# Players Whining that they Should be able to Buy Magic Items



## National Acrobat (Jan 26, 2005)

Does anyone else have this problem? I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will. It's just me and my style, and I am very up front with it when starting a new game or group. However I've noticed that with the advent of 3E, a few of my players are very adamant that the rules indicate that they are allowed to purchase magic items.

Now, rule 1 is of course, the DM sets the rules. I have never allowed this, and am fairly good about providing treasure in the form of items the party will need and will find useful and beneficial, and even after all of this, they are telling me that I am missing the boat on 3E rules.

Am I? I don't think I am, but some opinions and experiences would be helpful.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 26, 2005)

First off, the rules do not say the players can buy magical items.  However, it does say they can make them.  So, encourage them to make the items.  

Now, I've been polaying for a long time as well and I know the old school deal about not having magical weapon shops.  But I have found that as long as they are unique, interesting, and have a set inventory they can actually be great fun.  For instance none of the magical shops imc advertise.  The common man can't afford their wares so   they are very private and hard to find.  Second, with the rareity of magical items, it is a sellers market.  The cost in the DMG is usually as low as they will go, but many times they ask for even more.  THe most important thing though is the set inventary.  That way players can't just go in and name whatever they want.  Some magic shops will make special orders but theree is usually a waiting list.


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 26, 2005)

Any player that ever tried to tell me I was running my game wrong would be told up front "This is the way I run my game.  If you don't like it, there's the door.  Thanks for your interest."  Ultimately, the GM is the one who calls the shots, and the players have to respect that.  When I GM, I lay out my rules that deviate from the core rules at the beginning and expect the players to either agree or bow out of the game.  

Now as for magical items specifically, I am with you on that score.  I have never and will probably never allow magical items to be bought.  They have to be earned, and should be more special than a trip to the local magic shop would make them.  I have yet to meet any players that disagree with this ruling, but then again many of my players have been around since before 3E, so that could be one reason.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 26, 2005)

alot of new edition players will tell you they need to have Ye Olde Majick Shoppe to purchase and sell their phat magic lewt.

i've got 44000gp worth of phat magic lewt right now i'm pwning off on my DM.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 26, 2005)

Does your ban on buying magic include potions, scrolls, and commissioning substantial items?  I can see not allowing them to just amble into ye olde magic shoppe and pick up some +5 half-plate off the rack, but why prevent them from buying minor stuff and specifically playing in the campaign to commission something nifty from a competent crafter?


----------



## Ryltar (Jan 26, 2005)

You'd best take your players aside for a second and have a talk.

Do you run a campaign that is deviating from the D&D norm in a way that 
- Monsters are weaker/stronger than standard
- Challenges are meant to be greater and more difficult to overcome
- it is a low-magic setting ?

If yes:

Do the players realize this? Even if you haven't explicitly stated it, is it something that has been established over the course of several gaming sessions?

If yes, then your players should realize that they are not being put at a disadvantage - you simply changed the rules in a global way to fit your DMing style. This is perfectly acceptable, but it's your players who have to be okay with it. Maybe what they really want is a different sort of game? Maybe they just need to see your reasoning behind it all.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 26, 2005)

Hitokiri said:
			
		

> Now as for magical items specifically, I am with you on that score.  I have never and will probably never allow magical items to be bought.  They have to be earned, and should be more special than a trip to the local magic shop would make them.  I have yet to meet any players that disagree with this ruling, but then again many of my players have been around since before 3E, so that could be one reason.




They need to be earned?  They are earned, at least the gold the players get from adventurering is earned.  And allowing them to spend that on magical items is still being earned.  Unless you are handing out free gold to the players that is.


----------



## Henry (Jan 26, 2005)

I see it as a sign of the current gaming environment, influenced by CRPG's of various types, which puts different social contracts into circulation. As the gaming populace has changed, their cultural influences on gaming style have changed with them. Some groups have stuck to and reinforced the "old way" of the majority of magic being introduced by the DM, but others have adapted the styles of current game trends. Neither is good or bad, but different in styles.

One thing you CAN tell them is that the DMG itself states that those are guidelines, and not a mandate that PCs can purchase items. The reason so many DMs use them as such is either as an expedient, or because of misconceptions garnered by skimming the material. Misconceptions happened due to not thoroughly reading the material with 1E and 2E, and now with 3E, too. But by no means does it say anywhere that the PCs have a "right" to purchase, nor that they even have a right to ANYTHING ELSE IN THE DMG, for that matter, whether it's the art and jewelry, the Prestige Classes, or the magic items. If they can't have the Flintlocks and Blaster Rifles listed, why should they have the magic items?

I allow purchase in most of my campaigns, but I do it was an expedient. Even then, I don't allow carte blanche - They tell me what they seek, I tell them if it's available, or if it needs to be commissioned in X days, or even if there's someone who can make it!


----------



## azmodean (Jan 26, 2005)

What it comes down to is, do the players have magical equipment appropriate for their level?  I had a DM a while back that never, ever gave us magical items, or loot for that matter, and it took an encounter that was supposed to be easy for our level almost causing a TPK before he realised that we actually need that magical stuff.

If you pump up the magical items in treasure and/or have the party fight lots of well-equipped NPCs, then that should suffice, but if you give them by-the book treasure and they can't use the money on magical items, they will fall behind on the power curve.

This all assumes you use the cr system, if you have a pretty good feel for challenging your party based on their actual resources instead of using the abstract system, then there is no reason to try to stick to the suggested character wealth.


----------



## was (Jan 26, 2005)

If your players know the score when they sign on, they're in no position to complain...


----------



## Mirage_Patrick (Jan 26, 2005)

Logically...if magic items exist then they will be bought and sold...now that might be on a 1 to 1 basis, auction, or if you have shops you can easily limit the stock of what they happen to have available.


Here is the simple question...are you saying a player is not allowed to sell an item?  If a player can sell an item, then others can buy it...and there you go with the whole buying and selling of magic items.

The only way to logistically argue against the buying and selling of items is if the items themselves grow in power with an individual and therefore there would be a counter-incentive to selling of magic items.

Otherwise....if ya got a +5 sword...why not sell the +1, +2, +3, +4 swords...and by logic every other adventuring group/noble/merchant would have a similar mentality


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jan 26, 2005)

I tend to not sweat the small stuff like rods of cure light wounds, minor scrolls, potions, and alchemical items.

One thing to consider though, is that if there are magic items in the game and the PC's aren't the only ones doing adventuring, that someone is boudn to have set up some type of 'swap'. Happens all the time in real life with almost every subject that can be considered a collectible.

Others have also made good points about the whole CR vs assumed magic level of the characters being built into the game.

For me, I tend to have players that have access to minor magic and a few 'unique' tweaks here and there. For example, one of my players has a two-handed sword that is an Item Familiar (feat from Unearthed Arcana), another has a two-handed sword that's a Scion Weapon that kills dragons and is meant for mages, another has parts of a suite of items that gain more power when the whole suite is collected.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jan 26, 2005)

I'm somewhat sympathitic to the cry of "I wanna buy magic items!"

That said, the costs for the items in the DMG, are just that: the costs.  Point out to your players the selling price of most durable goods is around double of the creation costs.

Hey, if they really want to spend 1,500 gp on a 50 charge _wand of cure light wounds_ or 140,000 for a _rod of lordly might_, why would you want to stop them?  Seriously.  They have to use that gold for something.  Why not let them coustomize their character a bit?

If you don't like Ye Olde Magik Shoppe in your campaign, they can always commission the items from wizards or priests until they get high enough level where you are comfortable with them going to other planes for "the good stuff".  Let them know you're doing this.  Set a cap of, for example, 10,000 gp cost for anything available on the Prime Material and cut loose when they hit the multiverse.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 26, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> I see it as a sign of the current gaming environment, influenced by CRPG's of various types, which puts different social contracts into circulation. As the gaming populace has changed, their cultural influences on gaming style have changed with them. Some groups have stuck to and reinforced the "old way" of the majority of magic being introduced by the DM, but others have adapted the styles of current game trends. Neither is good or bad, but different in styles.




I see it as a recognition of the reality that in any environment in which valuable items exist, a market will arise in which people buy and sell such items. History teaches us that valuable items _will_ be bought and sold. No matter how "sacred" or "cool" the thing in question might seem to be, people will sell it if there are people willing to buy it. There is no persuasive reason for magic items to be an exception.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 26, 2005)

Back in AD&D1, the DMG stated that a PC could sell magic items to NPCs in the game, or to another PC. But a PC could not buy a magic item from an NPC. 

I saw character sheets for high-level PCs with an extra sheet (or 3) listing all the magic items the character had found and just stored away somewhere.

I used to go through the old classic modules and add up all the magic items the PCs could acquire. Often there'd be a couple +1 swords, or few +1 rings, or a suit of +1 plate mail and a suit of +1 chainmail. And even if there were enough PCs in the group to pass out these items without duplication, they'd find more in the very next module.

It was not uncommon to have collected a dozen magic items by 5th level, just playing the official adventure modules. And some of those items were duplicates or weaker than the character's main item.

It got kind of absurd to not allowing selling *and* buying of a perfectly legitimate type of goods. Why not let the PCs do this?

If it is a worry of having Magic*Marts in your campaign, are you also worried about having Armor Emporiums? Or Al's Used Ship lots? How about the Galleria of Jewels? I mean, if you allow the selling and purchasing of ships, you don't assume the PCs buy one of the twenty sitting down at the dockyard, right? They can buy a 5,000gp diamond (for a _raise dead_ spell), but you don't assume it's found at the corner shop, right? They don't buy full plate armor in a store, off a rack, right?

I've got a little house rule in my game that to purchase a magic item, it takes 3 days per 1,000gp in its price to acquire it (compare to 1 day per 1,000gp to craft the item). [A Gather Information check DC 25 can reduce the delay time to 2 days/1,000gp.]

This includes the time to find a seller, broker, or crafter, and then wait for the item to come available or be created. You want a +2 sword, fine. It will take 24 days to get it. Some of that time is the PC making contacts, asking around, and looking around. Some is spent just waiting for the broker to do the leg work. Some is spent for the crafter to create it. But PCs can buy magic items for the listed price (controlled by international guilds), but never just "off the rack".

Quasqueton


----------



## Orius (Jan 26, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Does anyone else have this problem? I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will. It's just me and my style, and I am very up front with it when starting a new game or group. However I've noticed that with the advent of 3E, a few of my players are very adamant that the rules indicate that they are allowed to purchase magic items.
> 
> Now, rule 1 is of course, the DM sets the rules. I have never allowed this, and am fairly good about providing treasure in the form of items the party will need and will find useful and beneficial, and even after all of this, they are telling me that I am missing the boat on 3E rules.
> 
> Am I? I don't think I am, but some opinions and experiences would be helpful.




It's not really surprising.  A lot of old-school DMs seems to find easier magic item acquisition and fast XP gains to be the hardest aspect of 3e to adjust to.  Myself, I do offer small amounts of random minor items to be purchased by players in the larger cities, but that's it.  The really good stuff has to be made or found.

We've had this argument here plenty of times before.  There's a few things to keep in mind.  First, in the old days, low magic was encouraged for the sake of game balance, but modules tended to be loaded down with lots of magic loot anyway, which went against the low magic reasoning in the first place.  The basic assumption behind 3e is high magic from the start.  Not all DMs like high magic, but keep in mind that a lot of monsters and such assume a party with plenty of magic resources.  If they don't have them, then encounters can become tougher.

Another argument is the verisimiltude factor.  Old school DMs generally prefer to ban the buying and selling of magic to keep a certain amount of control over the power that the party has.  However, some people will argue that that makes no sense in a greater economic scale, that people would likely by and sell magic items if they existed.  So you can still exert some control by not necessarily making everthing the PCs want available, reasoning that there are   wealthy NPCs out there scarfing up the good stuff, or that the owners of the good stuff don't want to sell it off.


----------



## diaglo (Jan 26, 2005)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> I used to go through the old classic modules and add up all the magic items the PCs could acquire. Often there'd be a couple +1 swords, or few +1 rings, or a suit of +1 plate mail and a suit of +1 chainmail. And even if there were enough PCs in the group to pass out these items without duplication, they'd find more in the very next module.





true enough the DM knew there were a lot of items.

the players did not.

identify didn't work that way. go read it again in the PHB.

neither did detect magic.

and trying to convince the merchant you were selling him a + X weapon... was a joke.


----------



## der_kluge (Jan 26, 2005)

I think you're missing out on some good opportunities here, really.

I mean, assuming the PCs have been asking around for the purchase of magic items, finally offer them up a "shady" dealer who claims to have an inventory of various items which can be manufactured "for a price" upon request.

Pick out some things, and then have the players pick the things they are interested in.  Shady dealer leaves, and a few weeks later delivers the goods as promised.

The items work as advertised - UNTIL the party meets their nemesis, who utters a single command word, and all of the items instantly become cursed, negative versions of what they were before they have detrimental effects.  Evil DM laugh ensues.


Alternatively, you could introduce a reclusive wizard in a tower dying scenario, whereby the PCs get to participate in an auction of the items present.  Come up with several items, list them on the docket.  Great way to alleviate them of all their money, especially if someone keeps outbidding them.


----------



## maddman75 (Jan 26, 2005)

IMC, I never had a 'magic shop' per se, but the characters could contact a wizard and ask him to make an item custom for him.  This often involved cash and other item in exchance, maybe a favor or two.  And when I set up a town or city, I would define what was available.  For instance, town A might have a 7th level wizard with Craft Magical Arms and Armor and Craft Wand.  That limits what he can make both in types of items and in power.  A large city might hold a 12th level mage with Craft Wonderous Item, Brew Potion, and Forge Ring.

For the most part they'd use what they found, old school style.  But if they wanted to track someone down they could indeed have special items made.


----------



## Orius (Jan 26, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> true enough the DM knew there were a lot of items.
> 
> the players did not.




Who said that's only back in the old days?  I always have cases of players missing hidden treasure caches or not looting bodies.  And I always chuckle about it.



> identify didn't work that way. go read it again in the PHB.
> 
> neither did detect magic.




But keep in mind that there are plently of DMs out there who simply tell the players when they load up on treasure "You got a _+1 sword_, _+1 shield_, _+1 ring of protection_," etc.


----------



## Bregh (Jan 26, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> true enough the DM knew there were a lot of items.
> 
> the players did not.
> 
> ...




Lots of those old classic mods and module series were written and playtested as tournament one-shots, too, not always intended for wholesale inclusion in a regular campaign without personal tailoring by the DM.

As to the thread topic, an NPC wizard or cleric can take the place of the shoppe, requiring a short quest or similiar adventure service for the crafting of an item, instead of simply plunking down some change.

If you really wanted to maintain an edge, then have the PCs pony up the cash and then gather a few of the components needed in the fabrication, too.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 26, 2005)

> true enough the DM knew there were a lot of items.
> 
> the players did not.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, but I miss your point. Why would reading the _identify_ spell in the PHB change the fact that classic modules had a lot of magic items, and the fact that most PCs of advanced level had a bunch? And how would it change the fact that the DMG specifically allowed PCs selling to NPCs but couldn't buy from NPCs?

Perhaps you should go read the DMG again?

Quasqueton


----------



## diaglo (Jan 26, 2005)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, but I miss your point. Why would reading the _identify_ spell in the PHB change the fact that classic modules had a lot of magic items...





identify and detect magic were 1st lvl spells.

you had a limited time in which identify would work. your exposure to it ... meant you lost the ability to read the magic or some bologna like that...

thus how many magic-users did you know that loaded up with identify and detect magic?

not many eh...

i think Orius and Bregh are more on target about why the PCs had so much.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 26, 2005)

I find player whining about magic items (or anything else) is usually solved by handing the player in question your screen... tell him you'll in the next room rolling up your halfing fighter/thief and you'd like him to run city adventures and never *ever* rail road him.

Since DMing is a lot more work than showing up 20 minutes late and whining about magic... most players take the hint and become a little more civil.

That said, I havent had a lot of trouble with whining players... (not for long- they usually move on to greener pastures).

Chuck


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jan 26, 2005)

I have one vendor in a city that will have some magic swords and stuff for sale on occasion but not many people know it and he is very expensive.   He's in a fairly large city as well and very few of his customers know this.  What really gets me is that the players expect there to be magic shops in tiny hommlets and other places where logic dictates there may be a merchant with poor quality goods at best.


----------



## francisca (Jan 26, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> identify and detect magic were 1st lvl spells.
> 
> you had a limited time in which identify would work. your exposure to it ... meant you lost the ability to read the magic or some bologna like that...



1 hour per level of the MU, after the initial discovery, IIRC.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jan 26, 2005)

A lot has been mentioned, but I have to ask this. How much gold do the PCs have? Sometimes, when you get all those coins burning a hole in your pocket, Magic Items are really the only thing that will get rid of all that gold.

And while in my games there ARE magic shops, they're expensive and usually lightly stocked. If you want something specific, you get it commissioned by a crafter type.


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 26, 2005)

OK, let me clarify my position and outlook on the situation.  I see a lot of people saying "well, the PCs will end up with lots of low level magical items by level X and will sell it, and if they are doing so, then so are others, thus there is a trade in magical items".  My question is how high is it before PCs are willing to sell things.  Most of the players I've seen like having a backup weapon, so you figure they will keep the first two, or maybe even 3, weapons they come across.  Likewise, a spare suit of armor doesn't hurt to have sitting at home.  Would suck for your 10th lvl PC to lose his +3 armor to a rust monster or black pudding and have to revert back to standard armor cause he sold his other magical armor for some quick cash.  Also, when was the last time you saw a PC sell off a useful potion or scroll, as opposed to holding onto it "just in case".  Now EVENTUALLY, I will agree that the PCs will get to a point where they will feel that selling some of their loot is worthwhile, but by this time they are usually mid level (or even higher).  So my question is, how many people ever reach the point where they are willing to sell the stuff?  Most of the people in the majority of the fantasy settings I've seen are peasants, merchants, laborers, nobles, etc.  These are not leveled characters that are obtaining magical items to sell.  Even among leveled characters, many may never be in a position to sell items.  A mage who becomes very powerful through study is unlikely to be wallowing in expendable items that he can convert to ready cash, nor is the high priest who gains his powers through meditation and communion with his diety.  So what I see is a VERY limited number of people who will ever be in a position where they would be willing to sell.  Certainly not enough to create magical shops (although I could see some sort of auctioning being done, much like what happens today when a rare piece of art goes on sale, but this would be the exception and not the rule).  The only other way for items to come into the market is if they are made to be sold.  Considering the costs and time involved in making them, I doubt that many mages or clerics are willing to act as magical labor in creating the items.

Now, if the players let me know they want item X, I may throw them a bone and let them hear about someone who reportedly has said item and let them try to track the person down and barter with them for it.  This can be a great platform for adventures as they follow false leads, maybe have to perform some service as part of their payment, etc.  But to allow them to say at the beginning of the adventure "I'm going to sell my +2 sword and pick up a +3 sword, and a couple of cure potions and a pair of boots of speed" kinda kills the mysticism of the items, in addition to being unbelivable imho.

As for what they use their money for, most of my players find things.  I've had players do anything from horde it to buying land or even (in one instance) a castle.  Some have had families or even villages that they send their money back to; less savory characters have used the money to buy power or influence, and as a way of bribing others in high society when needed.  Many of my players find they are consistently short of money, not that they have scads of it lying around with nothing to do with it.  Adventuring is a way for them to get ahead, seek their fortunes, not an end to itself.


----------



## National Acrobat (Jan 26, 2005)

Ryltar said:
			
		

> Do you run a campaign that is deviating from the D&D norm in a way that
> - Monsters are weaker/stronger than standard
> - Challenges are meant to be greater and more difficult to overcome
> - it is a low-magic setting ?
> ...




Yes, everything is level appropriate and reasonable. The players realize this, and in fact, I've been dming the same bunch for about 15 years. 

It isn't all of them, just a couple. 

The campaigns they have enjoyed and loved, and we have a great time. I have 8 players, and it's only 2 of them that really drive this issue, but they have a good time playing the campaigns, so it's just an annoyance really that just won't go away.

I think mainly they have gotten it into their heads that 3E states they can buy items. I've tried to tell them that they are guidelines, but they still whine.

I encourage them to take the Item Creation Feats, but most of the time the spellcasters want feats for other things. I have enough trouble trying to convince the Wizard to Scribe his own scrolls when he wants to. 

I think one of the underlying things is that the players don't want to give up the xp, but that seems a small cost to me to create what you want.




			
				Billd91 said:
			
		

> Does your ban on buying magic include potions, scrolls?




Clerics can purchase potions and scrolls from their own temples, wizards can from the Mage's guild, but again, I try to encourage them to manufacture them.


----------



## carpedavid (Jan 26, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> I think mainly they have gotten it into their heads that 3E states they can buy items. I've tried to tell them that they are guidelines, but they still whine.




Well, technically, 3E does state that they can buy items. In the DMG (at least the 3.0 version - I'm not sure if it's still there in the 3.5 version), there are rules stating what items are available for purchase in different size settlements (based upon expense of the item, etc). The assumption, from a game design perspective, is that there is trade of magical items. So they're technically right, in that the rules do explicitly permit the purchase of magical items.

However, I've never met anyone that runs the game directly out of the rulebooks. So, as everyone else has already stated, as the DM, you have the right to run things differently. However, as everyone else has also already stated, you need to talk with your players and discuss how to reconcile your respective expectations about how the fantasy world that you're collectively participating in works.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 26, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Does anyone else have this problem?



Nope. I've made quite clear to my players from the very beginning how my campaign world works (in terms of demographics, economics, and culture), thus they know from the start what to expect. Since they fall into the "semi-intelligent" category, they don't squawk about it.


----------



## Zappo (Jan 26, 2005)

IMC, players can and do purchase any magical item. However, it isn't as easy as it seems. You've got to find someone who has the item and is willing to sell it. Some campaigns have actual magic shops, and some don't. Even when there are magic shops, these will usually only reliably stock relatively common items. For stuff such as powerful items, or items that aren't especially powerful but are still rare (wands and potions of seldom-used spells, weird wonderful items...), the characters have to search, sometimes pretty hard.

Basically, I play it according to market logic, or at least try to. I think that it is pretty silly that characters could find any magic item in a ready fashion, and equally silly that (if the campaign is high-magic enough) there is no shop specializing in magic items.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 26, 2005)

I don't have a problem with a little S&S (slaughter and shopping) in my D&D campaign. I do have a problem with _everything_ in the DMG being available at any any given moment to PC's with the requisite amount of cash. So its not.

I do like the old-school tendency for characters to carry magic items that aren't ideally suited for them, thus neccessitating some clever use of the materials at hand. I'm thinking of an old game where we used a Decanter of Endless Water in a dozen crazy ways... it was a blast. That wouldn't have happened in game where the magic item trade was robust enough to allow for optimal PC loadouts.

So I guess I have a slightly old-fashioned bias: I want to see clever play happen inside the game, not between the covers of the rulesbooks with people mix-and-matching the perfect set of gear to handle every situation. I can get experience alone that playing CRPG's...


----------



## Turanil (Jan 26, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Does anyone else have this problem? I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items.
> 
> However I've noticed that with the advent of 3E, a few of my players are very adamant that the rules indicate that they are allowed to purchase magic items.
> 
> Some opinions and experiences would be helpful.



My experience: LET THEM BUY MAGICAL ITEMS IF THEY WISH: POTENTIAL FOR GREAT (DM) FUN!  

I don't remember the exact circumstances, but I did that a couple of times in some campaigns I ran. The main idea is to put purchases inside the game, as an adventure and roleplaying experience in itself. Do not let them exchange gp for magic items on their character sheets. That's the rule. But then, be devious:

-- Once they got some magical item from a thieves' guild's smuggler, and ended up carrying a stolen object extremely important to a powerful faction. They got serious problems and lost more than they had got in the first place. (**evil chuckle**)

-- Another time they bought many magical potions from a street crook, and never saw their money again. Plus the look of utter disappointment when in the middle of a fight, your potion of extra-healing doesn't work... (**another evil chuckle**)


----------



## Ogrork the Mighty (Jan 26, 2005)

The point of the game is for everyone to have fun, not just the DM. If everyone in the group would like access to a magic shop, IMO the DM has an obligation to either accomodate them to some degree or give them an explanation why not that is more than "this is my game and if you don't like it there's the door." Talk about an egotistical, tyrannical attitude!

That doesn't mean they should be able to buy whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want. But by the same token, having to rely on the DM to dish out what he feels like can be annoying after a while. And if you're not a spellcaster and there isn't an appropriate one in the party, once again the PCs are forced to rely on the benevolence of their DM to give them access to created magic items.

It's a team game folks!


----------



## Mallus (Jan 26, 2005)

Ogrork the Mighty said:
			
		

> If everyone in the group would like access to a magic shop, IMO the DM has an obligation to either accomodate them to some degree or give them an explanation why not that is more than "this is my game and if you don't like it there's the door." Talk about an egotistical, tyrannical attitude!



So if everyone wants to play machine gun wielding pixies into leather, then the DM has to oblige them?

I'm all for making the players happy. But sometimes you make your audience the happiest by cannily _refusing_ to give them everything they want...


----------



## Turanil (Jan 26, 2005)

If you go to the magic shop with your big bag full of 50,000 gp or so to get a +5 stuff, this isn't magic anymore. This is the fantasy equivalent of a modern technological equipment. As such, IMO it loses all flavor of what magic is supposed to represent.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jan 26, 2005)

> If you go to the magic shop with your big bag full of 50,000 gp or so to get a +5 stuff, this isn't magic anymore.



But you don't have a problem with the bag full of 50,000 gp?

Quasqueton


----------



## billd91 (Jan 26, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> So if everyone wants to play machine gun wielding pixies into leather, then the DM has to oblige them?
> 
> I'm all for making the players happy. But sometimes you make your audience the happiest by cannily _refusing_ to give them everything they want...




Well, there's the difference. Cannily refusing implies there's a reason rather than just the DM saying "I say so." I think that's what Ogrork is getting at.  That and DM flexibility to let the players have some control of their PCs destinites by being accommodating on some reasonably agreeable issues. I don't think he implied at all that machine gun wielding pixies were something that needed to be obliged to.


----------



## DanMcS (Jan 26, 2005)

I think the real problem here isn't players whining that they want to buy magical items.  It's really the DMs whining that they should have ABSOLUTE POWER.  You're not the only player, nor the player that matters the most.  The game shouldn't be a power fantasy for the DM.  If you can't work with your players to give them what they would like, you shouldn't be DMing; it's their game too.


----------



## Kast (Jan 26, 2005)

I think there should be items available for sale on a made to order basis. However, who does it and what is required to obtain them would be part of the role-playing experience. I would never cave in and go with a Magic-mart.

An adventure to find the maker, or get the components or a task to perform for the maker as a sign of good faith is no different than kicking a door down, slaying the dragon and knabbing the Frost Brand.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 26, 2005)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> But you don't have a problem with the bag full of 50,000 gp?




Well quipped!


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 26, 2005)

DanMcS said:
			
		

> I think the real problem here isn't players whining that they want to buy magical items.  It's really the DMs whining that they should have ABSOLUTE POWER.  You're not the only player, nor the player that matters the most.  The game shouldn't be a power fantasy for the DM.  If you can't work with your players to give them what they would like, you shouldn't be DMing; it's their game too.



DM's do have absolute power, it kinda comes with the title.

The difference between a good DM and a poor one is how they use it.  

I have always been up front with how I am going to run a game, so players walk into it with their eyes wide open.  They know what to expect the first time they sit down at the table.  As a result, I have very little patience for people who suddenly decide that Im running the game wrong.  If they didn't like the rules to begin with, then they shouldn't have joined in.  You can feel free to think that on some sort of power trip, but most of my players would laugh at you for saying so.  I think the fact that the vast majority of people I've GMed for have been eager to jump into my games when asked if they want to play again, sometimes at the expense of other groups, tells me loud and clear what their thougts on my style of play is.

Now a GM who arbitrarily decides these things on the fly without informing players beforehand is just ASKING to have problems.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 26, 2005)

billd91 said:
			
		

> Cannily refusing implies there's a reason rather than just the DM saying "I say so."



But, everything outside PC actions happen because the DM "says so". Rain falls, princesses get kidnapped by evil dukes, the dead rise from the earth to menace taxpayers... Sometimes simply saying 'that doesn't match the flavor of the campaign' is all you get. For example, if you're shooting for Tolkienesque epic fantasy, magic shops (and beholders) are right out.


> That and DM flexibility to let the players have some control of their PCs destinites by being accommodating on some reasonably agreeable issues.



'Giving PC's some control over their destinies' means allowing them free range of actions in the game, not altering the parameters of the world to suit their liking. A PC can decide to go shopping, I decide the contents of the store.


> I don't think he implied at all that machine gun wielding pixies were something that needed to be obliged to.



I know. I just like the thought of machine gun wielding pixies...


----------



## Ace (Jan 26, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> If you go to the magic shop with your big bag full of 50,000 gp or so to get a +5 stuff, this isn't magic anymore. This is the fantasy equivalent of a modern technological equipment. As such, IMO it loses all flavor of what magic is supposed to represent.




I disagree with this, IMC anyway, magic is technology --

Now I stopped the "need to swap" problem by giving my players cool items that level up with them -- that +1 Two Bladed Staff -- main gain new powers in time as may your amulet or barcers -- the "GP per level" equation stays the same but the number of items and the need to switch them out is reduced--

basically you can't get Aundril or Excaliber at level 1 but you can get a sword that will become Aundril or Excaliber 

Also I allow the players to buy any non destructive  "charged" item they are interested in any decent sized city -- these are OTC stuff and very common as they can be made from the magic in ordinary things 

+1 weapon and armor  can be bought at list price as can +2 with a few good rolls since they are juiced up masterwork and masterpiece items 

Destructive items can be had but they may be illegal 

Stronger stuff and permanent items need to be commisioned or aquired at a very specialized dealer in a very big city -- they require hard to get power components to make 

Now In my high magic game with common planar travel and loads of power components avavilable magic is a commodity --  find a city with the right GP limit and roll am Information gathering, Knowledge Local or at 5DC higher Knowledge Arcana or Bardic Lore check equal to DC10 + the highest level effect and you can buy the item


----------



## Ibram (Jan 26, 2005)

Permanet magic items are rare as hens teeth IMC, and are usualy family treasures or reveared relics.  Getting your hands on a magic weapon or armor is extremely difficult and dangerous, and are often dangerous to have or use as well.

This is due to several factors IMC; firstly being the extreme rarity of magic users capable of even producing a magic item, secondly those who can are either under the control of (or in control of) a powerful government or group and thus not likely to spend time making +2 longswords for every chump knight who wants to slay a daemon.

How do I compensate for this?  Well creatures that absolutly need magic items to defeat them are as rare as the magic weapons themselves.  In addition I've added differing levels of Masterworked items as well as added alchemical items; though not as powerful as magic they are easier to come by and are much safer to use.  Also since magic items are rare the opposition hardly ever uses them so the party doesnt need their own counter items.

Finaly I use levled items (that is items that become more powerful the more the PC uses it) so i dont need to worry about having the party find a new weapon to defeat a new foe.

Though I dont restrict PCs from selling items I doubt that any PC would ever sell a magic item the had (unless they knew it was cursed).


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 26, 2005)

DanMcS said:
			
		

> I think the real problem here isn't players whining that they want to buy magical items.  It's really the DMs whining that they should have ABSOLUTE POWER.  You're not the only player, nor the player that matters the most.  The game shouldn't be a power fantasy for the DM.  If you can't work with your players to give them what they would like, you shouldn't be DMing; it's their game too.




Sorry this just doesnt wash with me. 

If I spend 100 hours designing  a world, and 5 hours a week working on fun and interesting adventures (I hope) for players who show up on Sunday and game... then yeah, its more my game than theirs.

Does this mean I dont listen to their concerns? Nope.

Does that mean the final decision is still ultimately mine? Yep.

Notice I am perfectly content to let someone else take the reigns.

My experience is that most troublesome players dont want to actually do the work and GM. If they do, more power to them.

If the players would rather not game with ME... thats also their decision, and again more power to them.

However, as the person who invests the most in the game, I dont consider it unfair that I should get to "set the table". 

I dont think that's a "power trip". 

Chuck


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 26, 2005)

DanMcS said:
			
		

> nor the player that matters the most.



Meh. An assertion I don't agree with. My experiences have clearly shown me that the DM does matter most. One player not having fun allows the game to continue on. The DM not having fun = game grinding to an immediate halt.

In the end, attrition will determine whether that "power tripping" DM will continue to DM or not. You'd be surprised how much "absolute power" works for some groups.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 26, 2005)

DanMcS said:
			
		

> You're not the only player



True.



> ...nor the player that matters the most.



False. How many times have you gamed missing a player? How many times missing the DM?


> The game shouldn't be a power fantasy for the DM



Yes it should. But it should be a power fantasy for the players, too. 


> If you can't work with your players to give them what they would like, you shouldn't be DMing; it's their game too.



There's an enormous difference between providing an enjoyable game, and giving the players everything they ask for. 

There's a word for giving an audience everything they want. Its called _pandering_. The funny thing is most people don't actually like it. There's a certain pleasure in wandering around in someone else's made-up world, where things don't work they way you'd have them work...


----------



## jeffh (Jan 26, 2005)

How do DMs who don't allow purchasing magic items explain why no market develops for them? That would take some pretty bizarre behaviour on the part of just about everyone with any wealth to speak of in the entire campaign world.

I find Turanil's argument equally bizarre. I've never understood this "magic should be mysterious even to its practitioners" attitude. It's got no basis in historical beliefs about magic, the fiction these games are based on, mythology, folklore, _nothing_. As far as I can tell this utterly weird idea - which implies that no-one should be able to cast spells reliably, for one thing - was invented from whole cloth by gamers around 1980. It has zero basis in anything from before then or in anything from outside RPGs, period.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 26, 2005)

jeffh said:
			
		

> How do DMs who don't allow purchasing magic items explain why no market develops for them? That would take some pretty bizarre behaviour on the part of just about everyone with any wealth to speak of in the entire campaign world.




Becasue magica items are rare and too useful to sale.  Sure a few might get sold here and there, but not enough to delope a magic item market.  Also, most magical ityems are not all that useful to everyone.  Magica items are geared towards combat, and not many rich and wealthyt people will be combat oriented.  Also, the easiest and cheapeast magical items are limited in use, potions and scroll, wands and staffs.  So, they would get used up and not sold as easily.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 26, 2005)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> I'm somewhat sympathitic to the cry of "I wanna buy magic items!"
> 
> That said, the costs for the items in the DMG, are just that: the costs.  Point out to your players the selling price of most durable goods is around double of the creation costs.



No, the number in the DMG is already marked up 100% over the item creation cost. Read the rules for Item Creation. A 1st level casterlevel scroll of a 1st level spell is sold for 25 gp. It costs the maker 12.5 gp + 1 xp. The only reason to increase the cost more is if you add a middle man layer and I can see such a situation in a large city where the local mages don't want to be bothered by every two-bit adventurer in the city so they go through a guy who has set himself up as a middle man, who therefore takes a cut.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 26, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I see it as a recognition of the reality that in any environment in which valuable items exist, a market will arise in which people buy and sell such items. History teaches us that valuable items _will_ be bought and sold. No matter how "sacred" or "cool" the thing in question might seem to be, people will sell it if there are people willing to buy it. There is no persuasive reason for magic items to be an exception.



There are plenty of persuasve reasons for why you wouldn't have a magic _shop_ -- and especially why you wouldn't have one conveniently nearby, that you could easily locate, that had what you were looking to buy sitting on a shelf.

Buying a powerful magic item is a bit like buying a man-portable F-22 built by da Vinci.  It's a _tremendously_ concentrated store of wealth (i.e., it's easy to steal), it's a potent weapon (i.e., the state expects to control it), very few people can create anything like it (there's no mass production), and very few people can legitimately afford to buy it (and know how to use it).


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 26, 2005)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> No, the number in the DMG is already marked up 100% over the item creation cost.



Correct, but those item creation costs are just for _parts_; the markup presumably covers _labor_ -- and a high-level spellcaster is analogous to an engineer with a Ph.D., not a mechanic with a few years' experience.


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 26, 2005)

jeffh said:
			
		

> How do DMs who don't allow purchasing magic items explain why no market develops for them? That would take some pretty bizarre behaviour on the part of just about everyone with any wealth to speak of in the entire campaign world.
> 
> I find Turanil's argument equally bizarre. I've never understood this "magic should be mysterious even to its practitioners" attitude. It's got no basis in historical beliefs about magic, the fiction these games are based on, mythology, folklore, _nothing_. As far as I can tell this utterly weird idea - which implies that no-one should be able to cast spells reliably, for one thing - was invented from whole cloth by gamers around 1980. It has zero basis in anything from before then or in anything from outside RPGs, period.



If you look back, I explained my reasoning for the lack of available magical items.

Of course, that's in my world.  IN a world where every family has a +1 sword as an heirloom and potions can be found by the dozen, what I said wouldn't apply.  A lot of what determines the ability of the PCs to purchase magical items is it's availability, and the more common an item, the easier it is to get on the open market.  My games try to keep magic relatively rare and thus very valueble


----------



## billd91 (Jan 26, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> But, everything outside PC actions happen because the DM "says so". Rain falls, princesses get kidnapped by evil dukes, the dead rise from the earth to menace taxpayers... Sometimes simply saying 'that doesn't match the flavor of the campaign' is all you get. For example, if you're shooting for Tolkienesque epic fantasy, magic shops (and beholders) are right out.




I think here we're running into a difference between plot and possibility. Of course non-PC initiated plot has to come from the DM (though again there should be a semblance to reason in what is part of the plot). It's the questions of possibility that are most important between the DM and the players. If the DM is going to squeeze off a realm of possibility, there should be a reason. Keeping to a certain setting would be OK for many questions. With respect to the possibility of buying magic items, there should be reasons behind why that can't really be done (other than relatively low-powered consumables). Maybe the feats needed to make those items are forgotten lore. But if so, then how are they available to the PCs? One would figure, quite reasonably, that if NPCs have the item creation feats, they might be quite willing to make stuff on commission for the PCs.  Note that is different from getting stuff at Magic Goodies R Us and could make for good roleplaying.  If I were a player, I'd expect the DM to have a reasonable explanation why my character's gold wasn't good enough to pay for some NPC to make me that magic item I want when I know darn well the power to make such items is available.



			
				Mallus said:
			
		

> 'Giving PC's some control over their destinies' means allowing them free range of actions in the game, not altering the parameters of the world to suit their liking. A PC can decide to go shopping, I decide the contents of the store.




I don't look at it as altering the parameters of the world to their liking. It's molding the game so that they have a certain amount of ownership over it. I think good consideration of player input makes for better players.


----------



## Turanil (Jan 26, 2005)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> But you don't have a problem with the bag full of 50,000 gp?



Sorry, I forgot to add [SARCASM]bag full of 50,000 gp[/SARCASM]


----------



## Turanil (Jan 26, 2005)

jeffh said:
			
		

> I find Turanil's argument equally bizarre. I've never understood this "magic should be mysterious even to its practitioners" attitude.



IMC I want magic to be wonderful, amazing. I want players who get a magical item say "Woowww! Great!!". I don't see it being the case with "So, I have the money, lets get rid of this +1 sword and buy a +3, and if I bargain well, I may also get a healing potion". This is simply not how I do see magic. This is the normal behavior for modern equipment in a consumerist society. However, when I play a LotR / Viking / Dragonlance or else game, I don't want it that way. In these universes, getting a magical item is a great thing, an event of wonder, not going to the supermarket and get your +1 leather armor along your trail rations.

That said, I can allow the PCs seek and find a spellcaster, convince him through roleplaying and gold that he manufacture a magic item for them. But that's entirely different from the magic shop (even if in the end it amount to the same thing. A matter of _ambiance!_)


----------



## Evilhalfling (Jan 26, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> There are plenty of persuasve reasons for why you wouldn't have a magic _shop_ -- and especially why you wouldn't have one conveniently nearby, that you could easily locate, that had what you were looking to buy sitting on a shelf.
> 
> Buying a powerful magic item is a bit like buying a man-portable F-22 built by da Vinci.  It's a _tremendously_ concentrated store of wealth (i.e., it's easy to steal), it's a potent weapon (i.e., the state expects to control it), very few people can create anything like it (there's no mass production), and very few people can legitimately afford to buy it (and know how to use it).




This is my favoriate argument. 
I would add that temples are primary sources of potions, scrolls, weapons and armor.  There are lots of trustyworthy priests, and there is almost always a god of protection/war/smiths 
and one of healing.  In major cities this is where people would come for such things. 
this really only applies to low level items, as Temple Elders and patriachs rarely sit down in the old lab, pouring time and life energy out for some stranger. 

 Even highlevel craft mages have to limit the amout of powerful items the produce.   The experance drain will force them out into danger more often than they would like and If they are living peacefully in town there is a limit of how much gold they can spend, and still have time for crafting. 
The greedest craftmages should be middleaged wizards, who want their own tower and need to cough up the 50k.  Lets see thats 100k worth of items sold, and 4k experiance 
so these mages should work hard for a few years and then retire from activily creating items as they run out of xp or meet these goals - 
campaign hooks that I will be using 
1. a prolific crafter that retires from the buisness 
2. a mage who wants a bodyguard, and a milk run dungeon 
3. a mage who demands PC's pay the experance for items he crafts (assuming this is allowable), but wont lower the price much as he is the only source.

IMC PC's do a fair amount of crafting, and there are large traveling fairs that buy and sell random magic items.  PC's will frequently set up a booth and craft high demand items for sale 
Large cities will have people that will craft on commission, but not always the right feats (rods, ring and staff crafters are scarce) 
 NPC's will also offer to commission items from the party, in some cases appling poltical pressure so that it is hard to refuse.  They normally offer to pay full price


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 26, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> IMC I want magic to be wonderful, amazing. I want players who get a magical item say "Woowww! Great!!". I don't see it being the case with "So, I have the money, lets get rid of this +1 sword and buy a +3, and if I bargain well, I may also get a healing potion". This is simply not how I do see magic. This is the normal behavior for modern equipment in a consumerist society. However, when I play a LotR / Viking / Dragonlance or else game, I don't want it that way. In these universes, getting a magical item is a great thing, an event of wonder, not going to the supermarket and get your +1 leather armor along your trail rations.
> 
> That said, I can allow the PCs seek and find a spellcaster, convince him through roleplaying and gold that he manufacture a magic item for them. But that's entirely different from the magic shop (even if in the end it amount to the same thing. A matter of _ambiance!_)




Then you shouldn't run 3e, because 3e is balanced with _high magic_ in mind. Perhaps you should look at Grim Tales instead.

In 3e, so much of your character abilities are tied up in magic items (yuck!) that controlling what magic items players can get is a bit like telling a fighter he can't take Power Attack (sorry, can't find a tutor) or telling a wizard he can't research _cone of cold_ as one of his spells.

Aren't there low-magic threads we could necro, or should we start another one?


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 26, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> IMC I want magic to be wonderful, amazing. I want players who get a magical item say "Woowww! Great!!". I don't see it being the case with "So, I have the money, lets get rid of this +1 sword and buy a +3, and if I bargain well, I may also get a healing potion".




What?  Are you crazy?

I'd be much more likely to say, "Gee, this heirloom sword has served me and my family well.  I am in a position to improve it.  I think I'll ask the party wizard / Archmage of the City / the Armsmaster of Helm to help me reforge it.  On the other hand, I have no use for the Longsword of Nigh-Infinite Pointiness that the BBEG was wielding; it means nothing to me, other than a memento of a slain foe."

Plus, it's cheaper in the long run - you don't have to keep paying the MW sword cost each time!


----------



## Kast (Jan 26, 2005)

Another reason that magic items might not be bought and sold is a cultural bias against it. When magic is treated as barter, it cheapens it, angers its source and brings ill luck to the purveyors. The source not being the DM I hope, but maybe.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 26, 2005)

Just a point to those who think that 1st ed individuals wouldn't have lots of low-level magic treasure.

Once treasure gets identified as magic, any sane character would immediately throw it away. This would continue all the way until someone gets access to "remove curse", and potentially beyond that.

Why? Because some huge proportion of magical treasure is cursed, and cursed so bad that to use it or attempt to identify it is basically death for the character involved. So the smart thing is to leave it be.

And then once you've got remove curse, you can go back and collect it all. Possibly.

Or it's been nicked. By people who weren't fighters and couldn't defeat it's protectors. By people who are probably just going to sell it.

Oops.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 26, 2005)

Unless you're playing D&D in some kind of weird Eberron, Faerun or Planescape kind of world where everybody is a modern liberal democrat and magic oozes out of everybody's pores, I'm guessing that the campaign world is the good old fashioned pseudo-medieval D&D world. If that's the case, the most important thing to realize is that in the pre-modern world, there aren't shops in the modern sense of the idea; anything expensive or worthwhile was commissioned. It wasn't part of the inventory. In a medieval-style city, you have skilled tradespeople who make things; they might have one or two display items in their shop or booth to show the quality of their workmanship but generally, there will be no inventory to speak of. Any item of quality will have to be commissioned. 

And even if you somehow live in a world where there are modern-style stores with inventories, how many of them are going to have an inventory exceeding 1000gp? Very few if their owners have any economic sense at all. Who is going to use up xp to create items that sit on a shelf, depriving their creator of xp he could be using to level or brew potions or whatever? Who, furthermore, is going to run a shop with thousands or tens of thousands of gp worth of stuff that could be stolen? Nobody with an Int or Wis high enough to create the stuff! Any rational actor would wait to make a magic item until such time as there was a potential buyer for it. 

Now, I suppose the characters could go to a local temple or mages' guild to commission magic items for a special purpose. The people at that place would not only be selling very expensive materials in exchange for gold; they would also be selling their XP. (I challenge anyone who thinks there should be magic shops to explain who would take valuable xp, convert those xp into items they were not using and leave them on a shelf not accruing any revenue.) Now let's imagine the rate at which a priest or mage would sell his XP to the characters and what it might take to persuade him to do so. You might even consider asking the players what they would sell their XP for; maybe doing so would give them the idea of just how ridiculous their demands are.


----------



## Ogrork the Mighty (Jan 26, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> I'm all for making the players happy. But sometimes you make your audience the happiest by cannily _refusing_ to give them everything they want...




Yessssss, which is quite different than telling them no b/c you're the DM and if they don't like it they can leave. One scenario can be justified. The other cannot.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 26, 2005)

Evilhalfling said:
			
		

> 3. a mage who demands PC's pay the experance for items he crafts (assuming this is allowable), but wont lower the price much as he is the only source.




Well - this is kind of possible. The PC can participate in the creation, and be considered the 'creator' for the purpose of XP expenditure. Unfortunately the items caster level is also based upon the caster level of the contributing PC, so for many items, this isn't viable.


----------



## VirgilCaine (Jan 26, 2005)

Now, IMC buying and selling magic items isn't the free and easy thing it is in other campaigns, but thats the price for safe, responsible magic use (so says the Guild and they are right). 

But not allowing PCs to buy magic items at all makes no sense at all. In any context. 



> Sorry, I forgot to add [SARCASM]bag full of 50,000 gp[/SARCASM]




Which is why the Oath (magically binding vow that all wizards take before learning the trade) includes a coinage law--spells and items above third level cannot be paid for in coin. Gems, jewelry, art, land, titles, deeds, favors, or service. Not gold (or platinum. Eeugh.).


----------



## arwink (Jan 26, 2005)

Should the players be able to buy magic items? Only if the DM says so.

That being said, the trade in magic items was one of my favorite additions to 3rd edition.  As long as it's not treated as the magical equivalent of the super-market, you can actually use it to make magic more magical rather than less.  

Suddenly Elves can lay claim to being magically unique among the mortal races, because their long lifespans and rich magical heritage leads to a vast amount of magic items they are willing to trade with other races in order to get "something interesting and unique."  Players that want unlimitted access to magic items have to find places where they are traded and sold, often leading to back-alley fences that specialise or trips to once a year fey-moots where merchants from a dozen planes come to trade their wares on neutral ground in the prime plane.  Commissioning items requires tracking the rumors about an artisan that may be able to craft what you're looking for, as well as finding something that they may actually want (GP values don't necessarily mean the players are handing over coins).

More importantly I started to see games where players finished the campaign weilding the same weapons that they started the game with, feeling a great sense of accomplishment that they'd managed to craft their masterwork axe into a legendary weapon of power.  One player prefered to use the axe he'd built from the ground up to the more powerful sword the party found towards the end of the campaign.  As a fighter, he'd relied heavily on providing service and goods to allied wizards and temples in order to enchant the weapon.


----------



## Aaron L (Jan 27, 2005)

I pretty much find the idea that some kind of market for magic items WOULDN'T develop to be absurd.  As has been said, most magic items are made for combat, and common people aren't all that concerned with combat.  Adventureres, however, those people who go out risking thier lives for fame, glory, and MONEY, would certainly want those magic items that will benefit them, and to get a good money value of of those magic items that they can't use.  And most of them will be smart enough to realize that someone somewhere will have a need for those things that they don't want.

Now that doesn't mean magic shops.  I envision magic auctions, or an underground market with brokers, things like that.  Or good old fashioned footwork and asking around with other adventurers if they have anything they'd like to buy or sell or trade for.  But the idea that the farmer who finds a +1 sword is going to keep hold of it because it is valuable is kinda ridiculous.


----------



## National Acrobat (Jan 27, 2005)

Ogrork the Mighty said:
			
		

> The point of the game is for everyone to have fun, not just the DM. If everyone in the group would like access to a magic shop, IMO the DM has an obligation to either accomodate them to some degree or give them an explanation why not that is more than "this is my game and if you don't like it there's the door." Talk about an egotistical, tyrannical attitude!
> 
> That doesn't mean they should be able to buy whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want. But by the same token, having to rely on the DM to dish out what he feels like can be annoying after a while. And if you're not a spellcaster and there isn't an appropriate one in the party, once again the PCs are forced to rely on the benevolence of their DM to give them access to created magic items.
> 
> It's a team game folks!




There are 3 appropriate spellcasters in the group. None of the three has taken any Item Creation Feats at All. Zilch. One is a 9th Level Mage, One is a 9th Level Sorceror and the other is a 10th Level Mage.

The two players who whine run 2 of these characters.

I'm all for them creating things, but they won't.

Magic to me is special, as many have said. They have enough money to create items, but not enough with the mark up of the DM guide to purchase things. 

And as I've said, six of the players have no problem at all with the way that the game is run, however of those six, none of them like to play spellcasters.

Perhaps next campaign I should make people play a class they've never played before.


----------



## vortex (Jan 27, 2005)

I think the 3e concept of mix'n'match magic items (eg +3 keen, lightening, pixiebane mercurial greatsword) cheapens the whole magic item expirience. So does the mechanical nature of magic item generation eg potions must be spells less than 3rd level with a target of blah, blah, blah. It makes magic items generic and, thus, interchangable chattles. I understand the game balance issues, and i understand item creation is now an important game concept.

At the risk of sounding like an old fart, i quite liked the ad&d list of magic items. Magic items could have unique and interesting powers, just...just because.

I think you can make magic items special by giving them intersting names and even histories. So it's not a +2 keen longsword, its 'Razortooth' or even 'Duke Rumpskil's sword'.

Everyone l*oves* magic items, both dm's and players. I think its one of those things that drives the game. I think buying and selling is OK as long as you keep them iteresting and special, and not just comodities.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 27, 2005)

Like everything else in D&D, there are two aspects to this issue: the mechanical reality, and the flavor text.

Mechanically speaking, I allow my players to buy and sell magic items.  I often run a low-magic game, but even in such a game there are enough magic items to warrant PCs wanting to sell extras, and NPCs wanting to buy them, and vice-versa.

I have no problem with magic items being bought and sold.  I don't think it lessens the wonder of magic at all.  That wonder is generated from unique descriptions and histories, not from the fact that the items have no price tag.  i.e. a +1 sword the PCs can't get rid of is no more wondrous than the +1 sword they sell off.  But the Sword of Erisdale (+1 sword), that was forged from the nails that bound a village martyr to his cross of fire during the Consecration of Terror...has a sense of wonder about it whether you can sell it or not.

Flavor-wise, I don't like the idea of a magic shop.  It's rather mundane and, in my mind, would provide too tempting a target to professional thieves.  So I run the magic trade similar to a black market.  It's all about who you know, and who they know.  It's about finding buyers.  It's about buyers finding the money to actually pay the astronomical prices that magic items generate, or more often having something they're willing to trade.  It's about Gather Information, Buff, Sense Motive, and Diplomacy checks.  In 3.0 there were even Innuendo checks.

I choose to handle it this way because I think the "mini-adventure" associated with selling off extra loot or buying wanted items can be a nice break from life-or-death combat encounters and save-the-world type affairs.  It also provides me with plot hooks if I need them, though I rarely use these.







			
				Vigilance said:
			
		

> Sorry this just doesnt wash with me.
> 
> If I spend 100 hours designing a world, and 5 hours a week working on fun and interesting adventures (I hope) for players who show up on Sunday and game... then yeah, its more my game than theirs.



The issue here (for me,) is that the players (_all_ the players, which includes the DM,) should decide what kind of game they want to play _before_ the DM spends 100 hours preparing for the game.  At that point, if the DM decides he can't work with the kind of game the players want, they can figure out a compromise, or part ways.

But in my opinion it's a bit disingenuous for a DM to decide on his own what kind of game he wants to run, spend 100 hours preparing it, and only _then_ inform the players, at the same time telling them he's invested far too much time in the campaign to change it now.


----------



## Ourph (Jan 27, 2005)

Ogrork the Mighty said:
			
		

> Yessssss, which is quite different than telling them no b/c you're the DM and if they don't like it they can leave. One scenario can be justified. The other cannot.




Why is it unjustifiable to ask players to shop around for a game/GM who is happy running the kind of game they enjoy?

Personally, I think the fact that I invest significant time and money into creating a game (primarily for my own recreation and enjoyment) earns me the right to do things the way I want.  What can't be justified are players who try to coerce someone else into being their personal entertainment centre because they are too lazy to shop around for a GM who's already running a game that will satisfy them.

Telling a player that they have the option to leave if they don't enjoy the game is the height of respectfullness.  It's how mature adults communicate with one another.  If two adults cannot come to a mutual agreement on something, they part ways.  Children (and those adults who have failed at the task of growing up) are the ones who keep coming back week after week whining about not getting their way.


----------



## JEL (Jan 27, 2005)

For me it comes down to the setting.  In some settings (usually more mythic type fantasy), magic items are all one of a kind and incredibly rare, so buying and selling just doesn't happen.  In other settings, magic items do, more or less, equate with technology and buying and selling is going to happen and may even be common.  In other words, if I'm doing a game that's Middle Earth based, then no magic shops.  If I'm doing Talislanta or Spelljammer, then they exist.


----------



## Arcane Runes Press (Jan 27, 2005)

Ourph said:
			
		

> Why is it unjustifiable to ask players to shop around for a game/GM who is happy running the kind of game they enjoy?
> 
> Personally, I think the fact that I invest significant time and money into creating a game (primarily for my own recreation and enjoyment) earns me the right to do things the way I want.  What can't be justified are players who try to coerce someone else into being their personal entertainment centre because they are too lazy to shop around for a GM who's already running a game that will satisfy them.




There are two potential issues I see here, that make it unjustifiable:

1) It's not a simple matter to "shop around" for a game/GM. Roleplaying isn't exactly an expansive hobby, and most people tend to play with their friends, rather than hop from game to game. Gaming usually isn't like street court basketball, where you can take your ball down and find a game most any summer day - it's far more insular than that. 

2) If you're creating a game primarily for your own recreation and enjoyment, and presenting it as my way or the highway, then you're very much "coercing" the players into being your personal entertainment center - and the consequence of too much my way/highway GMing is often a disfunctional group, where no one ends up getting the satisfaction they want out of gaming. 


I don't really think that's what's going on in the case of this thread, at least not on the side of the GM. Personally, I think the  players are being a bit unreasonable (shocking behaviour for gamers, I know). Barring some unusual background issue we aren't privy to, I think the problem comes down to the two players stubbornly refusing to accept the painless solution - if item creation feats are available, they shouldn't complain that they can't buy magic items. 

The typical reason people complain about not being able to buy magic gear is because the GM has restricted other access to magic as well, with the result being they never get any of the gear they want. 

It would be one thing for them to complain if the GM had removed item creation feats, but of all people, magic users with access to those feats should be the _last_ ones to complain about not being able to buy magic. 

Patrick Y.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 27, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> Flavor-wise, I don't like the idea of a magic shop.  It's rather mundane and, in my mind, would provide too tempting a target to professional thieves.



I've never seen _anyone_ propose a magic shop in this sense, in several internet debates on the subject. Has anyone actually played in a game with one of these? I never have.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 27, 2005)

Until about a month ago I had always been of the opinion that PCs shouldn't be able to buy magic items in D&D. I changed my mind completely as I was convinced by arguments in an earlier thread that this was implausible in any universe where they exist in reasonable quantities.

As far as I can see there are two main arguments against this view:

*Well stocked magic shops are equally implausible*
This is true however no one, to my knowledge, has ever proposed the existence of well stocked magic shops. These are luxury items, made to order.

*You lose the 'magic' of magic items*
Firstly these are two different senses of the word magic. The first usage means wonderful, mysterious, etc. However magic items in the default D&D universe are not magical in this sense. In D&D 'magic' is a force of the universe, like electromagnetism. For all practical purposes, well understood.

That sense of wonder and mystery can be preserved however by using the most powerful and exotic of magic items - artefacts. These are the equivalent of super high technology in our world. Cold fusion or AI, for example. In other words - still mysterious.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 27, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> There are 3 appropriate spellcasters in the group. None of the three has taken any Item Creation Feats at All. Zilch. One is a 9th Level Mage, One is a 9th Level Sorceror and the other is a 10th Level Mage.
> 
> The two players who whine run 2 of these characters.
> 
> I'm all for them creating things, but they won't.



If that's really the case, then they're just jerks. Really. Of all the characters, these are the ones who are the least dependant upon magical items, and if they want magic items, they won't have a problem making them. They're given the feats as bonus feats for goodness sake!


----------



## Ourph (Jan 27, 2005)

Arcane Runes Press said:
			
		

> There are two potential issues I see here, that make it unjustifiable:
> 
> 1) It's not a simple matter to "shop around" for a game/GM. Roleplaying isn't exactly an expansive hobby, and most people tend to play with their friends, rather than hop from game to game. Gaming usually isn't like street court basketball, where you can take your ball down and find a game most any summer day - it's far more insular than that.




Well then, it's somewhat incumbent upon a player who wants to remain a player (i.e. not take up the reins of DM on his own) to accept the games he can find.  It seems a bit manipulative to say to a supposed "friend" that, despite the fact that the vast majority of time and work to make the game possible is put forth by the DM, the players demand equal input into the shape and strictures of the game.  IMO, a reasonable and mature player who is left with the choices of 1) play in a DM's game that isn't suited to his specific gaming tastes; or 2) don't play at all; accepts his situation and makes a committed decision between those two choices.  As I said before, only a child (or an entirely too child-like adult) returns to a friends game week after week demanding that the game be changed to suit him, despite clear indications that change will not happen and his constant complaining about it is unwelcome.



> 2) If you're creating a game primarily for your own recreation and enjoyment, and presenting it as my way or the highway, then you're very much "coercing" the players into being your personal entertainment center - and the consequence of too much my way/highway GMing is often a disfunctional group, where no one ends up getting the satisfaction they want out of gaming.




Not at all.  I create the campaign/game for my own enjoyment and shop for players who enjoy what I've created.  I coerce no one.  In fact, I'm very up front with people who join my game that it's not the kind of thing that appeals to everyone.  Not only do I not pressure them to stay with the game if they are not satisfied, I do what I can (using my Knowledge: Local Gaming skill    ) to help them find a game/GM who will fit with their preferred style of play.

IMO, that's the way intelligent, mature, good-intentioned adults behave toward one another.


----------



## tigycho (Jan 27, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> I think you're missing out on some good opportunities here, really.
> 
> I mean, assuming the PCs have been asking around for the purchase of magic items, finally offer them up a "shady" dealer who claims to have an inventory of various items which can be manufactured "for a price" upon request.
> 
> ...




I did something similar...  the party wanted to buy magic items, and a con man found out about it.  Now the guy is well meaning, he just isn't very GOOD at making magic items.  He rushes their completion...  so the items he makes are ... ahem ... defective.

Examples:  +1 flametongue blade.  Works mostly as advertised...  but only on even attack rolls.  10% chance of doing a 3d6 fireball, centered on the blade on a confirmed critical hit (they don't know that, yet).  Healing potions which work as advertised, but which leave the user faerie fired after use, as well.  Stuff like that.

They got decent prices for everything, better than book price, even, which should have been a clue.  The party isn't unhappy about this stuff, but if they even meet Big Frank the Magic Dealer again, I think a dust-up may occur...


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 27, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> But in my opinion it's a bit disingenuous for a DM to decide on his own what kind of game he wants to run, spend 100 hours preparing it, and only _then_ inform the players, at the same time telling them he's invested far too much time in the campaign to change it now.




You make it sound like Ive set some sort of "trap" for the poor prospective players.

I've run fantasy games on the same homebrew world for going on 20 years now... its not something I just sat down and designed so I could "spring it" on some poor players that just wanted a game with a decent magic shop.

And speaking of "what sort of game the players want"... if they are unhappy SOLELY because of the lack of a magic shop, what does that say? lol

When I "decided on my own" what sort of world I wanted, after reading an article about world design in Dragon and wanting to take the plunge... it never occured to me that a magic shop would be the make or break prospect of the whole campaign.

And in fact, it hasn't broken up a gaming group yet 

Chuck


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 27, 2005)

Ourph said:
			
		

> Well then, it's somewhat incumbent upon a player who wants to remain a player (i.e. not take up the reins of DM on his own) to accept the games he can find.  It seems a bit manipulative to say to a supposed "friend" that, despite the fact that the vast majority of time and work to make the game possible is put forth by the DM, the players demand equal input into the shape and strictures of the game.  IMO, a reasonable and mature player who is left with the choices of 1) play in a DM's game that isn't suited to his specific gaming tastes; or 2) don't play at all; accepts his situation and makes a committed decision between those two choices.




And again I take the pains to point out, we're talking about magic item shops here people.

If Im running a hardcore low magic game where there are witch hunters out there killing everyone who learns magic past 3rd level spells, and a player wants to play a mage... or a world where combat is exceptionally gritty and most PCs are losing limbs or dying irrevocably before they can struggle to 5th level... I could see a player having "taste" issues.

But a player who is dissatisfied with a game solely because he cant nag the Dm into opening a magic shop?

Is that really what people are defending here?

Being able to buy magic items isnt a "game type".

Chuck


----------



## FireLance (Jan 27, 2005)

When I see threads like these, I usually wonder how much of the aversion to PCs buying and selling magic items is rooted in a desire to keep magic rare and special, and how much is because DMs are unwilling to surrender the last vestige of control they have over the PC's cool abilities.

The current version of D&D really is geared towards allowing players to make the characters they want. It has lifted the arbitrary restrictions of previous editions with respect to which classes are available to which race, as well as on multiclassing (except for a few special cases). Players are generally free to choose the race, class combination, skills, feats and equipment they want. Unless the DM specifically restricts certain races, classes, skills or feats, it appears that magic items are the only exception.

Anyway, I've posted a poll on this topic here.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 27, 2005)

FireLance said:
			
		

> and how much is because DMs are unwilling to surrender the last vestige of control they have over the PC's cool abilities.




The last vestige of control huh? 

See I really dont see magic item shops as me surrendering my last vestige of anything. If I say "humans thieves only and the campaign will never leave this one city"... THEN I am stripping away player control. 

If I say "there's plenty of magic in the world... but it isnt bought or sold, sorry" and a player complains (and from the original post its an ongoing complaint by a minority of the gaming group)... thats a campaign decision.

Its like me saying Orcs have pink skin like pigs, not green skin like Tolkien... and players whining that they "cant play the character they want".

Chuck


----------



## Ciaran (Jan 27, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> And again I take the pains to point out, we're talking about magic item shops here people.



And as others have taken pains to point out, we're not talking about magic _shops_, we're talking about _buying and selling_ magic items.  Not the same thing at all.

- Eric


----------



## Stone Angel (Jan 27, 2005)

As most of the others I will go with the old it is your game and hey remember "No means No!"
It is not like you have made magic items unattainable. They can create them if they want them or just take what was found and hope that it benefits for them. Takes away from the whole questing for a specific magic item. 

"Well the ring is said to lay in a tomb over a week away"

"What does it do, it is said that it's bearer will become immune even dragons fire, which we need to get past Old Snarl and get to cave that contains the magical waterfall of Lei Tu Jaani"

"Hmmm well I have craft ring, give me a couple days OK"

I think that a lot of this stems from the 3.0 Forgotten Realms too. We all know that the Realms have incorporated magic unlike anyother system and magic is almost standard gear. But with the twist on the red wizards becoming magic item merchants, makes them even more accessible.


The Seraph of Earth and Stone


----------



## atom crash (Jan 27, 2005)

> If I say "there's plenty of magic in the world... but it isnt bought or sold, sorry" and a player complains (and from the original post its an ongoing complaint by a minority of the gaming group)... thats a campaign decision.




I don't understand how in a world where something is plentiful that no one would ever think to buy or sell it. "So valuable that it will never be sold" and "plentiful" are mutually exclusive, in my book. And how do the players come across these plentiful magic items? If they trade gems/items/services for magic items, that's still buying and selling them. Or maybe they're so powerful and valuable that they're all lying around in a dungeon somewhere.

But then again, this is a fantasy game subject to the player's/DM's tastes. Maybe in a fantasy setting where orcs rampage and elves frolic, free markets and daring entrepreneurs don't develop. "What do we do with these extra magic items we have, Berk?" "Maybe we should hide them in a dungeon for the next group of adventurers to find, Cutter!"

If I told my players that "there's plenty of magic in the world... but it isnt bought or sold, sorry" they'd most likely go to the library or sage's guild, find out who owns these magic items, and go kill them for their valuable magic items. Not the kind of heroic game I want to run.




> IMO, a reasonable and mature player who is left with the choices of 1) play in a DM's game that isn't suited to his specific gaming tastes; or 2) don't play at all; accepts his situation and makes a committed decision between those two choices. As I said before, only a child (or an entirely too child-like adult) returns to a friends game week after week demanding that the game be changed to suit him, despite clear indications that change will not happen and his constant complaining about it is unwelcome




Hmmm, where I come from mature adults compromise, because we all understand we'll never get everything we want. Only children think they should always get their way.

So I am able to appease my players by allowing them to buy or trade for items from time to time (up until now it's just been minor items as they have just hit the 7th level mark), but I retain control by limiting what they have access to.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Does anyone else have this problem? I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will. It's just me and my style, and I am very up front with it when starting a new game or group. However I've noticed that with the advent of 3E, a few of my players are very adamant that the rules indicate that they are allowed to purchase magic items.




They misread.



> Now, rule 1 is of course, the DM sets the rules. I have never allowed this, and am fairly good about providing treasure in the form of items the party will need and will find useful and beneficial, and even after all of this, they are telling me that I am missing the boat on 3E rules.
> 
> Am I? I don't think I am, but some opinions and experiences would be helpful.




The rules only state a market price so that you can backtrack to get creation cost and so that you can balance treasure value.  They should have used some other indeterminate measurement (such as parsecs - if Star Wars can use it as a unit of time, I can use it as a unit of value).  They could then supply conversions.  This would have given the more correct impression, IMO.

There's nothing wrong with disallowing the purchase of magical items, though if one looks at demographics, one will find that it is _likely_ that a character can purchase magical items somewhere, especially larger cities.  I would not simply follow the standard gold piece limit of a city by population, though.  I'd probably generate the population to see if there are wizards living there and of what level.  Use your intuition from there.

The rules certainly dictate, through logical deduction, the prerequisites for magical shops.  They do not say magic items are for sale.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> But I have found that as long as they are unique, interesting, and have a set inventory they can actually be great fun.




In the campaign my group just started, I allowed the players to use their starting cash (4th level) to purchase any magical item out of the SRD/DMG that consisted of something other than a sraight bonus, as I wanted the items to be unique and have some sort of flavor.  Not just, I hit 5% more now.  For instance, if they had the money, they could purchase a +1 flaming longsword, but not a +1 longsword.

It was very funny watching one player in particular try to find a magical item to improve his character with.  He was getting frustrated.  I think he ended up using all of his money on disposable items.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> alot of new edition players will tell you they need to have Ye Olde Majick Shoppe to purchase and sell their phat magic lewt.
> 
> i've got 44000gp worth of phat magic lewt right now i'm pwning off on my DM.




Your tone (not necessarily the "words") completely summarizes my feelings on the matter.  Players that started with the new edition seem to be under the impression that the core books are law.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I see it as a recognition of the reality that in any environment in which valuable items exist, a market will arise in which people buy and sell such items. History teaches us that valuable items _will_ be bought and sold. No matter how "sacred" or "cool" the thing in question might seem to be, people will sell it if there are people willing to buy it. There is no persuasive reason for magic items to be an exception.




That's not an entirely perfect analogy.  Historically, no one was forced to place their own life force into a manufactured good to make it, as is the case with magic items (XP).  I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, but it seems to me that it would be much more rare than its price would indicate (and its price would already indicate that it is rare).


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jan 27, 2005)

As a DM I _like_ the more easily available magic in 3.x.

I do not have 'Ye Olde Magicke Shoppe', rather you hire the work done.

And it takes time, generally a month or so. And you have to find a city with an appropriately powerful wizard/cleric with the spells and feats to create the item - they do not grow on trees. Go through your books and see what cities have powerful enough wizards and clerics, then decide how many actually can create the items (heck, just take a look in the DMG when creating your cities, there is a chart for what level the most powerful characters in a city hold). _Finding_ out who could create the item they want can involve seldom used skills,, or give the bard something to ruminate upon. Or perhaps the hiring of some sage who might know who would be able to create the item. Then have it be someplace not easily gotten to, or simply distant, so the purchase also involves travel, sometimes taking a month in itself, and sometimes requiring a hold on the quest they are on. I see nothing wrong with heroes saying "This day do we begin our quest to rid the Northlands of the White Wyrm Hrymfellhanjer, let us go then to the cities of the South to have the crafting of a weapon of fierey might, that we may slay the beast, and aye, with flame."

Do not make it _easy_ to purchase the items, use the gaining an adventure in its own right, as they trek from the icy lands of the North to gain the services of the one wizard that they know can create the weapon. (He may in fact not be the only one who can, but be the only one they know the name of.)

Players are sometimes loathe to use their feats in the manner that the DM insists on, and I do not blame them for it. Allow them to purchase the item that they want, but make it part of the game.

The Auld Grump


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> Alternatively, you could introduce a reclusive wizard in a tower dying scenario, whereby the PCs get to participate in an auction of the items present.  Come up with several items, list them on the docket.  Great way to alleviate them of all their money, especially if someone keeps outbidding them.




I like that idea, though it would fit in very few of my campaigns.  Mostly feudal and the property of a person without heir would go to the landholder/king/whatever.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> A lot has been mentioned, but I have to ask this. How much gold do the PCs have? Sometimes, when you get all those coins burning a hole in your pocket, Magic Items are really the only thing that will get rid of all that gold.




Land.  A nice palatial home.  Bribery.  Holdings.  Taxation.  Hordes of slaves.  Sheep.

I could easily spend the 20th level starting cash without ever looking at a magic item.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> I think one of the underlying things is that the players don't want to give up the xp, but that seems a small cost to me to create what you want.




Just tell them that the NPCs don't want to give up their XP.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

DanMcS said:
			
		

> I think the real problem here isn't players whining that they want to buy magical items.  It's really the DMs whining that they should have ABSOLUTE POWER.  You're not the only player, nor the player that matters the most.  The game shouldn't be a power fantasy for the DM.  If you can't work with your players to give them what they would like, you shouldn't be DMing; it's their game too.




I might be tempted to agree with you, except for one thing:

None of the players cares if I (DM) have fun.

I have been playing RPGs for 13 years.  I have had the opportunity to be a player on about a dozen or so occasions.  I would like to play.  But no one is willing to DM (no one that the rest of the group is willing to play under, at least).  So that pretty much gives me absolute power through monopolistic control.  In this free market gaming society, the players may feel free to join someone else's game.

As I said, in my experience, players are not there trying to make the DM have fun.  So I feel no obligation in facilitating theirs.  Their fun is their own responsibility.  From the few times I've played, I know that one can have fun playing in almost any type of setting, any level of magic, with any race, with any class, if one tries and is willing to.  As long as the game is run well, a player's fun is mostly controlled by their choices to get involved in the game, to role-play, and the decisions they make for their characters.  None of that is within my control, and so I don't bother trying.

I like creating worlds and stories, and so that is what I do.  If the players can have fun in the setting I create, then great.  If not, they wouldn't come back the next week (and occasionally they don't, but they always come back within the next month or two after they've tried playing with someone else or running their own game).

I know this goes against conventional wisdom.

I think DMs should create a union to protect them from overbearing players leveraging their greater numbers and hanging their involvement in the game over their DMs' heads.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 27, 2005)

Ciaran said:
			
		

> And as others have taken pains to point out, we're not talking about magic _shops_, we're talking about _buying and selling_ magic items.  Not the same thing at all.
> 
> - Eric




And as *I* asserted before... I dont think buying and selling magic items is a campaign style. People have jumped in saying the players should have a general say in what sort of game they are in. 

Is buying and selling magic items the deal breaker? 

If it is... I find that silly.

Chuck


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 27, 2005)

atom crash said:
			
		

> I don't understand how in a world where something is plentiful that no one would ever think to buy or sell it. "So valuable that it will never be sold" and "plentiful" are mutually exclusive, in my book. And how do the players come across these plentiful magic items? If they trade gems/items/services for magic items, that's still buying and selling them. Or maybe they're so powerful and valuable that they're all lying around in a dungeon somewhere.




So... you can suspend disbelief on the magic and the elves and the dragons kidnapping the princesses only to put them in heavily guarded towers... but any deviation from the laws of Adam Smith is a bridge too far?

Chuck


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Amusing anecdote related to this discussion in an off-topic sort of way.

I have a player who plays a monk 2/fighter X/cleric 1/wizard 1 so that they can use any wand in the game, have fairly excellent saves, and get a few bonus feats and evasion.

You can imagine how strange and confusing his backstory ends up being so that he can convince me (actually just himself, cause it never works on me) that this is the most logical progression for his character's concept.

If he's going for a prestige class, he'll drop cleric and get ranger instead (so he can still use cure wands) and add rogue for the skill points so that he can enter the prestige class as early as possible.

It's players like this that force my hand in removing things from the game and disallowing the purchase of magical items.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Land.  A nice palatial home.  Bribery.  Holdings.  Taxation.  Hordes of slaves.  Sheep.
> 
> I could easily spend the 20th level starting cash without ever looking at a magic item.



 Interesting thing about that is its just as much an individual campaign thing as the idea of magic item shops. 

I mean, really...you're actually trying to tell me that people buy LAND in D&D?! LAND?! Really now, land is plentiful and its all over the place and its not even mentioned in the Core books that you CAN buy it! Pfft! Buying land!

...sounds oddly similar to buying magic items...


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

jeffh said:
			
		

> How do DMs who don't allow purchasing magic items explain why no market develops for them? That would take some pretty bizarre behaviour on the part of just about everyone with any wealth to speak of in the entire campaign world.




It depends on the campaign, but it's usually a mix of the following:

 - sale of magical items incurs heavy taxation in the region where it is sold.  This is to the point where most selling would be underground and thus hard to find for the players anyway.
 - One must never ignore the expenditure of XPs.  While the DMG puts a value an XP (25 gp I believe?), it never directly addresses the "XP Limit" of a city (as it does GP limit).  One can pretty much take this how one sees fit.  In my experience (and this is my personal feeling on the topic as well), few players are willing to routinely expend XP just to make some money.  A DM could try to extrapolate an XP limit from the demographics, but it would be mostly hunches and gut instinct anyway, and would ultimately lead one to whatever conclusion one is looking for.
 - Shady merchants dealing in fake or inaccurate magical wares.  This is a great deterrence to buyers, thus limiting a market for sellers.
 - The more a group of characters relies on magical items (especially at higher level) the more likely those items are going to be destroyed by some intelligent enemy with a penchant for Disjunctioning everything the players have.  While this is only available to higher level people, it can help explain why there aren't a slew of old magic items lying around.
 - Think of wizards as the military.  Think of magic as guns.  Now think of all the people around the world that are for gun control of private citizens.  There may be groups that seek out and destroy magic items, whether this be a diorganized lot of people who snap any wand in half that they find, to entire subversive powerful organizations who routinely mug, rob, and steal magic items to keep them out of the hands of those who are not properly trained to use them (wizards).
 - Law.  In feudal society (the baseline for most any campaign I've seen, and most of my own), the ruler owns everything on his land.  He has full legal right to simply take your magic items, wish you a good day, and put you in the dungeon if you resist.  While many rulers might not choose to do this, a king recently finding himself at war against a greater power might take any offensive magic items, while another might like to keep the populace weak (see gun control above, where the organization might now work for the law).  These types of things not only might reduce the number of magic items, but would also be a serious deterrent for someone to start advertising (however discreetly) that they are selling magical items.



> I find Turanil's argument equally bizarre. I've never understood this "magic should be mysterious even to its practitioners" attitude. It's got no basis in historical beliefs about magic, the fiction these games are based on, mythology, folklore, _nothing_. As far as I can tell this utterly weird idea - which implies that no-one should be able to cast spells reliably, for one thing - was invented from whole cloth by gamers around 1980. It has zero basis in anything from before then or in anything from outside RPGs, period.




There's also no basis in using magic along the lines of _Wish_ four times a day.  Things have to be balanced somehow.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> In 3e, so much of your character abilities are tied up in magic items (yuck!) that controlling what magic items players can get is a bit like telling a fighter he can't take Power Attack (sorry, can't find a tutor) or telling a wizard he can't research _cone of cold_ as one of his spells.




Not true.  The CRs might not work out right, but who cares?  Players should learn how to run anyway.



> Aren't there low-magic threads we could necro, or should we start another one?




Here's good.


----------



## haakon1 (Jan 27, 2005)

Hitokiri said:
			
		

> My question is how high is it before PCs are willing to sell things.  Most of the players I've seen like having a backup weapon, so you figure they will keep the first two, or maybe even 3, weapons they come across.  Likewise, a spare suit of armor doesn't hurt to have sitting at home.  . . .
> Also, when was the last time you saw a PC sell off a useful potion or scroll, as opposed to holding onto it "just in case".  Now EVENTUALLY, I will agree that the PCs will get to a point where they will feel that selling some of their loot is worthwhile, but by this time they are usually mid level (or even higher).  So my question is, how many people ever reach the point where they are willing to sell the stuff?  . . .
> Certainly not enough to create magical shops (although I could see some sort of auctioning being done, much like what happens today when a rare piece of art goes on sale, but this would be the exception and not the rule).  The only other way for items to come into the market is if they are made to be sold.  Considering the costs and time involved in making them, I doubt that many mages or clerics are willing to act as magical labor in creating the items.





I've been pondering these questions for years.  I've often thought it would be fun to have two parties from similarly powered campaigns, but with different DM's and different players, be able to trade with each other, to see what would be exchanged, if anything.

In my main campaign, which is played very slowly over email, there is a magic item shop in the main city (Thornward in Bissel).  It's run by a Sorcerer of about 2nd-4th level, whose main ability is casting Detect Magic and Identify for fees.  I randomly rolled about 20 cheap to intermediate magic items for his inventory -- mostly potions and low-level scrolls, but also some weapons and miscellaneous gear.

For the better than potions and scrolls stuff, I fudged the random determination a bit towards the sort of things adventurers don't typically like -- items like a +1 scimitar (instead of a long sword, bastard sword, or great sword), a +1 club (when's the last time you saw a magic club, or a PC using a club?), horseshoes of speed, and +2 longspear.

What did the players do?  They dumped a lot of the low-end magic they had, and wanted to upgrade.  One was mad that he couldn't get a better magic sword than he had (+2 value), but the others accepted that the inventory is the inventory, and most of the white elephant items actually got bought, like a +1 hand-axe and some potions and cash going in to get the horseshoes of speed.

Also note the pricing rules -- full price for the Identification casting before you get to sell anything (caveat vendor), 80% of face value for most magic items (less for lame ones), and 120% of face value to buy, with at least half of the value coming in trade-in magic.

I think it worked out fun for everybody.  They've been back to visit the magic shop, and I've had some turn over of the low-end items go on.  I still love to see how the inventory would change if a party from someone else's campaign went thru the shop . . .


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> IMC I want magic to be wonderful, amazing. I want players who get a magical item say "Woowww! Great!!". I don't see it being the case with "So, I have the money, lets get rid of this +1 sword and buy a +3, and if I bargain well, I may also get a healing potion". This is simply not how I do see magic. This is the normal behavior for modern equipment in a consumerist society. However, when I play a LotR / Viking / Dragonlance or else game, I don't want it that way. In these universes, getting a magical item is a great thing, an event of wonder, not going to the supermarket and get your +1 leather armor along your trail rations.




But there was magic item trade in Middle Earth. Enchanted toys were imported to the shire for Bilbos b-day IIRC. 

Also, the wizard was quick to peg a moneytary value on the armor, even though its debatable if it would rate in as a magic item in D&D. At least it has the characteristics of one: very useful and very expensive. Now, if there was no market, how come there was a price?


----------



## Turanil (Jan 27, 2005)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Perhaps you should look at Grim Tales instead.



You are kidding me, don't you?    (You must know my love of Grim Tales if you read some of my posts...)



			
				(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Then you shouldn't run 3e, because 3e is balanced with high magic in mind. In 3e, so much of your character abilities are tied up in magic items (yuck!) that controlling what magic items players can get is a bit like telling a fighter he can't take Power Attack
> 
> Aren't there low-magic threads we could necro, or should we start another one?



I think we need begin a new thread. High level D&D having to be played with magical items or being unplayable is an urban legend to me! All of this because of that CR thing. However, when I do want to use that CR stuff in my campaign, it invariably doesn't work (maybe I should use that of Grim Tales   ). Now I am using monsters against my PCs as I feel it. If the monsters are too powerful the PCs can flee or else; if they are too weak I can adjust next time. Likewise for XP: I give them as I want (getting a level every two or three gaming sessions), not because of monsters slain.




			
				Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Turanil said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Listen: I totally agree with you. It's just that nobody seems to get my sarcastinc tone.    I will add appropriate notes next time I speak in sarcasms.


----------



## Turanil (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Unless you're playing D&D in some kind of weird Eberron, Faerun or Planescape kind of world where everybody is a modern liberal democrat and magic oozes out of everybody's pores, I'm guessing that the campaign world is the good old fashioned pseudo-medieval D&D world. If that's the case, the most important thing to realize is that in the pre-modern world, there aren't shops in the modern sense of the idea; anything expensive or worthwhile was commissioned. It wasn't part of the inventory. In a medieval-style city, you have skilled tradespeople who make things; they might have one or two display items in their shop or booth to show the quality of their workmanship but generally, there will be no inventory to speak of. Any item of quality will have to be commissioned.
> 
> And even if you somehow live in a world where there are modern-style stores with inventories, how many of them are going to have an inventory exceeding 1000gp? Very few if their owners have any economic sense at all. Who is going to use up xp to create items that sit on a shelf, depriving their creator of xp he could be using to level or brew potions or whatever? Who, furthermore, is going to run a shop with thousands or tens of thousands of gp worth of stuff that could be stolen? Nobody with an Int or Wis high enough to create the stuff! Any rational actor would wait to make a magic item until such time as there was a potential buyer for it.
> 
> Now, I suppose the characters could go to a local temple or mages' guild to commission magic items for a special purpose. The people at that place would not only be selling very expensive materials in exchange for gold; they would also be selling their XP. (I challenge anyone who thinks there should be magic shops to explain who would take valuable xp, convert those xp into items they were not using and leave them on a shelf not accruing any revenue.) Now let's imagine the rate at which a priest or mage would sell his XP to the characters and what it might take to persuade him to do so. You might even consider asking the players what they would sell their XP for; maybe doing so would give them the idea of just how ridiculous their demands are.



Perfectly said! I totally agree with you. Many gamers, it seems, see their medieval gaming world as a modern consumerist society. However, while it is perfectly possible to play like that (Eberron), this is NOT to be the case in a world inspired by the Vikings, King Arthur, Middle Earth, or even Dragonlance.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Jan 27, 2005)

In my experience, it stretches suspension of disbelief when players can't buy magic items.  When players say: "Ok, our party has sold 18 +1 weapons, 8 +2 weapons, 2 +3 weapons, 12 rings, even more of each plus of armor, and probably 40 different wonderous items, and we sold the excess 10 potions of cure light wounds by the time we were 12th level, we all have +3 weapons and armor as well, that was just our extra.  After all that, you are telling us we can't find a +1 weapon for sale as a backup as no one sells magic items?  We also ran into that adventuring party of 17th level characters last week, shouldn't they have sold even more than we did in this town considering you said they were based out of it?"

And why WOULDN'T magic shops start to come about in large towns?  Adventurers are apparently pretty plentiful at the rate that PCs run into them in taverns, as villians, and in the standard demographics in the DMG.  So, when they come back to town with 50,000gp, people are going to want to be there to provide them things they want to buy.

I used to be a staunch opponent of magic shops, mostly because it said they didn't exist in the books back in 2nd and 1st edition.  I'd try to come up with reasons why people couldn't buy things constantly.  I'd have to be constantly defending my position as my players kept arguing that with the amount of magic they were selling there must be others selling them too and who would be buying +3 swords of ogre decapitation except those who:

a) kill ogres
b) have the money to afford them

That pretty much narrows it down to shops that cater to adventurers or the adventurers themselves.  So, if you allow the PCs to sell off their equipment without sitting around for months looking for a buyer, then the PCs should generally be able to buy something with as much ease.

I pretty much figured all it requires is someone with a bit of money to start up a shop and buy some low powered magic items for half price and then sell them to someone at full price and they're suddenly very rich.  Adventurers love it because they only have to go to one place to buy and sell some stuff.  Then, someone in a different town hears about this and does the same thing and suddenly its very wide spread.  Sure, the shop keepers have a lot of expenses with magical traps and amazing quality locks and keeping expensive items off site to avoid thieves.  But even with those expenses, you can make a tidy profit.  Of course, this assumes there are enough adventurers to support this economy.  Mind you, due to the extravagent prices of magic items, it wouldn't require many.

I once tried to go back to my old ways and restrict buying of magic items without restricting magic item creation.  I had a player who would spend all his downtime making magic items for the party as they couldn't get it anywhere else.  He'd pocket the profit between the creation cost and the market value.  He started making all sorts of money with very little xp, strictly speaking.  He has enough money to afford everything he wanted.  So much so that he would make himself new items to replace old ones and sell off his extra items.

(EDIT: Adding a bit extra)I think the point is about the world making sense to the rules rather than the rules making sense to the world.  In order to run a homebrew game that had no magic item buying, I'd have to house rule a decent portion of the D&D rules.  Change the CR of almost every creature in the monster manual.  I'd have to give new abilities to some of the classes to make up for what they lose due to not having magic items, spellcasters would be too powerful as they rely less on magic items.  I can't think of all of them right now, but that one change changes the balance of the whole game and makes it a different game.  That's alright as long as you go through the effort of really going through the ENTIRE rule set from beginning to end and considering each rule in terms of "If I assume the PCs may have limited or no access to magic items, does this rule favor one class more than others?  If so, how do I fix that?"


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Arcane Runes Press said:
			
		

> 1) It's not a simple matter to "shop around" for a game/GM. Roleplaying isn't exactly an expansive hobby, and most people tend to play with their friends, rather than hop from game to game. Gaming usually isn't like street court basketball, where you can take your ball down and find a game most any summer day - it's far more insular than that.




That's kind of funny that you say that, because in my area it's a whole lot easier to find a regular RPGame than it is to find a regular basketball, football, or baseball game.  The only way to play those games regularly is to spend money and join a league.  If I wanted that much structure to my fun, I'd join the RPGA.



> 2) If you're creating a game primarily for your own recreation and enjoyment, and presenting it as my way or the highway, then you're very much "coercing" the players into being your personal entertainment center - and the consequence of too much my way/highway GMing is often a disfunctional group, where no one ends up getting the satisfaction they want out of gaming.




My friends are all poor, maladjusted members of society, so there's little they can offer in the way of life support (as in supporting me in my life's endeavors).  If I can't expect them to entertain me, what good are they?


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> I have a player who plays a monk 2/fighter X/cleric 1/wizard 1 so that they can use any wand in the game, have fairly excellent saves, and get a few bonus feats and evasion.
> 
> ...snip...
> 
> It's players like this that force my hand in removing things from the game and disallowing the purchase of magical items.




If your player wants to shoot himself in the leg with that sorry excuse for powergaming, why don't you just let him? It's not like a couple magic items could save that mess ..  :\


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> I've never seen _anyone_ propose a magic shop in this sense, in several internet debates on the subject. Has anyone actually played in a game with one of these? I never have.




Some of my players propose this.  And yes, I've seen games where this occurs.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

atom crash said:
			
		

> If I told my players that "there's plenty of magic in the world... but it isnt bought or sold, sorry" they'd most likely go to the library or sage's guild, find out who owns these magic items, and go kill them for their valuable magic items. Not the kind of heroic game I want to run.




Wow.  My players' characters would be arrested, mutilated, publicly demoralized, fined, and imprisoned for committing murder and theft; not to mention any equipment used in the murder would be impounded by the state.  They'd probably also be banned by whoever ran the library or sage's guild.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Wow.  My players' characters would be arrested, mutilated, publicly demoralized, fined, and imprisoned for committing murder and theft; not to mention any equipment used in the murder would be impounded by the state.  They'd probably also be banned by whoever ran the library or sage's guild.




Hehe, except that I've seen this happen to, it's amazing that if the players go on a killing spree gaining magic items, they become really powerful due to all the magic items they have.  If you just want to warn the players and send guards that they are capable of defeating against them, they tend to kill them and take whatever magic items they have, making themselves stronger.

I once had a campaign that continued on like this as I either had to say that all the guards in the world didn't have any magic, in order to maintain the "uniqueness" of magic, who would waste it on just some guards?   So, then, with the magic of the party they can easily defeat people with no magic who are Average Party Level +3 fairly easily.  Or, the guards all had magic, thus making the party WANT to attract guards and setting traps for them so they could get more magic.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> And as *I* asserted before... I dont think buying and selling magic items is a campaign style. People have jumped in saying the players should have a general say in what sort of game they are in.
> 
> Is buying and selling magic items the deal breaker?
> 
> ...




Is it a deal breaker to a Player Character?  Probably not, unless their character concept is an artificer who is a magical merchant.

To a campaign?  It certainly can be.  The whole logistics of history, war, government, economy, and law are changed by easy access to magical items.  That can pretty much change an entire campaign to the point where it no longer is the same campaign.

Why don't the thirsty people in Great Ulter Wastes just buy a decanter of endless water?  Why are castles built when a small, elite strike force can fly in over the walls and open the gate?  When the orcs fighting the Elf Wars of Alerand, why didn't they just fireball the hell out of the forest so the elves couldn't keep hiding?  Ring of the Ram?  Rod of Lordly Might?  Bead of Force?  Folding Boat?

If you can't see how easily commissioning these types of items can change history, then I'm happy for you that you don't worry much about realism* in your campaigns and just play for fun.  But I try to run campaigns that have great internal consistency.

----

* verisimilitude for the pedantic.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Interesting thing about that is its just as much an individual campaign thing as the idea of magic item shops.
> 
> I mean, really...you're actually trying to tell me that people buy LAND in D&D?! LAND?! Really now, land is plentiful and its all over the place and its not even mentioned in the Core books that you CAN buy it! Pfft! Buying land!
> 
> ...sounds oddly similar to buying magic items...




Well, that's why I listed several things.  Check out Stronghold Builder's Guidebook for official rules on how to spend a horde of money without getting anything magical.  In my experience buying land and property is rarely discouraged in a campaign.  I'm sure there are campaigns in which it would be inappropriate, but so too are there campaigns where item creation feats are inappropriate.

Bribery is always a good money sink, too.  Even if the DM doesn't feel that bribery is the way to go, throw enough money into it and it becomes ludicrous for the NPC to refuse it.

And sheep are in the core rules.  Nothing stops you from taking Profession (shepperd) and buying a ton of sheep.  Although, that creates more problems with economy, because the average high-level PC can afford to purchase a monopoly on the sheep industry and therefore would soon have way more money than he could possibly spend on sheep alone.  He would have to diversify.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Majoru Oakheart said:
			
		

> In my experience, it stretches suspension of disbelief when players can't buy magic items.  When players say: "Ok, our party has sold 18 +1 weapons, 8 +2 weapons, 2 +3 weapons, 12 rings, even more of each plus of armor, and probably 40 different wonderous items, and we sold the excess 10 potions of cure light wounds by the time we were 12th level, we all have +3 weapons and armor as well, that was just our extra.




In my campaigns the players wouldn't be able to find buyers for that stuff, usually.  The only reasonable place would be to a king or lord who would prompty integrate it into his military forces.  Therefore, it would no longer be for sale.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 27, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> If your player wants to shoot himself in the leg with that sorry excuse for powergaming, why don't you just let him? It's not like a couple magic items could save that mess ..  :\




Wands are extraordinarily cost effective, for one.  Using standard treasure tables, it would be very hard for mid-high level character to not make money just because he goes through 30-40 charges an adventure.  Your slightly lower BAB is almost completely offset by a wand of bull's strength (not to mention granting you +2 damage).  Magic Missile instead of ragned combat, allowing a more lopsided point buy.  Screw your skill investments in jump and climb since you can use spells for those.  Feat wise, if you were going to take Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple anyway, you are only down a single feat and 6 hp (the same you would be down by taking static hp if you were level 12) compared to full fighter.  Oh, and you get weapon spec. a bit later.  But you've added 5th level cleric and wizard spell capability, monk improved unarmed damage, turning (which means they can take the divine feats), familiar, evasion, MUCH higher saves (+3, +2, +6 at 5th level, the equivilent of more than 3 other feats) and few spells to boot.

The problem isn't that he is overly powerful in a straight up battle.  The problem is, why are the other characters in the party?  With spiked chain, improved trip, improved disarm, and power attack, there's nothing effective to throw up against him.  He can single-handedly take out just about any creature with a CR equal to his level (which is supposedly a challenge for an entire party).


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Wands are extraordinarily cost effective, for one.  Using standard treasure tables, it would be very hard for mid-high level character to not make money just because he goes through 30-40 charges an adventure.  Your slightly lower BAB is almost completely offset by a wand of bull's strength (not to mention granting you +2 damage).  Magic Missile instead of ragned combat, allowing a more lopsided point buy.  Screw your skill investments in jump and climb since you can use spells for those.  Feat wise, if you were going to take Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple anyway, you are only down a single feat and 6 hp (the same you would be down by taking static hp if you were level 12) compared to full fighter.  Oh, and you get weapon spec. a bit later.  But you've added 5th level cleric and wizard spell capability, monk improved unarmed damage, turning (which means they can take the divine feats), familiar, evasion, MUCH higher saves (+3, +2, +6 at 5th level, the equivilent of more than 3 other feats) and few spells to boot.
> 
> The problem isn't that he is overly powerful in a straight up battle.  The problem is, why are the other characters in the party?  With spiked chain, improved trip, improved disarm, and power attack, there's nothing effective to throw up against him.  He can single-handedly take out just about any creature with a CR equal to his level (which is supposedly a challenge for an entire party).




Bull's Str doesn't stack with the belts, which you'd rather be using (no round spent on boosting), and magic missiles from wands tend to be pretty pitiful compared to a real archer. One caster level of wizard on a multiclass character was at least in our games quite useless. 

But at first I was just looking at the fact that he sould've taken only a level of cleric and wizard, and take Magic domain to use wizzie wands. 

Of course if you say he's a powerhouse, I'll believe you, but the 1/1/1/X multiclasses I've seen thus far go against that experience, especially with spellcasters as the single level classes. 1st and 2nd level spells from wands don't count for much at higher levels (except for cure of wand ligh.. um wand of cure light wounds).


----------



## Sammael (Jan 27, 2005)

How many people here DM campaigns that go above level 10?

At 1st level, the PCs are too poor to afford magic items, so magic shops aren't a concern at all. 

From 2nd to about 4th level, potions and scrolls may be available and affordable, but anything beyond that is still too expensive. Going by the default PC wealth charts, PCs should start getting magic items from encounters with progressively more difficult opponents.

From 5th to about 9th level, characters have enough wealth that they _should_ be able to purchase, commision, or upgrade their magic items. However, any one of those  methods can be an adventure unto itself - looking for a powerful spellcaster, traveling to a major city, doing favors to people, etc.

From level 10 onward, characters have enough power, influence, and wealth that *not* letting them just buy magic items completely suspends realism. The party has access to _legend lore_, _teleport_, _locate person_, whatever... clerics are now bishops and can damn well order accolytes to make them magic items; rogues practically _run_ thieves' guilds; bards probably entertain kings and archdukes; wizards are guildmasters and sages; and fighters have probably saved their comrades' buts many, many times, and can expect to rely on their connections.

In other words, my campaigns are such that by the time the PCs have enough money, they can pretty much expect to be able to obtain nearly any item they can afford, and I don't waste their time by requiring them to roleplay shopping trips.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jan 27, 2005)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> I'm somewhat sympathitic to the cry of "I wanna buy magic items!"
> 
> That said, the costs for the items in the DMG, are just that: the costs.  Point out to your players the selling price of most durable goods is around double of the creation costs.
> 
> Hey, if they really want to spend 1,500 gp on a 50 charge _wand of cure light wounds_ or 140,000 for a _rod of lordly might_, why would you want to stop them?  Seriously.  They have to use that gold for something.  Why not let them coustomize their character a bit?




The prices listed in the DMG _are already_ double the creation costs.

I allow low magic pruchasing in my campaigns (up to +1 items since they are little better than plain old masterwork items, potions, scrolls, wands of level 3 or lower).  You have to be in a major city to find any of this stuff and usually the NPC will want gold and a little something extra (hello?  is that adventure calling?).


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jan 27, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> I think you're missing out on some good opportunities here, really.
> 
> I mean, assuming the PCs have been asking around for the purchase of magic items, finally offer them up a "shady" dealer who claims to have an inventory of various items which can be manufactured "for a price" upon request.
> 
> ...




See _that_ I would have a problem with.  A completely undetectable curse worked into their magic items?  Wow.  What fun.


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> See _that_ I would have a problem with.  A completely undetectable curse worked into their magic items?  Wow.  What fun.




Not a surprising suggestion, considering that the topic is pretty much about DM control. Banning all sale of magic items lets the DM control when, how and what magic items the PCs use. 

Next logical step is that if the DM has to concede and let some items be bought .. the items won't do what the players want, but what the DM wants.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> If you go to the magic shop with your big bag full of 50,000 gp or so to get a +5 stuff, this isn't magic anymore. This is the fantasy equivalent of a modern technological equipment. As such, IMO it loses all flavor of what magic is supposed to represent.




In terms of game world mangling hobbies, buying a +5 sword is pretty much the most innocent thing a PC could do.  He could raise an army and raze a kingdom for that kind of money in a realistic world.  

I am not advocating catering to the mere whims of players or making it easy on them, but "you have a mountain of money but cannot buy anything you would ever want" is the opposite of fantasy -- it is a lame morality play.


----------



## Yair (Jan 27, 2005)

I generally let people buy what they want. They would need to find the right place to buy it from, which in some cases may be difficult, and they may need to convince the sellers that making the item is a good idea (the high priest of Pelor won't make a Holy Sword for anyone for just for a pile of cash), but they can get it.
The main reason is character customization. I just want my players to have whatever characters they want to, I don't want to limit them. If they want some item, just let me know and I'll come up with a way to allow them to get it or purchase it (if it's within their power level). Why not? I want them to have fun.
Another reason is that I think that kind of world is more believable. Trade in magic items in a world run by the D&D 3E rules is almost a given; there is just so much magic around, and the characters are so reliant on it, it has to be tradeable.

Of course, it all depends on the campaign. I won't be allowing purchase of magic items in a Midnight campaign (although bartering may work, say for a supply of wheat...). My recent campaign had NO magic items except evil ones, and so the characters had none (but DID have their effects, through "divine blessings"). And so on.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> There are 3 appropriate spellcasters in the group. None of the three has taken any Item Creation Feats at All. Zilch. One is a 9th Level Mage, One is a 9th Level Sorceror and the other is a 10th Level Mage.
> 
> The two players who whine run 2 of these characters.
> 
> ...




Well then, that sounds like plain whining.  Creation feats are even more valuable in a low magic world -- you get better bang for the xp.

But I am confused.  Are they actually asking to buy things when they do not have the money?  What are they asking for exactly?


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

atom crash said:
			
		

> I don't understand how in a world where something is plentiful that no one would ever think to buy or sell it. "So valuable that it will never be sold" and "plentiful" are mutually exclusive, in my book. And how do the players come across these plentiful magic items? If they trade gems/items/services for magic items, that's still buying and selling them. Or maybe they're so powerful and valuable that they're all lying around in a dungeon somewhere.




Well put.

If we are not talking about worlds designed to be magic poor, that is a separate subject, but a campaign where wealth levels are within 50% of the DMG suggestions for level, the PCs will run into so many magic items by level 10 that a market for magic would have to exist (even if Ye Olde Magick Shoppe may not).


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> That's not an entirely perfect analogy.  Historically, no one was forced to place their own life force into a manufactured good to make it, as is the case with magic items (XP).  I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, but it seems to me that it would be much more rare than its price would indicate (and its price would already indicate that it is rare).





Seems like an irrelevant argument.

The price of a +3 Longsword in _gold_ is much less important than the value of the sword compared to a +2 Longsword.  The market for magic items does not exist because of my whim for a +3 sword, it _must_ exist if I can acquire a bag full of +1 and +2 weapons.  How coin figures into this is a minor detail.


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

My last campaign allowed the players to buy the equipment they wanted.  It was a nightmare where they were easily 3 levels above the CR of any creature equal to their level.

I will never allow PCs to buy the magic items they want again.  In the future, if they want something bad enough, then they will be forced to barter with temples, guilds or individual mages.  Gold alone will not be enough to secure the item.  They will need to do something for them in return.

It's not that magic is rare in my world.  Magic is controlled in my world by the wealthy.  Just like a normal citizen of the USA does not own a M! Abrams tank, a normal citizen of my world will not own a +5 suite of plate or a flametongue sword.  The PCs either have to become part of the establishment or work for the very powerful in order to get items.

Of course, any mage or cleric is free to make them items with the proper feats as long as they obtain the proper materials.  Players who want to make an item will need to adventure for the proper ingrediants.  Of course, that adventuring will gain them the XP needed to make the item etc.

It's idiotic to think that they will be able to just buy what they want.  

As for selling items, the PCs better not do that too often or the establishment will want them removed.  It is far better to either upgrade an item or get some other adventurer to do something for you.

For instrance, you hear that your old village is threaten by a troll.  However, you're on a quest for the king and you cannot attend to it.  You offer another adventurer an item and some money to help out the village.

So no, no player can expect to buy or sell items in my game.  Items can be found, commissioned, quested or made and that is it.


----------



## jasper (Jan 27, 2005)

Oh please I am old school too. I guess I played on the wrong side of tracks and with bad players. In the beginning magic shops were in every big town until we started knocking them off and stealing the loot. They did it to my world which in turn I did in theirs. Which then started either every magic shop being ran by a 20+ level wizard, or god. Then end with the magic shop from the n-dimension which would appear when you needed it and ran by a 20+ level wizard with lots of guards. 
Sorry played in different editions, on different coasts, on different continents. It is the players not the system or computer games or immature players or current culture.


----------



## swrushing (Jan 27, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> I never have and never will. It's just me and my style, and I am very up front with it when starting a new game or group. However I've noticed that with the advent of 3E, a few of my players are very adamant that the rules indicate that they are allowed to purchase magic items.




The first thing to keep in mind is that 3e is the first edition of DnD to IIRC take "wealth" into account into its "balance" system. PCs at level X are expected to have a certain amount of wealth and that is factored into the balance estimates.

By "wealth" the system doesn't think bags of coins or sacks of Gms but "useful items of value x". After a very short time, magic items = wealth since the mundane items are no longer that expensive.

Now, most of the actual loot one gets by the usual tables is in coins and gems and art and such, and the system does EXPECT as part of its balance equation that this will be cashed in more or less for useful items. Whether this is easy or difficult, quick or slow is up to you but the presumption is "it happens".

In the DMg they give guidelines for city size and item availability as a handle on this.

Given this, its perfectly reasonable for some player to figure thats expected and an important part of things. if they see the encounters you provide as more difficult than they think they ought to be, and you keep a tighter rein on item purchase so that a lot of their "wealth" stays in "useless coin and gem" form, they might get the notion that "we got less useful stuff than is expected" and "the scenarios are harder than they should be" are linked.

Numerous examples of WOTC and other products listing specifically "EL lowered due to the adversary being less equipped" probably add to this.

Now, of course, "you cannot buy items" and "you have less than expected useful gear" do not follow hand in hand. In your game because they cannot buy items, you may be adjusting your loot lists to account, giving more useful items and less coin and gem. You may be having NPCs giving "payment" and "rewards" for services rendered in useful items rather than sacks of useless coins. There are certainly many ways you handle the "coins are not going to help you" expected-wealth-balance-cr thingy.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> If you go to the magic shop with your big bag full of 50,000 gp or so to get a +5 stuff, this isn't magic anymore. This is the fantasy equivalent of a modern technological equipment. As such, IMO it loses all flavor of what magic is supposed to represent.




So, you are saying that magic is incredibly valuable, but that no one will ever buy or sell it? I believe that is called "implausible".


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> There are plenty of persuasve reasons for why you wouldn't have a magic _shop_ -- and especially why you wouldn't have one conveniently nearby, that you could easily locate, that had what you were looking to buy sitting on a shelf.




Except that the original poster didn't talk about a magic shop. He talked being bothered by the idea that PCs could buy magic items, not about the particular mechanic of the market that they would buy them in.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Ibram said:
			
		

> Permanet magic items are rare as hens teeth IMC, and are usualy family treasures or reveared relics.




Assumptions that make buying and selling magic items _more_ likely, not less. The more valuable an item is, the more likely it is to have a market built up around it.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> The prices listed in the DMG _are already_ double the creation costs.




Only if you think xp aren't worth anything.



			
				atom crash said:
			
		

> I don't understand how in a world where something is plentiful that no one would ever think to buy or sell it.




Is the GM making the case that money or goods are never traded for magic under any circumstances? No. He is making the case that there are no magic shops. The two things are not equivalents. 



			
				Numion said:
			
		

> Banning all sale of magic items lets the DM control when, how and what magic items the PCs use.




Did this DM ban all item creation feats when I wasn't looking? 

And frankly, when I'm a player, I'm just fine with the DM "controlling" when I get magic items, kind of the way I am with him "controlling" what monsters I encounter.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 27, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> My last campaign allowed the players to buy the equipment they wanted.  It was a nightmare where they were easily 3 levels above the CR of any creature equal to their level.




Why did you let them have so much money? Buying gear shouldn't be a problem if they're not overloaded with cash.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> That's not an entirely perfect analogy.  Historically, no one was forced to place their own life force into a manufactured good to make it, as is the case with magic items (XP).




In many cases people believed that certain things required portions of their life essence, or even their soul to make or do. And yet those things were bought and sold, just like any other valuabnle commodity.



> I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, but it seems to me that it would be much more rare than its price would indicate (and its price would already indicate that it is rare).




The price pretty much already incorporates the lost xp required by the creator, giving him a 100% markup on an item that probably took him a couple of days to create. 1,000s of gold peices worth of return for a couple days work (which is probably enough, in most campaign worlds, that he would never have to do another day of work in his life if he didn't want to).


----------



## jasper (Jan 27, 2005)

Diaglo… true enough the DM knew there were a lot of items.

the players did not….

Diaglo unlike you most of us back in the day had to worry about when PirateCat or Merric bought their own copy of the module. After all just because I was a dm who was I to tell the other teenagers what to do with their money since they DM too. 

Diaglo I don’t think the 1e identify spell was limited to how long you kept the item in your presence. 
1 hour per level francisa starting when you first lay eyes on it. This means I been miss reading the spells since 1980? Can you give me phb page number or dmg page number?


Imc low level items clw potion and like are generally available but the party can then buy the town out the current supply and be sol when they come back to restock. All other items may be available through magic brokers depending on the gp limit of city, the item, and other factors. Most of the time if it reasonable I will allow it to move game play along. Ex they use the last resurrection scroll in town the next one will be x% above the last one. But I haven't played full campaign mode (little less magic to be purchase but more land and rank available) in years. So my games are a little bit above beer and pretzels game play


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> So no, no player can expect to buy or sell items in my game.  Items can be found, commissioned, quested or made and that is it.




What do you think "commissioning" a magic item is that makes it different from one person selling it and another buying it?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> And again I take the pains to point out, we're talking about magic item shops here people.




No we are not. We are talking about the existence of a market for magic items. That is completely different from the idea of having a magic shop with piled of enchanted items lining the shelves.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Unless you're playing D&D in some kind of weird Eberron, Faerun or Planescape kind of world where everybody is a modern liberal democrat and magic oozes out of everybody's pores, I'm guessing that the campaign world is the good old fashioned pseudo-medieval D&D world. If that's the case, the most important thing to realize is that in the pre-modern world, there aren't shops in the modern sense of the idea; anything expensive or worthwhile was commissioned. It wasn't part of the inventory. In a medieval-style city, you have skilled tradespeople who make things; they might have one or two display items in their shop or booth to show the quality of their workmanship but generally, there will be no inventory to speak of. Any item of quality will have to be commissioned.




And this is different from buying and selling magic items how? You are just quibbling over the mechanic of the market, not the existence of the market itself.


----------



## Weyland (Jan 27, 2005)

I think a lot of whether buying/selling magic items is feasible rests in whether or not it fits into the campaign.

The last two campaigns I've played in handled it rather differently.  In one, the PCs were working in an (admittedly large) underground resistance cell to overthrow the conquerers of the island they were on.  There wasn't any buying or selling of magic items like in a shop, but the GM was pretty cool about letting us hand over items that we didn't need/couldn't use to the rebellion and either drawing some funds to compensate (since generally, some of the other resistance fighters could use them) or trade with some other units for items that they might have.  It worked out pretty well, and actually gave us some good RP, as otherwise nameless/faceless NPCs got fleshed out.

In the current Eberron campaign, it's pretty established that with artificers and magewrights, the purchase of pre-made or commissioned magic items is possible in major cities (like Sharn).  It still works out, since the GM has final say over just what can be easily found.  If we as the players still really want a rare item, we can always negotiate with the GM (in the guise of whatever artificer we're dealing with) to either pay out the nose for it or aquire it through shadier means.

Now it's entirely possible that neither of these solutions will work for everyone, and that's perfectly cool.  What I think the big thing to keep in mind is that if an active trade in such items exists in a world, what would the ramifications be?  Would there exist an entire class of mages who do nothing but make/sell items?  Would there be a grey market amongst adventurers who trade and sell items amongst themselves?

Just my $0.02 

-Weyland


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> No we are not. We are talking about the existence of a market for magic items. That is completely different from the idea of having a magic shop with piled of enchanted items lining the shelves.




Actually, according to the original post, we're talking about whether or not _the PCs should be able to buy magic items._


----------



## Turanil (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Turanil said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> No we are not. We are talking about the existence of a market for magic items. *That is completely different from the idea of having a magic shop* with piled of enchanted items lining the shelves.



Sorry, but like most of the others who quoted me: *. you just DIDN'T READ IT*. . 

I don't say that I don't allow to buy magical items. In fact, in another post I say I allow to _commission_ an item, and this takes roleplaying and adventuring, not taking your pencil and removing 50,000 gp to replace by "sword +5" on your character sheet. Here, I say that I do find absurd and destroying of the fantasy aspect of the game, when players go to the *magic shop*. 

The *MAGIC SHOP* i.e.: "Hello! How much cost this nice sword +5 here on the shelf?!". 

I can agree with some item sold on the black market by shabby individuals affiliated to the thieves' guild or what not. However this requires roleplaying, adventuring, and risks (of being cheated in some way). But the *magic shop*, i.e.: the player just takes his pencil and exchange the words "50,000 gp" on his PC sheet for the words "sword +5", I find this *LAME*.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> It depends on the campaign, but it's usually a mix of the following:
> 
> - sale of magical items incurs heavy taxation in the region where it is sold.  This is to the point where most selling would be underground and thus hard to find for the players anyway.




That's what having rogues and other information gathering types in a party are for.



> - One must never ignore the expenditure of XPs.  While the DMG puts a value an XP (25 gp I believe?), it never directly addresses the "XP Limit" of a city (as it does GP limit).  One can pretty much take this how one sees fit.  In my experience (and this is my personal feeling on the topic as well), few players are willing to routinely expend XP just to make some money.  A DM could try to extrapolate an XP limit from the demographics, but it would be mostly hunches and gut instinct anyway, and would ultimately lead one to whatever conclusion one is looking for.




In my experience, most PCs (who can) are willing to make magic items in exchange to trade, even just to trade for cash. Not all the time, but every now and then during their career. If you want to come up with an "xp limit", a good rule of thumb would likely be 1/25th of the gold piece limit.



> - Shady merchants dealing in fake or inaccurate magical wares.  This is a great deterrence to buyers, thus limiting a market for sellers.




This is an element of _every_ market. Magic items should be no different in this regard. But it hasn't killed the market in any other commodity, it just makes buyers cautious.



> - The more a group of characters relies on magical items (especially at higher level) the more likely those items are going to be destroyed by some intelligent enemy with a penchant for Disjunctioning everything the players have.  While this is only available to higher level people, it can help explain why there aren't a slew of old magic items lying around.




It can, but on the other hand, masterwork swords can be sundered quite easily too, but there are plenty of them available for sale. In reality, cars wear out after a few short years of use, but we have millions of them available for sale daily.



> - Think of wizards as the military.  Think of magic as guns.  Now think of all the people around the world that are for gun control of private citizens.  There may be groups that seek out and destroy magic items, whether this be a diorganized lot of people who snap any wand in half that they find, to entire subversive powerful organizations who routinely mug, rob, and steal magic items to keep them out of the hands of those who are not properly trained to use them (wizards).




Now think about all of the people around the world who have weapons. Especially in less than completely civilized areas of the world (which are usually analogous to the places that adventurers would spend lots of time in). Do you under stand just how easy is it to get weaponry in Afghanistan, or Sudan, or Somalia?



> - Law.  In feudal society (the baseline for most any campaign I've seen, and most of my own), the ruler owns everything on his land.  He has full legal right to simply take your magic items, wish you a good day, and put you in the dungeon if you resist.  While many rulers might not choose to do this, a king recently finding himself at war against a greater power might take any offensive magic items, while another might like to keep the populace weak (see gun control above, where the organization might now work for the law).  These types of things not only might reduce the number of magic items, but would also be a serious deterrent for someone to start advertising (however discreetly) that they are selling magical items.




I believe that your understanding of feudal law is somewhat lacking. Note, for example, that contrary to your assertions, historical feudal rulers often had to borrow heavily from those in their lands to finance their wars and other ambitions (rather than, for example, just confiscating their property as you would have them do). The very essence of fuedal law was reciprocating rights: the lord had power, but he also had duties and responsibilities to his vassals. Many feudal kings were overthrown (such as Richard II) or curbed by force (such as John Lackland) when they were perceived to have trampled on the rights of their vassals. What you assert as an example of "feudal law" is probably more like the law applied by the pre-Hellenic asiatic emperors of the middle-east.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> Actually, according to the original post, we're talking about whether or not _the PCs should be able to buy magic items._




Which would only be impossible in an environment in which you posited that there would be no market for magic items.


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> I can agree with some item sold on the black market by shabby individuals affiliated to the thieves' guild or what not. However this requires roleplaying, adventuring, and risks (of being cheated in some way).




The risk aspect of buying magic items has popped up a couple of times in this thread. I'm not saying that it would be impossible, but, how likely would the Thieves Guild or whatnot to piss of characters who evidently have earned 50k (or whatever large sum they're spending) in adventuring?

It's about the same as a shady used cars salesman tried to sell a lemon to person he knew to be Magneto / Superman. The thieves know that these are very tough hombres. Maybe there would be easy pickings elsewhere ..


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> But the *magic shop*, i.e.: the player just takes his pencil and exchange the words "50,000 gp" on his PC sheet for the words "sword +5", I find this *LAME*.




And the only person talking about having a magic shop in a campign is you. Perhaps you could find another argument no one is making, and fight about that?


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Which would only be impossible in an environment in which you posited that there would be no market for magic items.




Nonsense.

The trade commodity would merely have to be something other than coin.

Personally, I recommended an exchange of components and cash, but certainly a transaction that involved only specific components for the fashioning of the items desired would be feasible.

The game effect is subtly different, to be sure, restricting somewhat the convenience and ease with which magic can be acquired, but then _flavour_ issues seem to be what's really at stake here.

Neither the intial poster, nor _all_ the others who have followed him, are saying there's no possibility or likelihood of a market for magic items. Some are simply saying it could (and maybe should) be based on something other than gold.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 27, 2005)

[too lazy to go a few pages back and quote]

Am I the only one who finds the notion of more than a handful of successful con-men magic item dealers rather implausible? I mean, ripping off adventurers (who are practically famous for killing people and taking their stuff when wronged) who have thousands of gp on hand to spend on magic doesn't seem like a good idea.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> Nonsense.
> 
> The trade commodity would merely have to be something other than coin.




A trade commodity that would, inevitably, devolve to something that could be exchanged for gold. If you can trade magic items for land, and land for money, at some point someone will simply eliminate the middle-man and simply trade magic items for money.

Cash is just a place holder for value, it simply eliminated the barter exchange requirement that I find someone who is offering the exact same commodity that I need and wants the exact same commodity I have to trade. Instead of me wandering about offering a pair of shoes in trade, looking for someone who needs shoes and has, say, milk (which is what I happen to need) to offer me in return, I just look for someone who needs shoes for cash, and then find someone who has milk to sell. Cash eliminates the need to have a perfect synchronicity between buyer needs and seller needs. That's all.



> Personally, I recommended an exchange of components and cash, but certainly a transaction that involved only specific components for the fashioning of the items desired would be feasible.




Components that could, in virtually all cases, likely be purchased for cash. Which means you are recommending an exchange of cash and cash.



> Neither the intial poster, nor _all_ the others who have followed him, are saying there's no possibility or likelihood of a market for magic items. Some are simply saying it could (and maybe should) be based on something other than gold.




And in the end, that's simply saying that a market is based upon money, since ultimately, almost everything can be expressed in a cash value. The "something else" you are buying and selling magic items with will be translated into a cash value (or it has no value to begin with), and then you are just back to "cash for magic", where you started.


----------



## Kast (Jan 27, 2005)

If you want to bring economic realities into the picture, which is usually not a good idea in fantasy worlds:

Permanent magic items (and to a lesser extent the charged ones as well) essentially have the same sort of market as art and antiques.

1) Unpredictable Supply and Demand
2) Low real utility
3) High inventory costs
4) High overhead for security, procurement and transportation of goods.

In addition they have the problem that dangerous magical items (and maybe even weapons in general) are most likely a controlled product with stiff local regulations on their sale and possession. To ensure security, the shop owner wouls probably have to pay the local crime syndicate protection monies further raising the prices and limiting market access.

Furthermore, items available for sale would vary wildy in price and certainly would not have a modern day walmart style pricing = intrinsic product value + x% margin markup (as they are presented in the DMG). There's no real way to judge the value of an item except through expectations on it's utility, which vary from individual to individual. In addition, many magic items might be bought by rich collectors who have no intention of using them and could afford t pay much higher prices than a PC, essentially removing many exisiting items from the market.

