Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mithrus 04-19-07, 05:07 PM	At risk of starting a holy war, I have come to the conclusion that allowing magic item creation of permanent items is a bad thing for LG (specifically CWI). I think the game as a whole would be a lot more "balanced" by only allowing potions/oils, scrolls/wands/staves. As for the arguments the the casters in question have to burn a feat to get the ability, I think that it is weak at best. Consider that a crafting caster can obtain at a minimum +stat items at least 2 levels before their peers. They get the "penalty" of loosing exps, which I believe most agree is in reality a bonus, and the item creation feats easily become the most overpowered feats in LG. For those in shock that anyone might oppose the MIC feats, tell me how the world of LG would become a worse place with their absence? Sure, modders might have to tone down future mods, as many assume you will have some tricked out caster with uber items at APL 4. Having challenging adventures that aren't completely neutered by an overpowered craft caster would be a nice change, wouldn't it?
haferka 04-19-07, 10:17 PM	Living Campaigns are an adaptation of the Core mechanic.. so rather than remove a core (and integral) component from those rules.. I would recomend "adapting" them to the campaign. Remove the XP "cost" from all crafting.. and Simply give a 15% discount from the standard market cost of any item that is craftable.. This still allows the Crafting feats to be usefull... but fixes all of the existing problems with the system. Current Problems: People crafting Perls of Power and selling them back without ANY gp loss. This is basicly slowing their XP gain.. and allows them to hoard a VERY valuable resource.. (spells per day)... Excessive Crafting creates a wealth curve that far exceeds that of the non-crafters.. The crafter PCs loose XP.. so they are lower level... but they simply find lower level party members to adventure with or simply play up... (playing up increases the wealth curve even more.. since you recieve more gp and less xp than you would have for an appropriate APL mod. With my suggestion.. you ALWAYS loose money when selling crafted items.. (since you sell it back for half value.. and paid 60%.. thats a 10% loss... (still better than the 50% loss of a non-crafter). With my suggestion.. you also prevent the crafter dropping below the level of his fellow gamers... it also prevents the GP curve from being broken so easily.
wooti 04-20-07, 01:45 AM	Crafting is one of the things I really like in LG. I have found in many many home campaigns that crafting doesn't work. It is often rare to get a week off between adventures to do crafting not to mention getting 3 months. That combined with every member of the party wanting you to craft this or that and the exp loss crafting just doesn't work outside of LG. If you are worried about the exp loss get rid of it but otherwise crafting isn't bad.
Lupo 04-20-07, 02:50 AM	Crafting is one of the things I really like in LG. I have found in many many home campaigns that crafting doesn't work. It is often rare to get a week off between adventures to do crafting not to mention getting 3 months. That combined with every member of the party wanting you to craft this or that and the exp loss crafting just doesn't work outside of LG. If you are worried about the exp loss get rid of it but otherwise crafting isn't bad. HOW TRUE! in a home campaign, it is hard to even get a day or two off to (trans)-scribe scrolls or master a spellbook, while the frontliners start do drain the local inns dry :waits: the LG system is nice for crafters, but without the blanket access to DMG items, a big chunk of the advantage has gone - and crafting of wondrous items in general will be going down as a crafter has to wait till he actualy sees the goody he wants to craft (apart from the now open-to-all items). for the "delay retirement" part, if a crafter crafts actual gear for 200,000 gp he looses some 8,000 XP, basically half the amount between levl 15 and 16, maybe 4 more modules compared to a non-crafter. my cleric 13 has lost the same amount of XP for dying being some 50 XP short of level 7 - and yes, he will also loose around the 8000 XP for crafting, delaying his retirement a WHOLE level :mymy:. ciao martin m.
Madfox11 04-20-07, 04:28 AM	Crafting is one of the things I really like in LG. I have found in many many home campaigns that crafting doesn't work. It is often rare to get a week off between adventures to do crafting not to mention getting 3 months. That combined with every member of the party wanting you to craft this or that and the exp loss crafting just doesn't work outside of LG. If you are worried about the exp loss get rid of it but otherwise crafting isn't bad. You might want to talk with your DM and fellow players in the home campaign. Last home campaign I ran the players regularly took 1 or 2 weeks of to craft, buy and sell stuff.
mindreavertp 04-20-07, 07:04 AM	Fortunately the circle and others dont feel the way you do about crafting and LG. With the recent posts regarding total character wealth (earned in LG) versus the table in the DMG (character wealth by level) it is pretty clear most characters run well behind power wise what they should in regards to total wealth and equipment. Crafting is one way to let a character catchup a bit and actually perform 'at' their level.
