|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was browsing large gem finds like the Bahia Emerald (341 Kilogram Emerald) and the Star of Asia (500 Kilogram Sapphire) and thinking about spells like wish (25,000 GP diamond) or symbol of stunning (5,000 GP powdered diamond and opal) and it got me pondering. Do you think high level wizards in pathfinder would ever feel horribly conflicted about the massively valuable and possibly simply massive gemstones they'd need to essentially destroy to power their spells? Especially spells like symbol of stunning that might never be used.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gems are much more common in Pathfinder, and there are creatures that create gems as part of their natural life cycle. So it's not a limited industry like out world. Just because they destroy a 25,000gp doesn't mean there isn't a ready supply of them.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In our world price of diamonds is artificially inflated and it is relatively easy to make artificial gemstones. In Golarion and other fantasy worlds, it is relatively easy to go to other planes where gems can be more common.
Considering that, the value of the "diamonds" our character use is very questionable. It is a matter of purchase price (and getting a discount will ruin the material for the spell?), sale price, dimension, cut or what?
At the end of the day, it all depends on how you want to limit the spells that use those components. If the spells are used regularly, it is only a matter of price and the "diamonds" are common items, if you want to make those spells something rare and wondrous, getting the diamonds can be an adventure by itself.
Evaluating diamond dust is even more difficult. Is it the dust of an x value diamond or x value in diamond dust produced as a byproduct of cutting them?
Now moving to the starting question: as Bjørn Røyrvik said, if the gem is presented as an object of beauty it will pain my characters to destroy them, if it is presented as a trade item I will not feel anything.
It is like when you find "art objects" in the loot. A 100 gp art object is nothing, a 100 gp belt buckle depicting two intertwined succubus is something you remember (and the PCs actually used it to make a magic belt).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You also need to factor in the relative value of the gems. A 25,00 GP diamond sounds like it is priceless like the gems mentioned in the first post, but in reality, they are not. Looking at the wealthy by level charts you see the expected wealth of a character rises rapidly. A first level character can probably be assumed to have about 150 GP worth of gear, by 5th level they will have 70 times that amount and by 12th level they will have 2,160 times what a starting character has. That 25,000 GP gem is not a unique priceless gem, it is the engagement ring of someone who is moderately wealthy.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's my favorite way of giving loot to my players: a ton of valuable objets d'art which they won't want to sell, will argue about who gets, and will have zero impact on their power level.
I promise I'm not trying to hijack yet another thread talking about my players but yet again I just have to ask who these players are, where I might be able to find them for in person games. I give out art objects like jeweled scroll cases, mundane rings, purely ornamental shields and still others, stuff that I tailor to the skills and stated interests of the characters being played in my campaigns.
At least one PC in all my campaigns always takes Detect Magic in daily spells. If it's not magic they assess the value. From there they calculate it into final GP and sell it to divide the coins. Clinical, methodical. I've even tried adding gimmicky magic to items; a mundane necklace but it glows like candleflame or a sapphire that cools any drink its placed in. These magical quirks have so far made no difference.
Back to the thread, this is yet another reason why I DON'T think casters feel any conflict over using expensive material components. The players running said PCs or NPCs may solely see the end result; if I expend 25,000 GP, I can make a wish.
I love those kind of items. So hard to find a nice treasure generator with these kind of things in large numbers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gem pricing is too weird to get my head around honestly. Your character can fabricate a crate of s!$+ty uncut diamonds into one diamond the size of your palm and the value won't change a bit. Then you can hire a gem cutter to shape your large s@!$ty diamond into a round brilliant and make tons of extra money, then fabricate it into a much much larger raw gem and have it recut.
So does our wizard look at a 25k diamond and think "wow, beautiful", or do they see the multiple fabricates and gem cuts needed to get something that fancy.
Then you have to assume somewhere out there is a planar gem exchange that maintains the value of gems for spell purposes.
It's easier to handwave it all since it doesn't make real sense. I assume wizards look at these gems and thing "If I think about this too much, it won't make sense and the spell will fail."
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's my favorite way of giving loot to my players: a ton of valuable objets d'art which they won't want to sell, will argue about who gets, and will have zero impact on their power level.
I promise I'm not trying to hijack yet another thread talking about my players but yet again I just have to ask who these players are, where I might be able to find them for in person games. I give out art objects like jeweled scroll cases, mundane rings, purely ornamental shields and still others, stuff that I tailor to the skills and stated interests of the characters being played in my campaigns.
At least one PC in all my campaigns always takes Detect Magic in daily spells. If it's not magic they assess the value. From there they calculate it into final GP and sell it to divide the coins. Clinical, methodical. I've even tried adding gimmicky magic to items; a mundane necklace but it glows like candleflame or a sapphire that cools any drink its placed in. These magical quirks have so far made no difference.
Back to the thread, this is yet another reason why I DON'T think casters feel any conflict over using expensive material components. The players running said PCs or NPCs may solely see the end result; if I expend 25,000 GP, I can make a wish.
I doubt that I am in range, but my players keep the items that touch their character interests. They evaluate them, and the guy that keeps them compensates for the value of the item by adding enough coins to pay for it into the cash pool that has to be divided.
After a few level they even start to have a wunderkammer (generally very well hidden and protected) of the stuff that they don't want to sell nor use. That includes things like the tome with several thousand fiends' true names, the unholy weapon that they absolutely don't want to be used against them again, the armor that fits only a few very specific persons, and so on. They often keep the historical documents that they find or search for a buyer that is a collector or a purchaser for collectors of that kind of item. That way they get more money and are guaranteed that the item will be preserved.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In Golarion and other fantasy worlds, it is relatively easy to go to other planes where gems can be more common.Can you elaborate on "relatively easy?" There are some spells to summon creatures such as elementals that might have access to gems in their home worlds, but Summon Monster doesn't guarantee they'll bring you said stones. Then there's planar binding but now your elementals can't return home to retrieve the gems you need them to.
Traveling to elemental planes, as far as I can tell, requires either a very expensive magic item or Plane Shift which is a Cleric/Oracle 5, Sorcerer/Wizard 7 spell. Once in the elemental plane, you'll likely also want some method of planar attunement so the natural laws of the plane don't hinder you. Finally, I can't imagine a plane full of sentient earth creatures are going to happily give you access to huge diamonds for you to mine, so you may want to pack some ammunition in case a fight breaks out, not to mention the aforementioned mining.
I don't know about other folks but I'd say it's a bit of a chore making it to 5th level Cleric/Oracle spells. Keeping myself and my party alive is tough enough in mines on Golarion; doing so on the Elemental Plane of Earth feels like it'd be AS hard if not harder. If there's an easier way though I'm all ears.
Considering the level of the spells that need that kind of gems to be cast, getting to 5th level clerical spells is relatively easy. The first spell that requires an expensive diamond (1,000 gp) is Restoration when used to recover a permanently lost level. Casting it requires you to be 7th level. 9th level isn't too far away.
The plane of Earth doesn't require an attunement spell. It is hard to navigate, but generally, you can enter it in an air pocket.
To find the gems you want you do need native help or the right spells/magic items, but it is all stuff that is within the abilities of 9th level characters.
For PCs with the appropriate levels getting a few gems with the right values will be a small adventure, something normally within the limits of their abilities.
For NPCs, I easily see people like the Aspis Consortium setting up a mining camp in the plane of earth to gather gems. It will be destroyed by the natives every few months, but that is not a problem for the Consortium if the money return is good enough.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gem pricing is too weird to get my head around honestly. Your character can fabricate a crate of s*%%ty uncut diamonds into one diamond the size of your palm and the value won't change a bit. Then you can hire a gem cutter to shape your large s#~#ty diamond into a round brilliant and make tons of extra money, then fabricate it into a much much larger raw gem and have it recut.
So does our wizard look at a 25k diamond and think "wow, beautiful", or do they see the multiple fabricates and gem cuts needed to get something that fancy.
Then you have to assume somewhere out there is a planar gem exchange that maintains the value of gems for spell purposes.
It's easier to handwave it all since it doesn't make real sense. I assume wizards look at these gems and thing "If I think about this too much, it won't make sense and the spell will fail."
My explanation of that is that the gem's price doesn't actually matter at all for the spell its just a referential tool for the players to simplify play like other rules. What you actually need is a gem of X size and Y quality (based on 3 of the C's of gem grading clarity, colour and carat, cutting not being counted for these purposes). So a wizard (if they were real) would take a gem and consider these qualities to determine if its suitable for their spell.
Clarity
This ones a bit of a misnamer as mages aren't concerned so much with how many inclusions (things that interfere with the free passage of light e.g. bits of other minerals) but whether those inclusions indicate a flaw that could threaten the structural integrity of a gem. In real life a bit of mineral that's easily seen under magnifcation lowers the value of a gem for a mages purposes its only important if it indicates something that could cause the gem to shatter.
