Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)
<h1 id="title">Elliquiy Role Playing Forums</h1>
		<h2 id="linktree">Play-By-Post: Light =&gt; Light: Human Small Groups =&gt; Topic started by: kckolbe on 24-09-2013, 15:15:43</h2>
		<dl id="posts">
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>24-09-2013, 15:15:43</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				This is our secret little plotting thread.&nbsp; The game will be run on a different section (most likely NC systems), but I wanted a thread where the three of us could talk about how we want to do this.&nbsp; I have a few ideas and preferences, but I am flexible on a lot of things, as you two are vital to this game and I can't afford to run something that you two don't have a personal stake in.<br><br>So...basic premise.&nbsp; The three of us will play a semi-retired adventuring group that is about 4-6 levels above the other PCs.&nbsp; I am not going to be too picky about what each of us play, but I would ask that no one play "extreme" characters (no paladins or anti-paladins), since this concept works best if our chars are closer to neutral.&nbsp; They should also have a personality for business, even if they don't have the skills for it.&nbsp; <br><br>PCs will create chars between first and third level.&nbsp; They will be completely green, concept-wise, with an obligation for or need of the guild.&nbsp; As they level, eventually they will get to the point where guild missions just aren't worth it by themselves.&nbsp; Eventually they will want to seek out their own path to glory/wealth/power.&nbsp; We will make them do this by taking a huge chunk out of their rewards for every mission as guild dues.&nbsp; At first level, they have to tolerate it due to char concepts.&nbsp; By 4th level, they should be feeling open to offers and looking for ways to get ahead on their own.&nbsp; <br><br>This means that the PCs will not remain a coherent group.&nbsp; Splitting off to pursue their own agendas would be both allowed and encouraged.&nbsp; Pvp through influence as well.&nbsp; Direct pvp would be inevitable, but should not be happening for a long time unless a character is just a piece of shit.<br><br>The guild would not be associated with any nation, though players would, of course, have individual loyalties.&nbsp; I am strongly considering allowing players to form their own alliances.&nbsp; Eventually they could form their own country (Kingmaker has great rules for managing settlements).&nbsp; <br><br>Initial thoughts?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>24-09-2013, 21:00:01</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				There's some concerns among some of the players about the crafting rules. <br>We could make some simple adjustment to the rules that decreases the time used. Because as the rules work now it takes months to make a bow for example. I do have some ideas that could be used.<br><br>The rules for Kingmaker is not very good to be honest (I have tried them...) They do make a good basic guideline but they should never (and by never I mean nevernevernever! Not ever never NO!) be in the player's hands. The rules are too unbalanced to leave in player control.<br>There have been made an upgrade to the rules. But I haven't read them yet. This upgrade can be found here:<br>http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/kingdom-building<br><br>And with the latest question that came up we should think of what races are allowed to play. 
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 00:08:03</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I don't see a problem with any/all the featured/other races being allowed. Why would that be a problem?<br><br>Also, if you want to speed crafting, just change it to progress in gp rather than sp per week. That would speed it up by a factor of 10. If you want even faster, make it the check per day rather than per week.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 00:53:34</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				No I don't see any problem with any of the featured or uncommon races. But I know some GMs does and it would be sad if we hadn't thought about it and it became a problem<br><br>Just increasing the crafting time by a factor of ten will solve some problems but some things become very fast to craft then. I'm not saying that it's the worst solution, it might even be the best among a lot of bad solutions. :) Maybe the reduction in time could be dependent on the rank of the crafter with 20 ranks needed for the full factor of ten reduction. <br>Now that I think of it, that might not be a bad solution - multiply the sp result of the craft check by half your rank - that way if you have one rank it takes double the time, if you have 4 ranks it takes half the time etc....
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 01:18:44</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Note the downside: as long as wealth is tied to power, like it is in Pathfinder and D&amp;D before it, it lets you make free money out of nothing, thus getting ahead of everyone else on the wealth/power curve. The complaint was there because the player, IMO, doesn't understand the reason that crafting is so slow. It's to make it so that it's hard to generate "free" money and get ahead of everyone else. It's possible with enough downtime, but less feasible that way.<br><br>If you allow the speed up in crafting, it means that people are getting ahead of others in power (due to the increased wealth) by a factor of 10 greater than what they were "meant" to have under the system. It's important to understand that, and once we do, we can ask ourselves, is that something we want to allow? If we understand that and the answer is "yes", that's fine, but the important thing is to understand the ramifications of house rules, how they change the system, and how they change the interaction between the characters and the system and each other.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 02:25:33</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Short notice.<br><br>Those that have shown interest in the game thus far:<br><br>Muse<br>AndyZ<br>Countdown0 - LE wizard<br>Rhaegar14<br>EroticFantasyAuthor<br>Medical Miracle<br>Blinkin<br>CurvyKitten<br>Finn MacKenna - half drow
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 02:27:57</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Count me in there too :-P<br><br>Just because I'm willing to help DM and draw up maps and create encounters don't mean I don't wanna play too ;D
