Drivel

[Crothian]

Keep in mind that we are a group of DMs, yet they wanted to play in my games the majority of the time. It was one hell of a compliment. So, you see why I love myself so much.

That's cool. So, are all the games serperate in different worlds, or is there some cross polinization? For instance I ran a two games one year in the same world and in the same time. Each group would hear about the exploits of the other and meet the same NPCs. They never crossed paths though. I was ready to deal with that should it happen, but luckily it never did.

 

[kreynolds]

So, are all the games serperate in different worlds, or is there some cross polinization?

Yes. All of the games I run take place at roughly the same time and in the same world. The game I spoke of that is a dual DM run game is actually a game with just two DM's, me and one of my pals. He and I use that game to really flesh out our NPCs, and we commonly end up inadvertantly creating fresh storylines and plot threads in that world. Those can then be used later on as an adventure for one of the other games. All of my NPCs are just as fleshed out as your characters would be, mostly because I actually role-play most them with the other DM before they actually show up in another game.

Each group would hear about the exploits of the other and meet the same NPCs.

Same here. Anything they do in one game could quite possibly have effects on another game. For instance, if the party in game A fails to defeat the BBEG, more than likely, the BBEG's power will expand and then begin to threaten the party in game B. It's pretty wild, but really fun. Not all of them cross though, as I might have one game in Calimshan while another game is in Vasaa, so it's statistically unlikely that the two would hear of each other, unless they accomplished something truly amazing.

They never crossed paths though. I was ready to deal with that should it happen, but luckily it never did.

It happens occasionally, and I'm always ready for it. I prefer that it rarely happen because I don't want to make a regular thing about it. I don't want to lose sight of the characters by mixing them up all the time. Luckily, my players rarely jump from one game to another. Generally, the only reason they do this is because they were in a paired game but the other guy died, so they take their surving character and might jump into another game.

 

[kreynolds]

I'm now of the belief that you guys argee with each other, you are just stating it in a different way.

Not at all. What Weeble has stated is that any magic items that an item creator makes are charged against his character wealth at creation cost, not market value, which is incorrect. When he failed to prove his argument, he shifted to a more broad argument that the character wealth by level table is simply meant as a guide to limit how much treasure a character will find, though anything he makes is not applied in the same way, which is ludicrous.

This is not as simple as Weeble disagreeing with the purpose of the character wealth by level guidelines and simply house ruling that they don't apply as stated in the book. If that were true, then this whole thread wouldn't have gotten this far. The first time I brought up character wealth limits, he would have said "I don't follow those." But he didn't say that. He proceded to argue that my stance, which is correct and by the rules, was wrong, and that the table does not apply to item creators in the same way, even if the creator gives an item to someone else, it would be half price.

It is true that both Weeble and myself do not strictly adhere to the character wealth guidelines at all times, but we do so for different reasons. I will stray from said guidelines when the addition of an item to a character's inventory, whether it be magical or mundance, would have no impact upon the balance between all of the players. Weeble, however, strays from the guidelines simply because he doesn't have a clue as to how they work. He's a player, and if he's a DM, then he's definately new at this because it's quite obvious that he has no idea as to what he's talkin' about.

He wants me to quote relevant rules in the DMG which state that magic items count against the wealth of an item creator just like anything else, but I can't, because there aren't any that specifically and bluntly state this. I must rely upon all of the relevant information in the DMG, which must be assembled like a puzzle, so that the true system behind character wealth and item creation can be seen and clearly understood.

The best Weeble can do is rape the rules by quoting a section of the DMG and totally screwing up the definition and/or meaning of said section. He doesn't know the rules, and he most certainly does not even know what's right in front of him in the DMG. Which is strange, by the way, because he's apparently a DM, yet he doesn't get it. It would be one thing if he simply disagreed with the DMG, or he just wanted to make a house rule, but that's not the case. He just doesn't get it.

Thus, my theory is looking pretty darned sound: That he's nothing but a disgruntled player who wants to be able to carry around far more stuff than would normally be allowed and he is attempting to gather ammunition to use against his DM. He might be trying to prove to everyone that his interpretation is correct for the sole purpose of saving his own hide and preserving his sense of worth and self-respect.