Mithrus 04-20-07, 08:11 AM	Fortunately the circle and others dont feel the way you do about crafting and LG. With the recent posts regarding total character wealth (earned in LG) versus the table in the DMG (character wealth by level) it is pretty clear most characters run well behind power wise what they should in regards to total wealth and equipment. Crafting is one way to let a character catchup a bit and actually perform 'at' their level. I agree that in general, LG is far too cash poor at the present, especially in the mid levels. Perhaps the lowering of some costs in the MIC will help with things some, but I don't own the book so I don't know anything too specific other than WotC lowered the cost of many items. I think you may be missing my main point, however: crafters have a *too* significant advantage over non-crafters. D&D already has the overall powercurve slanted towards the casters (IMO; I realize this is subjective), and with wealth in general as a precious commodity, I would like to see the playing field evened out somehow. I'm not suggesting we get rid of crafting completely. Most of my angst I suppose is towards CWI, since it is such a broad category. Getting most of your stuff for *half* price for the cost of *one* feat (that's available as early as 3rd level) is too powerful. Granted, not all casters have spell access to allow them to craft any item they want, and many items require being higher level, but the list is still so large for this one feat that it is hard to have any sympathy in that regard. A real shame IMO is when sitting down to create a caster character, how much item creation can play a part in deciding between a limited spell list caster and one with a broader list. IMO, the loss of XP is one of the least of the issues. I am mostly concerned with the overall disparity of quality of items obtained of crafters vs non-crafters. Since the mundane craft skills are unusable in LG to even allow a non-crafter to make MW items at reduced cost, I think the idea of lowering the overall savings would go a long way in balancing everything out.
Randall Montgomery 04-20-07, 10:38 AM	Speaking as a crafter myself, I can understand where you're coming from. CWI is easily my most valuable feat, and I am strongly considering taking it for my Ranger when his spellcasting is high enough, which I probably wouldn't consider outside of LG. However, there is one limiting factor that you haven't spoken about, which is the TU costs associated with crafting. To craft any +6 stat item will take you 8 TUs minimum, and some of the other craftable items can really pile on to this. For every TU you lose to crafting, you're losing the ability to play a module with that character. Thus, you not only lose the XP from crafting, but you lose the potential XP you could have made had you not crafted that item. Personally, I spent most of last year spending 36,000 GP for a non-craftable ring because I simply couldn't afford to spend the TUs for stuff I really wanted to craft. Don't get me wrong, you have a point about CWI. But just keep in mind, there are concequences to using it, too. I would not have a problem with a revision along the lines of what Haferka mentioned, but if they left the TU cost as is, I would seriously object.
KShaver 04-20-07, 10:49 AM	However, there is one limiting factor that you haven't spoken about, which is the TU costs associated with crafting. To craft any +6 stat item will take you 8 TUs minimum, and some of the other craftable items can really pile on to this. For every TU you lose to crafting, you're losing the ability to play a module with that character. Thus, you not only lose the XP from crafting, but you lose the potential XP you could have made had you not crafted that item. Personally, I spent most of last year spending 36,000 GP for a non-craftable ring because I simply couldn't afford to spend the TUs for stuff I really wanted to craft. Only an issue if you play a lot of mods with that character. Most people I know have quite a few spare TUs at the end of every year. I can't even comprehend running out of TUs myself except for trying to save enough for one character to play all of RHoD this year.
Jay_Ibero_911 04-20-07, 11:03 AM	Only an issue if you play a lot of mods with that character. Most people I know have quite a few spare TUs at the end of every year. I can't even comprehend running out of TUs myself except for trying to save enough for one character to play all of RHoD this year. I don't know where you play...but in my group of players they typically end up with at least 2 PC's completely out of tu's and several others with various expenditure's each year. Just by playing all your regional, metaregional, and core mods you burn a ton of TU's before you even go outside your region. So the TU cost for crafters is significant, because you probably want to play as much as possible with your shiny new toys...
