This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Sacrificial Lamb

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 128
1
https://disrn.com/news/hasbro-pulls-trolls-doll-from-stores-after-uproar-over-button-in-private-area-that-makes-it-gasp-and-giggle

Quote
Hasbro pulls "Trolls" doll after uproar over button in "private area" that makes it "gasp and giggle"
 by Adam Ford ยท Aug 8th, 2020 10:56 am 72
Article Image
   
Last Updated Aug 9th, 2020 at 5:41 pm
Toy-maker Hasbro announced that it will pull a new "Trolls" doll from stores after an uproar and petition denouncing a button located in the doll's "private area" that makes it "gasp and giggle," drawing accusations that the toy grooms children for sexual abuse.


A video that went viral shows a mother explaining her outrage and demonstrating the button after her daughter received the doll for her birthday:


A petition demanding that the toy-maker pull the product from shelves reached nearly 400,000 signatures. The petition states:

Our society is conditioning our children to think pedophilia is ok. This Trolls World Tour doll named Poppy has a button on her private area under her skirt. When you push this button on the doll's private she gasps and giggles. This is not okay for a child's toy! This toy needs to be removed from our stores. What will this toy make our innocent, impressionable children think? That it's fun when someone touches your private area? That pedophilia and child molestation are ok? It's not ok! It's not fun! It's damaging and has long term affects on a child's mental/physical health! Sign this petition to get this toy removed from shelves and help #SaveTheChildren! Children are our future and WE are their voice!

After Hasbro announced that it would pull the toy, Jessica McManis, the woman who created the petition, responded on Twitter:


"I didn't expect my petition to blow up like this! I'm so happy it did! They recalled the doll today. There's no way someone at Hasbro didn't think that it was weird when deciding to create this doll like that."


Pictures and videos of the toy are at the link, along with the article.

Looking at this, the creation of this pedo toy had to be intentional. The troll doll is a child's toy, in which it has a button on its crotch area. When the button is pushed, the troll doll (which looks like a child) makes gasping sounds that could be perceived as sex noises or orgasms. This button is not listed on the box. It looks a lot like the men who control Hasbro are trying to normalize pedophilia. This is occurring in an era in which we hear many more horror stories about child abuse, human trafficking, child sacrifice, and underground pedophile rings.

Let's also remember that multiple high-level WoTC Magic the Gathering judges (Ross Prajzner, Sam Straus, Jason Long, David Park, Luke Flora...for example) have faced actual convictions on child pornography charges and criminal sexual abuse charges. The pedo epidemic amongst MtG judges is something that Jeremy Hambly (of the Quartering) unearthed a couple years ago, and neither WoTC nor Hasbro has ever really apologized for it (or corrected it).

Meanwhile, the Hasbro troll pedo doll is something I discovered right now, so I'm still trying to process the potential implications of what's happening with Hasbro. What other depravities lurk down the Hasbro rabbit hole?

2
Quote from: Omega;1112528
The book even TELLS you to adjust things to better suit your campaign. Of course the OP ignores that. soooo.

Village Idiot Application #ILOSTFREACKINGTRACK: The Series will probably be renewed for another season of pedantery and lies. Horray.


Good grief. Everyone here knows that "Rule Zero" applies to every single game ever created and played in the entirety of human history. Yes, you can change individual rules for your campaign. That suggestion is not revolutionary. I'll say this again to the "Rulingsz Not Rulesz" crowd, because this point needs to be hammered into the thick skulls of grognards everywhere:

"'Rule Zero' has no place in a discussion on how game mechanics actually work." :cool:

The only exception I'll make for this statement above, is if the rules and game mechanics of a game are modular enough to enable you to easily change entire subsections of the rules without wrecking the entire game. AD&D has that level of modularity, while 5e largely does not. Granted, you can change some things in 5e, but not nearly as much as you can with AD&D......at least not without the game system imploding.

Anyway, did you read the mathematical breakdown I made in my previous post? It was carefully detailed. Read it again, and consider the implications behind the math. Then try to apply that math to magical craftsman who don't even have the Persuasion skill or a high Charisma score, which would make those calculations appear even more depressing. The base system in the 5e DMG is objectively horrible.

Now I will admit that magic item craftsmen could greatly improve how quickly craftsmen find a potential buyer willing to pay them for their labor, if they get hold of a 14th-level Bard (due to the Bard's 'Expertise' and 'Peerless Skill" class abilities)......but 14th-level Bards don't grow on trees. The omnipresence of extremely high level Bards in every magical sale should never be considered the default expectation for the entire magic item industry. That's neither plausible nor practical. So the base system is dog shit, "Rule Zero" or not. Now here's a question. Can we change this subsystem without fucking up "Bounded Mediocrity"? I don't know. :cool:

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic
Since you're so thorough, sacrificial Lamb, I want to see your take on the XGE crafting rules since that's what's the up to date version anyway.


I could do that. I'll go through the entire Xanathar crafting system, step by step. It certainly is different from the system in the 5e DMG, and it'll take me a while to go through it. I'll start covering it in my next post. :)

3
Quote from: Naburimannu;1112321
Reality check: one of my employers hires the plurality of the world's PhDs in one particular subject, pays them extraordinarily well, and gives most of them scutwork. Despite this low-efficiency use of modern-day wizards, said employer makes many billions of dollars in profit every year.


Here's another reality check:

You're describing a situation that is the opposite of what is in the 5e DMG. Based upon the written game mechanics in the 5e DMG, six HIGH-LEVEL 11th-level Wizards working in concert to enchant A Frost Brand sword.....will be sitting together in a quiet room for 11 months, after which most customers will expect them to give their labor away FOR FREE.

In fact, in many cases.....you end up selling these items for LESS than what it cost to craft them.

But listen to me. I should make this scenario more favorable to the grogs in this discussion, because the higher your Charisma score is.......the greater the chance you have of making a small profit. So let's make them all 11th-level Sorcerers instead, with the Guild Artisan background, the Persuasion skill (+4 bonus) and 20 Charisma (+5 bonus). The 11th-level Sorcerer is more likely to make a profit than the 11th-level Wizard, so we'll do things this way instead.

Six 11th-level Sorcerers with the Persuasion skill and 20 Charisma selling a Frost Brand sword

d100 roll with average check ___ Buyer(s) lowball you with...
20 or lower __________________ 10% of base price
21-40 ______________________ 25% of base price (normal buyers)/50% of base price (for a "shady" buyer)
41-80 ______________________ 50% of base price (normal buyers)/100% of base price (for a "shady" buyer)
81-90 _______________________100% of base price
91-00________________________150% of base price (for a "shady" buyer)

So these six 11th-level Sorcerers have a 10% chance EACH (on average, assuming an average roll of 11 on d20) of finding a "shady" customer from the criminal underworld.......willing to pay them enough money for their Frost Brand sword to make a profit. To put this in layman's terms, 90% of their customers expect them to give their labor away for free. :rolleyes:

If it costs you 50,000 gp to craft an item, and 90% of your customers refuse to pay you more than 50,000 gp for it, then this means two things:

(1.) Your customers know what your creation costs are.
(2.) 90% of your customers refuse to pay you for your labor. :mad:

In fact, if we assume that half your customers from a dice roll of 21 to 80 are "shady" criminal underworld types, then the conclusion I'd come to would be that there'd be a roughly 60% chance of most customers demanding that you sell at a loss, a 30% chance that they'll pay you full price (which means you're actually giving your labor away for free), and a 10% chance of "shady" criminal underworld types offering to pay you 25,000 gp in profit.

But let's break this down a little more. For the sake of argument, let's assume that your Sorcerer enclave finds a total of 100 potential customers. Here's the breakdown:

* 20 customers offer you 10% of your creation costs/base price [you're selling at a 90% loss]
* 10 customers offer you 25% of your creation costs/base price [you're selling at a 75% loss]
* 30 customers offer you 50% of your creation costs/base price [you're selling at a 50% loss]
* 30 customers offer you 100% of your creation costs/base price [you're breaking even, giving your labor away for free]
* 10 customers offer you 150% of your creation costs/base price [you're making 50% profit]

But perhaps even this is not enough information, because we want to differentiate between ordinary customers and "shady" customers.....from the criminal underworld. Remember that this is for a "very rare" Frost Brand sword with a base price and creation cost of 50,000 gp. It cost you 50,000 gp to create this weapon. So we also break it down like this:

# Customers________Payment Offer___________________Customer Type
* 20________________5,000 gp (10% creation cost)____________Normal
* 10_______________12,500 gp (25% creation cost )____________Normal
* 20_______________25,000 gp (50% creation cost)_____________Normal
* 10_______________25,000 gp (50% creation cost)_____________"Shady"
* 20_______________50,000 gp (100% creation cost)_____________"Shady"
* 10_______________50,000 gp (100% creation cost)_____________Normal
* 10_______________75,000 gp (150% creation cost)_____________"Shady"


If you spent almost a year of blood, sweat, and tears working on a project.....you'd feel a little bit insulted by all this, right? :(

However, for the sake of argument.....let's assume that these Sorcerers rolled high, and found a "shady" customer from the criminal underworld who doesn't try to rob them, and who actually agrees to pay them a profit. :)

The base price for a Frost Brand sword is 50,000 gp, and half of that is 25,000 gp. So the 11th-level Sorcerers split this money six ways, and earn 4,166 gp each for almost a year's work. Now call me crazy, but I think it could be much more profitable to get money adventuring. These characters are not researching anything, or learning anything new. They're just building something, by applying research they already know. And somehow, you have to convince six different high-level characters to sit in a room together every day for almost a year......and offer them a pittance to do it, in comparison to the likely much greater money they could receive while adventuring. Meanwhile, 90% of their potential customers are insulting them by refusing to even pay them for their labor. Adventuring sounds much more lucrative than this, right?

Additionally, what you're really describing with the guys with the PhDs.....is the equivalent of a group of zero-level sages from AD&D being hired by a wealthy benefactor.....and agreeing to sit in the same building, in order to do research and some menial labor....while getting paid well to do it. That scenario simply does not apply here. Once you're a high-level spellcaster, you're not a low-level peon grunt that gets pissed on any more (allegedly). So your analogy completely falls apart. :cool:

4
Quote from: Omega;1112304
Nice try but you fail trolling as usual.
Apparently several noticed that and jabbed TSR for such a supposed flub. But was pointed out. Pelias is the exception. And is from one of the Conan books where he is a rarity there too. Scarlet Citadel I believe. The only other I can think of is Zelata. Though have not read the story she appears in. Just noted she got her own figure in the Conan Board game. Normal PCs can not be magic users normally in AD&D Conan.


It wasn't really a "flub". Spellcasters do exist in Conan's world, even if they aren't particularly common (or moral). You said "no non-NPC spellcasters", but there was an actual pregenerated player character spellcaster in that Conan adventure module.......and the spellcaster in question was even reasonably high-level. I know this, because I have that adventure module.

I can say that, because it's true.......and trolling isn't even necessary. :)

5
Quote from: HappyDaze;1112299
Since you've already written so much on this,  why not user your word count to present a better set of rules that still fits within the basics of 5e (i.e., that accepts the way proficiency bonus and skills work without altering them). Bitching is the easy part.


Bitching might be easy, but deconstructing the actual game mechanics is hard. Most people are unwilling or unable to really do this. Before I even think about creating new rules, I'm deconstructing and critiquing the game mechanics in the most ruthless way possible. I think that doing this is a good mental exercise, and personally......it helps me to more completely understand the nuances of the game.

But that wouldn't be a terrible idea. I just wonder what other issues of the crafting system that I might be missing in all this.

6
Quote from: Doom;1112283
Great, the crafting rules for PCs are rubbish and clearly are a subtle way of saying "PCs can't trivially craft whatever they want." Now, it's clear in the game that NPCs have different crafting rules (these items obviously exist in many modules, and were clearly not made by the players at your table).

Sooo...all we still have here is there's a page of rules you don't like in a game you don't play. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone who cares to have more crafting has houseruled it (I have)...what kind of fix do you propose, or is this really going to go on forever?


You seem slightly irritated there, chief. :cool:

What I like or dislike doesn't matter much, does it? Isn't this discussion about what makes sense in the 5e crafting rules, and what does not? If certain game mechanics are defective or nonsensical, then I don't see an issue with ruthlessly deconstructing and critiquing those game mechanics.

You're saying it's "clear" that NPCs in 5e use different crafting rules. Well, are those NPC crafting rules codified, in the form of actual game mechanics? You're being very carefully non-specific about that, which implies that separate NPC crafting rules don't truly exist.

Yes, I'm sure that magic items appear in the 5e adventure modules. However, I seriously doubt that the authors of these modules are asking themselves questions about how Leather Armor +2 (which takes five-and-a-half years to craft) or Leather Armor +3 (which takes 55 years to craft) are making an appearance in these products.

In other words, I'll bet you that very little logic is being used when placing magic items in these products.

Meanwhile, you're telling me to create a solution (in a not-so-subtle attempt to shut me up)......when multiple posters haven't even honestly acknowledged that any problems even exist within the 5e magic item crafting system at all.

