Crafting for your party - What is a fair price ? Is profit for yourself ok ?

[duboisjf]

What would consider a fair price to craft magic item for other party members ?

Seem that if I do it at the cost, everybody benefit of it but me less than the other cause I spent a feat that I cannot use for something else.

Having no crafter would be crazy in that campaign cause there plenty of downtime.


I figured out that for a party of five (our party), if I charge 60% (50% being the cost and 100% the normal price). I would get a profit of 10% of the normal price.

So if I craft everyone else an item normally sold 5000 gp, I would get 2000 gp in profit (500 gp from each player).

In return, everyone else would have an item worthing 5000 gp for 3000 gp. So each one saves 2000 gp. The exact amount I keep as profit.


Am I a cheap loser ? :)

[Serafina]

Only your fellow players can really answer that.

Buying magic items is always subject to GM-whims and circumstances - especially with more expensive magic items it becomes very difficult to find a seller according to RAW.
So if your fellow player wants "Really obscure and/or specific Item", your crafting feats are a much larger boon to him than if he's just looking for a +3 full plate.
Your crafting feats also become more important the greater an items importance to a build is - if you really need an item due to synergy with your build, getting it becomes more important.

Etc. - basic supply and demand stuff. However, you should also consider this:
If you don't have an item-crafter in the party, you have to buy magic items at 100% of their market value and might not be able to buy them at all. Thus, no matter what your item crafter charges, having one in the party is beneficial.

Then again, having a stronger (=better equipped) party is also beneficial to you. But the corollary is that having a better equipped crafter is also beneficial to the party, and that's what you'll spend the extra money on after all.
To enhance the latter effect and make your party happier, consider spending the extra money on things that benefit the entire group - upgrading your stronghold, emergency supplies and so on. They'd benefit you as much as them.


Personal Opionion:
You are still a huge boon to your party if you charge 60%, so i see nothing inherently wrong with it.

[TheJudicator]

Oh, I've had a character do that. In the Pathfinder system's Skull & Shackles game (pirates, yarg), I had a crafty witch who ran the bookkeeping for the party. I offered my crafting services as the voyages were long, and charged them 75% of the cost.

Naturally, the players balked at the idea of that, claiming I was trying to scam them. I explained it was to cover risk of crafting failure. If such were to happen, I guaranteed a second attempt out of my own pocket, which warmed them to my terms.

The reality of it was, however, that my spellcraft was through the roof and the witch just wanted more of a cut than she was already getting skimming the loot. Being CE and all, it just made sense.

So to answer your question, you have every right to charge more for your time and risk in service to the party. If you're of a good alignment, though, I wouldn't expect to remain one for long, haha.

[Lightlawbliss]

...If you're of a good alignment, though, I wouldn't expect to remain one for long, haha.

How is it against good alignment to charge your allies less for an item then the market price? I dare say one can easily justify asking market price to their allies while maintaining good alignment, as long as motivations are correct.

[VexingFool]

Generally I don't think profiting off of your party is a good idea. You probably would not appreciate it if the party rogue took an extra 20% for every chest he disarmed/unlocked. What if the fighter said, "Everytime I cleave something I get 100gp added to my share of the treasure." Or the cleric said, "When I cast a persistent/extended buff on the party you need to pay me."

If you don't think the crafting feat would benefit you then don't take it. If you are an arcane caster you may not benefit from craft magic arms and armor, but everyone benefits from craft wondrous. The benefits of crafting for your party is that your party becomes more effective. A more effective party can handle greater challenges that can lead to greater rewards. An effective party also may not use as many consumables therefore save party resources.

If this was not Pathfinder I could see charging a fee to offset the XP loss from crafting. But with no xp loss and plenty of downtime I don't see the need.

In several MMO's I am playing, if a player provides the materials/cost most crafters will craft the item for free but say, "Tips are appreciated."

