Honestly, how would crafting be rebalanced in the first place? The only items worth crafting are magic items, and I'm not sure they want to bake in ease of accessibility to the crafting of magic items, given that's an area that the DM is supposed to be able to regulate at their discretion.
I would like at least 2-3 examples for each magic item of components that the magic Item requires to make it.
For some it’s easy like an Elemental Gem would require essence of the type of elemental the gem summons. Other’s it’s not as easy. Like what component would +1 weapons and armor need? Or a Pearl of Power?
The exact items don't matter unless they're suddenly going to go in for "drop tables" on monsters, which seem unlikely. Requiring a component is just a plot device to justify the connected encounter.
Honestly, how would crafting be rebalanced in the first place? The only items worth crafting are magic items, and I'm not sure they want to bake in ease of accessibility to the crafting of magic items, given that's an area that the DM is supposed to be able to regulate at their discretion.
I would like at least 2-3 examples for each magic item of components that the magic Item requires to make it.
For some it’s easy like an Elemental Gem would require essence of the type of elemental the gem summons. Other’s it’s not as easy. Like what component would +1 weapons and armor need? Or a Pearl of Power?
The exact items don't matter unless they're suddenly going to go in for "drop tables" on monsters, which seem unlikely. Requiring a component is just a plot device to justify the connected encounter.
An example would help the DM plan an appropriate and thematic encounter.
Honestly, how would crafting be rebalanced in the first place? The only items worth crafting are magic items, and I'm not sure they want to bake in ease of accessibility to the crafting of magic items, given that's an area that the DM is supposed to be able to regulate at their discretion.
I would like at least 2-3 examples for each magic item of components that the magic Item requires to make it.
For some it’s easy like an Elemental Gem would require essence of the type of elemental the gem summons. Other’s it’s not as easy. Like what component would +1 weapons and armor need? Or a Pearl of Power?
The exact items don't matter unless they're suddenly going to go in for "drop tables" on monsters, which seem unlikely. Requiring a component is just a plot device to justify the connected encounter.
An example would help the DM plan an appropriate and thematic encounter.
There's 16 pages of magic items when I filter for a DMG source, at 20 entries per page. Even accounting for redundant entries for items that have an alternative name and +X's, that's well over 200 entries. It seems very unlikely that they'll make multiple examples of components for what amounts to an optional rule.
I would like at least 1 example for each magic item of components that the magic Item requires to make it.
For some it’s easy like an Elemental Gem would require essence of the type of elemental the gem summons. Other’s it’s not as easy. Like what component would +1 weapons and armor need? Or a Pearl of Power?
The components are whatever you want them to be. At some point, a DM just needs to be able to think for themself. Maybe it's just regular off-the shelf iron, and then you magic it, and poof, its +1. It can be just that simple. Maybe its metal from an asteroid. Or it's carved from the bone of a dragon. Or from the wood of a branch freely given by a tree in the sacred grove. Or its metal made from the steel heart of an earth elemental. A pearl of power needs a pearl from an oyster that lives near a node that connects to the elemental plane of water. Or it's formed in the belly of a beholder who eats a rust monster. Or its the teeth of the sahguin queen. I came up with those examples as I was typing them. It's not hard. We've all read enough books and seen enough movies to just steal ideas.
But to codify it in the rules? Such ideas are almost impossible, because ingredient availability will always be campaign dependent. If you say you need the bones of a storm giant to make electrical items, what happens if there aren't storm giants in the campaign, or in the world? Then the recipes become pointless, or a DM has to re-arrange their world to accommodate them. If you need the essence of an elemental, but the DM wasn't planning on putting any into the campaign, then what happens to the crafting table?
Also, this is a great thing to put on the players. They say, "we just killed a dracolich and strip it for parts, what can we make?" You reply, "what do you think you might be able to make?" Let them use their creativity. If they can justify it, and it doesn't break your world, let them go for it. Maybe they make something they hadn't thought of for any of their characters, but they'll still love having it. To my mind, that's actually the better use for crafting, is taking items you found and seeing what you can do with them. It turns the item into an organic part of the story. Rather than having macabre shopping lists of creature parts you need to harvest to make what you want. Then it's like, whoa, I never thought I'd have a cloak of the bat, but it's cool, because it's a trophy from that vampire we killed. Or you can have: I can now make that sun blade I've wanted since character creation, and I barely remember where I got the parts, because the end result was all I was really after.
