How are the Tome of Clear Thought, etc, handled in your campaign?

[Inspector]

The attribute increasing tomes - the Tome of Clear Thought, Tome of Understanding, Manual of Gainful Exercise, etc - each have versions from the 27,500g +1 inherent bonus to the 137,500g +5.

My question pertains to campaigns that use the standard treasure per encounter guidelines.

The Tomes explicitly do not stack with each other, such that if you buy and use a +1 Tome early on, and later buy and use a higher Tome, the gold you spent on the +1 Tome is gone. And the only way to replace it is to adventure more, thus gaining more XP along with any treasure, thus throwing you off of your WBL and essentially crippling your character unless something is done.

(this applies whether one buys a Tome or receives it as treasure, given the opportunity cost of the latter)

So my question is, if you're running a campaign using the treasure per encounter system, how does your DM/campaign handle this issue?

Here's what I've been able to speculate:

1) Our campaign hasn't ever reached high enough level to not only gain a Tome, but also replace it with a higher Tome.

2) We never noticed the fact that upgrading a Tome throws you off the WBL wagon, permanently crippling your character. Oops!

3) We never buy Tomes until we can afford the +5 ones, thus avoiding this problem, but ensuring that we never get any Tomes until level 19 or so. Which kind of begs the question, "Why ever include the lower Tomes if they're only a trap?"

4) The DM tracks your character wealth, notices it has taken a nose dive, and throws some extra treasure your way.*

5) ???

I'd love to hear how people have solved this problem in their campaigns.


* #4 I find interesting, because it kind of opens up a number of other cans of worms...

If, for example, you've got crafting feats that throw you ahead of the WBL curve, wouldn't the DM logically have to give you less treasure? If so, what was the point of taking crafting feats, then?

Or: Could you blow all of your treasure on wands and potions, use them all up, and then the DM would have to give you boatloads of treasure until you had level appropriate wealth again?

[Jack_Simth]

5) ???
Players recognize the conundrum, and optimize by way of not using a Tome or Manual until they can afford to invoke the "improving magic items" clause, to get it up to the +4 (even stats) or +5 (odd stats) that they need.

[Inspector]

5) ???
Players recognize the conundrum, and optimize by way of not using a Tome or Manual until they can afford to invoke the "improving magic items" clause, to get it up to the +4 (even stats) or +5 (odd stats) that they need.

So you are saying that they do not buy lesser Tomes, and hold onto any Tome they receive as treasure until they can improve it?

In that case, wouldn't this mean they've have a huge chunk of treasure that's doing them no good until they can upgrade it? And thus, effectively, have the exact same WBL problem until then?

That sounds very much less than ideal...

[AzazelSephiroth]

It is not RAW, at all, but we have always allowed multiple tomes to stack up to the +5 maximum. This allows them to be purchased or aquired over time and still not throw off the WBL curve.

This has worked wonders for us... although frankly few characters invest in even the smallest tomes when they can aquire other items they find more worthwhile.

[elonin]

You could sell it. Anyway it is cheaper to use wishes directly. Even scrolls would be cheaper than one of those tomes.

There is another way of looking at this question. Do you keep stat boosting items as they become available or wait until you can afford the +6 item?

[Jack_Simth]

So you are saying that they do not buy lesser Tomes, and hold onto any Tome they receive as treasure until they can improve it?

In that case, wouldn't this mean they've have a huge chunk of treasure that's doing them no good until they can upgrade it? And thus, effectively, have the exact same WBL problem until then?

That sounds very much less than ideal...
That, or sell them now and buy / craft them again later, yes. It's a strategy.

See, the Wealth-by-level tables were actually derived at one point - they're the result of random treasure rolls, with certain assumptions about player choices in the sale, purchase, and crafting of items... including use of consumable items. They are not, strictly speaking, arbitrary. D&D assumes you'll use a certain proportion of your wealth on consumable items - potions, scrolls, wands, et cetera.

If your DM doesn't pay attention to wealth-by-level, holding onto such things and trading up for the permanent or peak items is a strategy. You sacrifice a bit of power now (the use of consumable items) for more power later (permanent items that have comperable effects). The Fighter who buys magical armor and weapons is, initially, weaker than the Fighter who buys mundane armor and weapons while purchasing oils of greater magic vestments and greater magic weapon. Long term, however, the fighter that goes with the oils rather than the inherent magic has some problems, in that the continual wealth drain of the potions and oils means that he can't get the good stuff. So (pulling numbers out of thin air, here) while the potion guy has his +4 Oils on his mundane armor and weapons at 5th, while the actual enchanted armor guy only has +1 armor and weapons... at 15th, the oil guy is still working with +4 oils, but the permanent enchantment fighter has his +5 sword, his +5 shield, and his +5 armor. (Note: This is just a simple example to illustrate the basic strategy; I'm not saying +5 Armor is optimal...).

The flip side of this, of course, is that if your DM does, occasionally, push everyone towards wealth by level, then the guy with the potion habit is going to be better overall (his potion habit doesn't hurt him).

[Inspector]

You could sell it. Anyway it is cheaper to use wishes directly. Even scrolls would be cheaper than one of those tomes.

There is another way of looking at this question. Do you keep stat boosting items as they become available or wait until you can afford the +6 item?

The stat boosting items have upgrade rules in the MiC, so this is not an issue unless for some reason you don't use those rules. In which case, that would present a similar conundrum.

Also, buying a Wish takes 5g per XP, so it's only a few hundred gold cheaper to hire someone to cast Wish versus buying a Tome, and even then you have to somehow secure several Wishes in a row...

[Inspector]

D&D assumes you'll use a certain proportion of your wealth on consumable items - potions, scrolls, wands, et cetera.

Aye, that is true. And they have "slippage" built in with the differential between the Treasure and Wealth by Level. And, indeed, it can account for a few healing potions, oils, and so on.

However, this "slippage" is nowhere near the 27,500g lost from upgrading a single Inherent bonus from +1 to +2.

I can't help but think that we're intended to either avoid the Tomes like the plague until +5, sell them (assuming that doing so would not put you under WBL), or have the DM adjust wealth periodically... in which case you have the problems I mentioned...

[Jack_Simth]

However, this "slippage" is nowhere near the 27,500g lost from upgrading a single Inherent bonus from +1 to +2.This depends on what level you're looking at, in terms of character level, how much people burn on their consumable items, and how much people lose on sales.

But you've seen the basic approaches, now, which was my main goal.

[Zaranthan]

The flip side of this, of course, is that if your DM does, occasionally, push everyone towards wealth by level, then the guy with the potion habit is going to be better overall (his potion habit doesn't hurt him).

I've always favored the guy with the potion habit. It leads to players buying things like necklaces of fireballs and high-CL wands of magic missile, and then ACTUALLY USING THEM. Doing things > not doing things, and belts of giant strength don't actually do things.

[Inspector]

This depends on what level you're looking at, in terms of character level, how much people burn on their consumable items, and how much people lose on sales.

I guess my point was that no matter what level, no matter how little people burn on consumables, or how little they lose in sales, there is simply not enough slippage to possibly account for the use of Tomes, and so even with the fact of slippage, my basic conundrum, although mitigated slightly, does very much remain.

------------------------------------------------------


Which again brings me back to the inevitable conclusion of the necessity for the DM to adjust, the vagueness of RAW as to when and how, and the pitfalls and problems with this that I mentioned...

[Telonius]

Personally, I treat them as being Volumes 1-5 of the same work, with each volume costing 27.5k gold; you have to read the previous volumes to get anything out of the later volumes. Seems silly to restrict the PCs otherwise.

[Cruiser1]

There's nothing unique about the virtual loss of WBL when upgrading from a +1 to a +2 tome. The same issue applies in other areas of equipment. Suppose your magic weapon gets sundered, or a rust monster eats your magic armor, or you lose half your items in a Mage's Disjunction. Are the values of those lost items permanently remembered and counted against future WBL? Or should the DM treat it as if they never existed and give you much more treasure in the next few encounters to make up for your new lower wealth?

If the DM doesn't treat you differently, you're underpowered. If the DM does make more treasure available, there's little risk adventuring, where a metagamer can even take advantage of this by "accidentally" losing items to replace random gear he doesn't like with a "reroll" of better gear in the next room.

[Inspector]

Cruiser1,

Yes, precisely. I am almost certain now that this was the intent. But, then, the problems of crafting feats and metagaming...

I suppose the latter would have to be solved by a gentleman's agreement?