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 04:24:34</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Ghostwheel, I love that you are aware of any consequences of my style choices.&nbsp; That's definitely the kind of shit GMs need to be aware of.&nbsp; The good news is that we need this.&nbsp; Bear in mind that I am fully wanting to significantly limit the gold they would earn throughout adventuring, which will weaken them compared to some challenges and even NPCs outside the guild.&nbsp; I feel that this decision will help influence them to explore the sandbox outside the guild halls, and we should try to encourage that without seeming to.<br><br>Meanwhile, by allowing crafting to increase their wealth, we counter some of the pitfalls associated with giving them less gold.&nbsp; What I like is that we effectively give PCs a way to make more money <em>on their own</em>, which might help influence them to take more initiative...or it might make them just sit and craft.&nbsp; The ideal situation would be a mechanic that makes crafting useful to a PC, but not significantly profitable at later levels.<br><br>Also, all three of us will have a primary character.&nbsp; He/she won't participate in combat as much, but will be a proper PC.&nbsp; We can talk more about them later, but I would like if all three of us play weaker classes/prestige classes.&nbsp; You know, the ones that feel cool but just really suck.&nbsp; I bet Ghostwheel could think of a few nominations.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 10:34:20</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				LOL - of cause we are in that pool of players.<br><br>But as for choosing the weaker classes.. I don't really see any weak classes in pathfinder. To me every single class is awesome in pathfinder. But maybe it's because I'm old and keep comparing them to what the classes were in 2nd edition :D<br><br>To look at the math of the crafting then a 5x increase in crafting at level 10 would do the following:<br><br>Skill at level 10: 10 (rank)+3(class skill)+2(intelligence)+5(magic item)+2(masterwork tool)+2(assistant)+3 (skill focus) = 27<br><br>That means the character would be able to make DC 35 crafting checks by taking 10 (could make DC 37 but 35 is a more round number). So the character could make a longsword by increasing the DC to 35 and make 1295 sp worth of longsword each week.<br>To do that the character would use 432 sp materials and be able to sell the swords for 647 sp. That would give the character a net profit of 215 sp for a weeks work!<br><br>If the character produces at 5 times the normal speed the profit will be 107.5 GP.<br><br>I'd say that 100 gp of profit every week is not very much for a 10th level character. So I don't think it'll be unbalancing. It will however give the players the chance of creating their own plate armor or master work sword without spending months in the smithy.<br><br>What would be unbalancing however would be players starting to charge money for the magic items they create for the other players. A player can make for 1000 gp worth of item in one day by spending 500 gp. If that player charges 250 gp from the other player for each day's work (still a very good deal for the buyer), the value of crafting items would skyrocket. <br><br>
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 10:44:49</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Eh, if you're talking about shooting yourself in the foot combat-wise, it's not too hard. Play a fighter with 10 (or less) in str and dex. Choose only Skill Focus (Profession/Craft) for feats. Fill all your spell slots for the day with Magic Missile as a level 20 wizard, even the higher-level ones. Not that difficult.<br><br>Another question for crafting is magic crafting--should players be able to craft items as normal at 50% cost, doubling their effective wealth, and on top of that do the same for other players, but with a small fee (still keeping it less than if the others tried to buy stuff for themselves) thus multiplying their money even further?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 12:19:18</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				OK I stand corrected. But I didn't mean you couldn't f**k up your own character. I meant that in pathfinder there's no classes that are inherently bad - unlike earlier versions of D&amp;D
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 12:21:46</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Amol, thanks for the math on crafting.&nbsp; I agree that a five times increase is far from imbalancing (by five times I am assuming you are referring to crafting time).&nbsp; If anything, I still feel it isn't enough.&nbsp; At tenth level, it would still take over 1 day to make a single, non masterwork longsword?&nbsp; Screw that.&nbsp; <br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8957752#msg8957752">Quote from: amol on 25-09-2013, 10:34:20</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">But as for choosing the weaker classes.. I don't really see any weak classes in pathfinder. To me every single class is awesome in pathfinder. But maybe it's because I'm old and keep comparing them to what the classes were in 2nd edition :D</blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>Almost all classes are stronger than in D&amp;D, but some prestige classes seem weak.&nbsp; Arcane archer, for example, seems a nice way to lose damage.&nbsp; I can't fathom a character build that would be improved by taking that class.&nbsp; Also, the earliest one could qualify for that class is 7th level.&nbsp; The level one ability of considering arrows to be +1 is irrelevant.&nbsp; What archer wouldn't have a +1 bow or quiver by then?<br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8957752#msg8957752">Quote from: amol on 25-09-2013, 10:34:20</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">What would be unbalancing however would be players starting to charge money for the magic items they create for the other players. A player can make for 1000 gp worth of item in one day by spending 500 gp. If that player charges 250 gp from the other player for each day's work (still a very good deal for the buyer), the value of crafting items would skyrocket.</blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>Magic items take longer to make, require specific feats (and spells), and cost xp.&nbsp; I, personally, would love to see a PC have a crafting side-business.&nbsp; Of course, the guild would charge a fee on all such sales.&nbsp; I'd much rather see a crafter making money on the magic items he/she made as opposed to "party members" getting free upgrades through no merit of their own.<br><br>Ghostwheel:&nbsp; Like Amol, I was talking about weak concepts as opposed to sabotage, but if none come to mind then no worries.&nbsp; Suffice to say that I don't want any of our characters to be or seem overpowered.&nbsp; This will be important both early and later on.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 12:29:10</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8957954#msg8957954">Quote from: kckolbe on 25-09-2013, 12:21:46</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote"><br>Magic items take longer to make, require specific feats (and spells), and cost xp.&nbsp; I, personally, would love to see a PC have a crafting side-business.&nbsp; Of course, the guild would charge a fee on all such sales.&nbsp; I'd much rather see a crafter making money on the magic items he/she made as opposed to "party members" getting free upgrades through no merit of their own.<br><br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>Actually the magic item crafting has been changed a lot since 3.5.&nbsp; You no longer use XP and you don't have to have the spells unless in a very few cases (it just makes it harder to make the item without the spell). And really a single feat for being able to create just about anything (Craft wonderous) is quite cheap.<br><br>As for character. I was considering a totally non-combat oracle. Would be a cool way to get informations about missions and such and would give the other PCs an access to some healing spells like lesser restoration and later raise dead.