NWN2: Crafting

[ç i p h é r]

The thing that's always going to exist about magical crafting is how easily it can be exploited. For all intents and purposes, crafting is creating wealth out of nowhere. It doesn't come with associated experience, in fact it involves taking experience away, so it has the capacity to be a real eyesore on any attempt to keep things within bounds - at least with players who are "me-first" or rules lawyerish in bent.

Considering the gold, time, and XP costs, and considering the underlying requirement for a masterwork item (which consumes gold and materials but comes with no creation guarantee), I think the risks of removing wealth out of the game are higher than introducing them into it. If you're spending currency AND experience to receive an item of equal value up front, where is the exploit?

Basically, magical crafting is a bootstrapping methodology. And simply based on NPC tables or NPC lists, there has to be an implicit assumption that because someone "can" make something doesn't mean they do.

The limitations are already imposed with the costs required to create magic, which are not insignificant. We can always increase the cost requirements, but let's not compare the D&D crafting rules with the experiences we may have had with systems like ATS or CNR. They are not the same. There are virtually no costs in those systems (other than time and energy) out of the box, and thus the very real questions of "can I afford to create this?" or "should I create this?" are notably absent.

Perhaps to further safeguard against misuse, we can allow DMs to "unlock" or "lock"' crafting skills if someone is merely crafting goods with the intention of flooding the economy with items. Although, it's probably just easier to zero out their skill ranks or ban such individuals. Having been on numerous servers with crafting systems, I guess I'm just not that nervous about it. With careful thought on the placement and availability of resources, crafting won't/can't be abused and the challenges involved will make for a good time for many.

I think Amar and the group have done a great job so far of trying to toe that line so far. I think they were very responsive to my points/critcism awhile ago, and at the very least, I think they deserve to have their proposal given a trial run through ALFA1 to try to learn some lessons for NWN2's campaign.

Perhaps the way to go is that through NWN1 require all magical crafting to be documented - things like Start Date, End Date, adventuring in between, quest details. Maybe we could get a sense of how individual crafters evolve/play along, and what trouble DMs have in making their decisions. I don't think we're going to get a heck of a lot more out of armchair quarterbacking Crafting - I think we need to make it happen and learn the lessons real-time.

I completely agree. Let's build it and evaluate how it works taking as many safeguards as we can foresee. Let's use NWN1 to our advantage with the expectation that we'll have learned the valuable lessons for a clean start in NWN2.

[ç i p h é r]

abilities higher than +6, they would simply not be craftable in ALFA. ALFA is not an epic campaign and epic items will never be craftable. Items higher than +6 should be issued with utmost caution.

That's fine, but we may as well think it through in the proposal even if we want to cap it IG. If we want these to be DM controlled, the guidelines would help standardize the costs and limits.

[AlmightyTDawg]

Considering the gold, time, and XP costs, and considering the underlying requirement for a masterwork item (which consumes gold and materials but comes with no creation guarantee), I think the risks of removing wealth out of the game are higher than introducing them into it. If you're spending currency AND experience to receive an item of equal value up front, where is the exploit?

At present, the majority of mundane "masterwork" items are likely acquired from other sources. That might be a bit of a throttling agent with regard to weapons and armor, but those are more accessible via static merchants - for Wondrous Items it tends to be presumed.

The limitations are already imposed with the costs required to create magic, which are not insignificant. We can always increase the cost requirements, but let's not compare the D&D crafting rules with the experiences we may have had with systems like ATS or CNR. They are not the same. There are virtually no costs in those systems (other than time and energy) out of the box, and thus the very real questions of "can I afford to create this?" or "should I create this?" are notably absent.

Trust me, I don't even consider the built crafting systems - I compare all things to canon as the hallmark of a tried/tested system. Basically in canon, crafting cost is ~50% (materials and some things excluded) retail cost. So from the analysis of someone gauging your wealth level, one month ago you had 1000gp and a masterwork sword. Today you have a +1 sword. You just "gained" 1000gp.