Colour
The concern for the mage here is much the same as anyone picking a gem for setting in jewelry. Gem colour refers to hue, tone and saturation. Hue is the basic colour of the stone (red to purple colours). Black, white and brown are tones from darkest to lightest and saturation is how intense the colour is (pink is a light saturation of red), while warm colours e.g. red and orange become shades of brown as the saturation decreases. For colored gemstones, generally speaking, highest values go to stones with pure hues and strong, rich colors. For a mage they'll want similar stones and will also be picking colours that tend to have assocations with the spell their after e.g. Corundum. If the Corundum has a blue colour then its a sapphire and used for call construct or instant summons, if it has a black/blue colour then its a black sapphire and used for soul bind, if it has a red colour then its a ruby and is used in a lot of spells. Of course colour doesn't matter for some spells e.g. wish where it doesn't matter if you have a red, yellow, blue, white or colourless diamond as long as you have a diamond of X carats and Y clarity.
Carat
Easy one here its how big the stone is or more specifically how much it weighs with 1 carat = one fifth of a gram.
So a mage is looking for a gem to cast a spell they need to determine how big it is, what colour it is and whether it has any flaws that could cause it to shatter in an undesired way. Of course all this is far more effort and detail than most players want to bother with so we get the short hand do you have (a) gem type and (b) gem value? If yes then you can cast the spell even though as you point out there is no objective gem value you can just assign and the same gem could fetch different prices in different places.
However if you were my players which would you rather be told "You need to find an Opal worth 5,000 GP to cast that spell." or "You need to find an opal, it doesn't matter if its black, white, crystal, jelly, fire, hyalite, water, hydrophane or honey. So long as its at least 17 carats and has no flaws that would cause it to shatter under stress." After you cast the spell "Fun fact that blue opal you used would have actually sold for 51,000 GP, Shame the green opal was only 15 carats as that's worth 3,750 GP." I'm sure there are some players who'd prefer the second option but most like the "Gem = GP value" approach.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We don't bother with any of this stuff in my campaign world anymore. I created our setting in 1991 and eventually we just decided material components don't get used up, destroyed, folded, spindled, or mutilated when used to cast spells. The players have to actually possess the necessary component but it acts more along the lines as a focus of sorts and after the spell is cast it goes back into their fanny packs of holding or wherever else they might store their stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
LOL Yes, it could, although I think that if we played more regularly and more often, we'd pay more attention to things like that and incorporate the material components rules back into our games. But because we don't get to play as often as we used to or as much as we'd like now, having sessions where the players are either on a side quest to find some expensive and rare components or lugging around gold and haggling in a city large enough to actually be likely to have some of the things the spellcasters need would just bite too deeply into our small windows of gaming opportunities. I've tried to get my bunch to do things like this between game nights and chat about it online and such but no one was interested. Hell, most of the time they don't even look at their characters until game night and then everyone suddenly remembers they didn't update their XP totals. If they happen to have broken into a new level then more game time is consumed while they do all of the levelin' up stuff.
Our game nights have just become casual get togethers where gaming happens to be the reason we're all together. It's not really different than when folks would get together and play cards when I was growing up (I seldom played any card games. I don't like them but my parents and their friends did). I'd love for the games to be more like they used to be, with players actively engaged in doing things in downtime or at least bloody thinking of the game before the next session (when we played last month it was the first time we'd gathered since October of last year. Six months of gamelessness and I still had to wait for a couple of them to do all of the things that have to be done when leveling up). Everyone is so consumed with their work and family lives that they don't have the mental energy to bother with game-related things outside of game nights anymore. It bugs me.
Sorry, Mark. I didn't mean to run off the rails there.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One point not raised yet, the value of gemstones (it could be argued) is kept artificially high in the real world. The diamond 'producers' operate like a cartel, controlling the number and quality of diamonds available, so the gp 'value' of a gem could and would vary... a better metric is possibly needed.
Oh and another point, we are at a stage where we can make synthetic diamonds quite easily so I suppose it would be viable for someone say, a group of dwarves to do so in a fantasy setting.
Oh, and another another point, it is theorised that on certain planets carbon under pressure could fall as a form of diamond rain so perhaps liquid and gaseous forms of 'diamond' could exist.
In order . . .
1) See my post above.
2) I now need to look up how we make Synthetic diamonds, in theory if we can do it a fantasy setting where you do have advanced tech might be able to as well.
3) Interesting I know there are planets where you have massive tornado's of glass shards but the idea of liquid and gaseous diamond intrigues me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if the whole reason diamonds are valuable on Golarion is precisely BECAUSE they seem to be the (almost) universal spell component?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
2) I now need to look up how we make Synthetic diamonds, in theory if we can do it a fantasy setting where you do have advanced tech might be able to as well.
Not sure if I said it here or in the other thread, but, in my opinion, the crafting DC in our world receives a huge bonus for the equipment used. Fabricate doesn't use equipment, so it lacks that bonus.