KShaver 04-20-07, 11:30 AM	I don't know where you play. Cols, Ohio ..but in my group of players they typically end up with at least 2 PC's completely out of tu's and several others with various expenditure's each year. They play a lot more LG then. I don't see this except the one or two people who chase cons and travel way out of town to play in other regions. Playing a couple of LG games a month isn't enough to run 2 characters out of TUs, even counting meta-orgs and other TU expendiatures Just by playing all your regional, metaregional, and core mods you burn a ton of TU's before you even go outside your region. So the TU cost for crafters is significant, because you probably want to play as much as possible with your shiny new toys... Suggesting that one play every single regional, metaregional, and core mod in a year sounds like crazy talk to me. I wouldn't have any time for any of the other games I like to play. How would the XE campaign feel if we abandoned it entirely? Going out of region just to play mods is right out, crazy talk again I say, I've no reason to travel to play D&D...my friends are already right here. So the TU cost is significant to some, it also happens to be meaningless to others.
Jay_Ibero_911 04-20-07, 12:27 PM	Cols, Ohio They play a lot more LG then. I don't see this except the one or two people who chase cons and travel way out of town to play in other regions. Playing a couple of LG games a month isn't enough to run 2 characters out of TUs, even counting meta-orgs and other TU expendiatures Suggesting that one play every single regional, metaregional, and core mod in a year sounds like crazy talk to me. I wouldn't have any time for any of the other games I like to play. How would the XE campaign feel if we abandoned it entirely? Going out of region just to play mods is right out, crazy talk again I say, I've no reason to travel to play D&D...my friends are already right here. So the TU cost is significant to some, it also happens to be meaningless to others. Just saying it looks like you are in the minority on that one...
KShaver 04-20-07, 01:05 PM	Just saying it looks like you are in the minority on that one... Nuh-UH. Sorry, but thats about all this statement warrants, and, in fact, is all it says. If you want conversation regarding the issue at hand try making a point or counter-point. To sum up my points: 1. Some people have a lot of time units to spare, myself included. TU expendiature means nothing to them. 2. The TU cost might be significant to some, but not everyone.
Jay_Ibero_911 04-20-07, 01:19 PM	Nuh-UH. Sorry, but thats about all this statement warrants, and, in fact, is all it says. If you want conversation regarding the issue at hand try making a point or counter-point. To sum up my points: 1. Some people have a lot of time units to spare, myself included. TU expendiature means nothing to them. 2. The TU cost might be significant to some, but not everyone. My point is that based on my experience both local and abroad at cons, the TU cost seems significant to enough characters to warrant leaving the system as is. Unfortunately it would be very difficult to get precise worldwide statistics for this without some kind of online character tracker... [Edit] Also, the players that the TU cost is not significant too are clearly playing much less than those that the TU cost IS significant for, and therefore have less of an impact on the campaign as a whole.
Howie23 04-20-07, 01:44 PM	My point is that based on my experience both local and abroad at cons, the TU cost seems significant to enough characters to warrant leaving the system as is. Unfortunately it would be very difficult to get precise worldwide statistics for this without some kind of online character tracker... [Edit] Also, the players that the TU cost is not significant too are clearly playing much less than those that the TU cost IS significant for, and therefore have less of an impact on the campaign as a whole. I really depends a lot on whether the character is played a lot. That's what it comes down to. The character may not be played a lot be design, opportunity, or presence of other characters in the player's stable. Whatever impact the TU cost has, it is a metagame effect, not a character development effect. The most TUs that a player can spend without travelling is about 66 (8 regional, 8 metas, 40 cores, another 10 for interactives and core doubles), plus ADPs, which vary highly. During the first year of play, that number doubles because of old mods that are new to the player. As a datapoint, this is my fourth year in the campaign, and I expect to go through all TUs for two characters, and about another 40 between my third and fourth. That includes close to 40 TUs for metaorg and similar activiity. I have a lot of year 6's to make up, and will not be able to play many year 7s. David
KShaver 04-20-07, 02:58 PM	My point is that based on my experience both local and abroad at cons, the TU cost seems significant to enough characters to warrant leaving the system as is. How about we break it down to actual numbers, I'll compare it to another way to make cash through spending TUs. 1 TU = 5 days of crafting = 1 nonadventuring activity roll 5 days of crafting = 5,000g worth of items = 2,500g gain and 200xp spent 1 nonadventuring activity roll = an average of 110g (if you can consistently make a DC 50) Which leaves us with: 1 TU = 110g 1 TU = 2500g and a 'free' loss of 200xp 110g =/= 2500g and a 'free' loss of 200xp Personally I think making a DC50 consistently is quite a bit harder than taking one craft feat, and probably has 2 or more feats invested into it as well as a character build made specifically to be able to make those rolls. Also the DC50 is likely going to take much higher level character than one who can just take CWI at 3rd. Next note: nonadventuring activity = nerfed to be terrible on the low end, slightly better on the high end magic item creation = not so much nerfed I would kind of expect that if TUs were so valuable that magic item creation might actually take more than it currently does, as it obviously undervalues them compared to other TU expenditures that are being looked at closely. You would have to increase TU expenditure on magic item creation by 20x its current cost as well as remove the xp cost benefit component to have it even remotely compare to nonadventuring activity.