[Gabe the Bard]

Everyone's going to have a different opinion on this. As it is, in the group I play with our DM rarely has magic item merchants that sell anything at market value. Magic items are usually 50% more expensive or double the price, and not everything is available at every shop or vendor. So for me, if someone in my party used up a feat slot (a very valuable resource) to make things available to me at market value, I'd have no problem with it. In fact, I would be very happy with the arrangement if it means we can get the items that we want when we want them. If you start charging ABOVE market value, then I might be worried, but if everyone else in the world is charging the same price, then what difference does it make to me whose getting the money? If anything, I would be happier to keep resources in the party, since whatever items you buy or make for yourself, whether they're scrolls or metamagic rods, are going to be used to the benefit of the group in some way, whether indirectly or directly.

[vhfforever]

I've occasionally seen items sold to the party at cost (by an Artificer in D&D, where the xp loss was mitigated and the crafting feats were freely obtained), and from there up to 75% of market value. Players generally don't complain if you can make them what they want, when they want, and save a trip on whatever quest to whichever Magic Mart sells that special magical halberd, as opposed to the ones that only stock long/great/short swords.

[Serafina]

Lets look at this from a roleplaying-perspective:
You are sinking a large amount of your free time (weeks or months) which you could spend for your own benefit into making things for others. How can you really justify not getting some compensation in-character unless you are hopelessly altruistic?

This goes even more so in Pathfinder, since the actual downtime-rules would actually generate you money. At the very least you could demand equivalent payment for your lost downtime activities - not even necessarily in gold pieces, but in capital or favors the others generated during that time.

[Spore]

- not even necessarily in gold pieces, but in capital or favors the others generated during that time.

I like the idea. You're not a dispenser from Team Fortress as much as your fighter is not a stupid wavebreaker for you in combat. And the word "favor" does not always have to be followed by "maniacal devilish laughter". :)

I'd say 60% and a favor sounds fair. Or 75% for normal people with less of a paladinesque altruism.

[Serafina]

Really, crafting magic items for material costs only would be like a highly skilled construction worker taking off several weeks from their job in order to help you renovate your house and only being compensated for the materials necessary. You'd only do that for a really really good friend, and even then most people would rightfully demand at least some compensation - most likely, they'd just offer their usual rates with a "friends and family" discount.

So just offer your party a "fellow adventurers" discount of 25-40% on magical items compared to vendor prices, and i don't think anyone will complain about that!

[Kudaku]

The downtime system lets you use Magic capital at full value when crafting, so with a good Spellcraft modifier and enough downtime you can make items at 25% of their base value. Instead of charging your players a 10% markup, why not craft at the base rate and pocket a quarter of the selling price by using your own materials?

Less people upset in the party and you'll have a much higher profit line.

[magwaaf]

never charge the party, make sure the party has the money and will pay for the materials. your magic item creation should be keeping the party geared by using the party money. we don't really have much individual gold as much the millions of gold we've made over the past 3 years of game. our crafters are outrageous and pretty famous in game and they just make all the money and keep us all geared

[Segev]

The last time I played a wizard who was making even moderately extensive use of Craft feats, I offered to make custom items for the party for 75% of market value. I had some players get offended, and others be grateful. The character I was playing at the time was the sort to simply say "that's my price; take it or leave it," so those who got offended and wouldn't buy items from me paid more for their items to other vendors.

Really, charging anything less than 100% market value is little different than taking the Ancestral Relic (or whatever it's called) feat and offering to take the "junk" loot as your share of the treasure. In both cases, you're increasing the individual wealth of the party members by reducing overall costs they have to dish out, and you're benefitting from it. (In point of fact, you could actually take FROM the "junk loot" pile when the party is down to divvying up according to sell-value, and be taking no more than your fair share while getting 2x the benefit. And you're still not hurting the rest of the party.) In the event that you're making a genuinely custom item for somebody, charging 100% market value is not necessarily out of line; they're paying for exactly what they want when they might have to hunt down an NPC with the time and skills to make it for them, otherwise.

Come to think of it, an item crafter with Ancestral Relic could play this really effectively: take his share of the loot from the half-priced "sell off" pile, then accept people's "for sale" loot at 75% of its market value while charging 75% market value for the items they want to craft.