Ah, but the crafting feats... now there's the rub...

[Coidzor]

I imagine that bringing up such questions is part of why Disjunction is so reviled.

[peacenlove]

Personal opinion:
6) Make inherent bonuses stackable with an upper limit variable for level (+1 for levels 0-4, +2 for levels 5-9 and so on).

[Inspector]

I imagine that bringing up such questions is part of why Disjunction is so reviled.

Heh. Or, rather, the lack of bringing them up, depending...

[Velaryon]

Cruiser1,

Yes, precisely. I am almost certain now that this was the intent. But, then, the problems of crafting feats and metagaming...

I suppose the latter would have to be solved by a gentleman's agreement?

Ah, but the crafting feats... now there's the rub...


Nobody ever does item crafting in my games, but if they did, I would handle it by counting crafted items at only half their value when totalling up the PC's gear value. For example, that Headband of Intellect +6 they crafted for themself only counts as 18,000 gp worth of their expected WBL, so I will adjust the treasure that comes their way accordingly.

[watchwood]

Nobody ever does item crafting in my games, but if they did, I would handle it by counting crafted items at only half their value when totalling up the PC's gear value. For example, that Headband of Intellect +6 they crafted for themself only counts as 18,000 gp worth of their expected WBL, so I will adjust the treasure that comes their way accordingly.

The reason you don't really see it in 3.5 is because of the XP costs - since there's no XP costs in Pathfinder, I've taken it on both casting-capable PF classes that I've played so far.

[Douglas]

Rules that prevent stacking have two main reasons to exist:
1) To prevent circumventing a maximum
2) To prevent changing a more-than-linear (usually quadratic) cost progression into a linear one

Inherent bonuses actually do have a linear cost progression already, so I see no reason to prevent them stacking as long as the maximum is still in force. In my games I house rule them to stack because of this, up to the usual +5 maximum.

[Hirax]

I would treat the WBL value of any superseded tomes as zero. Do you factor expended scrolls, wands, potions, etc. into somebody's WBL? Further, I oppose using the cost basis of an item in tracking WBL. For instance, if I pay 900GP or 1,200GP for a cloak of resistance +1, it still counts as against WBL as 1,000. Or if a wizard scribes a spell from a scroll, expending the scroll, I treat that spell as though it were copied from another wizard's spellbook for a fee, for the purposes of WBL, and if they later get a blessed book and put all their spells in it, I remove ink costs as a WBL factor for their extra spells known. The only things that are particularly tricky to value in my mind are things such as simulacrums or ice assassins, that provide a permanent benefit and have a material and exp cost.

[Inspector]

The reason you don't really see it in 3.5 is because of the XP costs - since there's no XP costs in Pathfinder, I've taken it on both casting-capable PF classes that I've played so far.

I tend to point out the "XP is a river" argument whenever faced with this reluctance.

[Chess435]

Personal opinion:
6) Make inherent bonuses stackable with an upper limit variable for level (+1 for levels 0-4, +2 for levels 5-9 and so on).

DDO does this, and for an MMO, it applies surprisingly well in normal pencil+paper play. (+1 at lvl 3, +2 at 7, +3 at 11, +4 at 15, and +5's don't exist yet.)

[Morithias]

In my campaign setting they stack up to +5. You can read a +1, then read a +4, and you'll end up with a +5.

Pretty basic.

[willpell]

I see this as a problem of excessive munchkinism, and the solution to ignore it. You don't want to read the +1 tome? Fine, you're giving up treasure. You read the +1 tome now and you later find a +2? Give it to another member of the party as part of his share. Every character has some use for every stat; don't reward characters for narrowly optomizing, as the system will already do that. If the party has one Sorcerer and only he wants Charisma, then as DM you should probably just replace any redundant Charisma tomes you roll with something else. If WBL is a little off, big deal; the numbers don't really make sense anyway, a little GM fiat either way will fix any problems that come up.


I imagine that bringing up such questions is part of why Disjunction is so reviled.

I'm afraid I don't understand how Disjunction pertains to this discussion.....

[Zaranthan]

I'm afraid I don't understand how Disjunction pertains to this discussion.....

There's a parallel discussion going on about "lost" wealth. If an NPC hits the party with a Disjunction and destroys half their items, do you give them more stuff in the next adventure? What if they prefer using potions of bull's strength over belts of giant's strength? There are pros and cons to both sides.

