Class and Level Geekery XVIII - Everyone's an Expert

[Kurald Galain]

assuming no magic items:

Why on Earth would you assume no magic items on a character known to spend several hours per day crafting magic items?

[TooSoon]

Considering that Haerta was able to use Familicide, y'know, at all, I'm not inclined to think that the Spellcraft checks are being kept track of.

Haerta was a preposterous level clearly.

NB: It's not about assuming Xykon has no magic items, it's about not assuming specific items we have no specific evidence for.

[danielxcutter]

Hey, speaking of which, are there any official items that give a Spellcraft bonus that wouldn't contradict what we already see on him? Though it wouldn't exactly be a shock if that robe was like a Robe of Spellcraft +30 or something, I'd say.

[Quartz]

Why on Earth would you assume no magic items on a character known to spend several hours per day crafting magic items?

Because it provides a baseline.

[Metastachydium]

Hey, speaking of which, are there any official items that give a Spellcraft bonus that wouldn't contradict what we already see on him? Though it wouldn't exactly be a shock if that robe was like a Robe of Spellcraft +30 or something, I'd say.

Doesn't his level of spells known limit what he can even craft?

[Reboot]

Moreover, he said himself how rare it is for him to get XP these days. That has implications for what he can craft, if he can't replenish XP lost in crafting. (It also shows just how high his net level is...)

[danielxcutter]

I think scrolls can be used for crafting?

[Doug Lampert]

I think scrolls can be used for crafting?

Pretty much any item that will let you or someone else cast the spell will do.

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

Scrolls are inefficient, because the discussions of creation of individual item types (armor, weapons, ext...) specify that you need the spell every day that you are working on the item, and scrolls are one of the most expensive ways to access a spell (hiring an NPC to cast it is cheaper if you have a big enough city for such an NPC to exist).

IIRC, a complete reading of the rules indicates that Miracle used to emulate any spell of level 8 or lower (cost free) is sufficient to make items, so with Red Cloak's cooperation, X can bypass any one spell prerequisite per day.

[TooSoon]

Because it provides a baseline.

Exactly right. We can level Xykon to say 27, if that's what he needs for the 12th level slot and to hit a 59 DC for Superb Dispelling, and then if evidence to the contrary emerges in the future (say due to unknown magical items) we adjust down. We don't need to prove a negative here,

[Peelee]

Because it provides a baseline.

It doesn't, though. The floor should be established at the lowest point and move up as evidence warrants, not be established at an arbitrarily high point and move down. That's the point of it being a floor. There's no baseline in assuming that he can do things that might otherwise be accomplished by items, which we know he has in spades even if we don't know which specific ones they are.

This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to get a good peg of his level. That sucks, but that's how it shakes out. If you want to have a personal guess as to what levels you think they are, the site owner has explicitly said that this could be done in a new thread in the homebrew section. But a floor that's too high is probably not going to pass muster in a curated thread. But hey, a lot of people could disagree and I could be surprised.

[TooSoon]

It doesn't, though. The floor should be established at the lowest point and move up as evidence warrants, not be established at an arbitrarily high point and move down. That's the point of it being a floor. There's no baseline in assuming that he can do things that might otherwise be accomplished by items, which we know he has in spades even if we don't know which specific ones they are.

This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to get a good peg of his level. That sucks, but that's how it shakes out. If you want to have a personal guess as to what levels you think they are, the site owner has explicitly said that this could be done in a new thread in the homebrew section. But a floor that's too high is probably not going to pass muster in a curated thread. But hey, a lot of people could disagree and I could be surprised.

Except we could say the same about many characters stats on this thread; "an unseen item could have done it". We just don't when it's [insert arbitrary character here, who is usually not a primary caster or Tarquin]. I certainly disagree with this approach because it's not being applied consistently on here (see e.g's I cited a few pages ago, such as the highly arbitrary evidence for Elan's intelligence and wisdom scores).