Honestly, how would crafting be rebalanced in the first place? The only items worth crafting are magic items, and I'm not sure they want to bake in ease of accessibility to the crafting of magic items, given that's an area that the DM is supposed to be able to regulate at their discretion.
They'd have to renormalize the game to have assumed levels of itemization, at which point crafting just lets you achieve the expected power level.
100%. That's what people keep saying they want, so why hold out?
Still, they certainly could write optional rules that are still balanced and fun. Just because they'd work doesn't mean everyone would have to use them. Maybe they're even balanced for a higher power level than normal. Or a lower one, for the weirdos out there. Whatever. That would be an easy excuse for any DM who doesn't wanna use them, to not use them. The current crafting rules are not balanced because item rarity is not balanced, and they're not fun because they provide neither a satisfying mechanical puzzle nor a compelling story, choosing instead to split the difference ineffectively. This is a solvable problem, and a problem I very much expect to be addressed, if not solved, in the rules revision.
Honestly, how would crafting be rebalanced in the first place? The only items worth crafting are magic items, and I'm not sure they want to bake in ease of accessibility to the crafting of magic items, given that's an area that the DM is supposed to be able to regulate at their discretion.
They'd have to renormalize the game to have assumed levels of itemization, at which point crafting just lets you achieve the expected power level.
100%. That's what people keep saying they want, so why hold out?
Still, they certainly could write optional rules that are still balanced and fun. Just because they'd work doesn't mean everyone would have to use them. Maybe they're even balanced for a higher power level than normal. Or a lower one, for the weirdos out there. Whatever. That would be an easy excuse for any DM who doesn't wanna use them, to not use them. The current crafting rules are not balanced because item rarity is not balanced, and they're not fun because they provide neither a satisfying mechanical puzzle nor a compelling story, choosing instead to split the difference ineffectively. This is a solvable problem, and a problem I very much expect to be addressed, if not solved, in the rules revision.
Honestly, I don't. Crafting has always been an afterthought and an optional feature. I seriously doubt they're going to change their position on that, particularly not to the point that it instead becomes a near mandatory component DMs have to grapple with. The codified crafting system has been something to fill the hypothetical time between adventure arcs, not a component of adventures, and I doubt they're going to attempt to overhaul the core beats of a campaign in 1D&D.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
I'm not saying they aren't supposed to be purchased at all, but the DM has control over what is and isn't available; players can't always just make a shopping list and get everything on it. This is not a binary all or nothing, it's about where control of access lies.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
Even if a DM allows players to buy magic items, players don't just say "I wanna get a +3 sword" and then the DM checks a table and replies "500,000 gp." There has to be someone selling the items. The person selling the items is controlled by the DM. The magic items are still being issued by the DM. With crafting, there's theoretically no such middleman. If you have 500,000 gp (worth of stuff), you can craft a +3 sword. That's significantly different, because it means a DM who doesn't want you to have a +3 sword can't really do anything besides starving players or changing the rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
Even if a DM allows players to buy magic items, players don't just say "I wanna get a +3 sword" and then the DM checks a table and replies "500,000 gp." There has to be someone selling the items. The person selling the items is controlled by the DM. The magic items are still being issued by the DM. With crafting, there's theoretically no such middleman. If you have 500,000 gp (worth of stuff), you can craft a +3 sword. That's significantly different, because it means a DM who doesn't want you to have a +3 sword can't really do anything besides starving players or changing the rules.
that doesnt answer my question. Yes I know the DM still has final control on the price and availability in store, as for making it themselves jsut by using the meager rules for making a magic item as is, a player isnt going to be able to do it anyway.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
they made a choice back in the day: magic items or Features. They chose to power up the classes specifically so that less and fewer magic items would be in the game, and doubled down on that choice with attunement and then doubled down again when they rewrote all the magic items and got rid of over half of them.
Then they doubled down yet again and made not being able to make anything over uncommon a standard.
They are, by action, stating that they think the idea that magic items should be purchased is ridiculous. And that is not going to change.
also, I am curious: where is this wealth by level table? Because 17k gold is low as hell for my game, lol. Hell, rent in one of the Apses of Durango would suck up over half of that in one year. For a single!
That converts to a fairly low social class income for a year in my game — a bit above a farmer, well below a guildsman, not even close to a merchant (well, maybe a peddler). I confess I have a slightly more developed out economics system, but damn….
