saw most of the magical gear going to the group, and when I got the feats of Brew Potion & Craft Wand, my services just increased as they bought potions at cost from me when we where in places that didn't have the magical supplies (after all most small villages only have if they're lucky 1-4 minor magical items like potions of healing. )


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dastis wrote:

Please try to understand what people are saying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

See my posts above. If the crafter is a renowned performer in a prosperous city with an amazing Perform check (30) who can attract distant patrons (even extraplanar patrons) he can earn 10.5 gold per day. Are you suggesting that your wizard who is doing something that any level 3 wizard/cleric can do should be getting paid more than 10.5 gold per day? If so, how much more?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

If my players asked me, as GM, how this should be handled, I'd probably say the following:

The rules are clear; if you sell something, you generally sell it it for half its total market value. The rules make no distinction as to whether you are selling to a PC or NPC whatsoever, so the rule applies across the board. The crafter, however, is under no obligation to spend his downtime crafting for others anymore than the party's fighter is obligated to spend his downtime rubbing the crafter's feet.

This will impede possible abuse or imbalances, and is more or less universally fair, at least from a rules perspective. I also think it would reduce the possibility of internal conflict among players. If the crafter wants to turn a profit, he can still take advantage of the downtime rules, as well as feats and abilities that lower crafting costs, in order to do so. This ruling also makes such feats and abilities a little bit more valuable.


Ravingdork wrote:

If my players asked me, as GM, how this should be handled, I'd probably say the following:

The rules are clear; if you sell something, you generally sell it it for half its total market value. It makes no distinction as to whether you are selling to a PC or NPC whatsoever, so the rule applies across the board. The crafter, however, is under no obligation to spend his downtime crafting for others anymore than the party's fighter is obligated to spend his downtime rubbing the crafter's feet. Supporting the party during downtime is not the same as supporting them out in the field.

This will impede possible abuse and is universally fair, at least from a rules perspective. I also think it would reduce the possibility of internal conflict among players. If the crafter wants to turn a profit, he can still take advantage of the downtime rules, as well as feats and abilities that lower crafting costs, in order to do so.

This ruling also makes such feats and abilities intrinsically more valuable.

Note that the rules do not obligate support in the field either. It's a common assumption, but not something specified in the rules. There is no such downtime/adventure time distinction in the rules about how party members should behave. Quite likely such implicit group contracts will vary not only from group to group, but from campaign to campaign depending on the nature of the adventure.

Does crafting on the road fall into downtime or in the field, under your assumptions?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Balkoth wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
So, the fighter should be happy if I offer him 10gp per day to dig latrines for my wizard academy, eh?

Well, that's 200 gold a month assuming 4 weeks and 5 days per week. What does that buy him?...

"Poor (3 gp/month): The PC lives in common rooms of taverns, with his parents, or in some other communal situation—this is the lifestyle of most untrained laborers and commoners. He need not track purchases of meals or taxes that cost 1 sp or less.

Average (10 gp/month): The PC lives in his own apartment, small house, or similar location—this is the lifestyle of most trained or skilled experts or warriors. He can secure any nonmagical item worth 1 gp or less from his home in 1d10 minutes, and need not track purchases of common meals or taxes that cost 1 gp or less.

Wealthy (100 gp/month): The PC has a sizable home or a nice suite of rooms in a fine inn. He can secure any nonmagical item worth 5 gp or less from his belongings in his home in 1d10 minutes, and need only track purchases of meals or taxes in excess of 10 gp."

In other words, most laborers would be thrilled to earn 10 gold in a MONTH. Even trained/skilled experts and warriors living an average lifestyle could make a month's of expenses in a day. Or latrine digger could afford a wealthy lifestyle and still have 50% of his gold for other expenses.

So, you're saying I should offer the fighter less?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
So, you're saying I should offer the fighter less?

For digging latrines? Yeah. There's plenty of laborers out there who'd be thrilled to dig latrines for even 1 gold per day. Remember, a "poor" person only spends 3 gold per MONTH on his lifestyle. A person who has actual TRAINING in a profession ("You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession’s daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems.") makes 5-6 gold per week -- and we only need untrained laborers to dig latrines. So they make even less.

Edit: in fact...

"Untrained laborers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day."

So an untrained laborer digging latrines only expects about 1 silver piece (or 0.1 gold pieces) per day.


Michael Talley 759 wrote:
First let me say, good argument, faved it.

It's a terrible argument, because in the field 'healing' contributes exactly as much to 'keeping the party alive' as the fighter killing the monsters before they kill the cleric.