My personal view is that, if you're charging 75% market value to your party to get yourself a "bigger share" of loot, you're likely spending that on more stuff to improve yourself. Improving yourself also helps the party, and they're getting MORE than they would out of their gold, still.

The attitude that you somehow owe the other PCs your character's labor for free is a weird one, to me. If they know best what they need to help the party out, shouldn't you know best what your time is spent doing? Maybe you're better serving the party making an item for yourself than for them, unless they're paying you more for it so you can make yourself something better later. If you do not know what is the best use of your time for the party, how do they know what the best equipment for them to have for the party is?

[KillianHawkeye]

I play 3.5 rather than Pathfinder, but my policy with my wizard is to craft wondrous items at cost for my party if they buy me a new spell for my spellbook (preferably whichever one is needed for the item, but an equivalent level spell is fine if I already know the spell in question). Otherwise, I charge 70% of the market value for the item. The extra 20% is to cover the XP cost of the item, at the standard rate of 5 GP for 1 XP.

With scrolls I don't even bother with the extra charge since the XP cost is so negligible. There aren't even many people in my party who can use wizard scrolls besides myself anyway.

Nobody has complained so far. Most of them take the "buy a spell" option since it's a better bargain, and I'm happy because I keep learning new spells. I am strongly considering branching out into weapons and armor in the near future, since that will really make the party like me.

[NichG]

Generally I don't think profiting off of your party is a good idea. You probably would not appreciate it if the party rogue took an extra 20% for every chest he disarmed/unlocked. What if the fighter said, "Everytime I cleave something I get 100gp added to my share of the treasure." Or the cleric said, "When I cast a persistent/extended buff on the party you need to pay me."

If you don't think the crafting feat would benefit you then don't take it. If you are an arcane caster you may not benefit from craft magic arms and armor, but everyone benefits from craft wondrous. The benefits of crafting for your party is that your party becomes more effective. A more effective party can handle greater challenges that can lead to greater rewards. An effective party also may not use as many consumables therefore save party resources.


Game-theoretically, this outcome is worse for everyone involved than the case in which other party members help subsidize the cost of the feat for the crafter. Lets use a Lv10 party with 4 PCs as an example.

- The crafter values a feat slot at some fixed amount of gold X. If purely deciding based on self-interest and considering crafting for other PCs as 'free', the crafter will rationally take the feat if 50% of their craftable WBL is greater than X. For a wizard, much of their WBL is expected to go into purchasing scrolls of new spells, scribing things into their spellbook, etc, so their craftable WBL is probably at best half of their total. So if the feat is worth less than 12kgp to them, they'll take it, otherwise they won't.

- The value to the entire party however, assuming the same 50% of WBL being craftable, is four times that. So collectively the feat has a value to the party as a whole equal to the WBL of a single 10th level character, or about 50kgp. Which means that if the feat slot is worth anything less than 50kgp to the crafter, the party as a whole can profit even if they have to pay the crafter above material costs.

So basically, its worth it for the party to be willing to pay the crafter extra for making a character build choice that would otherwise not be ideal for them.

[Talya]

My brother-in-law is a mechanic.

He charges me half for repairs to my car what he charges his other clients, and I'm grateful for that.
He's family, and yet I do not expect him to do it for free. He's using his time to help me, and i'm getting a big benefit from it. It's generous of him. His time is worth much more than what he's charging me.

But he still makes a profit.

Some people here make it sound like that's a bad thing. It's not.

[RogueDM]

This really depends on if its in the character's nature to charge for services rendered. I played a rather mercenary game of 3.5 a while back where it was very common for the spellcasters to charge for item creation. It was a cheaper price than the item would have been available for at market, but there was definitely a mark-up.

My CG rogue/fighter did not begrudge them this as crafting costs resources (and in D&D xp). It was still cheaper and easier than buying magic items in town. To be fair, we did draft up an "adventuring company charter" before our adventure began. It covered just what was expected of each party member and how loot would be divided. We would all agree upon the quests and all pull to achieve that goal. Making new baubles for the fighter was -not- covered in that charter, so it costs extra.