The importance of this issue has a very profound effect upon the entire game, much more so than just a few mere pages of rules. The acquisition of loot and magical bling during a dungeon expedition is half the point of playing Dungeons & Dragons. If most of the magical bling would not logically even be crafted, then that creates a very weird situation....putting nearly half of the basic premise and motivation of the game into jeopardy. In AD&D, acquisition of coins and magical bling enabled you to acquire xp. In 3e, acquisition of coins and magical bling enabled you to craft or buy more magic items. 5e does neither of these things. :(

In 5e, only Potions of Healing are for sale, and most magic items cannot or will not be realistically crafted (due to insanely long time constraints, and also due to most customers refusal to pay magic craftsmen for their labor). Additionally, in 5e......you don't acquire xp from the acquisition of coins or magical bling either. Can you see how this all might be a slight issue? :cool:

When I bring up the fact that it takes 55 years to create Leather Armor +3 or Sovereign Glue, other posters start disingenuously making comparisons to the Pyramids of Egypt or Noah's Arc. See how dismissive responses like that might be a subtle barrier to discussing the actual game mechanics, or even as a barrier to discussing the DISINCENTIVES of using such game mechanics?

deadDMwalking said this:

Quote from: deadDMwalking
And you are wrong to do so. What is the intent of item crafting rules? Is it to give players the tools to make items? Or is it to tell them it's possible but actively discourage them from doing so.


Wouldn't it be more honest for the authors of 5e to just openly say that they don't want PCs crafting magic items, instead of passive-aggressively trying to manipulate players into not crafting anything at all? Right? Isn't full transparency better?

Meanwhile, the crafting system indirectly ties into bounded accuracy, or as I like to call it, "Bounded Mediocrity". Fixing the item crafting system really depends upon how tightly woven, "Bounded Mediocrity" is in the game. Will the RNG fall apart if PCs can reliably craft +3 Leather Armor or Swords +2? I'm not sure. "Bounded Mediocrity" is designed to greatly limit the PCs ability to affect their environment in any meaningful way. If I delve into solutions for this, then I might have to start delving into the issues with "Bounded Mediocrity" as well.....and I sense that you don't really want that. :)

If we just stick with the magic item crafting rules themselves, and entirely ignore the monstrously idiotic clusterfuck of the "bounded mediocrity" rules......then there would still have to be changes. Things like:

* reducing crafting times for magic items
* providing multiple formulas for crafting magic items
* creating a system where the default position is that magical craftsman can actually charge customers for their labor
* describing auction houses for magic items
* discussion of how magic bling fits into the economy
* create haggling rules (only applying these rules, when appropriate)
* describing (and codifying, via game mechanics) some of the types of customers you might receive
* describing and codifying game mechanics and rules for what magic item shops might look like

7
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1112275
I'll address this point. The way I interpreted that rule re: shady/ethical people is that it costs more to sell an item through official channels, just like in real life. You have to go through certain markets, pay certain fees, etc. Whereas if you just throw it on the black market, you skip all of the safety and regulations and get more profit, but open yourself up to danger. In fact I never thought of it another way until I read this, but I'm convinced that this is what the rules were going for.

I agree that it is unlikely a player will spend 55 years crafting such an item. But I don't think the rules are aimed at PCs in that case, but just something a kingdom of elves might do. Why would a bunch of wizards work together? Because their king ordered them. Etc. It's not something people do on a whim willy nilly, but rare, because magic items are rare.


I think that there are some orders that high-level Wizards would refuse to follow, king's orders or not. I'm having great difficulty imagining a scenario in which six high-level Wizards would willingly submit themselves to indentured servitude for almost a year, in order to create a weapon that is barely more combat efficient than a Sword +1.

I just don't see it. :(

8
Quote from: Omega;1112232
AD&D Conan. No non-NPC spellcasters. No non-human PCs and effectively none as NPCs. Low magic and no clerics. D&D pared down to the bones nearly. And works really well.
Whereas in TSR Conan PCs can eventually pick up magic. But magic near invariably has a price. Usually a loss of sanity, sometimes a permanent loss of health just to cast some spells.

Or in Dragon Storm which I designed a few cards for. The PCs start out usually as farmers and peasants totally unaware and unprepared for what is about to happen to them. You might luck out and get  an ex necro apprentice or hidden shaman. But even they are in the same boat. Just possibly actually aware of the true nature of the situation.

Pelias the Socerer was one of the pregenerated player characters in the "Conan Against Darkness!" AD&D adventure module. TSR statted him up as a multiclassed 10th-level Magic-User/6th-level Illusionist. :)

9
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1112258
And you are wrong to do so.  What is the intent of item crafting rules?  Is it to give players the tools to make items?  Or is it to tell them it's possible but actively discourage them from doing so.  The rules for PCs are not the rules for NPCs in 5th edition.  While that's objectionable, claiming that PC rules don't work for NPCs doesn't actually say anything people didn't already know.  

There is no handwavium required to say 'someone spent 55 years making an item, not because they wanted to make some money but because they had a vision that it would save their people'.  Like, Noah built an arc for similar reasons.  Nobody sits here and says 'but why build an arc if you can't sell it for a profit as if there couldn't be any other reason you might want an arc before a flood...