Does the fighter get paid depending on how many hit points of damage he does? Does the rogue get paid per trap disabled/lock picked? Does the Bard get paid per ally that is 'inspired'? Does the wizard get paid per summoned creature?

Terrible, terrible argument.

The opportunity cost for spells in combat vs. downtime activity is a completely different situation. Buffs vs. heals vs. crowd control vs. debuffs vs. direct damage. These are tactical decisions that one should use to optimize your survival and chance at success. You could very well decide that instead of throwing out a cure moderate wounds, your party is better served by a silence spell on the enemy caster, for example.

Casting spells in combat does not consume the same type of resources that downtime crafting consumes, namely time that could be spent benefiting yourself.


Balkoth wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
So, you're saying I should offer the fighter less?

For digging latrines? Yeah. There's plenty of laborers out there who'd be thrilled to dig latrines for even 1 gold per day. Remember, a "poor" person only spends 3 gold per MONTH on his lifestyle. A person who has actual TRAINING in a profession ("You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession’s daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems.") makes 5-6 gold per week -- and we only need untrained laborers to dig latrines. So they make even less.

Edit: in fact...

"Untrained laborers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day."

So an untrained laborer digging latrines only expects about 1 silver piece (or 0.1 gold pieces) per day.

Eh, I don't mind paying the fighter 5sp/day, but I expect that he digs some quality latrines. No slacking off on the job like those untrained laborers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
Michael Talley 759 wrote:
First let me say, good argument, faved it.

It's a terrible argument, because in the field 'healing' contributes exactly as much to 'keeping the party alive' as the fighter killing the monsters before they kill the cleric.

Does the fighter get paid depending on how many hit points of damage he does? Does the rogue get paid per trap disabled/lock picked? Does the Bard get paid per ally that is 'inspired'? Does the wizard get paid per summoned creature?

Terrible, terrible argument.

The opportunity cost for spells in combat vs. downtime activity is a completely different situation. Buffs vs. heals vs. crowd control vs. debuffs vs. direct damage. These are tactical decisions that one should use to optimize your survival and chance at success. You could very well decide that instead of throwing out a cure moderate wounds, your party is better served by a silence spell on the enemy caster, for example.

Casting spells in combat does not consume the same type of resources that downtime crafting consumes, namely time that could be spent benefiting yourself.

But you could decide that buffing yourself or even amusing yourself blasting the bad guys would benefit you more than buffing (or healing) the fighter. Much like the fighter could decide that charging in and getting full attacks on the enemy would benefit him more than protecting the casters would. Either could be wrong.

Much like when the fighter fails his save and gets dominated because you charged more than he could afford for that Cloak of Resistance upgrade. That's not really to your benefit either.

When all these downtime activities are feeding directly into the group's adventure readiness, it's hard to draw such firm lines between downtime and combat rules.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:
whew wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

I haven't seen anything in an extra 250 posts to change what I said originally. Follow the flowchart. Specifically: Friend->brother from another mother->owe them a kidney->did they promise you a kidney->will they flake. Entirely possible to fail on an earlier point too. Not every party does everything for the good of the party. Sometimes they're just a loose group of like-minded mercenaries. That party will work much differently than one in which they all work towards the collective good of the party.

I've also seen brought up several times (and never refuted) the other issue I mentioned, which is that the crafter is being expected to work while the rest of the party is not. That's not equitable or fair. If the crafter is working on crafting for the party, why isn't the party required to be out adventuring/making money? If the crafter is required to be working for the good of the party, why isn't everyone else? Why do other people get free time and the crafter does not?

Why is the DM forcing the party to take free time? My PCs will happily leave the jerk caster behind to craft and go out adventuring without him.

EDIT: The non-crafting PCs are doing the crafter a favor by foregoing adventuring so that he has time to craft.

If the party never has any free time then it's a bad idea to play a crafter. If the party is only making free time so the crafter can craft then it's both a bad idea to play a crafter and an even worse idea to craft anything for the party (since you want to finish stuff as soon as possible to keep adventuring). So I'm working off of the situation in which the party already has free time (for whatever reason).

Your PC is not the party unless you only have one PC in the party. If everyone else votes downtime, is your PC adventuring alone?

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...

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.


Balkoth wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
I just disagree with the people who seem to think that if I'm not crafting for free for party members, I'm screwing the other PCs over.

Okay, let's work out a reasonable rate, then.

A profession check earns you a weekly wage of half your check. Let's even say you have a total of 20 in your profession and roll a natural 20, for 40. That's 20 gold per week. Assuming a 40 hour work week (with 5 days and 8 hours per day) that's 4 gold per day.