[mucco]

In my games, tomes stack up to +5. The lesser books, though, cost more: 40k for a +1, 70k for a +2 etc. This way you have a tradeoff - bonus early or better deal?

[danzibr]

It is not RAW, at all, but we have always allowed multiple tomes to stack up to the +5 maximum. This allows them to be purchased or aquired over time and still not throw off the WBL curve.

This has worked wonders for us... although frankly few characters invest in even the smallest tomes when they can aquire other items they find more worthwhile.
Same. buffer buffer

[Inspector]

You don't want to read the +1 tome? Fine, you're giving up treasure.

I find this attitude to be essentially vicious. If a player realizes that the system has a flaw such that an action will punish him - in this case by throwing him way behind the WBL curve - then he is to be punished even more by losing his treasure entirely?

What you're saying is: his choice is to lose his treasure, or lose his treasure. Be punished inadvertently by a flaw in the system, or be punished directly by the DM for... I'm really not sure what the logic is, actually.

Either way, it's not a great choice, from his perspective.

[Coidzor]

What you're saying is: his choice is to lose his treasure, or lose his treasure. Be punished inadvertently by a flaw in the system, or be punished directly by the DM for... I'm really not sure what the logic is, actually.

"Metagaming" probably. Because it's just so horrible to realize one is playing a game.

It is a very, very bloodyminded and vicious attitude, I agree.

[Hirax]

Are there that many people that really count superseded tomes against WBL? Do you also count expended scrolls against their WBL? Doing either is equally stupid. :smallconfused:

[Elric VIII]

I find this attitude to be essentially vicious. If a player realizes that the system has a flaw such that an action will punish him - in this case by throwing him way behind the WBL curve - then he is to be punished even more by losing his treasure entirely?

What you're saying is: his choice is to lose his treasure, or lose his treasure. Be punished inadvertently by a flaw in the system, or be punished directly by the DM for... I'm really not sure what the logic is, actually.

Either way, it's not a great choice, from his perspective.

The player should just sell the tome and buy a Candle of Invocation. You can get +5 really easily that way.

[tyckspoon]

There's a parallel discussion going on about "lost" wealth. If an NPC hits the party with a Disjunction and destroys half their items, do you give them more stuff in the next adventure? What if they prefer using potions of bull's strength over belts of giant's strength? There are pros and cons to both sides.

If the player has made a deliberate decision to play for the shorter game- lots of consumables, picking up a Tome as soon as possible- let them live with the decision. They have purposefully decided that a peak of power now is better than more overall power later. Maybe it'll work out, maybe it won't, but don't *guarantee* that it's always the better play by increasing treasure for that player.


If the DM has destroyed gear- Rust monsters, oozes, intelligent foes using Sunder, whatever- then the player should get replacements or equivalent wealth to spend on other things if he decides he didn't really need whatever it was all that much. Not immediately, of course; you wouldn't have used a gear-destroying enemy unless you intended to have your players deal with losing a favored weapon/item/other widget for a while. But it shouldn't take too long, either by giving the player an opportunity to shop for a replacement soon (and increasing treasure values overall for a bit until he's back on par) or just placing an appropriate item altogether.

[Inspector]

If the player has made a deliberate decision to play for the shorter game- lots of consumables, picking up a Tome as soon as possible- let them live with the decision. They have purposefully decided that a peak of power now is better than more overall power later. Maybe it'll work out, maybe it won't, but don't *guarantee* that it's always the better play by increasing treasure for that player.

I agree in spirit - you need some kind of costs or else players will run around with bags of holding and a bajillion potions, or something weird like that. But the opposite isn't necessarily desirable, either. Players would have to agonize over every expenditure, or else they lose wealth per XP that will never come back.

I think there has to be a middle ground.

[Zaranthan]

I think there has to be a middle ground.

I find my middle ground starts in campaign design. I usually structure my adventures so that once the players have gained about 80% of the XP needed to level up, they have accomplished something noteworthy in the world (saved the princess, KO'd the necromancer, what-have-you). At this point, there's that "declining action" moment that comes after such a climax, and it's a good time to tally up bonus XP for things like entertaining roleplay scenes and clever play, and I usually toss in enough "quest XP" to top them off. Thus, my adventures are generally written with exactly what level the PCs will be at any given point.