I was also the only one in the party to refuse most monetary rewards, or to give gold freely to help others. "Because its what a hero should do" was the rationale.

[AnonymousPepper]

My party in my 3.5 campaign where I played an artificer quickly realized just how much cheaper it was to have me do everything. So we pooled our money, purchased a custom demiplane (remember, in 3.5, time traits are as fast as you want them to be with Genesis, not 2x at most like PF) for crafting purposes, and then just handed me basically all of the party chest and all our magic gear.

I then planeshifted off, ate all the magic items that I didn't sell off for gold for crafting XP, crafted items for the entire party, and came back. In twelve seconds.

Didn't charge them a thing, and they got much much much better gear off of it.

My fee was allowing me to make some stuff for myself, which I did, along with paying for my demiplane. At level 9, a non-trivial investment.

[Squirrel_Dude]

What would consider a fair price to craft magic item for other party members ?

Seem that if I do it at the cost, everybody benefit of it but me less than the other cause I spent a feat that I cannot use for something else.

Having no crafter would be crazy in that campaign cause there plenty of downtime.


I figured out that for a party of five (our party), if I charge 60% (50% being the cost and 100% the normal price). I would get a profit of 10% of the normal price.

So if I craft everyone else an item normally sold 5000 gp, I would get 2000 gp in profit (500 gp from each player).

In return, everyone else would have an item worthing 5000 gp for 3000 gp. So each one saves 2000 gp. The exact amount I keep as profit.


Am I a cheap loser ? :)It's kind of pointless because as a party you should still end up with the same amount of wealth overall as if the party hadn't paid you extra. You'll just have a larger slice of the pie.

[Sayt]

My Runesmith/Ab Champ charges a 12.5% GST on top of the craft price of the item, because thats downtime he doesn't get to spend at leisure, or researching spells, or maintaining his library. He charges +12.5% to the party members he likes. He charges +12.5% to the party members he doesn't like.

And abstracting it a bit, from a game theory(I think, it was a few years ago) perspective, in one of my Pol Sci classes, we were given an example. You and the person sitting next to you are given $100 to split between the two of you, except instead of an even split, one person at random from each pair gets to make an offer to their partner about how they'll split the $100, and it just has to be in an an amount which is handle able with the currency at hand. If their partner refuses, neither of the pair gets any of the money. Now, most people think that 50/50 is an equitable split and feel like they're being cheated if they're offered less than that. But lets say that your partner offers you a 30/70 split. Does it seem fair? Well, it certainly doesn't. On the other hand, are you gonna turn down a free $30 just because you don't like how much the other person got?

Now, it's not a perfect parallel, but do you want to pay market price and not be sure if you can get your hands on it, or do you want a 37% discount?

And anyway, it's not like my character spent the 12.5% on cards and booze, it went towards gear to help the party on it's missions and quests.

[The Random NPC]

...On the other hand, are you gonna turn down a free $30 just because you don't like how much the other person got?...

Yes, but only because the anguish the other person feels at losing $70 is worth about $40 to me.

[Slipperychicken]

1. Use cost-reduction to get the materials cost down to like 25% or 10% market price.

2. Charge the party 50% market price.

3. Use the difference to get items (typically consumables) which the party is too stupid to pool their wealth for. Or to give "gifts" to PCs in need of equipment.

[Tvtyrant]

I would set up a crafting pool along with the parties healing pool. My party buys wands of CLWs as a group, so it would not be strange to make a general crafting pool.

[jjcrpntr]

See when I was a player I charged a small fee. If I'm making an item for them they are getting it for 50% of what they would have normally. So I charged them 60% of the cost to buy it. My logic is that I invested the feat, I'm still saving them a bunch of money and it's kind of a time/effort thing. They all were cool with it. I mean it didn't add up to much. If the barbarian wanted an amulet of health it was 4000 to buy it or 2400 gold for me to make it. Still a good deal.