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 12:53:06</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8957954#msg8957954">Quote from: kckolbe on 25-09-2013, 12:21:46</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">Ghostwheel:&nbsp; Like Amol, I was talking about weak concepts as opposed to sabotage, but if none come to mind then no worries.&nbsp; Suffice to say that I don't want any of our characters to be or seem overpowered.&nbsp; This will be important both early and later on.<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>I've got a few ideas. But we can talk about them if we ever get to the point where we're considering PrCs, what with how slowly pbp games tend to move.<br><br>And yeah, like amol mentioned, no xp cost for crafting in Pathfinder.<br><br>If I wanted to do an arcane archer, I'd probably do a Myrmidarch Magus and cast spells while full attacking with the bow in the same round. Probably combine it with Eldritch Knight for something like Magus 8 / Arcane Archer 8 / Eldritch Knight 4 (switch around levels of the two if you want) for +18 BAB and 17th level Magus spellcasting (still gets max-level spells). Actually had a similar idea for a character, but unrelated.<br><br>Also, what does it matter what we build our characters into/from as long as we use the same material and rules as the PCs? O.o<br><br>Last question, any idea when you'd like to start? I think we have enough people interested to give them a firm ETA for the game...
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 17:04:47</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Forgot about Magus.&nbsp; Admittedly, I'm not crazy about that class, same with summoner and gunslinger.&nbsp; How do you feel about making those classes off limits?&nbsp; <br><br>As for our characters, I would like us to build them a bit differently than the PCs.&nbsp; The most obvious difference would be level.&nbsp; Basically, say we begin at level 6 and the PCs at level 2.&nbsp; I want them to feel like if their characters were the same level, they would be stronger than our chars.&nbsp; One way to do this is by playing weaker classes.&nbsp; Another is lower point buy.<br><br>As for ETA...not sure.&nbsp; In late November I will have a 10 day stretch where I may not have E access, so I am tempted to wait until after that to kick off IC.&nbsp; Either way, I feel there is a lot to work out before starting, especially with setting.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 17:37:01</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I would be very much against making those classes off limits. Maybe the gunslinger if you DESPERATELY want to disallow black powder due to how you see the setting working (though even that's a half-baked excuse IMO), but apart from that I really see no reason to put them off limits.<br><br>Also, I very much want to play, so I'm fine starting at level 2 like everyone else and running with everyone through adventures.<br><br>Lastly, November is REAAAAAALLY far away. By that time people are going to get bored and drop off. If you plan on doing it like that, I'd wait until after the 10-day stretch ended before putting up the interest thread. Or at worst, myself and amol can run everything temporarily while you're gone. If you don't want interest to fall off, I'd start within a week or so at most.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 17:55:52</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Having you guys take over for ten days is fine with me if you two are willing.&nbsp; I can say that I will not start within a week or two.&nbsp; I really like to take time planning.&nbsp; I've actually gotten the feeling several times that you and I have different approaches and preferences, which will be difficult on issues like this, but I also kind of like it, because you force me to think about and seriously consider things that might not have occurred to me.<br><br>Given what I want out of this game, I think the three of us have a LOT of worldbuilding to do before we can start.<br><br>Bear in mind that I haven't put up a recruiting thread yet, even though some folks are treating it like one.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 21:18:00</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I don't really have any feelings about the three classes. Except that I do have a problem with the synthesist archtype in a game where you use point buying. <br><br>One thing I am wondering. Is there a reason you don't want to use standard Golarion as the world? It's more or less well established and we could put the players in a corner of the world that's less developed like the river kingdoms. That'll cut down on the amount of world building needed. <br><br>As for playing characters. I'm totally cool with playing one or two guild masters to guide the PCs through the game and aid them when necessary. I think I'd sit over with having an adventurer (level 2 like) in this game though.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 21:26:18</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I'd also be fine with running a guildmaster character, though I want to be in the game as well :-D<br><br>And in that case, yes, I would be willing to gimp the guildmaster a bit :P<br><br>As for the synthesist archetype... I've heard people say it's broken (OMG, you can totally dump 3 stats!) but since it falls off hard at higher levels, I don't think a one-level dip to hurt yourself later is too bad, so I'm not sure why people say it's broken, since you completely lose the action economy bonus from playing a regular summoner.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>25-09-2013, 23:49:26</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				How do you guys feel about Pathfinder psionics (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed) by Dreamscarred Press? I've found that they're very well balanced to the system, and the small (but completely broken) things that were detrimental to psionics in 3.5 have been taken out.<br><br>I wouldn't use them as my "actual" character, but I think I'd like to have the old "mentor" guildmaster who's probably a psionic type and takes a lot of flavorful powers rather than combat ones since we won't really see them in combat anyhow.<br><br>The only thing I would ban from there is Thrallherd, mostly because I hate the Leadership feat (unbalanced, since it almost doubles your character power &gt;_&gt; hate hate hate), but apart from that it's very well-balanced.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 01:00:34</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Synthesist is one of those disturbingly popular ones that makes me suspicious.&nbsp; I was thinking of disallowing it or nerfing it slightly for peace of mind, but I know Ghostwheel feels differently.&nbsp; <br><br>I am a fan of the Leadership feat for flavor, but I completely understand the logic.&nbsp; No feat is more powerful, especially at higher levels.&nbsp; In a game like mine, though, Leadership can be a significant liability as well (mouths to feed, etc).&nbsp; <br><br>I'm not a fan of psionics either, more for flavor though I can't fully explain why.&nbsp; Amol, how do you feel about them?<br><br>In general, I'm against 3rd party work, which is unfair because some of it seems well-tested.&nbsp; <br><br>As for setting, Ghostwheel and I chatted about that on YIM a bit yesterday.&nbsp; I will use Golarion, but we may have to edit our world to make it fit certain groups of modules and to allow certain options down the road.<br><br>I already told Ghostwheel he could play a normal adventurer on top of a guildmaster, and the same goes for you.&nbsp; I appreciate both of you and want you to enjoy yourselves.&nbsp; I will not be playing a proper PC.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 12:20:51</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Here are my proposed rules for crafting multi-tier masterwork items.&nbsp; Note that these rules do <strong>not</strong> address the base amount of time to craft an item.<br><br>Creating Masterwork Items: The character can make a mastercraft item - a weapon, suit of armor, shield, or tool that conveys a bonus on its use through its exceptional craftsmanship, not through being magical. A mastercraft item costs three times normal because of the materials and craftsmanship used and has a Craft DC 5 higher than normal (stacking with each level of masterwork bonus).&nbsp; The time to craft such items is also increased based on the table below.&nbsp; Lastly, crafting such masterful works takes skill.&nbsp; The character's rank in a skill, plus Skill Focus (Craft)-if applicable-must meet the required number.&nbsp; Everything else (paying 1/3 the base cost, making periodic Craft checks, etc.) remains the same.<br><br>Level&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Bonus&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Rank&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DC&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Price&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Longsword&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Full Plate<br><br>Well&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x10&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x1.5 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1,515&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3,500<br>Fine&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+10&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x20&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3,015&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5,500<br>Superb&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+15&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x30&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4,515&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7,500<br>Excellent&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+20&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x40&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6,015&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9,500<br>Expert&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+25&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x50&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x5<br>Exceptional&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+6&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;18&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+30&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x60&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x6<br>Extraordinary&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+7&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;21&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+35&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x70&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x7<br>Legendary&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;25&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+40&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x80&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x8<br>Perfect&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+9&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;28&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+45&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x90&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x9<br>Divine&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+10&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;31&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+50&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x100&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;x10<br><br>Repairing Items: A character can repair an item by making a Craft check against the same DC that it took to make the item in the first place, -5 (since he's only fixing it, not making it anew). The cost of repairing an item is one-fifth of the item’s price.<br><br>Aid another: You can't have more people working on an item than three time the item's size category relative to the crafters - that is, up to three humans (Medium) can work on a suit of human-size armor; 12 could work on a small house (Huge); 48 could work on a small castle (Colossal). By "work on the item" this means adding their bonuses as per aid another - this provides a decent guideline for DMs.<br><br>Cost Modifier: Mastercraft items add a modifier based on the quality (see below); the multiplier is then applied to the total price.<br>For example: Jalya wants to buy a set of superbly crafted half-plate. Half-plate is heavy armor (+500 gp modifier); superb craftsmanship has a cost multiplier of x9. The end price is 600 (base price of the item) + (500 x 9) = 5,100 gp<br><br>Modifiers:<br>Light armor&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+100 gp<br>Medium armor&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+150 gp<br>Heavy armor&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+200 gp<br>Ammunition&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+15 gp<br>Light weapon&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+100<br>One-handed weapon +150<br>Two-handed weapon +200<br>Buckler&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+40 gp<br>Light shield&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+50 gp<br>Heavy shield&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+60 gp<br>Tower shield&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+70 gp<br>Other items&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+50 gp/lb.<br><br>Weapon Enhancements<br>The following enhancements can be added to mastercraft weapons. The Bonus listed below is the minimum mastercraft bonus required to apply the particular enhancement. For example, a well-crafted weapon can have any enhancement with a +1 bonus cost added to it; a finely-crafted weapon can have two +1 enhancements or a single +2, etc.<br><br>Balanced&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1<br>Crushing&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1<br>Heavy&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+2<br>Penetrating&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1<br>Serrated&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+2<br>Sharpened&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+2<br>Strength&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Var.<br>Strong&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1<br><br>Balanced: The weapon is exceptionally well-balanced; it grants a +1 craft bonus to attack rolls.<br>Crushing: This enhancement can be applied to bludgeoning weapons only. The weapon has a heavier head, giving it more crushing power. It has a +1 craft bonus to damage.<br>Heavy: The weapon weighs 10% more than usual, but has a +2 craft bonus to damage and deals double damage against objects. This enhancement cannot be applied to Light weapons, and can be added to a weapon only once.<br>Penetrating: This enhancement can only be applied to piercing weapons. The weapon is weighted toward the head, which is reinforced, giving it much greater penetration power. It has a +1 craft bonus to damage.<br>Serrated: The weapon's blade is serrated, enabling it to open horrible wounds. The blade deals +1d3 points of damage. This enhancement can only be applied to bladed weapons or arrows, and only once.<br>Sharp: The weapon's blade is exceptionally sharp, enabling it to slice through even the thickest hide. It has a +1 craft bonus to damage. This enhancement can only be applied to edged weapons.<br>Strength: The weapon has been specially modified to take advantage of a high Strength bonus.&nbsp; This enhancement is most often added to bows (composite short or long only), but can be added to any ranged weapon. Each +1 of the Strength bonus equals a +1 craft bonus.<br>A ranged weapon can receive only so much of a Strength bonus before it must be increased in size to take advantage of greater Strength, as noted below<br>Strong: The weapon has been specially reinforced, giving it half again as many hit points as a normal item of its type. This enhancement can be applied only once<br><br>Weapon Type&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Medium&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Large&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Huge<br>Longbow, hvy crossbow&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1 to +5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+6 to +10&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;—<br>Shortbow, lt crossbow&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1 to +4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+5 to +8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+9 to +10<br>One-handed&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1 to +3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+4 to +6&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+7 to +10<br>Sling&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1 to +3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+4 to +6&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+7 to +10<br><br>Armor Enhancements<br>The following enhancements can be added to mastercraft armor and shields. The bonus listed below is the minimum mastercraft bonus required to apply the particular enhancement. For example, a well-crafted set of armor can have any enhancement with a +1 bonus cost added to it; a finely-crafted set of armor can have two +1 enhancements or a single +2, etc.<br><br>Defensive&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1<br>Mobile&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+2<br>Spellcaster&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+2<br>Strong&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;+1<br><br>Defensive: The armor or shield is constructed in such a way that it provides greater protection for its wearer without sacrificing mobility. In effect, it grants a +1 enhancement bonus to Armor Class without having its weight, Dex penalty, or Concentration check penalty increased. This enhancement can be added multiple times; the AC bonus stacks.<br>Mobile: The armor is much more flexible and generally fitted to its wearer, enabling greater range of motion. The maximum dexterity is increased by 1 and the armor check penalty is reduced by 1. This enhancement can only be added to armor, not shields. It can be added multiple times, but the Dex penalty cannot be more than doubled or the check penalty below half its original value.<br>Spellcaster: Armor with this enhancement has been made with spellcasters in mind – it is less restrictive, but at the cost of armor bonus. This enhancement can be added multiple times; each time, it reduces the effective armor bonus by +1 and the spell failure chance by 10%.<br>Strong: The armor or shield has been specially reinforced, giving it half again as many hit points as a normal item of its type. This enhancement can be added only once.<br><br><br>For the most part, these rules benefit fighters more than casters, but that should compensate somewhat for the fact that the lower starting money hurts fighters more.&nbsp; Let me know what you think.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 15:58:07</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Those rules seems quite decent. I must admit I haven't made any calculations of how they would work for real but at the overview they look like they could work.<br><br>If we also use decreased crafting times - depending on rank - like I suggested then we might actually have a system where it's still interesting to craft items even in the endgame. 
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 16:31:00</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I definitely want to decrease crafting times.&nbsp; The good news is that we may not need to by much.&nbsp; So, let's say you are level 2 (where I am leaning toward starting).&nbsp; You have 2 ranks in craft.&nbsp; You have a +1 int modifier.&nbsp; You have +3 for class skill.&nbsp; You have +2 for masterwork tools (provided).&nbsp; You have +4 for 2 assistants (the most you can have on a medium weapon...somewhat provided).<br><br>This gives you a +12 to craft at 2nd level...an amazing bonus.&nbsp; Taking 10 gives you a 22.&nbsp; Multiply that by a standard 15 DC and you have 330, enough to make 2 normal longswords in a 1 week period or 1.5 masterwork (+1) longswords per week with the rules above.&nbsp; Obviously, bonuses will increase at a very slow rate from there (basically +1 per level), but I don't think we'll need to quicken the time by more than x5.&nbsp; At higher levels, crafting will still take a while, but the products will be worth it.<br><br>Using the x5 and the modifiers above, let's look at masterwork full plate, the benchmark of crafting.&nbsp; Without the x5, progress of 418 sp per week.&nbsp; It would take 35 weeks for just NORMAL full plate, and about 52 weeks (a fucking YEAR) for +1 masterwork, which, to be fair, is more than a level 2 character should have.&nbsp; With the x5, the time goes down to 7 weeks for normal and 11 weeks for masterwork.&nbsp; <br><br>How about crafting is increased by a factor of 5 AND characters receive a bonus of +1 to craft checks as they level (in addition to skill ranks)?&nbsp; Does this sound like too much?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 16:37:34</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I don't think we should give people +1 to craft each level in addition to skill ranks. If people want to craft they need to use the skill ranks for it. It would be pretty annoying for the PC's if the master smith isn't much better than the wizard that used 1 rank.<br><br>But that being said. I think we should consider giving every player 1 extra rank per level that can be used for either a craft skill or a profession skill. 
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 18:52:00</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I also think you're forgetting that people can quite easily get items that grant bonuses to skills--a +10 item costs 10k gold (very easy to get by level 10ish), and the most you can get is a +30 item, which is even more than their level. Plus their miscellaneous bonuses, such as a masterwork set of tools.<br><br>Just to contrast, here's (http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Masterwork_Variant_(3.5e_Variant_Rule)) my take on the Masterwork rules (which I've already referred kckolbe to), and I prefer them since they don't have the artificial "reach level 10 and you can make a +3 item!" thingy, but are completely skill based, which is better IMO.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 19:19:52</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I was actually thinking of giving each character 1 less skill point per level, BUT giving them 2 per level that can be spent on craft, profession, or perform.<br><br>Ghost, good point on skill bonuses from items.&nbsp; Go ahead and completely disregard the bonus +1 per level.&nbsp; Bad idea, that.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>26-09-2013, 21:17:09</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8964097#msg8964097">Quote from: kckolbe on 26-09-2013, 19:19:52</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">I was actually thinking of giving each character 1 less skill point per level, BUT giving them 2 per level that can be spent on craft, profession, or perform.<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>I'm VERY strongly against that--if you want to give them more skill points only for crafting and the like, then I'd do it a different way--instead, on top of getting the usual bonuses from taking a level in a favored class, players also get a single skill point that can be used on the following skills: Craft, Perform, and Profession. Thoughts?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 03:43:37</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8964633#msg8964633">Quote from: Ghostwheel on 26-09-2013, 21:17:09</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">I'm VERY strongly against that--if you want to give them more skill points only for crafting and the like, then I'd do it a different way--instead, on top of getting the usual bonuses from taking a level in a favored class, players also get a single skill point that can be used on the following skills: Craft, Perform, and Profession. Thoughts?<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>How about this?&nbsp; IF they take the extra skill point from favored class, they instead get two, but they must be spent on Craft, Perform, and/or Profession
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 08:01:21</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Again, for people who aren't really interested in any of those skills ("I'd be fine if I got extra for it, but lose something I already have? No thanks.") it limits their choices which is always a bad thing and they'll always take HP instead of skill points if that's the case.<br><br>Plus, you shoudln't <em>need</em> more than one of those.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 08:23:06</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				About the extra skill points. I've thought about the pros and cons of loosing a point and gaining two versus just gaining one.<br><br>While I like craft and profession skills because they add flavour to the game I the version with gaining two SP would favour those that would take craft skills anyway - high intelligence characters with limited class skills (wizards) or alchemists come into mind. These would never be restricted by this. A fighter however with intelligence 9 would loose half his skill points for other things this way. <br><br>That alone should be enough to go with just an extra point per level.<br><br>But I understand why you want to force them to use two points per level. But maybe we should make that more of a player choice with serious DM (oops.. it's GM in PF) nudging. We could simply state that if players used their skills to earn money then they'd also gain XP - it shouldn't be a lot but still enough to be interesting. And that the XP gained would be dependent on the number of ranks the player had in that skill (not on total skill bonus because it would again favour certain characters). It should however be a minor xp gain like 1 to 5 xp per rank per week. <br><br>Also: We need to come up with a verdict on what races will be allowed and how many exotic PCs we'll allow. I'd say that we should at least have half the PC from the core races and not more than 1/4 of them from the uncommon races. That would make a decent mix.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 08:29:12</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				So no changes to skill points, but an award of xp to the successful use of craft, profession, and perform checks?&nbsp; Obviously, bards would not get the xp for using perform for class abilities, just for actual performances.&nbsp; That would encourage putting points in the skills, but not limit options.&nbsp; Well done, amol.<br><br>So, on to a couple of other decisions.&nbsp; I would prefer point buy and average health per level (full at first, of course).&nbsp; How many points should we start with?&nbsp; I am thinking 30 for adventurers (the majority of the PCs) and 20 for us and any "support" characters).&nbsp; <br><br>Lastly, I'd like to allow the race builder, but only for 0 level races.&nbsp; I think that it will allow players to design races that fit their play style and char concept that could still be more city friendly.&nbsp; Plus, who wouldn't want to see half-dwarves, half-gnomes and half-halflings (quarterlings?)
