There is no mention of price in Intelligent Items.
How to define its price rather than convert from 1e?Exception: Intelligent relics in addition to other rewards.
For Party Treasure.
Please don't start multiple threads on the same topic.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no price on intelligent items simply because they cannot be purchased. They only enter a campaign if the DM decides to include them. They are unique items, priceless in more ways than one.
And, FWIW, you can't expect Paizo devs to chime in on your question, especially when all you could possibly want to know is already listed in the book. Their price is "-" = meaning there is no price.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my personal view the price "-" = meaning there is no price is deliberate by Paizo and I regard it as empowering for the GM.
This is my view - but in 2e I feel there has been a shift of power from players back towards GMs. And yes - that is fueling a lot of the discussions here on the rules forum.
The advantage of a price "-"
As GM I can set a price as it fits into the game. If I want the group to have an intelligent item then I can set the price low enough, so they can afford it. Or if it only has some intelligent aspects but otherwise isn't very powerful then I can also add it as plot device.
The disadvantage of a price "-"
As player you can't sell it for half price.
It is up to the GM to set a price for you if you want to buy it (anyhow - an intelligent item will be uncommon at best but more likely rare - so you depend on the GM to make it available RAW in any case)
In the end - if there is a trusting relationship between players and GM then a price of "-" doesn't matter as the GM will come up with a solution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As player you can't sell it for half price.
It is up to the GM to set a price for you if you want to buy it (anyhow - an intelligent item will be uncommon at best but more likely rare - so you depend on the GM to make it available RAW in any case)
As a class of items, one might say they are rare. But each intelligent item is unique - one of a kind. That's beyond simply being "rare".
This said, you can get a ballpark figure by checking what level it is, and how other items of a similar level are priced. But IMHO, the fact that the price is listed as "-" is indeed an intentional decision on the part of the devs. These items are "priceless". Any attempt to buy or sell such an item is an adventure of its own.
in 2e I feel there has been a shift of power from players back towards GMs
I think you mean PF2e has seen a significant shift in increasing the burden on the GM
‘power’, whatever you mean by that, was never a factorbesides the non-insignificant places where the rules actually say “the GM will decide”, or “the GM will usually”, or a like phrase,
there are so many vague, ambiguous, incomplete, or more than one of those aspects of the game throughout the CRB (and subsequent publications ) that these occur to the degree where
the GM has to virtually non-stop “come up with a solution”
if all we want to do is tell a story, we need zero rules for that
my group has even played that game where ‘storyteller’ is in the subtitle
however, that is not what we wanted to do when, well over a year ago, we picked up PF2e and started that as the game we’d play during our weekly sessions
what we we wanted was to play the next iteration of Paizo’s flagship game
to know what the designers were up to when they designed their game
not some ‘here is some stuff, though these blanks will need filling; you know, a do-it-yourself kit where you have to provide many of the needed materials as you go about doing it yourself’
we want to play a game where, at every turn, how the designers intended the systems mechanics would work was obvious
yeah, yeah, yeah, someone will whine about an encyclopedic sized rule book, or that this is impossible, or some other nonsensical rationalizing about why Paizo couldn’t do what many others (including themselves) have done at other times
I am not asking for perfection, or every nuance and oddity be covered
nor am I asking for ‘what should the NPC say here?’ or ‘this monster do there?’
what I mean is the common, banal, ordinary, everyday, encountered in many if not every session type aspects be covered and not in the ‘gee, what is going on in the latest thread on battleforms and special statistics?’ way we have see so very much of what is in the CRB et al and how it was [not] covered
an objective, disinterested review of the past year plus strongly suggests
- there was no comprehensive, internally consistent vision
- a bunch of various ideas were hodge-podged together without regard for how they dovetail with each other (or even if they do or can seemlessly fully mesh)
- there is next to zero interest by the-powers-that-be in clarifying any of the various ambiguous and incomplete portions of the rules (and zero interest in doing so in any way even vaguely resembling a ‘timely manner’)
- this lack of vision and providing clarifications is not the industry norm, seemingly unique to this entity
Though this does give me a fun idea for a possible intelligent item, perhaps connected to the archdevil Mammon or the circle of Erebus, that only operates when the party sacrifices wealth to put in Hell's vaults.
this one time at DnD-derivative camp, we had an item ...
hey buddies, look, it takes a lot of effort and energy to provide you all these special abilities and use my powers ...
uh, what do you mean? don’t you just do those? like this staff I have here? or Billy’s sword? or Wendy’s boots?
oh puh-lease! that’s just insulting comparing me to those - how would you feel if I compared you to a worm or a bug? “don’t you just walk like a rat? swim like a fish?”
oh you’re right, our bad; what should we do?