[Peelee]

Except we could say the same about many characters stats on this thread; "an unseen item could have done it". We just don't when it's [insert arbitrary character here, who is usually not a primary caster or Tarquin]. I certainly disagree with this approach because it's not being applied consistently on here (see e.g's I cited a few pages ago, such as the highly arbitrary evidence for Elan's intelligence and wisdom scores).

We don't know for sure that most characters have unknown magic items. For Tarquin, one who we do know this about, his stat block is notably wanting.

Your opinion does not seem to be shared by many.

[TooSoon]

We don't know for sure that most characters have unknown magic items. For Tarquin, one who we do know this about, his stat block is notably wanting.

Your opinion does not seem to be shared by many.

I mean, I'm more interested in whether I'm right as opposed to popular. That's a good place to be I think.

The reality is we could scrub many stats on here by applying the "a magic item could have done it" test. That standard of proof is only applicable on an arbitrary basis. If it's a character nobody cares about like Elan, we can use hyperbolic comments to stat his intelligence and wisdom scores. If it's a non-caster we can stat their level with art that seems to hint at attacks per round, or "a swirly pattern". If it's a caster, or Tarquin, you must clear the highest of hurdles apparently. I disagree with this approach, and I hope others can see the inconsistency with this approach also. If they don't that's fine too though.

[Peelee]

I mean, I'm more interested in whether I'm right as opposed to popular. That's a good place to be I think.

Then there are two issues you have to realize you face:

First, this is a curated thread. As such, it has a "majority rules" approach to content in the opening posts. You may denigrate it as "being popular", but that is a (arguably, the) necessary criteria for the stat blocks to change, as you constantly propose they do.

Second, the author has explicitly said that the story trumps the rules and he will make adjustments to that effect, as well as that he does not care to look things up and either has things happen as his memory allows, whether right or wrong, as well as trying to move away from hard and fast builds to avoid locking himself into things later in the story as not doing so affords more character freedom. Which means that being "right" is, if not impossible, then as close to it that there is no substantial difference. As I have suggested before, it would seem to serve your goals better (so far as I can tell from what you've said) to simply make your own thread regarding it.

[TooSoon]

The author doesn't always follow the rules... but for the purposes of this thread we assume he is, unless there is specific evidence to the contrary. That is outlined on page 1 also.

[Peelee]

The author doesn't always follow the rules... but for the purposes of this thread we assume he is, unless there is specific evidence to the contrary. That is outlined on page 1 also.

Yes, but the purposes of this thread also are majority opinion rule, which you derided as "being popular". As such, you clearly disagree with the the purposes of this thread in some ways, and I was (again) offering reasons why you might be happier with your own dedicated thead.

[TooSoon]

Yes, but the purposes of this thread also are majority opinion rule, which you derided as "being popular". As such, you clearly disagree with the the purposes of this thread in some ways, and I was (again) offering reasons why you might be happier with your own dedicated thead.

You're a mod, so it's true if you say so; strictly speaking however there is no such criteria or provision to this effect on page 1, and what is and is not a majority opinion and when it is followed is actually not terribly clear or consistently applied (e.g. when the person running the thread picked "an unknown magic item" as the solution to V being able to cast telepathic bond, a solution absolutely nobody was advocating at the time; only to quietly remove it later when I complained). If 10 random posters joined tomorrow, and all came on and agreed with me, they would outnumber those opposed to my views. Would that mean my views prevailed? I doubt it. If 15 people joined tomorrow and argued Xykon was level 100, would that mean we ignored the rules and listed him accordingly? Again, I doubt it. People might reply to me by saying "oh, well the rules don't provide the proof for Xykon being level 100, so we can't do that no matter the majority", but on the other hand there is no rules based reason Tarquin isn't listed as Epic after his arrow catch feat, people just "don't like it". So when a majority does and does not matter (assuming an anti-Tarquin majority even exists anymore) is charmingly vague at present.