Oh? What are the separate rules for NPCs crafting magic items then? By your justification, I didn't see them in the book. We have rules for how many hit points a Giant Goat in 5e has. You think it's too much effort for WoTC to provide the rules for how NPCs create magic items? Is that really so hard?

By the way, we are discussing someone theoretically crafting a suit of Leather Armor +3....and not someone creating a gigantic arc that saves the lives all living creatures that walk the Earth. I talk about suits of Leather Armor +3, or Potions of Storm Giant Strength, or Sovereign Glue. Don't you think it's a little disingenuous to compare these items to the Pyramids of Egypt or Noah's Arc (which enables the survival of all life on Earth)?

They're not artifacts, remember? :)

Do you also remember when I said that "handwavium" has no place in a discussion of how game mechanics actually work? By saying this, you indirectly acknowledge that I am correct.

10
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1112173
Honestly, you've made so many mistakes it's becoming clear you don't really know what you're talking about. Why are you pouring so much time and effort into a game you don't even play? You just randomly decided to theorycraft about a design decision you don't like, is that it? Oh well.

I have to give credit for just admitting you're wrong though. "I don't like the design" is pretty much the truth of the matter.


Quote from: S'mon
He's not had much sleep for a long time. :( Guess this is his way of coping.


Admittedly, yes....I am very tired and sleep-deprived, so I made some mistakes. However, I'm discussing 5e, because it looks like nobody truly critiques this stuff. Every edition of D&D has received ruthless examination and critique, except this one. So I'm trying to deconstruct the system, to see what's right or what's wrong......and take things to their logical conclusions.

And despite my mistakes, I'm still right about the main issues of the crafting system. Posters on this thread could only poke holes on points that weren't even integral to my central arguments. If most buyers refuse to pay you for your labor, then that creates a DISINCENTIVE for crafting magic items. If the only people who might be willing to pay you a little bit for your labor are all "shady" criminal underworld types, then these game mechanics demonstrate a situation that is the opposite of human nature. Ethical people are more likely to pay you for your labor. Unethical "shady" criminal underworld people are less likely to pay you for your labor.  Additionally, there is no incentive for six 11th-level Wizards to spend 8 hours a day in a room, every day.....for 11 months, just to craft a Frost Brand sword that is barely any more combat efficient than a Sword +1. :cool:

A brass Horn of Valhalla is objectively better than a silver Horn of Valhalla, but these two items are the exact same price.

Using the rules as written, nobody will spend 55 years crafting Leather Armor +3, a Potion of Storm Giant Strength, or Sovereign Glue. And you will never convince dozens of 17th-level Wizards to work on these items simultaneously, in order to bring the crafting times down. If WoTC truly wanted to make these magic items into artifacts.....then they could have done that. But they didn't. These are not truly powerful or awe-inspiring magic items, and the system for crafting them creates a situation where most of the stuff in the DMG wouldn't even be crafted in the first place.

ABSOLUTELY NOBODY here has had a legitimate response to these issues. That's the truth. People here are getting butthurt when I bring this up, especially when I start talking about "incentive". I mean, I don't see anyone here talking about how they crafted a "very rare" or "legendary" magic item in their campaigns, using the rules as written. That tells me a lot. That tells me that posters here are defending a system that they don't even really use. And I sense the reason why they don't use it, is because the game mechanics create a DISINCENTIVE for them to use the rules as written.

Articulating this seems to really irritate the "rulings not rules" crowd. There's nothing wrong with admitting that the system is defective. Gygax will not come back from the dead, and slap you guys to death for heresy.

Quote from: deadDMwalking
No you don't. Ranting about a game that you don't even play without either understanding how it works or trying to build a better system for your own gaming is a waste of your time that you could be doing better things with. I don't play 5e and I don't like 5e. But it doesn't give me a rage-inducing brain aneurysm to think that others might play and might enjoy it. To then focus specifically on item crafting which is well-outside of the experience of most groups is really insane. Even if the creation of magical items were completely retarded, the rules do have a way of placing magic items as treasure that actually works.

Your argument is a little bit like saying bees can't fly - even if you were right that they SHOULDN'T be able to, they DO. If magic items SHOULDN'T be created, but they EXIST in the setting it implies that there is something you're missing, not that it is impossible. The 5th edition ruleset isn't complete (which is its own problem) but if they provide new rules on 'magical materials' that remove the GP cost of magical items, would you suddenly reverse course and feel that the Magic Item Creation rules are actually good?


Did you notice that you're not really addressing my points? Are my central points correct, or are they wrong? If so, why are they correct? Why are they wrong?

We are here to discuss tabletop roleplaying games, aren't we?

Whatever my current issues might be, I am still capable of being mostly fair. If someone corrects me, I'll admit my mistakes....as I have done so in this thread. So let's address all my mistakes in this thread. Issues that I forgot or missed:

(1.) Consumables are half price (however, this errata'd rule was not in my book)
(2.) PC makes a Charisma (Persuasion) check, and adds that total to the roll on the "Selling A Magic Item" table
(3.) Ability Score Improvement (ability scores can improve by 2 points at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 19th-level; because bounded accuracy is so unforgiving, it's implied that PCs will have an ability score of 20 in their primary stat by 8th or 12th-level)
(4.) Humans have +1 to all ability scores
(5.) One advantage can cancel all forms of disadvantage, and vice versa (this argument was in a different thread though)

I noticed the backgrounds, but didn't bring them up.....because it's unlikely that most spellcasters will automatically have the Guild Artisan or Noble background, when there are 13 different backgrounds in the DMG to choose from.

So now that I have articulated all my mistakes, how or why does this affect my central points? Are you now going to have your 17th-level Wizard spend the next 55 years crafting Leather Armor +3? Or will he somehow convince four other 17th-level Wizards to help him spend every day of his life crafting a suit of Leather Armor +3 over the next 11 years? The answer is....

....definitely not. :cool:

If the answer is "definitely not", then how do these "legendary" items ever get made......when there is no INCENTIVE to spend 55 years of life crafting this stuff?

Nobody here has a legitimate answer for this, and I just see people turning their brains off and engaging in "handwavium" instead. When people here do that, I see it as an indirect admission that the game mechanics are defective.

11
Quote from: moonsweeper;1112107
Uh...your math and rules are wrong.
The stat bumps you get at every 4th level are +2 per bump not +1.
By using both increases for CHA and point buy for a starting CHA 15, all of those casters will have a 19 by 8th level except the human and half-elf who will have a 20.

Sigh. :(

Yes, you are correct. Thank you. I am embarrassed.

But this is all still very weird. 5e has a system of Bounded Accuracy, but everyone is assumed to have the human maximum ability score of 20 in their main ability score. That's just so.....idiotic. Why even have bounded accuracy in the first place, and then create a system where everyone almost inevitably has a 20 Strength or 20 Charisma (or whatever) by either 8th-level or 12th-level? So this means that your ability scores are one of the most important aspects of play.

I don't like that design decision.

However, my item crafting calculations are still correct. I'm still right about the crafting system....which is the point of this thread.

Edit: My apologies to you, rawma, for giving you grief about the ability scores. I was wrong about that section.

12
Quote from: rawma;1112026
Hardly. Your numerous errors clearly reveal someone who has not actually played 5e much.

* The belief that it would be surprising for an 11th level sorcerer to have a 20 Charisma (or, more generally, that a primary caster would be unlikely to increase their casting ability)?


Again with this bullshit? I'll bet you that at least half the 5e groups out there use point buy. When you use POINT BUY, then your Sorcerer can start off with a base Charisma of 15. If he's Human (+1 Charisma), then that Charisma will be 16. If he's a Half-Elf (+2 Charisma), then it could be 17. But there's no guarantee that the Sorcerer will automatically be a race with a Charisma bonus. For the record, I wasn't treating the Drow as an "Elf"....even though they are technically Elves. They're an evil race of spider-worshipping megalomaniacs, so I wasn't treating them as part of the "Elf" entry...even though they technically are. In most cases, the magical merchants you meet will not be Drow. In other words, I don't consider Drow relevant to the discussion. :cool:

Anyway, the character can then get a bonus to an ability score at 4th-level and 8th-level.....improving his Charisma by +2. So if we use point buy as a way to determine a character's stats, then this is the likely Charisma score for an 11th-level Sorcerer.

* 11th-level Stout Halfling Sorcerer (17 Charisma)
* 11th-level Wood Elf Sorcerer (17 Charisma)
* 11th-level Hill Dwarf Sorcerer (17 Charisma)
* 11th-level Human Sorcerer (18 Charisma)
* 11th-level Half-Elf Sorcerer (19 Charisma)

See? There's lots of 11th-level Sorcerers with "only" a 17 Charisma (via point buy). :D

And even if you roll your ability scores, there is no guarantee that your stats will be any higher than they would be under point buy. I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS. That means that there's no automatic expectation of an 11th-Sorcerer having a 20 Charisma. This is just pure logic.