Jay_Ibero_911 04-20-07, 03:09 PM	How about we break it down to actual numbers, I'll compare it to another way to make cash through spending TUs. 1 TU = 5 days of crafting = 1 nonadventuring activity roll 5 days of crafting = 5,000g worth of items = 2,500g gain and 200xp spent 1 nonadventuring activity roll = an average of 110g (if you can consistently make a DC 50) Which leaves us with: 1 TU = 110g 1 TU = 2500g and a 'free' loss of 200xp 110g =/= 2500g and a 'free' loss of 200xp Personally I think making a DC50 consistently is quite a bit harder than taking one craft feat, and probably has 2 or more feats invested into it as well as a character build made specifically to be able to make those rolls. Also the DC50 is likely going to take much higher level character than one who can just take CWI at 3rd. Next note: nonadventuring activity = nerfed to be terrible on the low end, slightly better on the high end magic item creation = not so much nerfed I would kind of expect that if TUs were so valuable that magic item creation might actually take more than it currently does, as it obviously undervalues them compared to other TU expenditures that are being looked at closely. You would have to increase TU expenditure on magic item creation by 20x its current cost as well as remove the xp cost benefit component to have it even remotely compare to nonadventuring activity. Ultimately it comes down to "Magic is infinitely better than not magic". Don't like it? Play another system, or wait and see how it goes in 4.0
Mystical_Tutor 04-20-07, 03:36 PM	I would recomend "adapting" them... I recommend leaving them like they are. IMHO your points are insignificant to warrant a change in the system. I have failed to see enough of this in real life play to be concerned. So, the idea that crafting significantly impacts the RP quality of LG over all is, to me, is a non-issue. Even the issue of TU management seems to be a very subjectivley personal responsibility that we all have to face. I know how it is when you finally hit the really right combo in a toon. You want to play him/her to the max. Probably dust collects on the rest of the toons in the tackle box that only get pulled out when that is the only way you can get a table. You will never have enough TUs for that one. Retirement time will come all too soon. And those two statements will be true even if you intentionally die every level, craft yourself to the max, play down every opportunity you get and anything else you can think of to delay the inevitable. No, my friend, we don't need to change the system, we just need to game on.
KShaver 04-20-07, 03:52 PM	Ultimately it comes down to "Magic is infinitely better than not magic". Don't like it? Play another system, or wait and see how it goes in 4.0 You're essentially saying that a non-casting class who doesn't multi-class or PrC to get some casting levels deserves to not have anywhere near the amount of gear a pure caster gets?
Mattastrophic 04-20-07, 07:45 PM	That's how the game works. Wizards have to slog through their careers with d4 HD, half-BAB, hardly any proficiencies, and 2+Int skill points, wearing little to no protection. They're super-weak early on in exchange for the enormous amounts of arcane power later on. Thus, I see no reason for anyone to complain about power level of casters vs. power level of non-casters. Wizards pay their dues, and they deserve the payout that later. In the early game, Fighter > Wiz. Later on, Wiz > Fighter. (with exceptions of course; I'm being very general) And being able to construct items of power is one of those reasons why. Crafting is an important part of the game. It should be embraced, not nerfed.
Mattastrophic 04-20-07, 07:51 PM	On top of that, coming from someone who's about to hit 14th with his crafter... Those TU costs start piling very high as the market values of what you're crafting stack up. So high that of course a crafter is going to have delayed retirement... in realtime, because he spends so many TUs on actually using his feats! Even further, right at APL 10-12, when you can start affording to throw money at higher-end items, the amount of gold per adventure starts to equal and soon exceed the savings you get from crafting. Before asking for crafting feats to be changed in LG... try playing one all the way up first. -Matt
Japangirl 04-20-07, 08:02 PM	In the early game, Fighter > Wiz. Later on, Wiz > Fighter. (with exceptions of course; I'm being very general) And being able to construct items of power is one of those reasons why. I've seen multiple combats ended with some use of Sleep, Grease, Glitterdust, and Color Spray far more often than I've seen a fighter at 1st or 2nd own up. Just saying . . .