If the thread is curated in such a way perhaps that should be added to page 1, along with the reference to how we assume the rules are in effect for the purposes of this thread. Some sort of criteria for determining this, or resolving disagreements, might also be considered.

I would also personally suggest a standard of proof be provided, so stuff can be decided more consistently. I advise all this because right now anyone coming into the thread would have no idea from reading page 1 that we determine the stats off majority decision (or how this is ascertained). The OP merely provides that the rules are assumed to be in effect regardless of what the Giant says, unless there is specific evidence to the contrary in that instance. If it is the case that majority opinion overrides the rules because they "don't like the outcome of the rules" that should be clearly stated. I think before doing that there should perhaps be a discussion on here with posters about whether they actually want that to be the process going forward, and if they understand that to be the process themselves, and how it should work. Just a thought.

[Peelee]

there is no such criteria or provision to this effect on page 1

Rules for curated threads are in the first post, as shown below (boldong mine).

Q: I've heard there was a fight over some topic years ago, and now we're not allowed to discuss it any more. Is that the case?
No; this thread does not have a banned topic list (of course, the forum as a whole has one; please see the board rules for details). Also see the thread rules by Mark Hall.

If you meant about making your own thread in the homebrew section and titling it something like "TooSoon's take on OotS character stats", that does not need to be in the opening post nor should it be, since the current curator is not a Moderator or Administrator and does not have authority to speak on topics like that. The link to how curated threads are handled itself doesn't even need to be in the opening post; that is a courtesy the curator is granting, but they can just as easily be found via search engine or asking the mods.

If 10 random posters joined tomorrow, and all came on and agreed with me, they would outnumber those opposed to my views. Would that mean my views prevailed? I doubt it. If 15 people joined tomorrow and argued Xykon was level 100, would that mean we ignored the rules and listed him accordingly? Again, I doubt it.

If they created a consensus, then yes to both, as that is how curated threads work. This is unlikely to happen, of course. But it would be keeping with how curated threads are run (which, again, is linked to in the opening post).

[halfeye]

If they created a consensus, then yes to both, as that is how curated threads work. This is unlikely to happen, of course. But it would be keeping with how curated threads are run (which, again, is linked to in the opening post).

Even if they were obvious sockpuppets? That seems unwise.

[Peelee]

Even if they were obvious sockpuppets? That seems unwise.

Fortunately, that's against the Forum Rules, which trump the curated thread rules.

[TooSoon]

Even if they were obvious sockpuppets? That seems unwise.

There seems to be an obvious tension between saying "the thread assumes rules are in effect" and "10 random frat buddies can come on and say 'screw the rules, let's list Xykon as level a million!!!'" While you have submitted that we would in such a circumstance change Xykon to level 1 million, I think I am with the majority in affirming I do not believe that is what would happen in actuality. That is the only observation I will make.

[Peelee]

There seems to be an obvious tension between saying "the thread assumes rules are in effect" and "10 random frat buddies can come on and say 'screw the rules, let's list Xykon as level a million!!!'"

This has been the case for years, and yet to the best of my knowledge there has never been an influx of new accounts that home in on a single curated thread all making the same spurious claim. I do not believe this situation is as likely to happen as you seem to think it is.

[Anteros]

In a lot of ways this thread has maintained its popular rule by simply shutting down people who dissent until they stop participating. Much like you're doing now. Of course you're going to have popular rule when you have a literal moderator as well as the thread creator telling anyone who disagrees with them to shut up or go make their own thread. I can't remember how many times I've seen some variation of "that's not how we do that here" to dismiss perfectly valid (or even invalid) arguments, and for the posters in question to eventually give up and leave. It's why I usually only lurk this thread every few months instead of posting, because every time I check it out some form of this is happening.

If you want to cite popular rule that's fine, and I don't even personally agree with most of TooSoon's arguments, but it should be fairly obvious that ideas can't gain popularity if you make the people voicing them feel so unwelcome that they leave.