I track their "lost" wealth over the course of an adventure, and distribute some compensation over the course of the NEXT adventure. Burn some wand charges trying to save the princess? Cool. But that money's staying spent until AFTER you save the princess, and it's not necessarily going to be in that climactic treasure horde, you're gonna have to find some new adventures if you want your loot back.

[Qwertystop]

I would rule that if someone uses a +2 Tome, then uses a +5 Tome, they only drain as much magic from the Tome as is required to bring the relevant score to +5. Therefore, they are now left with a +3 tome and a +5 inherent bonus. They can then sell the +3 Tome or give it to another party member.

[dsmiles]

We play it as an expendable resource, much like potions and scrolls. If it shows up in random loot, (as a DM) I usually ignore it and go with something more relevant to the campaign.

If the players buy (or make) one? Whatever, it's your gold (and/or XP) do what you want with it. I don't see the issue with spending your WBL on an inherent bonus. WBL isn't the be-all-end-all of a character, unless you're (as one of my players calls himself) a "Geardo."

[Coidzor]

Or you're a class that can't properly contribute if they fall too far behind where the game expects them to be...

[dsmiles]

Yeah, but who even plays a Tier Monk character anymore?

[Coidzor]

Yeah, but who even plays a Tier Monk character anymore?

Paladin fetishes exist, for whatever reason. *shrug*

[dsmiles]

Paladin fetishes exist, for whatever reason. *shrug* Yup. I ran a game, just the other day, where one of my character creation guidelines was "No Fighters, Monks, or Paladins. They're replaced by Warblades, Swordsages, and Crusaders." Nobody complained, and I always have at least one player who complains about my character creation guidelines. :smallconfused:

[nedz]

These items seem almost Gygaxian in design. The lesser tomes are useful for non prime stats, but otherwise they are a poor use of resources. We have the same design decision with inherent bonuses from wishes too. I'm not sure I understand why.

You could argue about less sooner is worth more than more later, but with so much else you could have spent that gold on ?

I suppose it is similiar to the model where you :-

Buy a +1 weapon early on, sell that at half price and buy a +2, sell that at half price and buy a +3, ... (Do this from +1 to +5 and you have wasted 30,000 gp, Add in Armour and Board and thats another 30,000 gp)
Or the 5,000 gp you might have to spend in diamond dust occasionally.


WBL is a metric which is rarely constant across a party; even assuming fair and equitable distribution some PCs will end up with more than others for all manner of reasons.

[Coidzor]

I suppose it is similiar to the model where you :-
Buy a +1 weapon early on, sell that at half price and buy a +2, sell that at half price and buy a +3, ... (Do this from +1 to +5 and you have wasted 30,000 gp, Add in Armour and Board and thats another 30,000 gp)

Thankfully most people seem to have recognized that as a really, really bad idea, so either they as a group adopt one or two schemes for upgrading by either getting existing equipment enchanted to be better or swapping out the weapon when they get a better replacement in the loot. Or both.

I've never heard of anyone actually doing what you're suggesting at any rate.

With diamond dust though, since you generally lose XP with that up until very high levels, your GP per XP ratio should be better preserved, though I'm not up to crunching the numbers at the moment.

[Elric VIII]

I've never heard of anyone actually doing what you're suggesting at any rate.

In my first campaign my Half-Elf Evoker Wizard did this with his longbow. But he also took Toughness twice and banned Conjuration and Transmutation, so he's not the best example. No, this is not sarcasm or hyperbole. It is the sad sad truth of my first character.

[nedz]

Thankfully most people seem to have recognized that as a really, really bad idea, so either they as a group adopt one or two schemes for upgrading by either getting existing equipment enchanted to be better or swapping out the weapon when they get a better replacement in the loot. Or both.

I've never heard of anyone actually doing what you're suggesting at any rate.

Erm, I wasn't suggesting that anyone do this - though I have seen it :smallconfused: Some people just have to go shopping.:smallsmile:
I was just pointing out that upgrading through the Tomes would be a similar waste of resources to doing this.

As for the Diamond Dust, well if one PC has died more than the others then they may well be behind the others in wealth because of this. This assumes that party loot is split evenly and that PCs pay for their own diamond dust. In any event that PC will have burned through more cash for no extra kit.