[NightbringerGGZ]

Personally, I view the crafting feat investment as a way to help make the rest of the party more effective. Get that dex-based combatant and Agile weapon earlier than expected, or help boost everybody's AC at a cheaper cost. Maybe help out with a really odd item for those special builds. If I can help party members get significant boosts at earlier levels than expected, then it's a boost to our overall performance.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with charging other players a bit extra for crafting their items. They're still getting a discount after all. I just have a hard time seeing what I'd use the extra gold for on a character that would actually be an effective crafter.

[NichG]

Yes, but only because the anguish the other person feels at losing $70 is worth about $40 to me.

Add six zeroes to both sides - would you act the same way? (and I mean $7 million and $4 million, not $70.000000 and $40.000000)

[Slipperychicken]

Add six zeroes to both sides - would you act the same way? (and I mean $7 million and $4 million, not $70.000000 and $40.000000)

That ultimately depends on the extent to which schadenfreude incurs diminishing marginal returns, assuming it does so at all.

[NichG]

That ultimately depends on the extent to which schadenfreude incurs diminishing marginal returns, assuming it does so at all.

Well, also how much your life depends on that money. $40 might be nice but probably won't change your life, so its easy to afford losing it just to make a point. $4 million will change most people's lives, so most people won't be so ready to give it up just to make an emotional point. That said, for all I know, The Random NPC is independently wealthy and $4 million wouldn't be worth a nod (though I think statistics are on my side on that one)

[Gullintanni]

Add six zeroes to both sides - would you act the same way? (and I mean $7 million and $4 million, not $70.000000 and $40.000000)

Depends...if I was a billionaire? Yeah, I'd turn it down. Otherwise, millions is millions, and I'm not THAT proud ;)

But yeah, if you're willing to be unfair about splitting 100 bucks down the middle, I'll turn down 30 out of spite. lol

[SiuiS]

It's possible to cut costs, you know. You can get the price down to about half if it's only usable by a [class/race/alignment combo]. I deny the thought that a feat spent on crafting is a sunk cost that you don't benefit from though; any time you want a magical effect and don't want to spend slots buffing, put it on an item. They're amazing.

I suggest that you have the entire party pool all their money. Tell them the first 1/3 to 1/2 is for business expenses – crafting, restocking, rezzing, party-shenanigans. The rest, after that, is their take-home pay. That way, if someone wants an item. Them can pay expenses for it unless it would come out of the party coffers. Keeps everyone up to speed and prevents anyone from losing all their money.

[NichG]

It's possible to cut costs, you know. You can get the price down to about half if it's only usable by a [class/race/alignment combo]. I deny the thought that a feat spent on crafting is a sunk cost that you don't benefit from though; any time you want a magical effect and don't want to spend slots buffing, put it on an item. They're amazing.

Well its not a sunk cost, but it is a cost. The main point of the game theoretic PoV is that the individual optimal decision can be manipulated to the benefit of the entire party if other party members agree to subsidize the cost. E.g. a feat is generally listed as a 30kgp value, but for a Lv10 caster a Craft feat gets them roughly 12kgp of additional wealth - so if the party can bump that above 30kgp in order to incentivize the caster to take it, its globally optimal for them to do so.

Really, subsidization like that is an incredibly powerful tool. I played a guest character (partial xp, downtime participation only) in a campaign once who was an xp banker - essentially my entire schtick was that I could move xp around between people, give loans, generate some amount of interest, and also increase the global xp gain rate by a few percent in exchange for flat xp costs. By making various deals of this sort, I was able to basically fabricate an xp income for myself out of nowhere and still improve everyone else's income in the net. It was probably the only time I found accounting to be fun and engaging.

[The Random NPC]

Add six zeroes to both sides - would you act the same way? (and I mean $7 million and $4 million, not $70.000000 and $40.000000)

Nope.


That ultimately depends on the extent to which schadenfreude incurs diminishing marginal returns, assuming it does so at all.