One thing I will agree with is that the requirements for evidence in this thread are sometimes incredibly arbitrary. Ranging from a 13 page thesis for some arguments to "well the sound effect said he dodged, so he must have the dodge feat" for others.

[TooSoon]

In a lot of ways this thread has maintained its popular rule by simply shutting down people who dissent until they stop participating. Much like you're doing now. Of course you're going to have popular rule when you have a literal moderator as well as the thread creator telling anyone who disagrees with them to shut up or go make their own thread. I can't remember how many times I've seen some variation of "that's not how we do that here" to dismiss perfectly valid (or even invalid) arguments, and for the posters in question to eventually give up and leave. It's why I usually only lurk this thread every few months instead of posting, because every time I check it out some form of this is happening.

If you want to cite popular rule that's fine, and I don't even personally agree with most of TooSoon's arguments, but it should be fairly obvious that ideas can't gain popularity if you make the people voicing them feel so unwelcome that they leave.

One thing I will agree with is that the requirements for evidence in this thread are sometimes incredibly arbitrary. Ranging from a 13 page thesis for some arguments to "well the sound effect said he dodged, so he must have the dodge feat" for others.

Don't worry. I'm not the sort who gets scared off from participating. I'm sure plenty of people do agree with me, I've seen some of them posting, but I agree that it seems like some people would just give up after hitting the brick wall here.

[Squire Doodad]

Pretty much any item that will let you or someone else cast the spell will do.

Does this mean you could use a Craft Wondrous Item scroll to craft an item worth more than a Craft Wondrous Item scroll?

[danielxcutter]

Nnnnnno, that's not how it works? What we mean is that you can use wands or scrolls to provide the required spells - i.e. if you're a warlock but don't have Imbue Item yet, you can buy a scroll of Fireball and use that to fulfill the spell requirement part for that +1 flaming burst adamantine scythe or whatever.

[Squire Doodad]

Dang, I guess that means no infinitely recursive money schemes.

[danielxcutter]

Dang, I guess that means no infinitely recursive money schemes.

I think "cast Wall of Salt" is more than enough for that, as salt is a trade good and therefore provides a surprising amount of cash.

[Peelee]

In a lot of ways this thread has maintained its popular rule by simply shutting down people who dissent until they stop participating. Much like you're doing now. Of course you're going to have popular rule when you have a literal moderator as well as the thread creator telling anyone who disagrees with them to shut up or go make their own thread.

Thread curators cannot say anything of the sort. Moderators can, but you will absolutely know when that happens, and it will not happen without good reason. When I became a moderator, I had to make a choice - stop posting generally, or assume that people would be able to tell that I only act in the capacity of a moderator when using red text. I choose to believe I was not overly optimistic when I made my decision.

Further, my suggestion that one person specifically may be happier with their own thread was due to that person having argued for a single position for over a year and a half, spanning 80 pages of discussion. I felt it was a reasonable suggestion at that point, and regardless, it was merely a suggestion.

I can't remember how many times I've seen some variation of "that's not how we do that here" to dismiss perfectly valid (or even invalid) arguments, and for the posters in question to eventually give up and leave. It's why I usually only lurk this thread every few months instead of posting, because every time I check it out some form of this is happening.

If you believe the thread is being run badly, you are free to appeal to the moderators and argue for a change of curator. I have suggested this to others who voiced issues, including the person that you have accused me of "telling to shut up and make their own thread".

[Rogan]

Don't worry. I'm not the sort who gets scared off from participating. I'm sure plenty of people do agree with me, I've seen some of them posting, but I agree that it seems like some people would just give up after hitting the brick wall here.

There are also plenty people disagreeing with you. I'm not sure if this would work here, but in other threads, there will be a vote for or against inclusion. It would require a careful wording of the question, but I'm sure this could be done.

If this would happen here, it could put an end to the discussion of "What level is V" until there is new evidence in one direction or the other.