But really, you're more than a mere blacksmith, tailor, tanner, etc. You're probably at least in demand as a highly skilled bard who can take 10 and get a 30 on his perform check. In a prosperous city, that bard can earn an average of 10.5 gold pieces per day. So if it takes you two days to craft a belt of +2 strength, and we assume your time is worth as much as that highly, highly skilled bard who "may draw attention from distant patrons, or even from extraplanar beings" then the total price to the fighter should be 2,021 gold. You earn 21 gold for two days time.

But let's even say you're worth nearly five times what that bard is. Somehow. Even though a level 3 wizard or cleric can make a belt like that. So you get 100 gold for two days of labor in wages, which brings the total to 2,100 gold.

That's...quite a bit shy of 3,000 gold. One is charging 5% more to cover lost profession/perform/etc checks. The other is charging 50% more for...reasons.

We don't have a specific level we're basing this off of, so this entire discussion is pretty danged pointless. You either discuss with the players at the table, or you don't. It's my choice what feats I take. A teamwork feat is essentially useless unless you're an Inquisitor, or if another person agrees to take it (abilities that grant them notwithstanding). What you need is agreement. 21 gold for that amount of time would probably be more than reasonable to a 3rd level wizard or cleric I was playing. A 7th level character would probably laugh in their face and instead invest in a business. Okay, I wouldn't laugh, but I'd probably give them a weird look, depending on the campaign. (A lot depends on the other player and PC. If you're playing a Charisma 7 jackass who insults my character a lot, there is no way in hell I'm making stuff for you at a reduced price. I've seen it.) Sure, a business might take a while, but then I can earn Magic at half price, and craft items at 25% price, and sell them at 50% of their normal price.

But of course, this depends on A) The party having downtime, and B) the downtime rules being allowed. If A doesn't apply, then the entire subject is pointless because we can't craft anyway. If B is out of the question...well, instead I'll wait until I have Fabricate and use a decent craft skill to make money on creating items (craft for 30%, sell for 50%). And if the GM refuses to let PCs make money, there's no point in discussing any of this, and I may as well just play an evoker or the like.

Grand Lodge

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Discussions like this make me very glad that my current group uses a "all treasure is party treasure" philosophy. Gear gets distributed to whoever we feel needs it most. Decisions about what to sell and what to keep, and what will the crafters work on, are made by the group. Since all treasure is party treasure, who pays for crafting always has the same answer... The group

I realise that as the number of players increases the viability of this scheme decreases (probably exponentially) but it really keeps everyone pretty happy in our smaller group.


thejeff wrote:

But you could decide that buffing yourself or even amusing yourself blasting the bad guys would benefit you more than buffing (or healing) the fighter. Much like the fighter could decide that charging in and getting full attacks on the enemy would benefit him more than protecting the casters would. Either could be wrong.

Much like when the fighter fails his save and gets dominated because you charged more than he could afford for that Cloak of Resistance upgrade. That's not really to your benefit either.

When all these downtime activities are feeding directly into the group's adventure readiness, it's hard to draw such firm lines between downtime and combat rules.

Er, what? None of what you said blurs the line between downtime and combat 'rules'. All it says is that some decisions can be non-optimal. Well, of course. Also, none of what you said addresses the issue that someone thinks getting paid to heal 'is a good argument', but getting paid to buff, deal damage, find traps, summon creatures, and so on and so on, isn't? So we really want to set up a system where loot is apportioned by some complex calculation of how much you 'contributed' towards defeating the encounter?

Why can't the fighter buy his own cloak again? Maybe he shouldn't have spent so much on his fancy sword if he's worried about getting dominated. Or wait, maybe the wizard should be 'forced' into taking the craft arms & armor feat, so that he can craft the fighter's sword for him too, eh?

Isn't that the logical conclusion of your argument?


_Ozy_ wrote:
thejeff wrote:

But you could decide that buffing yourself or even amusing yourself blasting the bad guys would benefit you more than buffing (or healing) the fighter. Much like the fighter could decide that charging in and getting full attacks on the enemy would benefit him more than protecting the casters would. Either could be wrong.

Much like when the fighter fails his save and gets dominated because you charged more than he could afford for that Cloak of Resistance upgrade. That's not really to your benefit either.

When all these downtime activities are feeding directly into the group's adventure readiness, it's hard to draw such firm lines between downtime and combat rules.

Er, what? None of what you said blurs the line between downtime and combat 'rules'. All it says is that some decisions can be non-optimal. Well, of course. Also, none of what you said addresses the issue that someone thinks getting paid to heal 'is a good argument', but getting paid to buff, deal damage, find traps, summon creatures, and so on and so on, isn't? So we really want to set up a system where loot is apportioned by some complex calculation of how much you 'contributed' towards defeating the encounter?

Why can't the fighter buy his own cloak again? Maybe he shouldn't have spent so much on his fancy sword if he's worried about getting dominated. Or wait, maybe the wizard should be 'forced' into taking the craft arms & armor feat, so that he can craft the fighter's sword for him too, eh?

Isn't that the logical conclusion of your argument?

There are more and less optimal uses of combat time and abilities. There are more and less optimal uses of downtime time and abilities. (And of the various times that aren't either - like crafting during adventuring days when the rest of the party is probably doing things like taking watches so you're not distracted from your crafting.)

All of these things contribute to the party's ability to survive and accomplish its goals.

No, I don't think a complex system of dividing loot is a good idea. I also don't think only some of the party being paid extra for their contributions is a good idea.


Benjamin Medrano wrote:
And if the GM refuses to let PCs make money, there's no point in discussing any of this, and I may as well just play an evoker or the like.

Even if you can't "make money", crafting is still useful by reducing the cost of your gear. It's just not a "print money to break the WBL guidelines" magic button. I don't believe the downtime rules are intended to be that either.

The rules even address this directly:

Quote:

Some GMs might be tempted to reduce the amount or value of the treasure you acquire to offset this and keep your overall wealth in line with the Character Wealth by Level table. Unfortunately, that has the net result of negating the main benefit of crafting magic items — in effect negating your choice of a feat. However, game balance for the default campaign experience expects you and all other PCs to be close to the listed wealth values, so the GM shouldn’t just let you craft double the normal amount of gear. As a guideline, allowing a crafting PC to exceed the Character Wealth by Level guidelines by about 25% is fair, or even up to 50% if the PC has multiple crafting feats.

If you are creating items for other characters in the party, the increased wealth for the other characters should come out of your increased allotment. Not only does this prevent you from skewing the wealth by level for everyone in the party, but it encourages other characters to learn item creation feats.


thejeff wrote:
No, I don't think a complex system of dividing loot is a good idea. I also don't think only some of the party being paid extra for their contributions is a good idea.

What do you mean 'only some' of the party? Everyone can craft and charge extra. Nobody is suggesting that only the wizard should get to charge a bit of a markup for their crafting. The fighter can charge the same markup.


No, it really isn't a good idea to charge your allies for something that is benefiting the whole party. Having stronger allies is something you should want, not a burden that needs to be charged for.

Make them pay for the materials cost and that's all. The barbarian takes hits for you for free. The cleric heals you for free. Crafting magic items is part of your role in the group. Just do it for free.

Also, keep in mind that "Wealth By Level" is a description of how much your gear is worth. Not how much it cost you to make it. You might be saving money by crafting, but it still counts full against how much the total worth of your gear is. You'll want to come up with some kind of in-game reason not to end up with higher WBL than you are supposed to have at your level. (this is something a lot of people don't seem to realize about the crafting system)


Benjamin Medrano wrote:
We don't have a specific level we're basing this off of, so this entire discussion is pretty danged pointless.

At what level do you think a Bard can take 10 on perform and get a skill check of 30? It ain't gonna be level 3.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Doomed Hero wrote:
You'll want to come up with some kind of in-game reason not to end up with higher WBL than you are supposed to have at your level. (this is something a lot of people don't seem to realize about the crafting system)

You would be wrong.

"Some GMs might be tempted to reduce the amount or value of the treasure you acquire to offset this and keep your overall wealth in line with the Character Wealth by Level table. Unfortunately, that has the net result of negating the main benefit of crafting magic items — in effect negating your choice of a feat. However, game balance for the default campaign experience expects you and all other PCs to be close to the listed wealth values, so the GM shouldn’t just let you craft double the normal amount of gear. As a guideline, allowing a crafting PC to exceed the Character Wealth by Level guidelines by about 25% is fair, or even up to 50% if the PC has multiple crafting feats."


Always amuses me when someone says something that goes against a rules quote just a couple posts above theirs.


Doomed Hero wrote:

No, it really isn't a good idea to charge your allies for something that is benefiting the whole party. Having stronger allies is something you should want, not a burden that needs to be charged for.

Make them pay for the materials cost and that's all. The barbarian takes hits for you for free. The cleric heals you for free. Crafting magic items is part of your role in the group. Just do it for free.

Says who? Fighters have a boatload of feats. Surely they can be inconvenienced to spend a couple of them on crafting feats...for the good of the party...

Tactical roles are not the same as strategic roles, and making these comparisons makes absolutely no sense.

Most of the reason is because tactics involves a specific situation where choices can be reasonably determined. You can't do the same for situations like strategic crafting.