Well, also how much your life depends on that money. $40 might be nice but probably won't change your life, so its easy to afford losing it just to make a point. $4 million will change most people's lives, so most people won't be so ready to give it up just to make an emotional point. That said, for all I know, The Random NPC is independently wealthy and $4 million wouldn't be worth a nod (though I think statistics are on my side on that one)

For me, schadenfreude does have diminishing returns, or at least it doesn't grow as quickly as the enjoyment that purchasing things gets me. And no I'm not wealthy, or to be exact all my money is tied up in investments and retirement. Even still, I'm far from wealthy.

[NichG]

So I was about to reply that the schaudenfreude is irrational, but its not really. It's the instinct that all games are really repeated games. If you turn down the $70 one game, then in the next game the guy offers you $50, so if you play 10 games you come out ahead. Essentially, controlling the state of mind and expectations of the other player has a non-zero value.

But when you have enough money on the line in a single play that it can transform your life, then you realize that it doesn't matter if the game is repeated or not - the results of a single play are all you need.

In terms of D&D characters (and their players), I don't know how this analysis goes. Is it worth short-term losses in order to convince the caster's player that he won't be able to make any money off the rest of the party by charging more than cost? I'm not sure it is; my feeling is that its not the same as the political science game, because its possible for the crafter to actually 'lose' money by agreeing to a bad deal compared to choosing to not play (e.g. the feat cost). So it might have a different kind of equilibrium in the repeated game.

[Cloud]

Given the cost of gold, time, feats, and at least in 3.5 xp, I think 75% is plenty fair. I'm more than happy to pay 75% to an ally instead of 100% to someone I don't know. If crafting didn't take feats, (and didn't use xp like in pathfinder), I'd be probably less inclined to go that high on the %, because people don't charge for using spell slots, tanking blows, or making skill checks, though in a rule set like that the entire party is probably crafting there own gear anyway.

[Sayt]

So I was about to reply that the schaudenfreude is irrational, but its not really. It's the instinct that all games are really repeated games. If you turn down the $70 one game, then in the next game the guy offers you $50, so if you play 10 games you come out ahead. Essentially, controlling the state of mind and expectations of the other player has a non-zero value.

But when you have enough money on the line in a single play that it can transform your life, then you realize that it doesn't matter if the game is repeated or not - the results of a single play are all you need.

I should probably have noted that in the class exercise I did, it was one offer or bust, so there was an interestig dynamic of maximizing reward vs making an acceptable offer.

And as for schadenfreude, part of the point of the exercise was that people would irrationally act against their own interests because they felt slighted.

[NichG]

I should probably have noted that in the class exercise I did, it was one offer or bust, so there was an interestig dynamic of maximizing reward vs making an acceptable offer.

And as for schadenfreude, part of the point of the exercise was that people would irrationally act against their own interests because they felt slighted.

Well yes, but I'd say what it really indicates is that we think heuristically and not through logic. The heuristic is that we're tuned to think emotionally and act as if the world is composed of repeated games. If you create something that violates one of the assumptions that our heuristics are built on, then our behavior often becomes irrational.

[QuackParker]

In our game, we have opted to use modifications from a nifty alternate system called "Making Craft Work". Very short PDF, very easy to understand.

http://ur-talarius.wikispaces.com/file/view/D%26D3e_-_Pathfinder_-_Making_Craft_Work.pdf

[Spuddles]

Well its not a sunk cost, but it is a cost. The main point of the game theoretic PoV is that the individual optimal decision can be manipulated to the benefit of the entire party if other party members agree to subsidize the cost. E.g. a feat is generally listed as a 30kgp value, but for a Lv10 caster a Craft feat gets them roughly 12kgp of additional wealth - so if the party can bump that above 30kgp in order to incentivize the caster to take it, its globally optimal for them to do so.

Really, subsidization like that is an incredibly powerful tool. I played a guest character (partial xp, downtime participation only) in a campaign once who was an xp banker - essentially my entire schtick was that I could move xp around between people, give loans, generate some amount of interest, and also increase the global xp gain rate by a few percent in exchange for flat xp costs. By making various deals of this sort, I was able to basically fabricate an xp income for myself out of nowhere and still improve everyone else's income in the net. It was probably the only time I found accounting to be fun and engaging.

you sound like the kind of guy Id like to game with :smallsmile: