Lifestyle Replenish a Disguise Kit? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Lifestyle Replenish a Disguise Kit? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Greyson
09-08-06, 06:18 PM Does any level of Lifestyle replenish a Disguise Kit? I don't think so, but I'd like to be certain.

Thanks.
celexter
09-26-06, 12:00 AM According to the Sourcebook, upkeep does the following rather specifically:

"Spending this gold allows characters to spend time in warm beds, eat hearty meals, travel in relative comfort (for adventurers), replenish rations, mend clothing and equipment, refill healing kits, restock up to twenty normal arrows and bolts."

And in no other way does the Rich and Luxury suggest such a function too. In any case, you might be better off buying a new Disguise kit instead of paying a more expensive upkeep just to replenish it. Unless you use it very heavily.
TWG_Prometheus
09-28-06, 09:42 AM The trick with that statement is that I've asked questions about other items such as torches and how they work with Standard Upkeep, and people have given me firm 'yes' answers, that Standard Upkeep did replenish them, but they're not on the list.

Don was actually asking the question for one of my characters. I don't recall where I heard it (I think these boards, but I could be wrong) but I got the idea of getting a Disguise Kit based on some advice, with the understanding that Standard Upkeep would replenish the kit. I wouldn't have gone for it otherwise.

Now, I don't particularly care a great deal. I wasn't tracking my usage of the kit since I thought that Standard Upkeep would handle it and I wasn't using it more than twice a session. (less than that) I'm currently just assuming that it is gone. The darn thing weighed a ton anyway, so it was kind of nice to ditch it in a way.

However, the general question about what exactly is replenished by Standard Upkeep remains. I'll agree that the quoted text is fairly clear and official. However, if that is the case, there are widespread misunderstandings about Standard Upkeep's exact function that really ought to be addressed. If 'being addressed' just means 'Read the LGCS for a change' then I've already done so and my Disguise Kit won't come back onto my character sheet.

If that is the case, however, we may want to review it again at the next LGCS update. Torches in particular seem like they should be on the list (1c costs are annoying to bookwork, and that was the main point of Upkeep to my understanding) and Disguise Kit charges aren't any more expensive or more/less useful than Healing Kit charges.
celexter
09-28-06, 10:55 AM The trick with that statement is that I've asked questions about other items such as torches and how they work with Standard Upkeep, and people have given me firm 'yes' answers, that Standard Upkeep did replenish them, but they're not on the list.

Don was actually asking the question for one of my characters. I don't recall where I heard it (I think these boards, but I could be wrong) but I got the idea of getting a Disguise Kit based on some advice, with the understanding that Standard Upkeep would replenish the kit. I wouldn't have gone for it otherwise.

Now, I don't particularly care a great deal. I wasn't tracking my usage of the kit since I thought that Standard Upkeep would handle it and I wasn't using it more than twice a session. (less than that) I'm currently just assuming that it is gone. The darn thing weighed a ton anyway, so it was kind of nice to ditch it in a way.

However, the general question about what exactly is replenished by Standard Upkeep remains. I'll agree that the quoted text is fairly clear and official. However, if that is the case, there are widespread misunderstandings about Standard Upkeep's exact function that really ought to be addressed. If 'being addressed' just means 'Read the LGCS for a change' then I've already done so and my Disguise Kit won't come back onto my character sheet.

If that is the case, however, we may want to review it again at the next LGCS update. Torches in particular seem like they should be on the list (1c costs are annoying to bookwork, and that was the main point of Upkeep to my understanding) and Disguise Kit charges aren't any more expensive or more/less useful than Healing Kit charges.

In fact, the way I see it, Healer's Kit have more chances of being useful. So far, I have meet NPC being poisoned. If you don't have the spell for it, or your Heal check fails, prepare to say bye to the NPC (and perhaps a drop in XP gain).

Without Disguise, there might be other ways to get past a particular obstacle.

Perhaps Healer's Kit can be refilled is because they are just herbs? Disguise Kit consists of dyes, hairs, etc...

Torches... Well... Unless you are underground for a freaking long period, it's likely you won't even consume a single torch per adventure. It's easy to track how many uses a Kit has left. But how much more a Torch can burn? I don't think anyone will track that... Not even DM...
TWG_Prometheus
09-28-06, 07:29 PM Trying to say which kit is better is a useless, cyclic argument. Use of the Disguise skill can preclude a battle entirely in the right circumstances, while a Heal kit is only useful after damage is done. That said, the number of forced combats in Living Greyhawk means that a Healing Kit will see more use.

You're right that it's not difficult to track the number of uses in a Disguise Kit, but its specifications in that regard are equivalent to a Healing Kit. The cost to replenish either kit is not well defined, since the cost of 50g for each kit isn't broken down into how much is for bandages, antitoxins, wigs, perfumes, or ect. The only D&D standard rules for replenishing either kit is to replace it entirely.

With such similarity in specifications, the only reasons for allowing Standard Upkeep would be that one skill Heal is favored over the other Disguise, which is not a terrible thing to say, or simple oversight. I pointed out the Torches scenario mostly to indicate an obvious example where Standard Upkeep could help with the bookkeeping immensely, and yet the LGCS is silent on that particular issue. What this means is that while the LGCS definition of the advantages of Standard Upkeep is official, it may not be as complete as we would like.

Again, I'm not actually trying to campaign for Disguise Kits to be made Standard Upkeep. The darn thing weighed 8 pounds, and taking it out of my pack gave me a lot more leeway as far as weight is concerned. My concern is that it's not hard to come up with examples of items such as Disguise Kits and more especially Torches that seem like they ought to be handled by Standard Upkeep, and in many cases are assumed to be, but that are not listed in the LGCS. This is the reason I felt that it would be beneficial for the campaign to get a clarification of the nature of Standard Upkeep, or in the case that Standard Upkeep's function is specified precisely in the LGCS, my feeling is that certain items ought to be considered for addition in future LGCS editions. We have enough bookwork to handle without worrying about how many coppers we've spent on replenishing our torch supply.
celexter
09-29-06, 02:24 AM Trying to say which kit is better is a useless, cyclic argument. Use of the Disguise skill can preclude a battle entirely in the right circumstances, while a Heal kit is only useful after damage is done. That said, the number of forced combats in Living Greyhawk means that a Healing Kit will see more use.

You're right that it's not difficult to track the number of uses in a Disguise Kit, but its specifications in that regard are equivalent to a Healing Kit. The cost to replenish either kit is not well defined, since the cost of 50g for each kit isn't broken down into how much is for bandages, antitoxins, wigs, perfumes, or ect. The only D&D standard rules for replenishing either kit is to replace it entirely.

With such similarity in specifications, the only reasons for allowing Standard Upkeep would be that one skill Heal is favored over the other Disguise, which is not a terrible thing to say, or simple oversight. I pointed out the Torches scenario mostly to indicate an obvious example where Standard Upkeep could help with the bookkeeping immensely, and yet the LGCS is silent on that particular issue. What this means is that while the LGCS definition of the advantages of Standard Upkeep is official, it may not be as complete as we would like.

Again, I'm not actually trying to campaign for Disguise Kits to be made Standard Upkeep. The darn thing weighed 8 pounds, and taking it out of my pack gave me a lot more leeway as far as weight is concerned. My concern is that it's not hard to come up with examples of items such as Disguise Kits and more especially Torches that seem like they ought to be handled by Standard Upkeep, and in many cases are assumed to be, but that are not listed in the LGCS. This is the reason I felt that it would be beneficial for the campaign to get a clarification of the nature of Standard Upkeep, or in the case that Standard Upkeep's function is specified precisely in the LGCS, my feeling is that certain items ought to be considered for addition in future LGCS editions. We have enough bookwork to handle without worrying about how many coppers we've spent on replenishing our torch supply.

I don't really foresee myself doing Heal checks on my party members, usually the NPCs are the one who needs them, unless they are poisoned.