The creators of these items, wizards and clerics, certainly would not create expensive items for anonymous sale. The opportunity costs are too high. They would only do so on special request, with all of the costs (or maybe the whole price) payed up front. Local conditions such as gov't regulation and organized crime might even prevent them from selling direct to the public at all.

The kinds of entities that could actually afford to run a magic shop would have to have enormous resources and political clout to do so. This combined with the special treatment they receive by paying off the local mafia would mean a single entity would have a near monopoly on the market share. I could see maybe only one of these kinds of shops in a whole kingdom, certainly only one per large city or metropolis.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> So... you can suspend disbelief on the magic and the elves and the dragons kidnapping the princesses only to put them in heavily guarded towers... but any deviation from the laws of Adam Smith is a bridge too far?




Yes. Elves and magic are conventions of the genre. We assume reality differs from ours in that it has races of intelligent beings other than our own, and a form of physics that allows for manipulation of energy in ways other than those we understand.

Humans being fundamentally different in their nature than they are in our reality is not a convention of the genre. Humans failing to commodify valuable items (as they have always done with all items of value in history) is just beyond reasonable.


----------



## Henry (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Only if you think xp aren't worth anything.




Actually it's included too:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Breastplate of Command:...
> Strong enchantment; CL 15th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, mass charm monster; Price 25,400 gp; Cost 10,975 gp + 850 XP




So default price would be a bit over double, compensating for the XP lost. This is, of course, subject to individual DM ruling.




> And frankly, when I'm a player, I'm just fine with the DM "controlling" when I get magic items, kind of the way I am with him "controlling" what monsters I encounter.




That's a "me, too", since I played this way for years - why get upset if a DM chooses this avenue for a future game? Then again, I liked Drow weapons that decayed in sunlight, too.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> And this is different from buying and selling magic items how? You are just quibbling over the mechanic of the market, not the existence of the market itself.




It's not merely arguing about the mechanic; it is arguing about the circumstances. In my model, there is no presumption that:
(a) the characters have access to an NPC who can make the item
(b) the characters are deemed worthy by the NPC to have the item made for them
(c) the NPC is inclined at the time the characters want the item to part with the xp necessary to create it

Let me express what I mean in terms of silk:
(a.i) the characters might not be in a place that is receiving silk imports
(a.ii) there might not be anyone in the characters' region capable of actually working with silk
(b.i) the characters might find a merchant with silk who is saving up his limited supply for when a noblewoman or someone else capable of showing off his product in the right circles feels inclined to purchase it
(b.ii) the characters might find a merchant who is a member of a guild that only allows the sale of aristocratic clothes to aristocrats and deems it unlawful to sell aristocratic clothes to people of no rank
(c) the tailor might be keeping this bolt of silk on display in his booth in order to attract future customers; he might therefore decide that he will become just another tailor of he gives up his one bolt of silk and becomes just like all the other tailors in town

So, the fact that there exists a silk market in the world does not automatically mean that the PCs can go out and buy themselves silk outfits. 

The ability of characters to purchase magic items is conditioned by at least three factors:
(a) the existence of the item
(b) the availability of the item
(c) the values of the individual capable of obtaining the item for the characters

Or better still, how about children? Children are much more abundant than silk. The fact that it is undeniably true that people are selling children in this world does not make it true that the purchase of children is an opportunity available to everyone.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> Actually it's included too:
> So default price would be a bit over double, compensating for the XP lost. This is, of course, subject to individual DM ruling.




It's worth double if 1xp = 2.03gp. It's being produced at cost if 1xp=16.97gp. But in my personal schema for valuing xp, they are worth a whole lot more than that so I have trouble with the idea of a rational NPC selling his xp so cheaply.


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> And in the end, that's simply saying that a market is based upon money, since ultimately, almost everything can be expressed in a cash value. The "something else" you are buying and selling magic items with will be translated into a cash value (or it has no value to begin with), and then you are just back to "cash for magic", where you started.




Right. So, show me where the cash value for the following are given in the D&D books so I know how much to charge my PCs for the following, as I custom fashion a new magic item:

The breath of a fish.
The sound of a cat stalking.
Moonlight reflected in Kheled-zaram.
Tears freely shed from a stone.
The thought of a god.

Not everyone's campaign is going to reflect the nature of the market you're presupposing must exist there--at least one that's based entirely on value that can be expressed in gold. This works fine in games where a +1 (or +5) sword is only ever described as that, a +1 (or +5) sword. But not everyone is going to be satisfied with such mundanity, especially if they're shooting for something else.

Though, of course, there's always the possibility that we're, you know, playing D&D _wrong_, or something.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> It's not merely arguing about the mechanic; it is arguing about the circumstances. In my model, there is no presumption that:
> (a) the characters have access to an NPC who can make the item
> (b) the characters are deemed worthy by the NPC to have the item made for them
> (c) the NPC is inclined at the time the characters want the item to part with the xp necessary to create it




And all of these are just quibbling over the mechanic, not the existence of such a market. This is still buying and selling magic items, just with some market complications thrown in. It seems analogous to trying to get a piece of artwork made in Renaissance Italy, which probably works out to a a pretty 



> Let me express what I mean in terms of silk:
> (a.i) the characters might not be in a place that is receiving silk imports




But if they offer enough money for it, someone will likely try to bring silk to where they are.



> (a.ii) there might not be anyone in the characters' region capable of actually working with silk




But if they offer enough money for it, someone will likely show up with some.



> (b.i) the characters might find a merchant with silk who is saving up his limited supply for when a noblewoman or someone else capable of showing off his product in the right circles feels inclined to purchase it




But if they offer him enough money, he will likely be willing to forego those potential future profits for actual current profits.



> (b.ii) the characters might find a merchant who is a member of a guild that only allows the sale of aristocratic clothes to aristocrats and deems it unlawful to sell aristocratic clothes to people of no rank




In which case, the characters will likely try to purchase noble titles. Which was a common enough practice that it would not be surprising. Or they could forge documents showing their pedigree, or pretend to be nobles from another country (both of which were common). Or bribe the guildmasters of the silk merchant's guild to make an exception. Or go to the black market and get what they want there. If they offer enough money around, they can get what they want.



> (c) the tailor might be keeping this bolt of silk on display in his booth in order to attract future customers; he might therefore decide that he will become just another tailor of he gives up his one bolt of silk and becomes just like all the other tailors in town




Or, become the tailor who made a pile of money and bought himself another bolt of silk and had enough money left over from the transaction to buy two more.



> So, the fact that there exists a silk market in the world does not automatically mean that the PCs can go out and buy themselves silk outfits.




If they offer enough money, they probably can.



> The ability of characters to purchase magic items is conditioned by at least three factors:
> (a) the existence of the item
> (b) the availability of the item
> (c) the values of the individual capable of obtaining the item for the characters




And? This makes it different from a market for any other commodity how?



> Or better still, how about children? Children are much more abundant than silk. The fact that it is undeniably true that people are selling children in this world does not make it true that the purchase of children is an opportunity available to everyone.




I believe you are naive on this score. Of all the black market items one can get, children are probably one of the easiest to acquire.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> Right. So, show me where the cash value for the following are given in the D&D books so I know how much to charge my PCs for the following, as I custom fashion a new magic item:
> 
> The breath of a fish.
> The sound of a cat stalking.
> ...




If such things can be acquired (and since they are somehow elements necessary to make magic items, they must be acquirable), one could hire someone to get it for them. The cost of the items would be "how much does it cost to hire someone to get it for me".



> Not everyone's campaign is going to reflect the nature of the market you're presupposing must exist there--at least one that's based entirely on value that can be expressed in gold.




If it can be acquired, its value can be expressed in gold. This is a basic fact of life. Once you make something an item that can be owned or possessed, it has a value that can be expressed in gold. You may not like to deal with this basic and inalterable fact, but it can't be wished away. Certainly not by the sort of examples you've given here.


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I believe you are naive on this score. Of all the black market items one can get, children are probably one of the easiest to acquire.




Ah, and there goes any sense of logic this thread ever had.

Don't bother responding to any of my posts, as they won't have much relevance on the world you live on. Here, on my planet, at least, alcohol for minors, MP3 and DVD players, narcotics, firearms, and automobiles are far more readily availble on the "black market" than children.


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> What do you think "commissioning" a magic item is that makes it different from one person selling it and another buying it?




The difference is that the PCs have to ask for it.  They have to go to someone qualified, then dicker with them in order to have it made.  It will not already be made and the person who makes it will want something in return other than mere money.  Money may be a component, but something else will have to happen.

In addition, this requires the entire party to perform the duty, so the rest of the PCs better be willing to put their lifes on the line in order for their friend to get the item he wants so badly.

Basically, it should be hard to get your optimal magical load out.  I think that treating magic items as just another method of min/max or optimization is a load of bull.  The right items can make a PC far above their normal CR and still leave them at normal wealth by level.

That is crap.

At the end of the game where everyone was able to get what they wanted (ie. they all had items that equalled, but did not exceed, their wealth by level), the PLAYERS asked to go back to the older way where magic items were actually worth something.

Thus, if you play in my game, you may find someone wands, potions, or scrolls for sale, but nothing else will appear in any type of store.  It may exist in a treasure horde, or on the body of some dead adventurer, or something that they get from a slaine enemy, but they will not get a wish list and getting specific items will be hard.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven, all of your above statements are true if your merchant is a person who thinks like a modern capitalist, living alongside other individuals who share his beliefs and assumptions in a world governed by the laws of supply and demand. Fortunately, this type of world is not the only type of world in which all (or hopefully even most) D&D adventures take place. (Besides, how would the item creation rules even work in a world governed by the laws of supply and demand and therefore subject to inflation?)

And seriously, are you arguing that because there is a substantial black market in children Central Asia that I, sitting here in Central Canada, can go out and purchase a child today?


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> Right. So, show me where the cash value for the following are given in the D&D books so I know how much to charge my PCs for the following, as I custom fashion a new magic item:
> 
> The breath of a fish.
> The sound of a cat stalking.
> ...




We do things in a like manner.  The PCs had better find the components they need or they will be SOL for item creation and in many cases they will need to get the ingrediants even if they commission an item.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Only if you think xp aren't worth anything.




Perhaps you could read the rules a little more closely?

The market price of a magic item is what it is.

Half of that cost is strictly raw materials; so, .5 market.

Furthermore, the creator must pay 1/25 of that cost in XP.  XP are valued at 5gp per XP (see the section on hiring spellcasters).  That results in an "XP cost" of 1/25 * 5 = .2 market

So, the total raw materials cost of a magic item, including the cost of XP, is .7 market.

This means that every magic item has a markup on it of .3 market to cover the creator's time and profit - and that's assuming your creators aren't trying to gouge the PCs / buyers for all they can.


----------



## Ibram (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Assumptions that make buying and selling magic items _more_ likely, not less. The more valuable an item is, the more likely it is to have a market built up around it.




Actualy it makes it less likely that they will be sold.  Its not reasonable to think that the Order of the Martyered Lady would sell the Shroud of St. Lasira (cloak, +2 all saves +4 vs. magic w/ evil descriptor, +2 deflection bonus vs. daemons) that they have been keeping for centuries to a chump who shows up with a bag of gold? Would the Order of the Golden Blade sell the sword that gives their order its name?  Thats not to say that there is no access to magic items; a close friend of the OML could borrow the Shroud to help defeat Gerlaok the Heart Stealer but they had better return the Shroud once they are done with it.

Since magic items are so rare there can be no "Ye Olde Magik Shope" floating around, magic can be bought and sold but it is a very risky procedure and a bag of gold is rarely enough.

My current party has two magic weapons, a +2 ancesteral Katana carried by the samurai (whos not going to be traiding it in) and a Shocking Rapier carried by the rogue.  thats the extent of the parties magic (level 7 party).


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

> In which case, the characters will likely try to purchase noble titles. Which was a common enough practice that it would not be surprising.




Really? How easy do you suppose it would have been to purchase a noble title in Charlemagne's world? Or in a Norse kingdom? Especially in the Norse world, where coins were pounded into ornaments because there was so much gold and nothing to spend it on. If someone showed up in 9th century Denmark with a bunch of gold and tried to buy a title with it, here's what might have happened: he would have been beaten or executed for insulting the local king by trying to bribe him; then his money would have been taken and turned into jewelry to commemorate the occasion of his execution. 

From about the 16th century forward in England, people could purchase minor titles for cash but the whole reason feudalism arose was because the power of the sword trumped both money and civil authority. 

So, no. For most of history one could not purchase an aristocratic title at all. Look at India today, for goodness sake. Tell me: can people purchase membership in the brahmin or ksatriyah castes? There are billionaires in India who are still untouchables; why? Because caste, like feudal titles for most of history, cannot be bought.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Fortunately, this type of world is not the only type of world in which all (or hopefully even most) D&D adventures take place.




Actually, fusangite, I'd imagine that your particular way of playing D&D is in the vast minority.  Not many people that I've ever met are interested in attempting a "true-to-history" re-enactment of the middle ages, complete with fully-fleshed out medieval philosophies.

Your method sounds interesting, but I believe you're deluding yourself if you believe you are anything but in the minority.



> And seriously, are you arguing that because there is a substantial black market in children Central Asia that I, sitting here in Central Canada, can go out and purchase a child today?




Can you purchase a plane ticket?

Can you speak or find someone to speak the appropriate Central Asian language?

Then yes, it is possible that you could go buy a child.  Maybe not today - travel times are a bit difficult - but then, no one is saying that a standard PC should be able to go out and buy a +2 Flaming Burst longsword *today*, either.


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Then yes, it is possible that you could go buy a child.  Maybe not today - travel times are a *bit difficult* - but then, no one is saying that a standard PC should be able to go out and buy a +2 Flaming Burst longsword *today*, either.




emphasis added.

No, no. Storm Raven said it was quite easy. Go back and read his post! Children are actually one of the "easiest" things to acquire.


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> And the only person talking about having a magic shop in a campign is you. Perhaps you could find another argument no one is making, and fight about that?



And here we can see Storm Ravens innability to understand what he has read.  Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing my friend, I suggest you work on it.

As for magic items being on sale BECAUSE they are rare and valuable....I'll give that one to the first person that can show me the going price for the Shroud of Turin.  Heck, I'll even give the argument to someone who can tell me who to talk to about purchasing the Mona Lisa.  My point is that magical items in my games are like Picasso's.  Do the ever get sold, yeah, but it's not going o be a regular occurance, and it is definately not something which my players can just assume is on the open market once they reach the amount of gold listed in the dmg.  Even minor items are hard to get ahold of (Hey, clw potions take time and effort to make, why would a church sell them to every two bit adventurer that walked through the door, especially when they may not even follow the churchs precepts).


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> Ah, and there goes any sense of logic this thread ever had.
> 
> Don't bother responding to any of my posts, as they won't have much relevance on the world you live on. Here, on my planet, at least, alcohol for minors, MP3 and DVD players, narcotics, firearms, and automobiles are far more readily availble on the "black market" than children.




But at least most people get the item creation feat for free.


----------



## Sammael (Jan 27, 2005)

Actually, you'd be surprised as to how many slave children end up in the U.S. Since the U.S.-Canada border is a joke, smuggling a kidnapped child into Canada would be quite easy.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Perhaps you could read the rules a little more closely?




Perhaps you could read my posts a little more closely. I already clarified this in my response to Henry.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 27, 2005)

jeffh said:
			
		

> How do DMs who don't allow purchasing magic items explain why no market develops for them? That would take some pretty bizarre behaviour on the part of just about everyone with any wealth to speak of in the entire campaign world.



By having an adequately described combination of demographics, economics, and culture. A few people's games out there don't perfectly follow the RAW word-for-word, y'know. Guess you really haven't thought all that hard about it.


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Actually, you'd be surprised as to how many slave children end up in the U.S. Since the U.S.-Canada border is a joke, smuggling a kidnapped child into Canada would be quite easy.




Try it sometime.

Really.

Even with your own children.

I'm in the tourism industry, and you simply would not believe the number of father-son (where the son is a minor) fishing trips I've seen cancelled because the parent did not have sufficient documentation with him (including written permission from the mother) to bring the boy across the border.

And this is at the Sault Ste. Marie crossing, where you'd expect Northern Ontarians and Youpers to be fairly relaxed.

I should dig up the reservation slips from last year and compare the ratio of fathers and sons who got through and those who were turned back and had to cancel or re-schedule.

Honestly, you would not frigging believe how hard it is. (Not to say there aren't cases that fall through, obviously, but these are the exception, not the rule. And SR distinctly said that children on the black market were one of the "easiest" commodities. I don't dispute one bit that it exists, I dispute his disgusting hyperbole of it--even in Asia, where narcotics and high-seas piracy account for far more units of volume moved in the black market than the despicable trade in children.)

Anyway, let's quit derailing this marvellous thread and get back to the matter at hand.


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

The funny thing about this thread is that is further highlights the 3e divide.  Even in an area where the GM should have full control, magic item distribution, you get a rules argument that a certain level of items are owed to the players and that it is a rule!

Nevermind that the entire wealth by level chart and the CR charts are in the DMG and thus the province of the GM.  Nevermind that the entire issue is meant to be handled by the GM, we still get the argument in favor of more "player" options to help trick out their character.

Funny that this also seems to apply to the fluff versus crunch debate and that most people who are against the magic shop/ item market approach are giving fluff/ story reasons, while the proponents of the shop idea are focusing on crunch.

The entire argument seems to revolve around a GM/fluff vs. player/ crunch approach that seems inherent in 3e.

I am sure that the next edition of the game will further isolate the role of the GM until we eventually get replaced in favor of adventure rules and pregen scenarios that run with a rules  judge.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> I'm in the tourism industry, and you simply would not believe the number of father-son (where the son is a minor) fishing trips I've seen cancelled because the parent did not have sufficient documentation with him (including written permission from the mother) to bring the boy across the border.




If you are smuggling children across the border, do you really expect to be doing it at a border station? The U.S.-Canada border is huge, and easy to cross illegally if you want to.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jan 27, 2005)

I operate most of my games on the assumption that adventurers are rare.  The players are an oddity -- when they blow through some small hamlet, people will be talking about it for years.  The magic items that they may find along the way account for a significant chunk of all magic items in the world.  

Few adventurers means few NPCs with the level, experience, skills, abilities, known spells, and feats to create magic items.   While technically PC's may buy and sell magic items, there is not enough volume to constitute a market (either in the economic sense or the 'farmer's market' sense).  

Want a flaming sword?  Ok, find the best blacksmith you can (cause you sure don't want some hack screwing up and wasting the material), journey far and wide to find the purest iron.  Find a mage with the proper feat, and then adventure into the haunted mage's tower to retrieve the 'fireball' scroll to present to the mage so he can learn the proper magic to enchant the sword.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Hitokiri said:
			
		

> As for magic items being on sale BECAUSE they are rare and valuable....I'll give that one to the first person that can show me the going price for the Shroud of Turin.  Heck, I'll even give the argument to someone who can tell me who to talk to about purchasing the Mona Lisa.  My point is that magical items in my games are like Picasso's.  Do the ever get sold, yeah, but it's not going o be a regular occurance, and it is definately not something which my players can just assume is on the open market once they reach the amount of gold listed in the dmg.




Picasso's are bought and sold. Perhaps you have heard of places like Sotheby's and Christie's? I can find a listing of Van Gogh's up for auction _right now_. Or works from just about any other notable artist out there. The simple economic truth is that items are more likely to hit the market the more valuable they are, there is just that much more incentive to make a pile of money by selling them.



> Even minor items are hard to get ahold of (Hey, clw potions take time and effort to make, why would a church sell them to every two bit adventurer that walked through the door, especially when they may not even follow the churchs precepts).




For the same reason that the Catholic Church sold indulgences, pieces of the true cross and other relics and just about anything else they could think of: to finance church operations.


----------



## Bregh (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> If you are smuggling children across the border, do you really expect to be doing it at a border station? The U.S.-Canada border is huge, and easy to cross illegally if you want to.




You're quite something.

In an age of Amber Alerts, round-the-clock news networks, rapid communication, e-mails, sensitivity to missing children, and where American license plates and funny accents stick out like sore thumbs (especially in a country used to noticing their presence simply because y'all are so different from the norm) there's nothing *easy* about the market for smuggling children. (Which is how you described it.)

Does it happen?  Assuredly.

It acquiring a child from such actions easier than buying nicked video or hard drugs from the guy across town? Most. Frigging. Assuredly. Not.

Naive, indeed.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> Don't bother responding to any of my posts, as they won't have much relevance on the world you live on. Here, on my planet, at least, alcohol for minors, MP3 and DVD players, narcotics, firearms, and automobiles are far more readily availble on the "black market" than children.




Children are probably easier to get as a black market commodity than firearms or automobiles (cheaper in general) and depending on the bulk that you want easier to get than most significant narcotics transactions. I think you are underestimating just how easy trade in children truly is in the world, and how awfully omnipresent it is.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> The difference is that the PCs have to ask for it.  They have to go to someone qualified, then dicker with them in order to have it made.  It will not already be made and the person who makes it will want something in return other than mere money.




Anything that a person wants can be replaced by sufficient qualtities of "mere money".


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Picasso's are bought and sold. Perhaps you have heard of places like Sotheby's and Christie's? I can find a listing of Van Gogh's up for auction _right now_. Or works from just about any other notable artist out there. The simple economic truth is that items are more likely to hit the market the more valuable they are, there is just that much more incentive to make a pile of money by selling them.




There is a big difference between art and items that are meant to be useful.  The simple truth is that people will hold onto a valuable, useful item unless they have a large number of them.

And Sotheby's and Christie's exist because a communication network exists that allows them to get the items and make it known that they have them.

That does not exist in a fantasy world with a medieval tech level.

You cannot equate a modern economy with one where the vast majority of the wealthy nations are also on a subsistance level.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Storm Raven, all of your above statements are true if your merchant is a person who thinks like a modern capitalist, living alongside other individuals who share his beliefs and assumptions in a world governed by the laws of supply and demand. Fortunately, this type of world is not the only type of world in which all (or hopefully even most) D&D adventures take place.




You mean humans are radically different from the humans who populate our world? Because "capitalism" isn't an economic model that's new, and supply and demand isn't an assumption. If there is a demand for a good, and a supply for it, a market will ensure. Go back through history and try to find a culture in which this was not true.



> (Besides, how would the item creation rules even work in a world governed by the laws of supply and demand and therefore subject to inflation?)




Because as the price of magic items rose with inflation, other suppliers would step in and try to take advantage of the rising price, driving prices back down by increasing the volume of supply available to the market. This is basic economic market analysis.



> And seriously, are you arguing that because there is a substantial black market in children Central Asia that I, sitting here in Central Canada, can go out and purchase a child today?




Sure. Apply sufficient cash and you could get one, sufficient cash in this case being less than it would cost you to buy a new family size sedan.


----------



## Sammael (Jan 27, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> That does not exist in a fantasy world with a medieval tech level.



Ever heard of Aurora's Emporium?


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Anything that a person wants can be replaced by sufficient qualtities of "mere money".




Now you're just operating in a world of illusion.  Not all things are tied to money.

Of course, you're assuming that the PCs can find that much in hard currency.  Half the wealth the players in my group carry is art, fine rugs etc.  Gems and gold are fine and dandy, but places will not be able to do anything with large amounts of currency unless they start charging 10 gp per glass of ale.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> There is a big difference between art and items that are meant to be useful.  The simple truth is that people will hold onto a valuable, useful item unless they have a large number of them.




Unless someone offers them a lot of money for that item. That is known in economics as your "reserve price". The fact that you have a reserve price doesn't mean that there is no sale in the item. People sell the only example of a useful item they have all the time. How do you think, for example, Microsoft acquired Q-DOS? They purchased it (the only operating system intellectual property owned by the seller) for cash.



> And Sotheby's and Christie's exist because a communication network exists that allows them to get the items and make it known that they have them.




Really? So that's why Sotheby's has been in existence since 1744? And Christie's since 1766? What communications network existed then? Have you never heard of the di Medici family? Or the Fuggers? Or other large organizations that acted as banks, clearing houses, and trading points?