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
Crafting isn't crappy. The crafting system does its job -- which is to provide in-world explanation for magic items and add an excuse for fetch quests by PCs.
Honestly, how would crafting be rebalanced in the first place? The only items worth crafting are magic items, and I'm not sure they want to bake in ease of accessibility to the crafting of magic items, given that's an area that the DM is supposed to be able to regulate at their discretion.
They'd have to renormalize the game to have assumed levels of itemization, at which point crafting just lets you achieve the expected power level.
100%. That's what people keep saying they want, so why hold out?
Still, they certainly could write optional rules that are still balanced and fun. Just because they'd work doesn't mean everyone would have to use them. Maybe they're even balanced for a higher power level than normal. Or a lower one, for the weirdos out there. Whatever. That would be an easy excuse for any DM who doesn't wanna use them, to not use them. The current crafting rules are not balanced because item rarity is not balanced, and they're not fun because they provide neither a satisfying mechanical puzzle nor a compelling story, choosing instead to split the difference ineffectively. This is a solvable problem, and a problem I very much expect to be addressed, if not solved, in the rules revision.
Honestly, I don't. Crafting has always been an afterthought and an optional feature. I seriously doubt they're going to change their position on that, particularly not to the point that it instead becomes a near mandatory component DMs have to grapple with. The codified crafting system has been something to fill the hypothetical time between adventure arcs, not a component of adventures, and I doubt they're going to attempt to overhaul the core beats of a campaign in 1D&D.
I have to say I think they are going to at least dig into the core beats, and evidence is decidedly the Bastions, which do exactly that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
Even if a DM allows players to buy magic items, players don't just say "I wanna get a +3 sword" and then the DM checks a table and replies "500,000 gp." There has to be someone selling the items. The person selling the items is controlled by the DM. The magic items are still being issued by the DM. With crafting, there's theoretically no such middleman. If you have 500,000 gp (worth of stuff), you can craft a +3 sword. That's significantly different, because it means a DM who doesn't want you to have a +3 sword can't really do anything besides starving players or changing the rules.
that doesnt answer my question. Yes I know the DM still has final control on the price and availability in store, as for making it themselves jsut by using the meager rules for making a magic item as is, a player isnt going to be able to do it anyway.
What was the point of your question, then?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise?
To quote myself: The current crafting rules are not balanced because item rarity is not balanced, and they're not fun because they provide neither a satisfying mechanical puzzle nor a compelling story, choosing instead to split the difference ineffectively.
Thus: A "good" optional crafting rule would either be balanced or fun, I guess. Ideally both, both would be great, but maybe just one would still be good.
The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees.
That's a fine goal for some play groups, I'm sure.
Let me use a quick-and-dirty allegory. If I was looking for a vehicle to haul a lot of groceries home from the store in heavy rain and snow, you wouldn't offer me a motorcycle saying a motorcycle is fun, sporty, fuel-efficient and attractive to members of the opposite sex.
So when I come looking for a crafting system that meets the needs of the many, what I don't care about is the fact that the current crafting system does a really nice job of meeting the needs of a few. (Although I don't agree that it does. But that's not my point.)
Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
Indeed. But we are on the precipice of change. Hence the thread.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
they made a choice back in the day: magic items or Features. They chose to power up the classes specifically so that less and fewer magic items would be in the game, and doubled down on that choice with attunement and then doubled down again when they rewrote all the magic items and got rid of over half of them.
Then they doubled down yet again and made not being able to make anything over uncommon a standard.
They are, by action, stating that they think the idea that magic items should be purchased is ridiculous. And that is not going to change.
also, I am curious: where is this wealth by level table? Because 17k gold is low as hell for my game, lol. Hell, rent in one of the Apses of Durango would suck up over half of that in one year. For a single!
That converts to a fairly low social class income for a year in my game — a bit above a farmer, well below a guildsman, not even close to a merchant (well, maybe a peddler). I confess I have a slightly more developed out economics system, but damn….
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
Even if a DM allows players to buy magic items, players don't just say "I wanna get a +3 sword" and then the DM checks a table and replies "500,000 gp." There has to be someone selling the items. The person selling the items is controlled by the DM. The magic items are still being issued by the DM. With crafting, there's theoretically no such middleman. If you have 500,000 gp (worth of stuff), you can craft a +3 sword. That's significantly different, because it means a DM who doesn't want you to have a +3 sword can't really do anything besides starving players or changing the rules.
that doesnt answer my question. Yes I know the DM still has final control on the price and availability in store, as for making it themselves jsut by using the meager rules for making a magic item as is, a player isnt going to be able to do it anyway.