What's more useful to the party, in general? A 3rd level pearl of power, or a +3 cloak? There are specific situations which will provide an answer, but no way to determine this answer in general.


OK, haven't read anything since my last post, but I was talking to my rulesy friend who shall be known here as Bob.

Bob's rule on PC crafted items: A PC crafted item can only be used by that character or his minions (familiars, companions, cohorts).

I think it is strange, but apparently it satisfies Wobbly (WBL) concerns.
If it is moot, hated or whatever, well, whatever.


Daw wrote:

OK, haven't read anything since my last post, but I was talking to my rulesy friend who shall be known here as Bob.

Bob's rule on PC crafted items: A PC crafted item can only be used by that character or his minions (familiars, companions, cohorts).

I think it is strange, but apparently it satisfies Wobbly (WBL) concerns.
If it is moot, hated or whatever, well, whatever.

So, they can't be sold if you want to replace it with another item?


Balkoth wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
We don't have a specific level we're basing this off of, so this entire discussion is pretty danged pointless.
At what level do you think a Bard can take 10 on perform and get a skill check of 30? It ain't gonna be level 3.

Nope, with a 16 Charisma I can only manage a 25 on a take-10 without serious shenanigans.


thejeff wrote:
Benjamin Medrano wrote:
And if the GM refuses to let PCs make money, there's no point in discussing any of this, and I may as well just play an evoker or the like.

Even if you can't "make money", crafting is still useful by reducing the cost of your gear. It's just not a "print money to break the WBL guidelines" magic button. I don't believe the downtime rules are intended to be that either.

The rules even address this directly:

Quote:

Some GMs might be tempted to reduce the amount or value of the treasure you acquire to offset this and keep your overall wealth in line with the Character Wealth by Level table. Unfortunately, that has the net result of negating the main benefit of crafting magic items — in effect negating your choice of a feat. However, game balance for the default campaign experience expects you and all other PCs to be close to the listed wealth values, so the GM shouldn’t just let you craft double the normal amount of gear. As a guideline, allowing a crafting PC to exceed the Character Wealth by Level guidelines by about 25% is fair, or even up to 50% if the PC has multiple crafting feats.

If you are creating items for other characters in the party, the increased wealth for the other characters should come out of your increased allotment. Not only does this prevent you from skewing the wealth by level for everyone in the party, but it encourages other characters to learn item creation feats.

You're correct. It isn't a license to print money, and it shouldn't be. What I'm saying is that my time, in-game, has value. I may choose to craft at-cost (I usually do!), but it's my choice. Not a requirement. And unless the GM shuts down all of it, and keeps you strictly to WBL or using that specific rule, I'm giving up more than a handful of gold every day. And if the GM is using that rule, I'm not using my feat for allies, because it comes out of my Wealth By Level. I took the feat, I get the benefit.


Doomed Hero wrote:
No, it really isn't a good idea to charge your allies for something that is benefiting the whole party. Having stronger allies is something you should want, not a burden that needs to be charged for.

Party members and customers* not allies and friends. This is a solid enough motivation, in character. If the group don't want a crafting merchant around at all times, who also helps with some fighting, that's on them.

If I wanted to play like that, I really hope that my fellow players would accept it and not be too up-tight and boring and refuse me.


Wow, that came back before I went awa.
Bob says the crafter can break down his items for their cost in generic Magic Resources. So that means you can use them for future Enchants.
Oh, and apparently as a resource, the Resource can be sold for full resource value, like gems.
This can't be used to cheat because the half of retail price is already factored in.

(Remember, I personally think WBL is kind of a dumb thing.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rub-Eta wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
No, it really isn't a good idea to charge your allies for something that is benefiting the whole party. Having stronger allies is something you should want, not a burden that needs to be charged for.

Party members and customers* not allies and friends. This is a solid enough motivation, in character. If the group don't want a crafting merchant around at all times, who also helps with some fighting, that's on them.

If I wanted to play like that, I really hope that my fellow players would accept it and not be too up-tight and boring and refuse me.

No. I don't normally want a crafting merchant travelling around with us, even if they help with some fighting.

I don't want someone at my back whose main focus is making money off of me.


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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No.

This thread seems to reek of desperation at seeking justification with which to throw at an unsuspecting party for your behavior.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
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.

Math:
9600gp base loot, split 4 ways then paid to the crafter for gear at 60% of price.
Crafter gets 2400gp, keeps 400gp, crafts 4000gp worth of items.
Uses their 2400gp and additional 1200gp (3*400gp) to craft 7200gp worth for themselves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.

401 to 450 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