> That does not exist in a fantasy world with a medieval tech level.




Except that your history seems to be somewhat lacking. Large clearing houses are not new, nor do they rely upon strong communications networks. In point of fact, they prospecr in environments in which communications are _difficult_, because they act as a information transfer. Their existence is geared towards providing information of the existence of willing sellers to interested buyers. A greater flow of information is _bad_ for a clearing house like Sotheby's



> You cannot equate a modern economy with one where the vast majority of the wealthy nations are also on a subsistance level.




You have yet to demonstrate that supply and demand don't apply, even where people are in general poorer than you think they would be willing to make trades.


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Because as the price of magic items rose with inflation, other suppliers would step in and try to take advantage of the rising price, driving prices back down by increasing the volume of supply available to the market. This is basic economic market analysis.




Riiiiight....because thousands of high level mages and clerics are running around with the time and inclination to make magic items because it makes good business sense.

Glad to know that medieval markets recognized the need for more magic items and thus made sure to tell the youth to major in magic with a concentration in item creation so that they can make big bucks.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Bregh said:
			
		

> You're quite something.[/quoter]
> 
> And you are ridiculously naive.
> 
> ...


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Really? So that's why Sotheby's has been in existence since 1744? And Christie's since 1766? What communications network existed then? Have you never heard of the di Medici family? Or the Fuggers? Or other large organizations that acted as banks, clearing houses, and trading points?




Oh yes....please keep giving examples of organizations that are post printing press.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> By having an adequately described combination of demographics, economics, and culture.




Explain the demographics, economics, and culture that override basic human nature.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Explain the demographics, economics, and culture that override basic human nature.



Explain "basic human nature", referencing all human cultures on Earth over time and a number of fantasy worlds (your choice).


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Really? How easy do you suppose it would have been to purchase a noble title in Charlemagne's world?




In Charlemange's world? Pretty damn easy if historical evidence is to be believed. You didn't even have to purchase it in many cases, just assert your authority and back it up with sufficient violence and it would be recognized.



> Or in a Norse kingdom? Especially in the Norse world, where coins were pounded into ornaments because there was so much gold and nothing to spend it on. If someone showed up in 9th century Denmark with a bunch of gold and tried to buy a title with it, here's what might have happened: he would have been beaten or executed for insulting the local king by trying to bribe him; then his money would have been taken and turned into jewelry to commemorate the occasion of his execution.




Norse titles? Those were a joke. Norse kings hired themselves out as mercenaries on a regular basis. Most were answerable to things, and jarls who, in most cases, simply asserted their right to be a jarl as a result of their force of arms, something easy enough for most D&D adventurers to do. Buy a farm, become a jarl. Now you are titled. (Or, as more frequently happened, challenge a jarl to a duel, defeat him and take his property, and you are titled; and in many cases, hire someone to challenge a jarl of your behalf, have him defeated on your behalf, and take his title).



> From about the 16th century forward in England, people could purchase minor titles for cash but the whole reason feudalism arose was because the power of the sword trumped both money and civil authority.




From far earlier than that titles were for sale on a regular basis as a method for members of royalty and the senior aristocracy to _acquire cash_ to fund their operations. To such an extent that you periodically had laws enacted in an effort to limit the market (almost all of which immediately failed in the face of the economic reality that cash must come from somewhere).



> So, no. For most of history one could not purchase an aristocratic title at all. Look at India today, for goodness sake. Tell me: can people purchase membership in the brahmin or ksatriyah castes? There are billionaires in India who are still untouchables; why? Because caste, like feudal titles for most of history, cannot be bought.




For most feudal history in Europe, titles were for sale on a regular basis. You can romanticize the period if you want, but the reality is that titles were tossed around in exchange for cash constantly. Ultimately, anything of value can be expressed in cash terms.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Picasso's are bought and sold. Perhaps you have heard of places like Sotheby's and Christie's? I can find a listing of Van Gogh's up for auction _right now_.



Could you have done that as easily 100 years ago? How about 400? 1000? While few people's games strive for the kind of historical simulation someone like fusangite advocates, I think equally few run games that are pure 21st Western capitalist technocracies in Medieval drag...


> The simple economic truth is that items are more likely to hit the market the more valuable they are, there is just that much more incentive to make a pile of money by selling them.



But any civil society developed enough to have that kind of market economy is also going to have laws restricting the sale of goods that represent a massive threat to its stability. When you're talking magic the correct analogy is the arms trade. Often in WMD's. Try to buy a nuke, or surplus smallox cultures... while it may be remotely possible, such an endeavor requires more than a pile of cash...

And if you want to continue the art anology... there's a tremendous amount of art that _isn'
t_ for sale. The instituations that hold it don't put it on the market...


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> Explain "basic human nature", referencing all human cultures on Earth over time and a number of fantasy worlds (your choice).




People want to have wealth. It's that simple.

You can quibble over the volume of wealth an individual wants, or how much they are willing to do to get it, but people want wealth (or more accurately, the things wealth represents: food, shelter, security, and so on).

In any given population, a substantial number of people will want lots of wealth. That's generally why people invent things, go on dangerous journeys to strange lands looking for spices, gold, and other rare commodities, and otherwise do things they might not otherwise do. It is out of this desire to acquire wealth that a market arises: people want things, and to become wealthy, others will try to get it for them in exchange for those things they value.

To avoid a market economy arising in a campaign, you must posit a human nature in which humans do not desire wealth (as in, do not desire to secure food, shelter, security and so on), changing the basic nature of humanity into something so unrecognizable that you cannot reasonably call them "human" any more.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 27, 2005)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> Explain "basic human nature", referencing all human cultures on Earth over time and a number of fantasy worlds (your choice).



Starting with the easy ones, eh?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> Could you have done that as easily 100 years ago? How about 400? 1000? While few people's games strive for the kind of historical simulation someone like fusangite advocates, I think equally few run games that are pure 21st Western capitalist technocracies in Medieval drag...




Probably easier. The di Medici's purchased huge volumes of art on a regular basis, and are resonsible for the mere existence of a substantial  chunk of Italian renaissance art being produced (as a result of their financing). Prior to the romanticization of the past that has taken place in the modern era, these sorts of things were regularly traded.



> But any civil society developed enough to have that kind of market economy is also going to have laws restricting the sale of goods that represent a massive threat to its stability. When you're talking magic the correct analogy is the arms trade. Often in WMD's. Try to buy a nuke, or surplus smallox cultures... while it may be remotely possible, such an endeavor requires more than a pile of cash...




Where do most adventurers operate? Is it a vanue more like the United States and Canada? Or more like Somalia? Do you fully comprehend just how much ordinance is available for sale in most of the Third World?



> And if you want to continue the art anology... there's a tremendous amount of art that _isn't_ for sale. The instituations that hold it don't put it on the market...




A substantial portion art that is in institutions is privately held, so the institution couldn't sell it if they wanted. Contact the private owner and you may get a different response.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> To avoid a market economy arising in a campaign, you must posit a human nature in which humans do not desire wealth (as in, do not desire to secure food, shelter, security and so on), changing the basic nature of humanity into something so unrecognizable that you cannot reasonably call them "human" any more.



I don't think this debate is over the presence of market forces in a given setting, just how they manifest themselves... you seem to be saying market forces trump _every_ other force operating in a society, all the time. Or am I really misreading you?


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> But any civil society developed enough to have that kind of market economy is also going to have laws restricting the sale of goods that represent a massive threat to its stability. When you're talking magic the correct analogy is the arms trade. Often in WMD's. Try to buy a nuke, or surplus smallox cultures... while it may be remotely possible, such an endeavor requires more than a pile of cash...





Wouldn't that kind of thinking require that all wizards and sorcerers be banned and / or closely monitored too? Because a spellcaster packs much more punch than magic items, aren't they more dangerous than magic items you labeled as equal to WMDs?

And of course, your analogy only holds for doomsday device magics, i.e. artifact level stuff. +3 sword is not a threat to stability. It's equal to non-masterwork sword wielded by a stronger person. Do strong persons cause instability? Why should they be banned or restricted from sale?


----------



## Mallus (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Probably easier. The di Medici's purchased huge volumes of art on a regular basis, and are resonsible for the mere existence of a substantial  chunk of Italian renaissance art being produced (as a result of their financing).



I should have specified I was responding to your statement about 'checking the price of a Van Gogh right now'. The point I was trying to make involved the ease and speed of a transaction. I'm assuming a certain amount of convenience is implied in this discussion of the the magic item trade... most adventurers don't want to wait a year to close the deal on their enchanted gizmo...







> Where do most adventurers operate? Is it a vanue more like the United States and Canada? Or more like Somalia? Do you fully comprehend just how much ordinance is available for sale in most of the Third World?



I do. But again, there's also an implied level of safety in this argument. I'm assuming that a setting where the item trade is as dangerous as arms dealing in failed state like Somalia would be as palatable to some gamers as a setting where the trade didn't exist at all... The end result's the same; they can't easily acquire the items they can theoretically afford. Put another way, there are costs for items applied that go beyond what it says in the DMG...



> A substantial portion art that is in institutions is privately held, so the institution couldn't sell it if they wanted. Contact the private owner and you may get a different response.



Sure. I was only pointing out that some objects periodically exist outside market forces (for a period of time).


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> To avoid a market economy arising in a campaign, you must posit a human nature in which humans do not desire wealth (as in, do not desire to secure food, shelter, security and so on), changing the basic nature of humanity into something so unrecognizable that you cannot reasonably call them "human" any more.



Hardly.  To avoid a market economy, you simply need to remove the Rule of Law and Property Rights.  Then "transactions" are no longer mutually beneficial "win-win" trades but theft, annexation, tribute, extortion, etc.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 27, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> Wouldn't that kind of thinking require that all wizards and sorcerers be banned and / or closely monitored too?



That's one possibility, sure. Another is development of a wizard culture that operates in secret, below the authorities radar (except those employed by the authorities)  and avoids doing things like selling destructive items to any fool with some money. Another possibility is that the magic-users operate freely, and the resulting societies are so volatile than they frequently collapse, trashing the rule of law and easy, open markets...


> And of course, your analogy only holds for doomsday device magics, i.e. artifact level stuff. +3 sword is not a threat to stability.



A swords a terrible example. Try wands of fireball. How much of the countryside can you torch with a few of those and the will to use them?


----------



## Gundark (Jan 27, 2005)

I had problems with this as well, the players just assumed that being able to purchase a true ressurection (or any sort of magic) was just a matter of finding someone (3.0, not 3.5). I think video games are to blame somewhat for this mentality, diabolo, baluder's gate, champions of norath, etc. You get the loot sell the loot buy the better loot, etc.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

Kast said:
			
		

> Furthermore, items available for sale would vary wildy in price and certainly would not have a modern day walmart style pricing = intrinsic product value + x% margin markup (as they are presented in the DMG). There's no real way to judge the value of an item except through expectations on it's utility, which vary from individual to individual. In addition, many magic items might be bought by rich collectors who have no intention of using them and could afford t pay much higher prices than a PC, essentially removing many exisiting items from the market..




Sure.  And this is already figured into the market by the standard sale price being 50% of the market price.  The net effect is that PCs get taxed by a heavy transaction cost to cover the inefficiencies in the market.


----------



## Staffan (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> - One must never ignore the expenditure of XPs.  While the DMG puts a value an XP (25 gp I believe?), it never directly addresses the "XP Limit" of a city (as it does GP limit).  One can pretty much take this how one sees fit.  In my experience (and this is my personal feeling on the topic as well), few players are willing to routinely expend XP just to make some money.



The normal rate of XP to gp is 5 gp per XP. And when I offered the artificer in the party to trade in XP for gold (at a rate of 625 gp per 30 XP, due to having the two feats from Eberron that let him make items for 75% of the normal creation cost in gold and in XP - normally, it would be 500 gp per 40 XP), his reaction was "Whee! I'm rich!"


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Storm Raven, all of your above statements are true if your merchant is a person who thinks like a modern capitalist, living alongside other individuals who share his beliefs and assumptions in a world governed by the laws of supply and demand. Fortunately, this type of world is not the only type of world in which all (or hopefully even most) D&D adventures take place. (Besides, how would the item creation rules even work in a world governed by the laws of supply and demand and therefore subject to inflation?)
> 
> And seriously, are you arguing that because there is a substantial black market in children Central Asia that I, sitting here in Central Canada, can go out and purchase a child today?




Whether you can do that today or it take several weeks is just quibbling over mechanics.  I believe the going rate for buying healthy babies is around US$30K on the black market.  (These are often mostly legit adoptions, it is just the manner of involving money in the transaction is considered unethical & illegal -- for good reason.)

That is pretty cheap considering how many XP the mother sunk into making that baby.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 27, 2005)

Too much to reply to to actually go back and quote it all...

*Item Creation Feats:* Do you allow the players sufficient down time to make proper use of Item Creation? I have stopped getting item creation feats for my mages and clerics because most campaigns I play in ramp up to rollercoaster speed in a hurry and you just cannot stop for a week to make an item.

*Mideval Times and the lack of Inventory:* Someone put forth that the modern concept of Shops in general do not exist in a feudal world. If this was the world put forth by the rules, then all items, magical and mundane, would be listed with a price and a time. "I'd like to buy a grappling hook, good sir." "Smitty can probably make you one in about 2 weeks time. You should go ask him."

*Questing for Item Components:* The inherent flaw with this is by time I have quested for the item components, I'm 3 levels higher than when I started out and I no longer desire that item, but a more powerful item instead. And again, this puts the main plot on hold for long periods of time.

*Magic Item Shop:* You see a nicely appointed room with a single desk in its center. There is a large, stuffed chair behind the desk and two smaller chairs on your side of the desk. In the far corners of the room are two finely carved statues of strong fighting men. A curtain blocks your view of the room off to the right. The middle-aged man behind the desk stands and greets you in the customary way. "How can I help you?" he asks.

The important fact here is that there are no magic items on display. Everything in the room can be commands to attack with a single word from the broker. His "stock" is located elsewhere in a place proof against detection and whose only means of entry is teleportation. There is also a similar room called the treasury. The stock room and the treasury are not connected. Behind the curtain is an empty room which he uses to teleport to the stock room. He casts teleport to get in and out of the stock room. He accepts payment up front and takes the payment to the treasury. Leaving it there for at least a week before moving it to his "bank" of money. If payment is not in gold, he takes the payment to the treasury, then goes to the stock room for the item. Thus trojan horse payments never arrive in the stock room. This is doable by a 10th-12th level wizard on his own. With a few partners and some ambition the number of shops can be very plentiful.

That's how I would establish a magic item shop. Ultimately, you could eliminate the stock room and have the shop keeper become a broker. He knows where to get the magic items and his job is to get the buyer and the seller to agree on a price (from which he gets a cut).

*Purchasing Magic is a Video Game Idea:* The 1e DMG has prices listed for magic items. Please reconcile these two contradictory concepts.

I've played in games where you could buy magic items in all editions of the game. It's just more commonplace in 3e.

*Trading Rare Items:* The Shroud of Turin is not for sale because it is unique, not rare. Individual paintings are unique, but Van Goth's paintings (on the whole) are merely rare. While each one is unique, any one of them could be on sale at any given time. How does one find out one is on sale? Any number of divinations would probably work.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 27, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> Could you have done that as easily 100 years ago? How about 400? 1000? While few people's games strive for the kind of historical simulation someone like fusangite advocates, I think equally few run games that are pure 21st Western capitalist technocracies in Medieval drag...
> 
> But any civil society developed enough to have that kind of market economy is also going to have laws restricting the sale of goods that represent a massive threat to its stability. When you're talking magic the correct analogy is the arms trade. Often in WMD's. Try to buy a nuke, or surplus smallox cultures... while it may be remotely possible, such an endeavor requires more than a pile of cash...
> 
> ...




Was it easy 100 or 1000 years ago? Depends. According to a reference in the Cartoon History of the Universe by Larry Gonick (and he has a substantial bibilography), there are records of Romans buying up Greek art with insurance policies that included replacement with art of similar value of the original is lost in transit. So, yes. It could be that easy. 
But there are other issues at work. The church's most sacred relic wouldn't be for sale (note: that most sacred REAL relic and not pieces of the 'true' cross that we hear about in history) nor would some other things suppressed or monitored by the law under most circumstances other than the black market. And the trade in magic might decline from time to time based on the status of the economy, though it still might be possible to swing a purchase through some medium other than money.
That, however, does not deny that there might be a market for magic items just about anywhere. Most magic items don't come anywhere near the important relic level. A simple +1 sword? Not that hard to make, not all that pricey, not that significant in effect and probably not all that noticeable in use either, not hard to imagine these being relatively easy to find. Potions and scrolls really are pretty cheap to make and take relatively insignificant amounts of XPs.
The feats and resources for making many items aren't all that hard to come by either. So it's quite conceivable that general economic forces we are familiar with would create a cottage industry in making minor magic items... for cash as long as the cash economy is reasonably strong, for barter or other trade goods if not.
But even if we're looking at just a barter economy or even one based on trade in kind, we are still clearly indicating that there is a market for magic items and that characters can, in fact, buy them. Not being able to buy them at the drop of a had with a pile of cash doesn't mean we don't have a market in operation.
Nor does having significant historical works of art squirrelled away in museums really much of a counter argument. Art in general is still quite up for sale even if certain collectibles are being hoarded away. Maybe particular magic items by particular makers would fall into that intrinsically valuable category that it wouldn't be out on the market without the owner being in desperate financial straits. But other lesser works, reproduceable works, by other creators? Sure.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

When I last played a Wizard I was happy to make items for my friends at a 10% discount.  Then I would take the cash and make myself magic items.  I figured I was getting a little better than 10gp per 1Xp (plus the expenditure of feats).

The net result was I trailed about half a level behind everyone else and I had a little over twice the wealth, most of which were carefully selected custom items.  My survivability went way up as I could afford +4 Int, +4 Con, +3 Resistance items, a Stone of Luck, and a nice library of scrolls to cover emergencies.


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Picasso's are bought and sold. Perhaps you have heard of places like Sotheby's and Christie's? I can find a listing of Van Gogh's up for auction _right now_. Or works from just about any other notable artist out there. The simple economic truth is that items are more likely to hit the market the more valuable they are, there is just that much more incentive to make a pile of money by selling them.
> 
> 
> 
> For the same reason that the Catholic Church sold indulgences, pieces of the true cross and other relics and just about anything else they could think of: to finance church operations.



Ah, but now you are relying on modern technologies to reach a large enough audience.  I said that these items do go up for sale, but buying them shouldn't be a matter of crossing off X gp from your sheet and writing down +5 sword of awesomeness.  If we remove the instant communications, quick shipping, and many of the modern conveniences that help make these markets available, it is no longer as far fetched that tracking down a simple +1 weapon is going to an adventure in itself.  If I were to drop you into LA, or London, or Paris right now, could you find a picasso for sale in the city without resorting to mas media?  I doubt it, but this is essentially what the PCs want to be able to do.  And yes, clearing houses for them would exists, but the volume of sales would be much less than it is today.  You might have to bum around one of them for a year or two before the item you wanted came up for auction, assuming it ever does.  Really powerful items are going to be like the great works of art (Mona Lisa, David, etc.), they will be considered treasures that are HIGHLY unlikely to be sold.  As for selling bits of holy relics and indulgences, they cost the church nothing (or near nothing) to make (assuming the holy relics aren't real, and from what I've seen many of the one they sold weren't).  The same can't be said for potions and other gear.  The churches may need money, but they are hardly there to be a potion brewing factory for any wandering vagabond who can loot enough gp to afford them.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

billd91 said:
			
		

> But even if we're looking at just a barter economy or even one based on trade in kind, we are still clearly indicating that there is a market for magic items and that characters can, in fact, buy them. Not being able to buy them at the drop of a had with a pile of cash doesn't mean we don't have a market in operation.



An economy where buyers and sellers must work hard to find one another is not a modern commodity market; that's the point: it's not easy to buy and sell goods in such an economy.

We seem to have two extreme positions presented as straw men: (a) no magic items could or would be sold under any situation, or (b) any magic item you might want is on the shelf at your local Wiz Mart.

I don't think anyone supports Position A (no magic market _at all_).  I know plenty of people support Position B -- maybe not on this thread, and certainly without a sarcastic name like Wiz Mart, but plenty of people play with anything available from the DMG at list price.

And that's my point: if you can buy and sell any magic item at a known list price, with no extra effort, you've got a modern, highly efficient, commodity market.  And modern, highly efficient, commodity markets don't just happen -- at least not in the lawless lands where adventurers thrive.


----------



## GMSkarka (Jan 27, 2005)

Ah, Storm Raven.   Good to see that nothing has changed, even if the forum location is different.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 27, 2005)

Hitokiri said:
			
		

> If I were to drop you into LA, or London, or Paris right now, could you find a picasso for sale in the city without resorting to mas media?  I doubt it, but this is essentially what the PCs want to be able to do.




Actually, it'd be pretty easy.

You walk to the nearest Museum of Art, and find their business office.

Someone there will undoubtedly know which gallery in town has them available and for sale, and would be willing to share for the appropriate amount of money - and, likely, it won't be all that much.

Will it take you some time to do it?  Absolutely.

Will it be particularly difficult? Nope.

No one - other than those arguing stridently against the ability to buy and sell such high-priced items at all - is saying that purchasing a "work of art" is as simple as crossing an appropriate amount of cash off of your character sheet after a visit to "Enchanted Weapons 'R' Us."

Rather, those who support the concept of being able to purchase "works of art" have acknowledged that finding a local Community College and buying a couple pieces from the Art Department's show is probably pretty easy (i.e., potions, scrolls, some wands), but that there's going to be some legwork if you want a Picasso.  And if you want a *particular* Picasso, some of that legwork is going to be tracking down the current owner and convincing him - whether by large amounts of cash, other items, other works of art, special services, threats upon his person, whatever - to part with it.


----------



## Ciaran (Jan 27, 2005)

Hitokiri said:
			
		

> Really powerful items are going to be like the great works of art (Mona Lisa, David, etc.), they will be considered treasures that are HIGHLY unlikely to be sold.



From this, you'd almost think that Michelangelo and Da Vinci deposited all of their works directly at the local museum, while solemnly refusing to accept any monetary recompense for their efforts...


----------



## Numion (Jan 27, 2005)

Mallus said:
			
		

> That's one possibility, sure. Another is development of a wizard culture that operates in secret, below the authorities radar (except those employed by the authorities)  and avoids doing things like selling destructive items to any fool with some money. Another possibility is that the magic-users operate freely, and the resulting societies are so volatile than they frequently collapse, trashing the rule of law and easy, open markets...




Those would be the logical steps if the sale of magic items was banned because of the destructive nature. But thats not how I see most D&D worlds: wizards and sorcs operating in silence, fearing persecution. 



> A swords a terrible example. Try wands of fireball. How much of the countryside can you torch with a few of those and the will to use them?




But thats not a good reason for banning the sale of +3 swords. Thats a good argument for banning the sale of destructive items. 

Personally I like how it's handled in Forgotten Realms. The Red Wizards sell low-powered items, but not items destructive in nature. I've let PCs make special deals with the Red Wizards to buy more powerful items .. but that usually includes a service for the Wizards.

Besides, I really like the reasoning for the trade in magic items. Very Austin Powers' dr. evil vs. number two. 

Szass Tam: "We'll use our magical expertise to amass an undead and demon army and _take over the world_ BWAHAHAHAAHAAAA"

(previous 6 attempts at same foiled by goodly countries)

Number Two: "Why not use our magical expertise to manufacture and sell magic items. We could make billions of legitimate money."

Szass Tam: "Why make billions when you can make ... _millions_ ?"


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> And that's my point: if you can buy and sell any magic item at a known list price, with no extra effort, you've got a modern, highly efficient, commodity market.  And modern, highly efficient, commodity markets don't just happen -- at least not in the lawless lands where adventurers thrive.




As I see it, that is where the sale price comes in.  If most of your wealth is measured in magic items and you apply the RAW, what you have is an inefficient market, but an established market nonetheless.

Whether you buy at 125% market price and sell at 75%, or at 100% & 50% (as suggested by the RAW) is just quibbling over details.  How long it takes to successfully complete the transaction is also just a detail.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

Hitokiri said:
			
		

> Ah, but now you are relying on modern technologies to reach a large enough audience.