The total DC of making good-sized diamonds from pure carbon or smaller diamonds probably falls in the 50-60 range. At a guess, the applicable skill is Craft Alchemy.Artificial spinels have been crafted with relatively simple methods in the early XX century, but there is no proven case of synthetic diamond fabrication before ASEA success in 1952.
Considering the pressure used for that experiment, I wouldn't want to be in the same city where a guy is trying to replicate it with Fabricate.
A failed skill check could have some extreme consequences.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How long would it take for adventurers to weaponized the failed fabricate spell? Before the end of the game session I'd wager.
As near as I can tell, fabricate doesn't emulate the process of creating something, it just does it.
A wizard with even a decent Int (16 at 1st, +1 at 4th and 8th, headband of vast intelligence +2) who learns crafter's fortune and fabricate, plus being able to "take 10" on the Craft roll, means that even without any skill ranks the wizard can make a DC 20 Craft check with fabricate. A higher starting Int and/or ranks in the applicable Craft skill makes a DC 25 or even DC 30 Craft check something that can be accomplished without failure (unless casting in combat) at 9th level.
|
|
A wizard with even a decent Int (16 at 1st, +1 at 4th and 8th, headband of vast intelligence +2) who learns crafter's fortune and fabricate, plus being able to "take 10" on the Craft roll, means that even without any skill ranks the wizard can make a DC 20 Craft check with fabricate. A higher starting Int and/or ranks in the applicable Craft skill makes a DC 25 or even DC 30 Craft check something that can be accomplished without failure (unless casting in combat) at 9th level.
Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10.
When casting Fabricate a spellcaster is in the middle of casting a spell, a distracting activity for anything that isn't casting the spell. The skill check is separated from the casting, so he can't take 10 in it.
|
|
A wizard with even a decent Int (16 at 1st, +1 at 4th and 8th, headband of vast intelligence +2) who learns crafter's fortune and fabricate, plus being able to "take 10" on the Craft roll, means that even without any skill ranks the wizard can make a DC 20 Craft check with fabricate. A higher starting Int and/or ranks in the applicable Craft skill makes a DC 25 or even DC 30 Craft check something that can be accomplished without failure (unless casting in combat) at 9th level.Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10.When casting Fabricate a spellcaster is in the middle of casting a spell, a distracting activity for anything that isn't casting the spell. The skill check is separated from the casting, so he can't take 10 in it.
There are spells to split your mind and let the other id handle the spellc casting aren't there?
|
|
There are spells to split your mind and let the other id handle the spellc casting aren't there?A wizard with even a decent Int (16 at 1st, +1 at 4th and 8th, headband of vast intelligence +2) who learns crafter's fortune and fabricate, plus being able to "take 10" on the Craft roll, means that even without any skill ranks the wizard can make a DC 20 Craft check with fabricate. A higher starting Int and/or ranks in the applicable Craft skill makes a DC 25 or even DC 30 Craft check something that can be accomplished without failure (unless casting in combat) at 9th level.Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10.When casting Fabricate a spellcaster is in the middle of casting a spell, a distracting activity for anything that isn't casting the spell. The skill check is separated from the casting, so he can't take 10 in it.
None that I know, maybe in Occult adventures.
|
|
None that I know, maybe in Occult adventures.There are spells to split your mind and let the other id handle the spellc casting aren't there?A wizard with even a decent Int (16 at 1st, +1 at 4th and 8th, headband of vast intelligence +2) who learns crafter's fortune and fabricate, plus being able to "take 10" on the Craft roll, means that even without any skill ranks the wizard can make a DC 20 Craft check with fabricate. A higher starting Int and/or ranks in the applicable Craft skill makes a DC 25 or even DC 30 Craft check something that can be accomplished without failure (unless casting in combat) at 9th level.Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10.When casting Fabricate a spellcaster is in the middle of casting a spell, a distracting activity for anything that isn't casting the spell. The skill check is separated from the casting, so he can't take 10 in it.
That was what I was thinking of Divide Mind.
|
|
9th level spell. At that point probably you can make your skill check even rolling a 1.
If you cast fabricate as a Psichyc spell it will work for sure. I am not sure if it works with other spellcasting classes, as it says: "as a swift action you can have your second mind perform any purely mental action that normally requires a standard action or a move action. This includes casting psychic spells, using spell-like abilities, and concentrating on spells."
Apparently, you can concentrate on spells from all classes as a swift action, but you can cast only psychic spells as a swift action.
As with a lot of stuff in the later works by Paizo for 1st edition, the wording is sloppy.