I agree with you that more items should be replenished by the Upkeep. Torches especially. Perhaps some Trail Rations too, if DM tracks them

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Greyson 09-08-06, 06:18 PM	Does any level of Lifestyle replenish a Disguise Kit? I don't think so, but I'd like to be certain. Thanks.
celexter 09-26-06, 12:00 AM	According to the Sourcebook, upkeep does the following rather specifically: "Spending this gold allows characters to spend time in warm beds, eat hearty meals, travel in relative comfort (for adventurers), replenish rations, mend clothing and equipment, refill healing kits, restock up to twenty normal arrows and bolts." And in no other way does the Rich and Luxury suggest such a function too. In any case, you might be better off buying a new Disguise kit instead of paying a more expensive upkeep just to replenish it. Unless you use it very heavily.
TWG_Prometheus 09-28-06, 09:42 AM	The trick with that statement is that I've asked questions about other items such as torches and how they work with Standard Upkeep, and people have given me firm 'yes' answers, that Standard Upkeep did replenish them, but they're not on the list. Don was actually asking the question for one of my characters. I don't recall where I heard it (I think these boards, but I could be wrong) but I got the idea of getting a Disguise Kit based on some advice, with the understanding that Standard Upkeep would replenish the kit. I wouldn't have gone for it otherwise. Now, I don't particularly care a great deal. I wasn't tracking my usage of the kit since I thought that Standard Upkeep would handle it and I wasn't using it more than twice a session. (less than that) I'm currently just assuming that it is gone. The darn thing weighed a ton anyway, so it was kind of nice to ditch it in a way. However, the general question about what exactly is replenished by Standard Upkeep remains. I'll agree that the quoted text is fairly clear and official. However, if that is the case, there are widespread misunderstandings about Standard Upkeep's exact function that really ought to be addressed. If 'being addressed' just means 'Read the LGCS for a change' then I've already done so and my Disguise Kit won't come back onto my character sheet. If that is the case, however, we may want to review it again at the next LGCS update. Torches in particular seem like they should be on the list (1c costs are annoying to bookwork, and that was the main point of Upkeep to my understanding) and Disguise Kit charges aren't any more expensive or more/less useful than Healing Kit charges.
celexter 09-28-06, 10:55 AM	The trick with that statement is that I've asked questions about other items such as torches and how they work with Standard Upkeep, and people have given me firm 'yes' answers, that Standard Upkeep did replenish them, but they're not on the list. Don was actually asking the question for one of my characters. I don't recall where I heard it (I think these boards, but I could be wrong) but I got the idea of getting a Disguise Kit based on some advice, with the understanding that Standard Upkeep would replenish the kit. I wouldn't have gone for it otherwise. Now, I don't particularly care a great deal. I wasn't tracking my usage of the kit since I thought that Standard Upkeep would handle it and I wasn't using it more than twice a session. (less than that) I'm currently just assuming that it is gone. The darn thing weighed a ton anyway, so it was kind of nice to ditch it in a way. However, the general question about what exactly is replenished by Standard Upkeep remains. I'll agree that the quoted text is fairly clear and official. However, if that is the case, there are widespread misunderstandings about Standard Upkeep's exact function that really ought to be addressed. If 'being addressed' just means 'Read the LGCS for a change' then I've already done so and my Disguise Kit won't come back onto my character sheet. If that is the case, however, we may want to review it again at the next LGCS update. Torches in particular seem like they should be on the list (1c costs are annoying to bookwork, and that was the main point of Upkeep to my understanding) and Disguise Kit charges aren't any more expensive or more/less useful than Healing Kit charges. In fact, the way I see it, Healer's Kit have more chances of being useful. So far, I have meet NPC being poisoned. If you don't have the spell for it, or your Heal check fails, prepare to say bye to the NPC (and perhaps a drop in XP gain). Without Disguise, there might be other ways to get past a particular obstacle. Perhaps Healer's Kit can be refilled is because they are just herbs? Disguise Kit consists of dyes, hairs, etc... Torches... Well... Unless you are underground for a freaking long period, it's likely you won't even consume a single torch per adventure. It's easy to track how many uses a Kit has left. But how much more a Torch can burn? I don't think anyone will track that... Not even DM...
TWG_Prometheus 09-28-06, 07:29 PM	Trying to say which kit is better is a useless, cyclic argument. Use of the Disguise skill can preclude a battle entirely in the right circumstances, while a Heal kit is only useful after damage is done. That said, the number of forced combats in Living Greyhawk means that a Healing Kit will see more use. You're right that it's not difficult to track the number of uses in a Disguise Kit, but its specifications in that regard are equivalent to a Healing Kit. The cost to replenish either kit is not well defined, since the cost of 50g for each kit isn't broken down into how much is for bandages, antitoxins, wigs, perfumes, or ect. The only D&D standard rules for replenishing either kit is to replace it entirely. With such similarity in specifications, the only reasons for allowing Standard Upkeep would be that one skill Heal is favored over the other Disguise, which is not a terrible thing to say, or simple oversight. I pointed out the Torches scenario mostly to indicate an obvious example where Standard Upkeep could help with the bookkeeping immensely, and yet the LGCS is silent on that particular issue. What this means is that while the LGCS definition of the advantages of Standard Upkeep is official, it may not be as complete as we would like. Again, I'm not actually trying to campaign for Disguise Kits to be made Standard Upkeep. The darn thing weighed 8 pounds, and taking it out of my pack gave me a lot more leeway as far as weight is concerned. My concern is that it's not hard to come up with examples of items such as Disguise Kits and more especially Torches that seem like they ought to be handled by Standard Upkeep, and in many cases are assumed to be, but that are not listed in the LGCS. This is the reason I felt that it would be beneficial for the campaign to get a clarification of the nature of Standard Upkeep, or in the case that Standard Upkeep's function is specified precisely in the LGCS, my feeling is that certain items ought to be considered for addition in future LGCS editions. We have enough bookwork to handle without worrying about how many coppers we've spent on replenishing our torch supply.
celexter 09-29-06, 02:24 AM	Trying to say which kit is better is a useless, cyclic argument. Use of the Disguise skill can preclude a battle entirely in the right circumstances, while a Heal kit is only useful after damage is done. That said, the number of forced combats in Living Greyhawk means that a Healing Kit will see more use. You're right that it's not difficult to track the number of uses in a Disguise Kit, but its specifications in that regard are equivalent to a Healing Kit. The cost to replenish either kit is not well defined, since the cost of 50g for each kit isn't broken down into how much is for bandages, antitoxins, wigs, perfumes, or ect. The only D&D standard rules for replenishing either kit is to replace it entirely. With such similarity in specifications, the only reasons for allowing Standard Upkeep would be that one skill Heal is favored over the other Disguise, which is not a terrible thing to say, or simple oversight. I pointed out the Torches scenario mostly to indicate an obvious example where Standard Upkeep could help with the bookkeeping immensely, and yet the LGCS is silent on that particular issue. What this means is that while the LGCS definition of the advantages of Standard Upkeep is official, it may not be as complete as we would like. Again, I'm not actually trying to campaign for Disguise Kits to be made Standard Upkeep. The darn thing weighed 8 pounds, and taking it out of my pack gave me a lot more leeway as far as weight is concerned. My concern is that it's not hard to come up with examples of items such as Disguise Kits and more especially Torches that seem like they ought to be handled by Standard Upkeep, and in many cases are assumed to be, but that are not listed in the LGCS. This is the reason I felt that it would be beneficial for the campaign to get a clarification of the nature of Standard Upkeep, or in the case that Standard Upkeep's function is specified precisely in the LGCS, my feeling is that certain items ought to be considered for addition in future LGCS editions. We have enough bookwork to handle without worrying about how many coppers we've spent on replenishing our torch supply. I don't really foresee myself doing Heal checks on my party members, usually the NPCs are the one who needs them, unless they are poisoned. I agree with you that more items should be replenished by the Upkeep. Torches especially. Perhaps some Trail Rations too, if DM tracks them