It may also be very possible that he's just a fresh DM. In either case, I don't care. I know he's wrong, and since he's too stubborn to admit it, I can only pray that he will one day see beyond the blinding veil of pride that completely clouds his vision. *shrug*

 

[Crothian]

Well, it was a fun thread while it lasted. The whole thing is a guideline, so there really is no absolute right or wrong here. IMO, I tend to side with Reynolds, but as I've said before I don't use these guidelines at all. I perfer to play it by ear. In my normal campaign if the PCs say these guidelines they would complain because they would be lucky to have half what is recomended.

 

[Weeble]

“DMG p.145 Table 5-1 (Modified x3/4): Character Wealth by Level”
“Also, if I track each PC I can assure that no single PC is left out or too loaded. I just like the idea of my chart to encourage the magic item creation feats…”
“Also after checking this chart, I noticed that while I was winging the magic items gained by my party, I was WAY too low, trying to keep things low magic.”

Some earlier words of mine to show that I don’t let magic item creators run around with twice as much crap, even if I were a green DM. Odd that kreynolds assumes (you know what that means) that I am looking for ammunition against my DM. I have a Rogue/Fighter in his campaign. Maybe I’m saving my own hide and really want to carry around twice as much crap? Uhhhh, huh? Maybe that veil is clouding my vision again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Technically, creating magic items is not any cheaper than just purchasing magic items, (barring any fluctuation in market values, if you do that in your games) as the costs are nearly identical. When you create a magic item, sure, you only have to spend half the amount of gold to make it, but the item counts against your total character wealth at full value (NPCs are the only exception to this rule). Additionally, when you buy magic items, you don't pay the XP cost, so it doesn't slow down your level progression. Making your own magic items allows you to avoid having to carry a massive amount of wealth (half the normal value of the item to be created), but you pay it one way or another in the end, and you now level slower because of the XP expenditure.”--Kreynolds

DMG p.43, “Character-Created Magic Items: A PC spellcaster can spend as MANY of the XP and gp you have awarded toward making magic items as she wishes, provided that she has the proper item creation feats and prerequisites.”

“Nowhere in that quote does it state "All characters capable of creating their own equipment get to carry around twice as much crap as everyone else."--Kreynolds

Actually the “as many” part does. If a PC has the money, time, and XP and can obtain the recources, he or she could carry around twice as much crap, not that he would.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I say that a character with item creation feats should be allowed to pass their limit, or count created items at what they paid for them (part of that character's wealth).” – Weeble
“And you're dead wrong. Here's to hoping that you'll figure this out one day. Cheers.” –Kreynolds
but earlier and contradictory to…
“I would never tell someone that they couldn't make an item because of their character wealth limit.”--Kreynolds

“If there is some Force that mysteriously limits spellcasters from making items to increase their wealth beyond the normal, I would like to see the RULING. So, in your campaign, my wizard begins to mysteriously feel queezy and shaky when he makes that 2nd or 3rd pair of Boots (oh no, he is passing his limit in gp value!!!). He starts to vomit, an lo and behold, some random Rogue steels his raw materials, or his gold, or lightning strikes him for damage, and, umm, umm, he also fails a Ref save, and looses, um, um, all of the gold he needed to make them, mhuhahahahahahahaha!!!!!!”—Weeble

Ahh, I see what that Force is. It’s a DM enforcing a guideline (not a rule) and repressing the value of making magic items with feats, be it for an adventuring party or for profit. Since Table 5-1 refers to treasure found and not made, and since it is a guideline and not a rule, and considering that a PC can create as many magic items as he can afford XP and gp wise, even if it puts him or her over the limit of those guidelines (not rules), then this Force would be enough to make me NEVER take item creation feats. I could never make a profit over and above my fellow sorcerer if we happen to both be at the same character wealth and it happened to be near the top of the guidelines of Table 5-1. This would be a shame, as I wasted item creation feats that I can’t maximize while the sorcerer took metamagic feats that have NO limit placed on them outside of the rules (not guidelines). Using this Force would cause other posters to walk out on a DM who did such a thing, taking away that character’s ability to make AS MANY magic items as he or she can as long as there is enough XP and gp available.