Even if you take away the financial incentive (which would take away a large appeal of crafting, since no one does anything for free), there remains the side question of how much fine-tuned control you want to give folks over individual numbers in item creation.

In either case, you want it at least monitored as a behavior that is more conducive to issues. Heck, in the proposed wealth standards, I'll practically wear a two-piece and break out the pom-poms to get DMs to give out more items; I always thought roughly a 2:1 award:commission ratio was good to have control over min-maxing possibilities while giving players some freedom to direct their build.

In the FAQ of the Standards, you get my basic take. I figure it's something you trust players with until they prove themselves rules lawyers, and then give those in control some teeth to deal with that mentality. The worry that you're still going to get is how some DMs might "shield" favored players given such enforcement capability and responsibility. No real answer to it, I'd just rather see the problem in practice rather than on paper.

[MorbidKate]

Whatever is done with crafting it must be able to function with the minimum of DM supervision. Like trying to cap wealth, if you create more paperwork for the DM you only create certainty that it won't be followed or used universally but only rarely and selectively which is what you don't want in control systems.

If great time and effort is going to be spent creating a crafting system it must be useful to players. If they don't bother with it because it's over-regulated or too much of a hassle for all involved then it's a tremendous waste of resources and energy that could be better used elsewhere.

All the "Trader" players I've seen on ALFA rarely ever actually sold their stuff to players because it was easier for most players to find better stuff on their own through spawns, merchants and DM drops.

Whatever you choose to do, keep it simple and balanced. The xp hit alone will be a major factor in keeping players from flooding the market with items that most players wouldn't bother to pay for anyway. Unless of course spawns and merchants no longer sold items that would make most player crafted (MW for example) items a waste of time... and xp.

Kate

[ç i p h é r]

So, how do we advance this along? The sooner we have something to play with, the sooner we have data to evaluate.

[Amar]

we bring up another proposal to the HDMs. cipher, if youd like to help out more, PM fluff about joining the CTC (Crafting, Trade, and Caravans) team.

[ç i p h é r]

PM sent.

[Brokenbone]

<snip>
You need a system where a PC must give something up if they want to get really good at it. I've no issue with a Ftr that can make a sword, or repair a wagon wheel. When that same fighter splits his attention between melee and crafting, yet excells at both, we have an issue.

<snip>.

I would submit the above is a great thing to consider.

If you want to have someone who is a kick ass crafter, that should reasonably make them pretty much excel in that, and only that, endeavour. Perhaps they've blown a ton of skill points, they've taken a skill focus feat or two, and they've sunk a ton of gold into things like anvils, tools, assistance of professional NPCs, whatever. However, this may mean that, no, they haven't got a very "handy" adventurer type... skimped on healing ranks, or discipline, or listen, or whatever. Haven't got familiarity with a whole lot of weapons, etc. etc.

Anyhow, I'm ambivalent about crafting altogether, for some reason I'm imagining the focus is on MW or magical crafting, I'm having trouble picturing someone go through hours and hours of RP to end up with "Darts (50)" or other cheap gear, unless it's on a road to eventually being able to craft more pricey stuff.

Heh, it'd be an interesting part of any MW-permitted DMs offline system to prove that you've made "50 regular" longswords before you try your hand at masterworks. Number is picked out of the air, but you get my meaning... perhaps showing you've grasped the fundamentals of longsword forging would be required before being permitted to make a MW. At the most generous, you might get recognized as a "Master Weaponsmith", where you could also make a masterwork axe, despite never having forged one before. At the more controlled level, maybe one would just be a "Master Swordsmith", able to make any MW sword, but needing more training to do anything that isn't long and sharp. At a yet more controlled level, "Master Smith of Longswords", where you're not going to be able to make a MW shortsword until you get 50 (or 10, or whatever) of those done and a DM thumbs up to your increased capabilities.

In any case, crafting looks kind of fun. I saw Vendrin's posts in the NU forum about wizard and cleric crafting (DM controlled, naturally), and despite not playing a drow, a wizard, or a cleric, I'm excited for players who will get into that. Sure, the formulae there mean even a potion of CLW will potentially cost a mint to make but it's still cool.