What was the point of your question, then?
the point of my question is why bother collecting all this gold as a reward for adventuring if you cant do anything with it.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
Even if a DM allows players to buy magic items, players don't just say "I wanna get a +3 sword" and then the DM checks a table and replies "500,000 gp." There has to be someone selling the items. The person selling the items is controlled by the DM. The magic items are still being issued by the DM. With crafting, there's theoretically no such middleman. If you have 500,000 gp (worth of stuff), you can craft a +3 sword. That's significantly different, because it means a DM who doesn't want you to have a +3 sword can't really do anything besides starving players or changing the rules.
that doesnt answer my question. Yes I know the DM still has final control on the price and availability in store, as for making it themselves jsut by using the meager rules for making a magic item as is, a player isnt going to be able to do it anyway.
What was the point of your question, then?
the point of my question is why bother collecting all this gold as a reward for adventuring if you cant do anything with it.
That was your question. I'm aware of that. My question about your question is: why did you ask it?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The exact items don't matter unless they're suddenly going to go in for "drop tables" on monsters, which seem unlikely. Requiring a component is just a plot device to justify the connected encounter.
An example would help the DM plan an appropriate and thematic encounter.
There's 16 pages of magic items when I filter for a DMG source, at 20 entries per page. Even accounting for redundant entries for items that have an alternative name and +X's, that's well over 200 entries. It seems very unlikely that they'll make multiple examples of components for what amounts to an optional rule.
The components are whatever you want them to be. At some point, a DM just needs to be able to think for themself. Maybe it's just regular off-the shelf iron, and then you magic it, and poof, its +1. It can be just that simple. Maybe its metal from an asteroid. Or it's carved from the bone of a dragon. Or from the wood of a branch freely given by a tree in the sacred grove. Or its metal made from the steel heart of an earth elemental. A pearl of power needs a pearl from an oyster that lives near a node that connects to the elemental plane of water. Or it's formed in the belly of a beholder who eats a rust monster. Or its the teeth of the sahguin queen. I came up with those examples as I was typing them. It's not hard. We've all read enough books and seen enough movies to just steal ideas.
But to codify it in the rules? Such ideas are almost impossible, because ingredient availability will always be campaign dependent. If you say you need the bones of a storm giant to make electrical items, what happens if there aren't storm giants in the campaign, or in the world? Then the recipes become pointless, or a DM has to re-arrange their world to accommodate them. If you need the essence of an elemental, but the DM wasn't planning on putting any into the campaign, then what happens to the crafting table?
Also, this is a great thing to put on the players. They say, "we just killed a dracolich and strip it for parts, what can we make?" You reply, "what do you think you might be able to make?" Let them use their creativity. If they can justify it, and it doesn't break your world, let them go for it. Maybe they make something they hadn't thought of for any of their characters, but they'll still love having it. To my mind, that's actually the better use for crafting, is taking items you found and seeing what you can do with them. It turns the item into an organic part of the story. Rather than having macabre shopping lists of creature parts you need to harvest to make what you want. Then it's like, whoa, I never thought I'd have a cloak of the bat, but it's cool, because it's a trophy from that vampire we killed. Or you can have: I can now make that sun blade I've wanted since character creation, and I barely remember where I got the parts, because the end result was all I was really after.
100%. That's what people keep saying they want, so why hold out?
Still, they certainly could write optional rules that are still balanced and fun. Just because they'd work doesn't mean everyone would have to use them. Maybe they're even balanced for a higher power level than normal. Or a lower one, for the weirdos out there. Whatever. That would be an easy excuse for any DM who doesn't wanna use them, to not use them. The current crafting rules are not balanced because item rarity is not balanced, and they're not fun because they provide neither a satisfying mechanical puzzle nor a compelling story, choosing instead to split the difference ineffectively. This is a solvable problem, and a problem I very much expect to be addressed, if not solved, in the rules revision.
Honestly, I don't. Crafting has always been an afterthought and an optional feature. I seriously doubt they're going to change their position on that, particularly not to the point that it instead becomes a near mandatory component DMs have to grapple with. The codified crafting system has been something to fill the hypothetical time between adventure arcs, not a component of adventures, and I doubt they're going to attempt to overhaul the core beats of a campaign in 1D&D.