All of what I have noted IS in the DMG. Rules I take word for word, without twisting them or limiting their meaning by Forcing a PC to follow guidelines. I would allow a PC to surpass a guideline, where that character was quite substandard in combat related guidelines. I certainly wouldn’t penalize a magic item creator by secretly keeping treasure away from that character later on if they passed the guidelines. What if the party decided to split things evenly? Screw the whole party then, or say “no, you can’t give that character ¼ of the treasure! He’s made too many magic items and that would put his wealth over all of yours!” Never mind the lack of combat power due to spending feats on item creation.

I’ve seen absolutely no ruling in the DMG that supports kreynolds, as he claims to have quoted. The only quote he mentioned was on p.243, second column, first full sentence. So what is the difference between a Cleric’s wand (creation 2,250gp) of hold person and a Sorcerer’s (creation 6,750gp)? Oddly 4,500gp in creation costs, yet the market value is 4,500gp no matter who makes it. I’m seeing a value issue here and a reason NOT to count the market value against the character who made it. Now, if my wizard gave a magic item he made to another character, of course the item would be counted at full value, for that character. If I worked at a computer dealership and gave a computer I built to a friend that cost me $200 and 5hrs to make, it would still have a market value of roughly $400-$600 (he could sell it for that), yet it is only worth $200 TO ME (but I could sell it for $400-$600---a PROFIT). After all, I can make plenty more, given the time and recources (thank god I don’t loose XP-or maybe I do).

Kreynolds, there is little reason no basis for you to get personal and state that if it isn’t your way, it must be wrong. Your theory (that’s all it is) looks darned good to you and maybe some others, but I see that plenty of people here look at the DMG in regards to PCs and item creation. You follow whatever guidelines you want. I will too, but I won’t go against a DMG ruling . If you think I am, use any rule in the DMG to show me.

 

[kreynolds]

...<snip>...If you think I am, use any rule in the DMG to show me.

At this point, I don't have to. You're just plain wrong. You can spout as much nonsesne as you like, but it's still just nonsense.

By the way, quoting your posts over and over and over and over and over again does not reinforce your argument. In fact, it makes you look more desparate, as you can't come up with anything stronger than the weak arguments regarding the rules that you have presented thus far.

 

[Weeble]

At this point, I don't have to. You're just plain wrong.

At any point, you couldn't, because you're wrong.

 

[kreynolds]

At any point, you couldn't, because you're wrong.

*shrug*

 

[Syunsuke]

(I'm not very good at English, so forgive about that and I'm afraid I'm missreading rule...)

DMG, P.47, "HANDCRAFTED NPC":

When selecting gear for a spellcaster, count magic items that she can make herself as 70% as expensive as normal. This rule effectively treat the XP cost as an extra gold piece cost.

Though this is NPC creating rule, I belive it's useable for PC, too.
So, I fear both of you are wrong.

example:
If a wizard make magic item worth 1000 gp (2000 gp as market price), that item is count as 1400 gp for equipment value guidline.
He paid 40 XP for this creation, so he is 40 XP behind than other caracters(assuming they got same amount of XP).


For game balance , I don't think this rule cause big problem. They could have only 40% higher gp value equipment at most.

 

[Weeble]

I've seen the 70% value used for NPCs, but no, it wouldn't apply to PCs directly, as the Gear allowed in gold is at a different level. But, YES, it does imply that you use a different value to calculate items created. This would not be any different for either PCs or NPCs, as they are supposed to get the same chances, breaks, abilities, and so on using Elite stats. Instead of the 70% value used for NPCs, I should be the total item creation costs for calculation for a PC. They also use the 70% value for NPCs because its easy and not alot of work for the DM, plus some items cost more than half the market value to create anyway.
Kreynolds will say that an NPC with the exact same stats as a PC, but having a different name and being run by the DM should not be treated the same. But he is a new DM learning the ropes. We should give him a break.