Question about creating an Artificer above 1st level

[Jdvn1]

So you would remove treasure from a character who created an item in game? After all, PC wealth is supposed to be constant...

The party would receive less, since they have a source of creation.

Does noone in your game get ANY benefit from craft feats? Wow. That sucks. No wonder the artificer isn't getting the benefit of his craft reserve.

Of course they do. Just not before the game starts.

I disagree. The spells that he places in his spellbook, whether he scribes them for free or not, are still worth 200gp per page should he decide to sell the spellbook.

A Wizard selling his spells for money? If he wants to weaken himself for money, that's his choice to make.

In fact, for a character with a boccob's spellbook, it's entirely possible for him to put his 2 free spells per level into his regular spellbook, then scribe them to the boccob's free of charge, then sell the regular spellbook for a significant profit.

I've never had a character try to abuse the rules in such a way, but I suppose it'd take a big of money up front.

You're saying that every self-researched spell somehow has a value of 0, despite functioning identically to the equivalent bought spell.

I'm not sure how I'm saying that, but.

 

[Jdvn1]

However the artificer effectively "buys" equipment at a reduced cost since he is able to craft it himself. It doesn't say you get extra treasure, he still effectively only spends 49k in gold, yet he is able to more effectively utilize that 49k due to being able to "buy/craft" items for a reduced price.

He buys equipment at a reduced cost? Maybe he spends less xp, but he uses a class feature. I think it balances out rather than being reduced.

Any character that crafts stuff does as above, they spend a reduced amount of gold (and often XP or a craft reserve) for a greater relative amount of power in equipment compared to a standard non-crafting character.

Could you explain where in the rules this is explained? I'm arguing the rules. To my knowledge, the rules don't let you buy stuff at a reduced cost if you have a feat or skill.

If you deny them that, then you are basically unfairly penalizing a character who has invested their skills, feats and class abilities into being able to craft equipment rather than fighting better or whatnot.

I'm not penalizing the character, I'm treating him equally. He can use his skills and feats and class abilities, but it's unfair to the other players if he starts out better than everyone else.

 

[Kelleris]

The party would receive less, since they have a source of creation.

So they convert some of their XP to magic items, and then their (generally) reduced level determines the amount of treasure they get, with the items they crafted counting against the upper limit? That's... crappy. :\

 

[Kelleris]

Could you explain where in the rules this is explained? I'm arguing the rules. To my knowledge, the rules don't let you buy stuff at a reduced cost if you have a feat or skill.

That's because there aren't any other rules that say "here's some free XP, go nuts." This situation reminds of Mearls' comment a little while ago that magic items are basically a point buy system grafted on to a level system. The Artificer gets more of these points, and if you say he never got to spend them, and then lost them when he went up a level, you are screwing that character out of a class ability that grants, effectively, a pool of points with which to purchase other "class abilities".

EDIT: What the original poster should do is figure out a reasonable percentage representing how much of his craft reserve would be spent on temporary items. Just at a guess, I'd say 30%, with the rest going to items the character would still have. So add up all the craft reserves, multiply by 0.7, and give her that much free XP with which to craft starting gear.

I'd strongly encourage her to make some stuff for the rest of the party too, but that may just be me.

 

[Jdvn1]

So they convert some of their XP to magic items, and then their (generally) reduced level determines the amount of treasure they get, with the items they crafted counting against the upper limit? That's... crappy. :\

It helps, I think, because I always give my parties way too much stuff anyway.

 

[Kelleris]

It helps, I think, because I always give my parties way too much stuff anyway.

Then screw them all equally. Don't pick on the Artificer.

And besides, how does it not make sense that the freakin' Artificer, the class that specializes in building magic gear, would show up with a hefty edge in that department?

And why wouldn't a group that employs one have an edge in toys too?

 

[Jdvn1]

Then screw them all equally. Don't pick on the Artificer.

And besides, how does it not make sense that the freakin' Artificer, the class that specializes in building magic gear, would show up with a hefty edge in that department?

And why wouldn't a group that employs one have an edge in toys too?

I don't think I'm picking on the Artificer. I'm treating him equally. He's supposed to be making stuff, and yet there's the guideline for character wealth. Note that it's not class dependent, only level dependent.

He can make stuff, still. He gets his share of the gold xp, just like everyone else. He might get to be more powerful than everyone else, but I'm going to at least attempt to have everyone stay pretty even.

 

[Jdvn1]

Haven't thought this through, entirely, but would you allow a Rogue with maxed out Hide, Move Silently, and Sleight of Hand (typed Pick Pocket first ) to start with more stuff because he could steal it?

 

[Kelleris]

Haven't thought this through, entirely, but would you allow a Rogue with maxed out Hide, Move Silently, and Sleight of Hand (typed Pick Pocket first ) to start with more stuff because he could steal it?

Of course not, but this situation is different. There are only two true measures of power that D&D is concerned with, as far as class balance goes - XP and gold. The Artificer gets more of the former from a class ability than anyone else, and is expected to convert it to the latter in a way that generally builds up over time. It's not at all unbalancing to let him do so - it's part of the class. And by assuming that he starts with equal GP cost in gear as everyone else you're basically telling the Artificer's player that, through level 10, he has never converted his freebie powers (XP) into their intended form (gp).

The difference between this case and the Rogue case is that "ranks in Sleight of Hand" is not one of the two fundamental measures of D&D power. It's basically XP that has already been spent. The Artificer, on the other hand, gets this free XP, and it is an intrinsic part of the class that he is intended to convert it into gp, some portion of which is in permanent items that are legitimate and long-term parts of the class's power and not part of the usual wealth-by-level guidelines. What you're doing is the equivalent of saying that the Rogue can't have his full skill point total, not the other way around.

 

[Jdvn1]

Of course not, but this situation is different. There are only two true measures of power that D&D is concerned with, as far as class balance goes - XP and gold.

Well, this is also in response to people who say, "What about the Craft skill! They get stuff too!"

The Artificer gets more of the former from a class ability than anyone else, and is expected to convert it to the latter in a way that generally builds up over time. It's not at all unbalancing to let him do so - it's part of the class. And by assuming that he starts with equal GP cost in gear as everyone else you're basically telling the Artificer's player that, through level 10, he has never converted his freebie powers (XP) into their intended form (gp).

Actually, it's saying that he's either used the items up or he's using them now.

The difference between this case and the Rogue case is that "ranks in Sleight of Hand" is not one of the two fundamental measures of D&D power. It's basically XP that has already been spent. The Artificer, on the other hand, gets this free XP, and it is an intrinsic part of the class that he is intended to convert it into gp, some portion of which is in permanent items that are legitimate and long-term parts of the class's power and not part of the usual wealth-by-level guidelines. What you're doing is the equivalent of saying that the Rogue can't have his full skill point total, not the other way around.

Well, ranks in Sleight of Hand, Hide, Move Silently, et cetera can be used to get gold, which is one of your two measures of D&D power. What you're saying is that the Rogue couldn't have stolen anything before.