I feel like you only read the second half of what I wrote, lol. In most games, "optional rule" doesn't mean "poorly designed rule that we still decided to include for some reason." Optional rules can be good. I think most people feel like the feats optional rule is good, although I'm not certain I agree. The using-Strength-for-Intimidation optional rule is pretty unequivocally good though. So why does crafting have to be crappy just because it's optional?
By what metric are you deeming an optional rule to be "good" or otherwise? The purpose of crafting is to provide an alternative source of magic items in-between active adventuring time; because you have the time, you can make a magic item at a fraction of the list price if your DM agrees. I would say that's a fair arrangement; it's not optimal for speccing your character out like this is Skyrim or an MMO, but that's rather the point. Magic items are rewards issued by the DM, not resources just waiting for you to accumulate enough gold and/or plot coupons to acquire on demand.
the whole idea that Magic Items are not supposed to be purchased is ridiculous. according to the wealth by level chart a 10th level character would start (and by default would have earned) 17,000g. what exactly is the point of having that much gold? what are the players going to spend it on except for magic items?
I'm not saying they aren't supposed to be purchased at all, but the DM has control over what is and isn't available; players can't always just make a shopping list and get everything on it. This is not a binary all or nothing, it's about where control of access lies.
Even if a DM allows players to buy magic items, players don't just say "I wanna get a +3 sword" and then the DM checks a table and replies "500,000 gp." There has to be someone selling the items. The person selling the items is controlled by the DM. The magic items are still being issued by the DM. With crafting, there's theoretically no such middleman. If you have 500,000 gp (worth of stuff), you can craft a +3 sword. That's significantly different, because it means a DM who doesn't want you to have a +3 sword can't really do anything besides starving players or changing the rules.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
that doesnt answer my question. Yes I know the DM still has final control on the price and availability in store, as for making it themselves jsut by using the meager rules for making a magic item as is, a player isnt going to be able to do it anyway.
they made a choice back in the day: magic items or Features. They chose to power up the classes specifically so that less and fewer magic items would be in the game, and doubled down on that choice with attunement and then doubled down again when they rewrote all the magic items and got rid of over half of them.
Then they doubled down yet again and made not being able to make anything over uncommon a standard.
They are, by action, stating that they think the idea that magic items should be purchased is ridiculous. And that is not going to change.
also, I am curious: where is this wealth by level table? Because 17k gold is low as hell for my game, lol. Hell, rent in one of the Apses of Durango would suck up over half of that in one year. For a single!
That converts to a fairly low social class income for a year in my game — a bit above a farmer, well below a guildsman, not even close to a merchant (well, maybe a peddler). I confess I have a slightly more developed out economics system, but damn….
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Crafting isn't crappy. The crafting system does its job -- which is to provide in-world explanation for magic items and add an excuse for fetch quests by PCs.
I have to say I think they are going to at least dig into the core beats, and evidence is decidedly the Bastions, which do exactly that.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
What was the point of your question, then?
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
To quote myself: The current crafting rules are not balanced because item rarity is not balanced, and they're not fun because they provide neither a satisfying mechanical puzzle nor a compelling story, choosing instead to split the difference ineffectively.
Thus: A "good" optional crafting rule would either be balanced or fun, I guess. Ideally both, both would be great, but maybe just one would still be good.
That's a fine goal for some play groups, I'm sure.
Let me use a quick-and-dirty allegory. If I was looking for a vehicle to haul a lot of groceries home from the store in heavy rain and snow, you wouldn't offer me a motorcycle saying a motorcycle is fun, sporty, fuel-efficient and attractive to members of the opposite sex.
So when I come looking for a crafting system that meets the needs of the many, what I don't care about is the fact that the current crafting system does a really nice job of meeting the needs of a few. (Although I don't agree that it does. But that's not my point.)
Indeed. But we are on the precipice of change. Hence the thread.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/dungeon-masters-only/79378-character-wealth-gold-by-level
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/creating-a-campaign#StartingatHigherLevel
As forbeing low? accroding to the DMs guide the average income for a skilled working is 6 gold per month
the point of my question is why bother collecting all this gold as a reward for adventuring if you cant do anything with it.
That was your question. I'm aware of that. My question about your question is: why did you ask it?
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)