I’m so glad you asked ...
...
a full share?!?
and hilarity ensued
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the GM has to virtually non-stop “come up with a solution”In every table-top RPG ever to have a GM role, forever thus far, regardless of whether the text in the book presents itself honestly by acknowledging that a GM is going to have to ...
uh, no
not to this degreenot on basic mechanics that will be encountered in many if not all sessions
of course the GM has to be deciding things like
I want to look around town, see if there are any bounties posted and the like type stuff
as I follow the path this large group of orcs took - you said it was easy to follow, right? - I’m looking for signs that a small group or even a single orc split off from the rest
The creature notices you Palming the Object, and the GM determines the creature’s response.
no one had any dispute about that (that I am aware of)
what is being discussed is, for example
- what is meant by unattended in the phrase “up to two weapons, each of which must be wielded by you or a willing ally, or else unattended” and is that the same as in this sentence “If the slippers are left unattended for a while, they tend to attract spiders that nest inside.” or in this one “If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute, mindless minions usually don’t act, animals follow their instincts, and sapient minions act how they please.”?
- what is meant by “special statistics” in “If you take on a battle form with a polymorph spell, the special statistics can be adjusted only by circumstance bonuses, status bonuses, and penalties.”?
- how are animal companions and familiars supposed to be handled in exploration mode?
- if the party has to disengage and runaway during an encounter, and the only viable option is every player character will need their three actions to accomplish escaping, are animal companions and familiars supposed to be left behind? especially is not mature or have the independent ability?
the list of incomplete or excessively vague game mechanics is so long it is well past the statistically significant level
again, not talking about the storytelling elements that every GM is expected to be deciding every session (though this is almost always the aspect, like above, which is commented upon)
Should be obvious that you can't put a price on a halberd that calls you a b!~#*
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
an objective, disinterested review of the past year plus strongly suggests
...............
the list of incomplete or excessively vague game mechanics is so long it is well past the statistically significant level
I'm curious what criteria you're using for your "objective" review. And what data you're using to measure statistical significance.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Buying and selling intelligent/sentient beings is kind of creepy and violates the baseline lines/veils position of Paizo as I understand it.
well, my peep said
I don’t know. I’m sure Paizo put that in there somewhere, as there is no way they would not have properly covered that. Just give me a lil time to figure out what the Paizo designers intended for this and I’ll get back to you.
the rules are silent and incomplete in so many areas
and my group is quite fed up with that being so excessively prevalent in this version that we almost quit PF2e entirely solely because of these swiss cheese aspects of the rulesinstead, we have gone with not playing the parts where that is the case
no, we are not gonna write a single sentence, not pull a single ruling out of our backsides, to cover what should have been covered
we want to play the mechanics of the game as Paizo designers intended those basic game mechanics to function
and if a rule is absent or ambiguous, then we are following their lead of
this section is so secondary, it can be done without, so no need to write it up - just skimp/skip over it and move on to the actually important stuff
so that’s what we’ve been doing - ignoring the stuff that was clearly so trivial it was left out and moving on to the parts which matter (and are properly covered)
it has both streamlined our play to where each session is more productive and reduced our dissatisfaction to where each session is more enjoyableso a win-win all because we finally grokked well enough what they were slingin to cop their groove and swim in their wake instead of trying to cross it
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed on the fact you should not be buying or selling intelligent beings, and on the fact that this game is on the whole very well written and explained. it helps if you use your brain to think about what words mean. The game defines an attended object as being on someone's person - which tracks with the normal definition. One can reasonably assume an unattended object is something not on someone's person, unless perhaps their goal is to write angry forum posts about unrealistic hypotheticals in bad faith.