Li Shenron said:
The main unfortunate fact is that all D&D rules are designed around the PCs, and they don't make sense fully if you try to imagine a whole population living by the same rules...
Agreed. Which is why I've always assumed that there is another set of rules by which most of the rest of the population lives. Both rules apply equally to the PCs and the NPCs but the rules presented for the PCs are far more applicable to adventurers, and the rules which aren't presented - because they aren't really applicable to adventurers - are far more applicable to everyone else.
It doesn't make sense for example that to advance as a tailor, a cook or a basketweaver, you need to advance in level, something which can be done (by default) only by adventuring.
Which is why you shouldn't try to go to simulationist using the default rules, because they aren't intended to simulate anything other than the adventuring environs. It does make sense that you can advance a level as a tailor by sewing cloths. So, assume that if you want a level in tailor, you can spend a few years sewing cloths. This will have no practical impact on the PCs, but it doesn't explain where the 3rd level experts came from.
In my games from the time of 1st edition, I've always assumed that ordinary training and practice could grant you experience. I just assumed that it was so slow that PC's would largely not be interested in it, being almost always able to find better things to do with their time.
I have alot of problems with the item creation rules as they stand, but the fact that you must trade XP for items is not one of them. That actually seems rather inspired to me.
Problem #1: Flavor. I'm ecstatic that D&D finally has universal item creation mechanic, but I'm less than thrilled at how gamist it is. Essentially, you take gold and XP, hit it with a hammer and transform it into any item in the game. But, of course, magic items aren't usually literally made of large piles of coins. Something is lost. While I don't want to go back to explicit shopping lists for each item, because that was always a pain in the rear, IMO, it would have been great if right from the start the one major item involved in creating the item was listed and if you can obtain that item the cost in gold of producing the item was discounted by 25%. There are several benefits to this from a DM's perspective. It's an adventure hook. It oozes flavor. And, it allows the DM a veto over items he doesn't want coming into the game in such a mundane manner without simply saying "No." - "Your normal supplier informs you that there are no manticore's teeth on the market, anywhere, at any price. You'll have to find another way to acquire them."
Problem #2: Ease. The easy access to magic items is a two way street. On the one hand, I want the players to be able to craft thier own items. This is a satisfying endeavor for both player and dungeon master. On the other hand, I don't want the crafting of items to be so easy the specialness of magic items is unappreciated. Right now, when you gain a feat, you automatically know how to create everything. My preference would be that there are two periods of time involved. First, you have to research how to make the object. Then you have to spend time making it. From a DM's perspective, there are alot of benefits to this. It's very flavorful. It helps explain what's in all those magical tomes of the arcane other than spells. And, it is by implication therefore a plot hook. And because the means of making an item is now valuable it lets the DM hand out recipes for making magic items as valued treasure - something that I'm use to from my 1st edition games.
Problem #3: Required spell use. On the whole, this is good thing. I want a list of the spells involved in making a magic item. The problem with this is that for certain sorts of magic items - notably potions - I don't necessarily want these to be the exclusive domain of spell casters. I would be nice if there was an explicit mechanic whereby enough ranks of alchemy and a recipe could substitute for spell-casting ability. I'm used to alchemists playing a very big role in my campaign world. Similarly, I'd love to have a unified mechanic by which high level crafters - say in flavor, the legendary dwarven smiths - could turn out magic weapons and armor without recourse to spell-casting ability. At some point the line between skill and magic should blur.
Problem #4: Item crafting rules suck. Basically, the rules for figuring out the time required to create mundane items suck. They are inconsistant and produce counterintuitive results. Worse yet, they depend on the fixed value of the item. You can't use the crafting rules to figure out how much an item should cost. So far, I've seen some brave tries at fixing the rules, but none I'm completely happy with.
Problem #5: Ready availability. The default assumption seems to be that if you are in a big enough town (and cities in fantasy tend to default to unrealistically large anyway), that anything you could want to buy is available. Not only is every hamlet got a virtual wal-mart, but they are all apparantly mythical Bagdad with the practical equivalent of hawkers of magical wares lining the streets. It's not just that I don't like the flavor; it's that it tends to greatly reduce the value of having an item crafting feat if you can expect to readily obtain the item with far less fuss than making it yourself.
Problem #6: Poor economics. The rules for buying and selling magic items are designed for handling only the most light-weight of situations. Several posters have complained in other threads that under the default rules, PC crafters get shafted when they try to resell thier own creations.
the result is that you make it limited but once again free. 