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 09:44:23</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Why 30? 25 is "high-powered fantasy" in Pathfinder--I think that would be fine.<br><br>Also, why are people going to be ahead of others on the experience curve just because they use a skill more often? Couldn't, say, a fighter who has none of those use Intimidate to get the same thing running a protection racket or whatever? So no, I don't think that they should be given extra XP just for that.<br><br>What do you guys dislike about gaining an extra skill point whenever you take a favored class that can only be sunk into Perform, Craft, or Profession?<br><br>As for races, I'm fine with either the builder or using featured/uncommon races--but I do think we should limit (in other words, ban) monsters-as-races that use CR as their effective level, since those throw the power curve all over the place.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 10:02:23</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967690#msg8967690">Quote from: Ghostwheel on 27-09-2013, 09:44:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">Why 30? 25 is "high-powered fantasy" in Pathfinder--I think that would be fine.<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div>No comment. For me the stats of characters isn't that important. So I don't really care how many points are given. <br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967690#msg8967690">Quote from: Ghostwheel on 27-09-2013, 09:44:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">Also, why are people going to be ahead of others on the experience curve just because they use a skill more often? Couldn't, say, a fighter who has none of those use Intimidate to get the same thing running a protection racket or whatever? So no, I don't think that they should be given extra XP just for that.<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>In my mind everyone should have crafting and profession skills to make their characters more complete (see next)<br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967690#msg8967690">Quote from: Ghostwheel on 27-09-2013, 09:44:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">What do you guys dislike about gaining an extra skill point whenever you take a favored class that can only be sunk into Perform, Craft, or Profession?<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div>Nothing at all. I'd prefer it this way.<br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967690#msg8967690">Quote from: Ghostwheel on 27-09-2013, 09:44:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">As for races, I'm fine with either the builder or using featured/uncommon races--but I do think we should limit (in other words, ban) monsters-as-races that use CR as their effective level, since those throw the power curve all over the place.<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div>If we don't set some restrictions on the race part we risk getting a game of cat and bunny people......&nbsp; 
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 10:14:04</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967716#msg8967716">Quote from: amol on 27-09-2013, 10:02:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">No comment. For me the stats of characters isn't that important. So I don't really care how many points are given.<br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>Also note, kckolbe, that PF point buy is very different from 3.5 point buy--everything starts at 10 rather than 8, so it's actually a lot more points than it would be in 3.5.<br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967716#msg8967716">Quote from: amol on 27-09-2013, 10:02:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">Nothing at all. I'd prefer it this way.</blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>So we're in agreement to give people +1 skill point whenever they take a favored class, and that skill point may only be used on Craft, Perform, or Profession skills?<br><br><div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=185883.msg8967716#msg8967716">Quote from: amol on 27-09-2013, 10:02:23</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">If we don't set some restrictions on the race part we risk getting a game of cat and bunny people...... <br></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br>If that's what people want to play in order to feel invested in their characters and to enjoy playing them, what's wrong with that?<br><br>That said, I don't think there are any bunny people... and most people choose core races anyhow much of the time. If it's to allow people to play what they want so that they enjoy themselves, I don't think there's a problem, though I don't think that it would be the case that people play all kinds of things willy-nilly.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 10:49:21</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				If amol has no preference and Ghost thinks it is too much, then we'll go with 25.<br><br>So, for skill points, let's make sure we're all on the same page.&nbsp; A human fighter, Int of 10, with favored class bonus in skills.&nbsp; He would normally receive 4 sp/level.&nbsp; With this system, he'd receive 4/lvl, but one had to be in the list of skills we discussed.&nbsp; Is that right?<br><br>As for race, the intent is that the vast majority of the characters be human or half human.&nbsp; Bunny and cat people are possible, but will face significant scrutiny before being approved.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 10:59:43</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I think that both Ghost and I prefer to give an extra point along with the favoured class bonus. This point can only be used for a limited number of skills. So the fighter in your example would get 5 skill points if he chose the skill point option for the favoured class bonus and if he chose some other bonus he'd just get 4 points. Either way one point must be used for certain skills.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 11:58:48</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I'm good with that.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>Ghostwheel</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:01:56</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Two examples to illustrate this:<br><br>Two characters, one Fighter 20, the other Fighter 10 / Sorcerer 10. Both have Fighter as their favored class and have 10 Intelligence for 2 skill points per level and are NOT human.<br><br>The first one gets 3 skill points per level if he chooses +1 HP as his favored class bonus, for a total of 60 at level 20, 20 of which must have been spent on a Craft, Perform, or Profession skill. If he chooses +1 skill point as his favored class bonus, he'd have a total of 80 at level 20, 20 of which must have been spent on a Craft, Perform, or Profession skill.<br><br>The second gets has a total of 50 skill points at level 20, 10 of which must have been spent on Craft, Perform or Profession. If he chooses +1 skill point as his favored class bonus, he would have a total of 60 skill points, 10 of which still must have been placed into one of the three, since only 10 of his levels are favored.<br><br>Does that make sense now? <em>Regardless</em> of which favored class bonus you choose (+1 HP or +1 skill point), whenever you take a level in a favored class you get an <em>additional</em> +1 bonus skill point that must be placed into one of those three.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:10:09</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I'm tracking now, and no issue with that.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:31:55</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Thanks Ghost. <br><br>Your examples nailed the essence of what I was trying to say :D
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:42:27</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				So, character creation.&nbsp; There are 3 types of characters: adventurers, staff, and guildmasters<br><br>Adventurers get 25 points and start at level 1.&nbsp; They may sign up for missions (provided they are close enough in level) and receive experience normally.&nbsp; They may earn experience outside the guild on their own initiative.<br><br>Staff get 20 points as well and start at level 4.&nbsp; They may not sign up for missions, and receive only half xp from mission-related experience (should they end up involved).&nbsp; They may earn experience outside the guild on their own initiative.<br><br>Guildmasters get 15 points and start at level 7.&nbsp; They may not sign up for missions, though they may tag along at certain points for business reasons.&nbsp; They receive 10% of mission-related experience.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:48:11</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I think there should be some way for the guildmasters to earn xp outside of missions. Otherwise once the players hit level 7, the guildmasters will still be level 7 and of no real interest to the PC's and then the whole concept of the game is lost.<br>In my mind, the Guildmasters should stay at least one (if not two or three) level ahead of the PCs. 
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:50:36</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Hmmm, I actually *do* want PCs to reach the level of the guildmasters, but I also don't want it to be as early as this would be.&nbsp; Maybe lvl 9 for guildmasters?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 12:56:33</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Then why not just adjust the guildmaster level after the highest PC level. No real need for XP. XP isn't used for anything but book keeping in PF. So we could say something like<br><br>PC level&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;GM level<br>&nbsp; 1&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;7<br>&nbsp; 2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;7<br>&nbsp; 3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;7<br>&nbsp; 4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9<br>&nbsp; 8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9<br>&nbsp; 9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9<br><br>Could even be expanded with support staff levels too.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>27-09-2013, 13:03:57</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				That is a pretty good idea.&nbsp; I would like to keep staff xp independent, since they might branch off to other pursuits, but just tying guildmaster to highest adventurer is solid.&nbsp; Instead of your table, though, let's try something more like this:<br><br>PC level&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;GM level<br>&nbsp; 1&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;8<br>&nbsp; 5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9<br>&nbsp; 6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9 <br>&nbsp; 7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9<br>&nbsp; 8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;9<br>&nbsp; 9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;10<br>&nbsp;10&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 10<br>&nbsp;11&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 10<br>&nbsp;12&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 10<br>&nbsp;13&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 11<br><br>This way, the PCs start becoming equal to us at their level 8, but will have a few levels of relatively equal strength, and not able to overpower until levels 14+.<br><br><br>EDIT:&nbsp; Also, any preferences on traits?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 16:24:04</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Here's what I am thinking of playing for my character (I've not chosen traits yet).<br><br>http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=668909
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 19:48:03</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Looks nice. <br><br>Just took a quick look over it. You forgot the class skill bonus to your last craft skill.<br><br>About traits. As long as players take traits from different groups I see no reason to limit them - even allowing an extra if we wish.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 19:56:22</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				The only reason I was considering limiting traits is that we are already giving the PCs an extra skill point, so figured that was worth taking one trait.&nbsp; Also, alchemists only get the bonus to alchemy.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 20:05:24</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				The bonus I was referring to is the +3 class skill bonus you get to every class skill. Craft skills are class skills for all classes. So it should be a class skill for that character as well :)<br><br>I think the traits add depth to characters. But they can of cause be exploited. So maybe we should allow the players to take one trait and give them one based on their character background. It will also give the players a good reason to make a cool character (we could even say that we reward between zero to two extra traits based on background).
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 20:09:24</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				1 free trait and 1-2 awarded has potential.&nbsp; Let's do it.&nbsp; <br><br>So, what role were you wanting?&nbsp; I know you were talking about playing an oracle guildmaster, but how about in addition?&nbsp; Were you wanting me to just toss a handful of noteworthy female NPCs to you along with some plot notes?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 20:14:57</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				If you are up to just throw out a few female NPCs then I can play them. It could be something as simple as shy barmaid or lusty level 2 bard. Then I could evolve them from there. <br><br>But I'd like to know a little more about the setting. It could trigger some ideas. Maybe the local King has a daughter that needs to be involved in the game...
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 20:25:48</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I actually had some more significant characters in mind.&nbsp; One beautiful, 21 year old queen, for example.&nbsp; There are a few other female NPCs that have the potential to become affiliated with the group, though, and not all are of significant status.<br><br>As for setting, I am still really working on it.&nbsp; Basically, there are 2-3 major cities from Golarion that I want to use, but since they aren't next to each other I am thinking of just ignoring the rest of Golarion and making a simplified map that consists of the 2-3 major powers and a few unaligned small towns.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 22:13:33</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				That sounds like a good way to do it. One more thing we might want is a lot of wilderness like the areas in Kingmaker that was previously settled but then abandoned. It will provide a lot of space for adventuring and give the players a place to start out on their own later on if they wish.<br><br>And I can do a 21 year old queen ;)
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 22:22:54</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Oh yeah, plenty of open places and wilderness as well.&nbsp; I was just describing the political map, so to speak.&nbsp; I want to get rid of common, and have each nation have its own language.&nbsp; <br><br>I bet you could.&nbsp; And from your suggestions, I take it you would enjoy playing someone in the guild who was there to provide services of some kind?
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 22:27:05</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Good. And GOOD about common. It has always been one of the things I refused in any game I run. Different nations have different languages. If players have extra languages then they could invest them in some sort of trade tongue. <br><br>And yes about the oracle. I thought it would be nice to have some sort of access to healing spells and maybe craft wands for cheap wands. And access to divinations that could lead the players in the direction of adventures and wealth.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 22:51:41</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				Anything else you want to discuss then?&nbsp; If not, I'll throw up a recruiting post on Tuesday.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>amol</strong> on <strong>29-09-2013, 23:20:55</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				I'll think about it. But not anything right of my mind now.
			</dd>
			<dt class="postheader">
				Title: <strong>Re: Shh...Adults Are Talking (Amol, Ghostwheel, kckolbe)</strong><br>
				Post by: <strong>kckolbe</strong> on <strong>01-10-2013, 06:31:41</strong>
			</dt>
			<dd class="postbody">
				By the way, pulling a lot of "rulings" out of my ass, please let me know how you feel about them.
			</dd>
		</dl>
		<div id="footer" class="smalltext">
			
			<span class="smalltext" style="display: inline; visibility: visible; font-family: Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?action=credits" title="Simple Machines Forum" target="_blank" class="new_win">SMF 2.0.19</a> |
 <a href="https://www.simplemachines.org/about/smf/license.php" title="License" target="_blank" class="new_win">SMF © 2021</a>, <a href="https://www.simplemachines.org" title="Simple Machines" target="_blank" class="new_win">Simple Machines</a>
			</span>
		</div>