Redfist 04-20-07, 08:51 PM	Only an issue if you play a lot of mods with that character. Most people I know have quite a few spare TUs at the end of every year. I can't even comprehend running out of TUs myself except for trying to save enough for one character to play all of RHoD this year. That's different for everyone. This year - I will run out of TUs on 3 out of 9 PCs. I wish I could play my crafter more. I started life crafting as much as possible, now I'm starting to consider crafting less to be able to play him more. That leads me to believe that a TU cost is a balancing effect since I am considering the balance between play time and item wealth. I don't see a reason to change it personally and hope the circle leaves it the way it is fundamentally. I'd MUCH rather see more emphasis put into story writing, etc. than constantly talking about how to change the mechanics of the campaign. People plan PCs based on a set of rules. If those rules are constantly changing, those plans go out the window and lead to frustration. Frustrated players eventually leave. I'd hope to avoid that as much as possible in LG. --Gordon
Mystical_Tutor 04-20-07, 11:57 PM	In the early game, Fighter > Wiz. Later on, Wiz > Fighter. (with exceptions of course; I'm being very general) And being able to construct items of power is one of those reasons why. Crafting is an important part of the game. It should be embraced, not nerfed. I think we need to think beyond Wiz & Ftr. I really like to think of teamwork because that is one of the most important play values of D&D. Our group is just finishing up on RHoD and we have taken at least twice as long as other groups because we lack arcane power. So it is tanks and medics with no artillery. It is painful without the whole team. Here is how that integrates with crafting. Hasn't your group ever benefited from those scrolls the casters have burned? Isn't it because that druid was able to make a paraphet of Wis +x that he could summon that one more fire elemental to help the party through a battle? The cleric that just happend to have that scroll or rez when you bought the farm? Did you complain when the crafter in the party loaned your rogue those gloves of DEX +4? Usually the only person that complains when someone else in the party is powerful is the one that wants to hog all the glory and always be the hero. Every piece of crafted gear is one more bonus for the party your in and if you have a crafter out there that is just in the game to see how much money he can gather or how many toys he can play with, that is an individual problem, not a reason to change the game system.
Mystical_Tutor 04-21-07, 12:05 AM	I'd MUCH rather see more emphasis put into story writing, etc. than constantly talking about how to change the mechanics of the campaign. People plan PCs based on a set of rules. If those rules are constantly changing, those plans go out the window and lead to frustration. Frustrated players eventually leave. I'd hope to avoid that as much as possible in LG. --Gordon AMEN
dark_poet 04-21-07, 11:19 AM	I'd MUCH rather see more emphasis put into story writing, etc. than constantly talking about how to change the mechanics of the campaign. People plan PCs based on a set of rules. If those rules are constantly changing, those plans go out the window and lead to frustration. Frustrated players eventually leave. I'd hope to avoid that as much as possible in LG. --Gordon I agree too. Perhaps there is an imbalance. But I don't see it as that big an issue. I admit I play mainly casters so that's prob why. However, as LG is fairly new where I come from, the TU cost are significant for me. My regular group is not that large and I have to keep up with adventures to keep up with the general players primary's levels. Thus my crafting is limited. Of course I admit I'm a minority. What I am saying is, fine tweak crafting if you have a problem with the XP cost. But in the process since people say the TU cost don't really matter lessen or remove it as well? If you are saying it does matter then Crafting is fine as it is no?
Mattastrophic 04-21-07, 01:17 PM	Usually the only person that complains when someone else in the party is powerful is the one that wants to hog all the glory and always be the hero. Wow, you are SO correct. If someone's fun is lessened because of another character's power, it stinks of jealousy. Preach it, brother! -Matt
ithardin 04-26-07, 02:38 PM	Huzzah on the teamwork mention! My crafter is a Dwarven Cleric of Moradin who travels primarily with a group ohis fellow Dwarves from the same clan. His job is to heal and provide gear-such as cloaks of elemental protection for every one or the appropriate weapon if/when we run into something nasty. He doesn't get to make attack rolls unless I wind up at a table where I have to tank up and he doesn't get any of those cool cleric or meta-magic feats. I spend most modules in the second rank healing, buffing, etc. But it is the role I have chosen for this adventuring party and I love every minute with my Clan Rockhall Expeditiary Force brethren. Is it great to get the items cheaper (gold-wise) by making them? YES! Does it add to the role-play because Eohi is wearing something he made as a cleric of the Forgefather? YES!