You were nitpicking over the dumbest shit, that had nothing to do with the central argument. I mean, really. And let's be honest here. If you always assume that the Sorcerer will have maximum human Charisma (Charisma 20), then you are unintentionally making the point that you don't feel fully comfortable with Bounded Accuracy either in concept or in play.....even if you'd like to believe otherwise.

Quote from: rawma
* Not noticing backgrounds as a source of skill proficiency?


I'm aware of the BORING backgrounds. Did you notice that two out of my three original examples had merchants with the Charisma (Persuasion) skill? Of course you noticed it. I didn't bring up the Backgrounds, because not every guy who crafts and sells a magic item will automatically have the "Guild Artisan" or "Noble" background. I don't consider that to be a realistic assumption. After all, there are 13 different backgrounds in the Player's Handbook. :cool:



Quote from: rawma
* That only a human character could start with a 16 Charisma, in apparent ignorance of other (even higher) racial bonuses to Charisma?


Not everyone rolls their ability scores. That's not a reasonable assumption on your part in "current year". And even if you do roll your stats, there is no guarantee of higher ability scores than what you'd receive with point buy. After all, the whole point of "rolling randomly" is that you don't know what you'll get. :)

Quote from: rawma
* Your ignorance of how advantage/disadvantage combines (in the thread on 5e flaws)?
[/LIST]


Good grief. Are you still butthurt about my statement in the other thread? Namely this:

https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41219-What-are-the-big-problems-in-5E/page28

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb
(14.) Advantage/disadvantage sucks. This system is binary. You either have (dis)advantage or you don't. Once your opponents fire arrows at you from [a.] multiple directions, [b.] from higher ground, and [c.] from behind cover.....there's virtually nothing you can do to negate that, because even if you hide behind a log (for cover).....you are only negating one form of advantage, therefore, your opponents will still have advantage. Would it have killed WoTC to create some sensible LAYERS to the advantage/disadvantage mechanic? This is annoying, stupid, and lazy game writing. And I'm tired of non-luck-based characters constantly engaging in rerolls. To Hell with that.


Ok, you've got me on that one. :o You are right. I was wrong about the combination of advantage/disadvantage. I haven't played 5e in years, so I did forget this issue on the other thread. Granted, this issue you raise was in an entirely different thread, but I'll still eat crow on that issue. Congratulations on your (tiny) victory. However.....

.....somehow, that's even worse. One form of advantage nullifying all forms of disadvantage? One form of disadvantage nullifying all other forms of advantage? I was still right when I said the system is binary. You either have advantage, or you don't. You either have disadvantage, or you don't. There are still no meaningful layers to this game mechanic. There are no lesser/intermediate/greater forms of (dis)advantage. No nuance. So I was definitely on point about that.

Quote from: rawma
These are familiar to anyone who has played the game. You have torn through the rule books looking desperately for your "I Win!" button, equipping your character with limitless wealth and optimized magic items, and are furious that you could not find it; that doesn't translate into a broken game.

As S'mon said, 5e plays better in practice than it reads; you should try it.


I still win, because I stopped playing 5e years ago.....since this game is objectively horrible. The crafting system is still an unholy abomination, where most buyers expect you to give away your labor FOR FREE. Please don't defend that shit, because it's just indefensible.

Quote from: rawma

[/HR]
I will revise my choice of optimal front man for a magic item manufacturing business. Bard, College of Lore, 14th level, 20 Charisma due to two ability score increases from a point buy 16 (with a race that gets a charisma bonus), 19 Intelligence from the Headband of Intellect (a trivial startup cost for a magic item manufacturer), proficiency (and perhaps expertise) in Investigation and expertise in Persuasion. With Bardic Inspiration on ability checks, the bard can very often make a DC20 Investigation check (even without expertise or help to get advantage); averaging 31 on persuasion checks and so finding the shady buyer at 150% of cost with a 21% chance each search - averaging a little under 5 searches (d10 days each).

The DM retains the potential adventuring hook of shadiness of the buyer, and consequences of ignoring events in the world to spend a lot of time crafting magic items, but I expect that a risk-free highly profitable business is not of interest to anyone except Sacrificial Lamb.


So now you're assuming that every single magical merchant has an EXTREMELY HIGH-LEVEL BARD on his payroll? Is that right? By the way, a 14th-level character is a very high-level character. So you're telling us that most magical merchants have high-level Bards doing their bidding? Really? And we now also have to assume that all magical merchants are also wearing a Headband of Intellect? Seriously?

What you propose is NOT REALISTIC OR PRACTICAL for most magical craftsman. :rolleyes:

You know this.