[fluffmonster]

So, how do we advance this along? The sooner we have something to play with, the sooner we have data to evaluate.

um...right now, there's no way to get decent data, and not much time to form even a significant or accurate impression. There are real limits to what can be achieved rolling something out to get "experience" with it. The learning curve we'll climb up by getting some experience with such a system is a technical one, not a game balance one. The point: there's no rush.

[dergon darkhelm]

I can think of two general issues to be addressed with crafting : Realism and Balance.

From the balance side of things one must look at how a crafting system would alter the game world. The big three of imbalance: Money/Power/Experience

Money:

A crafting system should not be able to generate large amounts of coin particularly when compared to say, adventuring). However, marginal income generarted through the effort of crafting probaby wouldn't be hugely harmful. A system that allowed a craftsman to get a 5-10% return on base materials investments might not cause much of a problem.

Experience:

Experience from crafting would have to be dramatically limited, if given at all.

Power:

Crafting would likely only signifcantly affect PC power if magic items were craftable or if huge revenues were possible through crafting. I would leave magic item crafting in the hands of DMs. (PCs can RP it, but the DM keeps control)

Now for realism. The big three thing that would contribute to a realistic crafting system: Skill, effort, equipment.

Skill:

PCs need to be skilled at crafting in order to achieve success. ALFA could easily add the crafting skills (with any varying degree of specialization) to the skill tables. A DC should be made for success and characters can increase in skill over time. The "expert" class migh even be considered for those real enamored with crafting, in which skill points for craftin are class skills and everything else isn't.

Effort:

Mostly this is time. Some system to simulate the passage of time for each item made would need to implemented in order to keep someone from making 30 short swords in 3 minutes of leftclicking. Perhaps a crafting tool specially made item that allows a certain number of uses per day that is needed in order to make something. That would then necessitate PC rest to make numerous items.

Equipment:

Both base materials (that have some cost) and appropriate crafting tools should be necessary.




All those things come into place and crafting could work without becoming a stick in the spokes of ALFA.

[ç i p h é r]

So, how do we advance this along? The sooner we have something to play with, the sooner we have data to evaluate.

um...right now, there's no way to get decent data, and not much time to form even a significant or accurate impression. There are real limits to what can be achieved rolling something out to get "experience" with it. The learning curve we'll climb up by getting some experience with such a system is a technical one, not a game balance one. The point: there's no rush.

Wouldn't you consider wealth a game balance issue? What's really at stake is determining how much wealth "creation" we're actually putting in the hands of players and what will actually materialize as a result. We'd also be sorting out game play issues, like how much time is enough time to spend crafting in a real time environment. We can approach this fairly risk free in NWN1 and dispense with the extraneous "armchair quarterbacking" that's gotten in the way of an implementation knowing that any mistakes we make or abuses we witness are going to get wiped come NWN2, but that will serve as the basis for a final version we roll out. So, in that sense, we do only have so much time to fiddle and tweak to get the empirical data we need to analyze.

The alternative would be to use NWN2 as our proving grounds, and with a whole new world at stake, I think we'll likely get bogged down in the usual nitpicking over concerns about exploits/overpowered/underpowered/playability/etc.

I think technical feasibility is the lesser challenge here. That part, at least, isn't rocket science. There's little, or no, ambiguity there.

But, that's just me.

[AlmightyTDawg]

Right now Cipher, I would suspect first on his priority list is implementing the new wealth standards. That involves an ACR update, some associated rules changes, and training the entire DM base. The training itself shouldn't be terribly difficult, but I think there's a worry about information overload.

I'm personally all for working out the kinks of things in the waning days of NWN1, but I think like everything else it's picking your fights and prioritizing. Crafting in a general sense is a somewhat specialized concept, and most DMs and players know who's around to talk to for a decent ad-hoc canon way of going about things.

[ç i p h é r]

Money:

A crafting system should not be able to generate large amounts of coin particularly when compared to say, adventuring). However, marginal income generarted through the effort of crafting probaby wouldn't be hugely harmful. A system that allowed a craftsman to get a 5-10% return on base materials investments might not cause much of a problem.

VERY interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way but it's a valid point. Our wealth standards for adventuring will really serve as a benchmark we shouldn't exceed in the BEST case crafting scenario. More often than not, wealth gained from crafting ought to be somewhat lower, though by what percentage is another matter. We have to also consider that these will be PCs crafting so you don't want to wittle down the carrot too far. So yes, this is a big balance issue.

Experience:

Experience from crafting would have to be dramatically limited, if given at all.

The rules don't mention experience earned with crafting, so there wouldn't appear to be any concern. But what this means then is that you have to advance in SOME class to gain skill points. A rather awkward situation. Would it be possible to open up the "commoner" class to tradesman, I wonder? Or perhaps a tradesman PrC with its own skill point multiplier and class skills. Otherwise, you'd still need to do your share of adventuring to gain the skill points you need to add to your crafting ranks. Again, rather awkward because it's not all that logical and you'll see players picking classes based on skill point multipliers rather than what's appropriate (can you picture a rogue serving as a weaponsmith or armorsmith? ).

PCs need to be skilled at crafting in order to achieve success. ALFA could easily add the crafting skills (with any varying degree of specialization) to the skill tables. A DC should be made for success and characters can increase in skill over time. The "expert" class migh even be considered for those real enamored with crafting, in which skill points for craftin are class skills and everything else isn't.

Ah but that's not how the skill system works, and there's a good reason. Under this scenario, anyone could advance their crafting skills without compromising their adventuring class (there would be no tradeoff to consider like, does one put skills into discipline or should those points instead go into crafting?). So, in effect, you're creating skill ranks in a skill through non-conventional means and that's not desirable. FWIW, that's how non 3E based crafting systems work (ATS, CNR, etc). They have there own skill tables independent of 3E rules. However, like RP XP, I think we could support crafting XP while a PC is engaged in crafting, and hopefully advance the player crafting class (rather than a standard adventuring class).

Effort:

Mostly this is time. Some system to simulate the passage of time for each item made would need to implemented in order to keep someone from making 30 short swords in 3 minutes of leftclicking. Perhaps a crafting tool specially made item that allows a certain number of uses per day that is needed in order to make something. That would then necessitate PC rest to make numerous items.

Yes, this is something we've got to figure out and probably will be best worked out by play testing. Somethings just sound good on paper but don't work well in real time.

Equipment:

Both base materials (that have some cost) and appropriate crafting tools should be necessary.

Base materials are necessary. Tools only grant bonuses, though we can certainly apply circumstance penalties for not having anything suitable equipped as well. (ie -10 to your rolls to craft armor if you don't posses a hammer....can you imagine trying to shape iron with your bare hands?)

[ç i p h é r]

Right now Cipher, I would suspect first on his priority list is implementing the new wealth standards. That involves an ACR update, some associated rules changes, and training the entire DM base. The training itself shouldn't be terribly difficult, but I think there's a worry about information overload.

Ah, I see. Yes, I understand priorities. Clearly, I'm still a n00b in understanding the approval processes having never been involved with it before. Are we getting enough lines in the water though? I'd hate to think that we're just working sequentially when we have the people to move in parallel.

Anyway, thanks for clarifying.

[AlmightyTDawg]

Well, I know I can keep tracking of all the stuff we've got, but I realize I have a bit more time to devote to those sorts of things than a standard DM or the Admin team trying to get near-consensus.

One thing that might help crafting in particular is if players who wanted to engage in it, and DMs supporting it, were very good about keeping logs/data for someone to peruse, and if there was someone compiling/making use of it. Problem with that is so many of the things require permissions that route it up through a limited section of people (typically just the Admin).

I think that's more or less why they farm out idea/plan generation to Staff Heads and groups, because they're busy enough with day-to-day and implementation. That's why I say anyone who nominates you for an Admin position is clearly not your friend.