Never mind that it stills takes months, years, or decades to craft most magical bling.....and that you will NEVER be able to convince half-a-dozen high-level Wizards to magically wank in a room for 8 hours a day, for almost a full year.....just so they can craft a shitty Frost Brand sword that is barely more efficient than a Sword +1. :rolleyes:

See how you keep adding shit that is mostly peripheral to the discussion, in order to (futilely) make the base system work, when it obviously doesn't work? I see it. We were discussing what happens when most 11th-level characters craft a Frost Brand sword, remember? And you should also remember that only "shady" buyers (who might rob you) will even think of paying you (something) for your labor......which is completely ass-backwards. It is ethical people that are the ones who should want to pay you for your labor, not potential criminals.

When I do an evaluation of the magic item crafting system, I ask myself.....how much bullshit will most craftsmen (of any level) have to endure in order to craft something....and how much bullshit will most craftsmen have to endure, in order to sell what they crafted? It's a legitimate question, because if the game mechanics create a situation that the PCs will not want to interact with, then it's a safe bet that NPCs will not want to interact with these game mechanics either.

In other words, there is still no incentive for most of these magic items in the 5e DMG to be crafted. :cool:

13
Quote from: S'mon;1111926
Here's a revised version I came up with in about 15 minutes, with costs & times I like better.

Magic Item Crafting
Rarity Minimum Level Time Cost
Common     4           2 days       200gp
Uncommon 8           7 days    1,000gp
Rare             12      31 days    5,000gp
Very Rare    16      92 days   25,000gp
Legendary   20   366 days  125,000gp

I didn't address making commissioned works as a business; as discussed above that is best done using the business rules.

Those crafting times that you just posted aren't perfect, but they're admittedly better than what's in the 5e DMG, which is part of my point. It probably took you only 10 minutes to come up with that, and yet you just created something better than what WoTC published in their own book. It's crazy.

I would still want there to be a potential financial incentive for crafting and selling magic items though. That's kind of a sticking point for me. People should be paid for their labor, and the system used in the 5e DMG has most buyers refusing to pay you for your labor at all.

14
Quote from: SHARK;1111877
Greetings!

acrificial Lamb, hold on there a moment. I think more than a few members have agreed with most of your basic premise that the 5E crafting rules and magic item system is not perfect, and in fact is very basic and leaves much to be desired. At the same time, many have also maintained that *Rulingz, not Rulesz" as you say is the best solution. I have said that myself. If there are shitty rules, broken, fucked up sub-systems, or whatever details that you don't like, the DM has the authority and duty to change whatever they like.

I also am not impressed with the 5E Crafting and Magic Economy system, and yes, I have changed them to better suit my campaign. Many members here have done the same, some of which for the same reasons that you decribe and critique the 5E crafting and magic economy system.

Rulingsz Not Rulesz! is a crucial concept for any and all DM's to embrace. 5E is not a perfect system, and even back in the day with AD&D, we changed and modified the official game system nine ways to Sunday. 5E nowadays is no different.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


I'm fine with people changing game rules, if they wish to do so. No objection there. In fact, it is sometimes even necessary to change rules to fit our individual campaigns.....but I believe that the grognards still care about game rules more than they let on. If they didn't care about the rules, then they wouldn't favor one rules set over another. Granted, I'm being a little obnoxious about this, but I hate it when the grogs defend rules that are poorly written and make no logical sense.....and then defend these crappy rules with...."Rulingsz Not Rulesz!"

That just drives me nuts. :cool:

That mantra is not a legitimate justification for poorly written game mechanics. That's why I created the 5e crafting thread. I did that to break down the 5e crafting system, examine it, tear it to pieces, and then take it to its logical conclusions. Admittedly, I missed a couple details in that thread.....but I think that my overall points were solid.

15
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1111836
Then why the ever-loving fuck should I give any TTRPG company money.

Or is Crom too fucking stupid to understand economics?

That's my point as well. If they reject rules, why buy new product? If people here want to play a LARP, then they should go for it. But the "rulingz not rulez" crowd here don't seem to love 3e. And my response is:

"Why not, bitches?! Rulings not rules, right?" :rolleyes:

In other words, this group secretly cares about the rules for rpgs quite a bit, but they have trouble admitting it. They're more likely to change shit for their campaigns, and they're more prone to authoritarianism and dick-waving in their DMing style.....but they still do secretly care about the rules. In any case, my 5e crafting thread cured me of ever using the word, "rules" again....in regard to tabletop rpgs. If I have to read another "RULINGSZ NOT RULESZ!!!!11" sperg-out, I'll melt.

So now I'll just use the term, "game mechanics", to prevent that sperg-out from ever happening again. :cool:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 128