No you aren't. Sotheby's and Christie's have been in existence since the mid 1700s. Auction houses dealing in expensixe commodities predate them by a significant period of time. Trade groups that buy and sell expensive items date back through to the Roman era. In point of fact, the more difficult it is to gather information, the _more_ likely you are to have auction houses and trade associations that deal in goods like this, since one of their major contributions is providing a venue from which information is disseminated.



> If I were to drop you into LA, or London, or Paris right now, could you find a picasso for sale in the city without resorting to mas media?  I doubt it, but this is essentially what the PCs want to be able to do.




I could probably find some equivalently expensive art item for sale within a day or two. A week at the most.



> And yes, clearing houses for them would exists, but the volume of sales would be much less than it is today.  You might have to bum around one of them for a year or two before the item you wanted came up for auction, assuming it ever does.




But you haven't noticed one of the most important elements of such a establishment: it is not only a place for sellers to advertise what they have for sale, but also for buyers to advertise what they are willing to buy. Making that item _much_ more likely to come up for sale. As to the volume of items, that's going to depend on the price: the more expensive items will crop up less frequently, as will buyers for those items, but most magic items aren't +5 swords, and are far less expensive.



> Really powerful items are going to be like the great works of art (Mona Lisa, David, etc.), they will be considered treasures that are HIGHLY unlikely to be sold.




And yet, these works of art were commissioned, and paid for, by wealthy men and families, in exchange for cash. Which kind of makes your assertion ring hollow.



> As for selling bits of holy relics and indulgences, they cost the church nothing (or near nothing) to make (assuming the holy relics aren't real, and from what I've seen many of the one they sold weren't).




They were put forward to counter the idea that magic items are "too special" to sell. If we can sell remittances for sins (up to and including murder), and relics of Jesus' life and death, I don't think that there is a very good argument for saying a _belt of giant strength_ is too special to sell.



> The same can't be said for potions and other gear.  The churches may need money, but they are hardly there to be a potion brewing factory for any wandering vagabond who can loot enough gp to afford them.




A 100% profit on potions and other minor magical gear? Sign me up, I'd love to be in a business where I could make 100% profit on a routine basis. I doubt that a church in a polytheistic world will have any reservations on getting into the trade as well, since the profit would be used for the benefit of the faith.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 27, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> But thats not how I see most D&D worlds: wizards and sorcs operating in silence, fearing persecution.



Its not the way I see them working either. Its too... logical. But I was objecting to was the idea that it was solely market forces that drove the existence/extent of the item trade. Security concerns would be another factor in any "state" stable enough to support open sale of magical stuff.


> But thats not a good reason for banning the sale of +3 swords. Thats a good argument for banning the sale of destructive items.



You're right. It isn't a good reason. And I never said it was. You stated items had to be of "artifact level" before they constituted a serious public safety/security threat. I think that's dead wrong. You're the one who brought up +3 swords....


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> I don't think anyone supports Position A (no magic market _at all_).




Did you actually read National Acrobat's post that started this thread? Or some of the responses?


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> A 100% profit on potions and other minor magical gear? Sign me up, I'd love to be in a business where I could make 100% profit on a routine basis.



The potion brewer isn't buying potions at the local Rite-Aid, marking them up 100%, then selling them on eBay.  The potion brewer is equivalent to a Ph.D. chemist buying raw materials, applying his esoteric knowledge (labor), then selling the final product -- at a meagre 100% markup from his _expenses_.

He spent years at the Univesity, without financial aid or state subsidies, acquiring the skills to transform those raw materials into a useful potion.  Then he had to spend a considerable amoun of money building his own alchemical lab.  Then he had to buy the raw materials specific to one kind of potion.  Now, when he has a potion, he has to find someone to sell it to.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> Whether you buy at 125% market price and sell at 75%, or at 100% & 50% (as suggested by the RAW) is just quibbling over details.  How long it takes to successfully complete the transaction is also just a detail.



I don't think that how long it takes is a minor detail.  I don't think that whether the transaction goes through or not is a minor detail.  I don't think that having to travel hundreds of miles to buy or sell is a minor detail.

If your established-but-inefficient market is the arms market in Somalia or Afghanistan, I don't think it's just an issue of pecuniary transaction costs.  The non-pecuniary costs are substantial -- and full of dramatic potential.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> The potion brewer isn't buying potions at the local Rite-Aid, marking them up 100%, then selling them on eBay.  The potion brewer is equivalent to a Ph.D. chemist buying raw materials, applying his esoteric knowledge (labor), then selling the final product -- at a meagre 100% markup from his _expenses_.




A Ph.D chemist? That's a bit extreme. Especially since _adepts_ who are an explicitly NPC class described as hedge wizards, with limited training can easily make most of the common potions that PCs will want.



> He spent years at the Univesity, without financial aid or state subsidies, acquiring the skills to transform those raw materials into a useful potion.




Really? Are you sure it was without financial aid or state subsidies? How about church sponsored training? Are you sure it was years at the University? The average wizard, druid or cleric starts his career at the age of 21, which seems just about right for someone who is finishing a seven year _apprenticeship_, which would have cost him almost nothing in terms of financial outlay.

Besides, those are sunk costs, and sunk costs are almost entirely irrelevant to whether or not someone _now_ will sell something he can make.



> Then he had to spend a considerable amoun of money building his own alchemical lab.  Then he had to buy the raw materials specific to one kind of potion.  Now, when he has a potion, he has to find someone to sell it to.




It seems to me like has a lot of expenses. A lot of debts to pay back. Are you arguing that someone with this sort of financial investment and debt load _wouldn't_ be out trying to make that money back? It seems to me like clerics and wizards (given the economic conditions you describe with long years of study and training) are almost _driven_ to market their services and ware just to pay for all of these expensive things you assume they have.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Did you actually read National Acrobat's post that started this thread? Or some of the responses?



Yes, and I believe that Position A (no magic market at all) is a straw man, an exaggeration of the point held by the "no magic market" side of this argument.  The reasonable position is that there aren't Wiz Marts stocked with goods in every (or even any) town.  I don't think that anyone has said that no one would ever, under any circumstances, sell any magic item, even under commission, even for a non-pecuniary price.  They've said that you shouldn't just be able to scratch 50,000 gp off your character sheet and add "+5 longsword"; that's not the kind of thing you buy at the corner store.

I also believe that Position B (Wiz Mart on every corner) is a straw man, an exaggeration of the point held by the "pro magic market" side of this argument -- but I still feel that modern, efficient, commodity markets (a) don't make much sense for items of power in a lawless world, and (b) don't fit the feel many (but not all) people want in their fantasy world.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> I don't think that how long it takes is a minor detail.  I don't think that whether the transaction goes through or not is a minor detail.  I don't think that having to travel hundreds of miles to buy or sell is a minor detail.




The mechanics of the market are a minor detail. Especially since you can pay someone else to do these things for you. You may not be able to go buy something, but you can hire an agent to do it for you.



> If your established-but-inefficient market is the arms market in Somalia or Afghanistan, I don't think it's just an issue of pecuniary transaction costs.  The non-pecuniary costs are substantial -- and full of dramatic potential.




Yes, they are. But they are likely to be the conditions that prevail through most of any campaign that seeks to reflect anything resembling the world of the middle ages. Life was violent, short, and chaotic. I don't see buying and selling weaponry in Somalia today as anything substatially different from most areas that adventurers spend their entire careers in.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Really? How easy do you suppose it would have been to purchase a noble title in Charlemagne's world? Or in a Norse kingdom? Especially in the Norse world, where coins were pounded into ornaments because there was so much gold and nothing to spend it on. If someone showed up in 9th century Denmark with a bunch of gold and tried to buy a title with it, here's what might have happened: he would have been beaten or executed for insulting the local king by trying to bribe him; then his money would have been taken and turned into jewelry to commemorate the occasion of his execution.
> 
> From about the 16th century forward in England, people could purchase minor titles for cash but the whole reason feudalism arose was because the power of the sword trumped both money and civil authority.
> 
> So, no. For most of history one could not purchase an aristocratic title at all. Look at India today, for goodness sake. Tell me: can people purchase membership in the brahmin or ksatriyah castes? There are billionaires in India who are still untouchables; why? Because caste, like feudal titles for most of history, cannot be bought.




Umm, the Norse Kings _did_ sell titles. You could pay off just about _anything_ with gold, including murder, Norse kings were greedy buggers!

Do not take my word for it, look it up. Start with the Norse King of Dublin Olaf Sandle if you want a place to begin. (Name is translated, I do not remember the original off hand, but ca. AD 1000.)

In England -  again, look up Scutage - if you had the money to be a knight then you were a knight and _had_ to ride in the crusades or pay for someone to go in your stead.

No real bearing on Magic items, but...

The Auld Grump


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> Yes, and I believe that Position A (no magic market at all) is a straw man, an exaggeration of the point held by the "no magic market" side of this argument.




Of course, Position A is exactly the position that National Acrobat (and a few others) have staked out. Which makes your arguments less than compelling on this score.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Are you arguing that someone with this sort of financial investment and debt load _wouldn't_ be out trying to make that money back?



I've never argued against the profit motive; I've only argued that we wouldn't necessarily see an efficient, modern, commodity market.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> The mechanics of the market are a minor detail. Especially since you can pay someone else to do these things for you. You may not be able to go buy something, but you can hire an agent to do it for you.



"Here's 50,000 gp.  Bring back a +5 longsword."  You don't see anything that might go awry there?  Any "minor details" that might need looking after?


			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Yes, they are. But they are likely to be the conditions that prevail through most of any campaign that seeks to reflect anything resembling the world of the middle ages. Life was violent, short, and chaotic. I don't see buying and selling weaponry in Somalia today as anything substatially different from most areas that adventurers spend their entire careers in.



So, would you send $1M in cash to Somalia to buy a surface-to-air missile and just assume that the transaction would go fine?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> I've never argued against the profit motive; I've only argued that we wouldn't necessarily see an efficient, modern, commodity market.




No one has argued that we would. What has been argued is that you'd see auction houses, merchants that deal in mid to high end trade, individuals accepting commsissions, and so on for most permanent items and a relatively bustling market in lower cost one use items such as scrolls and potions.

By comparison, look at printers in the 17th Century. They were considered skilled in a relatively arcane trade. They were typically apprenticed for several years, after which if they went into business for themselves they had to acquire very expensive equipment to ply their trade. And most of them would have likely been _thrilled_ if they could have gotten anything like 50% profit on their expenses, let alone 100%.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> "Here's 50,000 gp.  Bring back a +5 longsword."  You don't see anything that might go awry there?  Any "minor details" that might need looking after?




If I were dealing with a reputable dealer, probably not. There are people who specialize in working out such transactions. There always have been. And their stock in trade is their reputation, which would be ruined if they fleeced their clients. And those types of dealers usually make it a practice to let people know where they can be found (since that's how they get clients).



> So, would you send $1M in cash to Somalia to buy a surface-to-air missile and just assume that the transaction would go fine?




If I had $1M and needed a surface to air missile, I could likely get one much closer and easier (and cheaper) than sending someone to Somalia. But assuming I did, and used an arms dealer with a good reputation, I'd be pretty confident it would go well. His reputation relies upon him getting more clients like me, and there aren't many of us. Screwing me means his business dies almost immediately. Reputation is important in business.


----------



## National Acrobat (Jan 27, 2005)

*Thanks*

Thanks guys, pretty intense thread that has given me a lot to digest and think about.

Interesting sets of opinions.

And yes, there are no magic marts in my campaign setting, which is a homebrew that I have used for 20+ years.

My players gain their magic loot from treasure hoards, npc's they've defeated, that sort of thing.

They recieve enough monetary treasure to make items, but they would have to pool their collective shares to buy many things.

At any rate, I know that isn't satisfactory or even advocated by most of my peers, but it's my way that I've always done it and it's worked for me for a long time and still does.

Like I said most of my players have no problem with this and actually enjoy it.

No one ever said a word about it until 3E came out. I was mainly just asking if anyone else had this problem with the advent of the 3E rules set, because that's when I had a pair of players start to tell me that the rules said they could, that's all.

Anyway, Nice discussion, I think I have plenty to digest now.


----------



## Ourph (Jan 27, 2005)

Some things to consider i.e. the availability of purchasable magic.

1)  Spellcasters or those benefiting from an item created by spellcasters are generally the only people capable of high speed communications and rapid travel in the D&D world.

2)  Spellcasters are the only ones capable of creating the items we are talking about.

3)  Spellcasters are much less dependent on magic items to achieve greater power as they go up in level than are other, non-spellcasting, classes (in other words, a 12th level Fighter with no magic items is at a significant disadvantage, compared to a 12th level spellcaster with no magic items).

Conclusion:  Spellcasters monopoly on magic gives them a huge amount of power.  It is greatly to the advantage of spellcasters to organize themselves and regulate the quantity and type of magic they produce and sell.  It's good to limit quantity because that keeps the price artificially high.  It's good to limit the type of items they produce because they can then assure that other (non-spellcasters) never achieve parity with them in terms of power.  It is good to limit the use of communication magic because that ensures the spellcasters will not only decide who knows what, but also that they know things well before others.  Therefore, an organized body of casters will limit the availability of magic items and powerful spells because it is in their own best interest to do so.

Corollary:  The spellcasters who benefit most from this arrangement are high level casters.  They are also the most capable of enforcing the arrangement.  High level casters benefit the most because they are so much less dependent upon other (non-spellcasting) classes for their own survival and protection.  Lower level casters might be tempted to create powerful items for other classes.  They might want to do so for their companions in the hope that said items will increase their own overall chance of survival (a good assumption).  They might want to create items for others in exchange for pay in the hopes that the increased wealth will bring them comforts and increase their overall chance of survival (again, a good assumption).  High level spellcasters are much less likely to care about empowering their allies (they don't need more powerful allies, they can just create more of the ones they already have) or about making money (it's likely they already have tons of phat lewt).  High level casters are the only ones who can create really powerful items.  Therefore, an organized cabal of high level casters will refuse to produce really powerful items for most people, will use coercion, persuasion and bribery to force less powerful casters to adopt the same policy, will actively oppose other high level casters who refuse to cooperate and will most likely work to limit the amount of "found" magic treasure that finds its way into the hands of normal folk (either by buying up anything that becomes available for sale or by simply taking it, if they are less than scrupulous).

Result:  Mr. Fighter can't buy or commission the +3 sword and +4 belt of strength he wants because spellcasters like the fact that he's dependent upon them casting _Greater Magic Weapon_ and _Bull's Strength_ to get the benefits of those magics.  The only readily traded/purchased magic items will likely be low-powered items usable only by spellcasters (such as scrolls, wands, etc.).  Even those items will likely be limited to containing innocuous spells such as _Mage Armor_, _Sanctuary_, _Resist Elements_ and the like, because in addition to not trusting other classes, it's likely spellcasters will not trust each other greatly either.  It only takes one time of selling someone a Wand of Fireballs and having him turn it on you, reducing your home/laboratory/shop to a pile of smoldering cinders to decide that maybe handing out WMDs to anyone who wants them isn't such a great idea.  Even low level spells such as _Charm Person_ are dangerous to spellcasters in the hands of others (anyone can fail a Saving Throw) and are not likely to be given out except to very trusted colleagues or people who are already capable of doing you harm anyway (such as a more powerful spellcaster in exchange for an item you want).

Of course, when people find out that spellcasters are hoarding all the neat-o magic stuff for themselves, there will be disgruntled individuals who speak out against the Wizards and their selfish ways, but that's what spells like _Disintegrate_ and _Mass Suggestion_ are for, right!


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 27, 2005)

Taken out of order to improve discussion ...  



			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> The reasonable position is that there aren't Wiz Marts stocked with goods in every (or even any) town.




Agreed.  



> Yes, and I believe that Position A (no magic market at all) is a straw man, an exaggeration of the point held by the "no magic market" side of this argument.
> 
> ...
> 
> I don't think that anyone has said that no one would ever, under any circumstances, sell any magic item, even under commission, even for a non-pecuniary price.




Not agreed.  Some people have, in fact, argued exactly this point:



			
				National Acrobat said:
			
		

> I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will.






			
				Hitokiri said:
			
		

> I have never and will probably never allow magical items to be bought. They have to be earned, and should be more special than a trip to the local magic shop would make them.






			
				Reanjr said:
			
		

> [In re: selling magical weapons and armor]
> In my campaigns the players wouldn't be able to find buyers for that stuff, usually. The only reasonable place would be to a king or lord who would prompty integrate it into his military forces. Therefore, it would no longer be for sale.






			
				BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> I will never allow PCs to buy the magic items they want again. In the future, if they want something bad enough, then they will be forced to barter with temples, guilds or individual mages. Gold alone will not be enough to secure the item. They will need to do something for them in return.




Note he first mentions that he'll never, ever let PCs buy things - except they *can* buy them with things other than straight coinage, which can in turn be bought with coinage, etc.

Bit of an odd view to hold, but there you go ...

Anyway, there you go.  The position that you claim is a straw man is in fact the position held by members of "the opposition" by their own words.  Therefore, it isn't a strawman.


----------



## Belen (Jan 27, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Note he first mentions that he'll never, ever let PCs buy things - except they *can* buy them with things other than straight coinage, which can in turn be bought with coinage, etc.
> 
> Bit of an odd view to hold, but there you go ...
> 
> Anyway, there you go.  The position that you claim is a straw man is in fact the position held by members of "the opposition" by their own words.  Therefore, it isn't a strawman.




Note that I prefaced that statement by talking about player abuse of strong magic item market.  The connotation being that having gold will not necessaily mean that the player will get all the items optimal for their character.  Items that they want will be very hard to get.

Simplely having money will not get them what they want.  Money only goes so far.

Of course, the part does not have a lot of liquid assets either.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> I don't think that how long it takes is a minor detail.  I don't think that whether the transaction goes through or not is a minor detail.  I don't think that having to travel hundreds of miles to buy or sell is a minor detail.
> 
> If your established-but-inefficient market is the arms market in Somalia or Afghanistan, I don't think it's just an issue of pecuniary transaction costs.  The non-pecuniary costs are substantial -- and full of dramatic potential.




The reason we would pay the big mark ups is exactly because we are dealing with professionals who know how to get things done for a healthy cut.  And these markets exist in the real world in places that you name.  Some how the silk and spice trade came into existence, in spite of the exact things you mentioned.  Some how tin was mined in bronze age Britain and moved into the Med to be sold as a commodity in spite of the risks.

My POV is not that every item should easily available or even available at all on any given day or year.  But eventually the campaign progresses to a point where it is not worth roleplaying out a PC traveling to the big city to cash in a +1 spear and a +1 dagger to acquire a +1 bow.  It is not logical.  It is not fun.


----------



## atom crash (Jan 27, 2005)

> My POV is not that every item should easily available or even available at all on any given day or year. But eventually the campaign progresses to a point where it is not worth roleplaying out a PC traveling to the big city to cash in a +1 spear and a +1 dagger to acquire a +1 bow. It is not logical. It is not fun.




Well put. Exactly how I feel. When gaming time is at a premium, I don't want to waste multiple game sessions on a shopping trip. I don't want my players to roleplay buying more oil for their lanterns. I don't want them to roleplay going down to the moneychanger to get that monetary loot converted into the coin of the realm. I want them to go track down the bad guys and bring them to justice.

(Unfortunately, the guys who happen to have magic items for sell from time to time are major NPCs in my campaign, so I've shot myself in the foot on that one. But we hardly ever roleplay selling off loot, and I check availability of a given magic item against a changing inventory I maintain for these dealers before players can put any new magic item on their character sheet. "Look, right now the weapons dealer has an axe +1, a flaming longsword +1, and a seeking repeating crossbow +1. No vorpal greatwords, sorry. Want something custom, go commission the blacksmith.")

Of course, I don't let them buy +2 weapons or major -- or even medium, for that matter -- wondrous items. Everyone wants goggles of night and a ring of invisibility. They won't find it, because no one in their right mind would pawn an item like that. And since my players are in the 6th-8th level range, I keep tabs on what they have and limit what they can get at this point. I feel it's part of my responsibility as a fair DM.

It strikes me that BelenUmeria responded to player abuse in one game by saying, "no buying magic items, ever (with gold)." Did it ever occur that another option would be to limit what would be for sale in any given market?


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> You mean humans are radically different from the humans who populate our world? Because "capitalism" isn't an economic model that's new, and supply and demand isn't an assumption. If there is a demand for a good, and a supply for it, a market will ensure. Go back through history and try to find a culture in which this was not true.




Perhaps you could find an historian or anthropologist who supports your view here. I am not aware of any reputable scholar who would argue that society has always been capitalist. 



> Because as the price of magic items rose with inflation, other suppliers would step in and try to take advantage of the rising price, driving prices back down by increasing the volume of supply available to the market. This is basic economic market analysis.




So why does the consumer price index rise every year? Why is there annual net inflation in the economy of every industrialized country on the face of the earth? Surely based on your "basic economic market analysis" the buying power of the currency in a healthy economy should not decline annually. Or perhaps you don't actually know economics that well.



> In Charlemange's world? Pretty damn easy if historical evidence is to be believed.




Really? Name someone who entered the aristocracy of the Frankish kingdom between 750 and 900 simply by paying cash. 



> You didn't even have to purchase it in many cases, just assert your authority and back it up with sufficient violence and it would be recognized.




Thanks for making my point Storm Raven! Violence, the capacity to exercise coercive force, was the real currency of vassalage. It didn't matter how much gold you had if you didn't have either violence, aristocratic blood or the church standing behind you. 



			
				The Auld Grump said:
			
		

> Umm, the Norse Kings did sell titles. You could pay off just about anything with gold, including murder, Norse kings were greedy buggers!




I realize that I failed to express myself properly in my post regarding the purchase of office in the pre-modern world. My point was not that money was never a necessary condition to obtain office. My point was that money was rarely a sufficient condition. 

The simple fact that one had money did not mean that one could buy whatever one wanted. One had to be entitled to that thing entitlement typically came from one of three places: ecclesiastical authority, aristocratic blood or force of arms. Without at least one of these things, it was extremely difficult to purchase anything of subtantial value. 

Simony was indeed widespread in the Middle Ages. But how many people who did not have the backing either of blood, God or force ever bought office? 

Yes. Offices were bought and sold, especially the office of bishop. But this does not mean that the simple possession of funds was sufficient to buy an office. 

Departing the medieval world, let me pose a more modern problem that I posed earlier in this thread: Why are there billionaire untouchables in India today? If all other forms of status are convertible into money at all times, in all societies in all places throughout the entire sweep of human history, why can't people just put up enough money to turn into brahmins today?


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> So why does the consumer price index rise every year? Why is there annual net inflation in the economy of every industrialized country on the face of the earth?




Usury.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Usury.




Which is part of which economic system?

How can one have capitalism if people cannot mutually agree to borrow money at an agreed-upon rate of interest?


----------



## Ciaran (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Thanks for making my point Storm Raven! Violence, the capacity to exercise coercive force, was the real currency of vassalage. It didn't matter how much gold you had if you didn't have either violence, aristocratic blood or the church standing behind you.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> The simple fact that one had money did not mean that one could buy whatever one wanted. One had to be entitled to that thing entitlement typically came from one of three places: ecclesiastical authority, aristocratic blood or force of arms. Without at least one of these things, it was extremely difficult to purchase anything of subtantial value.



Aaaaand...  you're saying that D&D adventurers and adventuring parties lack the necessary force of arms?


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

Ciaran said:
			
		

> Aaaaand...  you're saying that D&D adventurers and adventuring parties lack the necessary force of arms?




Depends on the power of the individual who can make the item (and his allies) and the power of the party demanding it. So, yeah -- in many cases, the party would not have the power but in many cases, they would. That would have to be assessed on a case by case basis -- which is my whole point.

Also, I'm not arguing, you may recall, that PCs should be unable to _obtain_ magic items; I am simply arguing that cash is not, by itself, a sufficient condition for obtaining them. Remember: _most_ magic items are obtained at swordpoint -- I'm not contesting that; but those magic items are considered "treasure" and are not purchased at all.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> So why does the consumer price index rise every year? Why is there annual net inflation in the economy of every industrialized country on the face of the earth?



Because the supply of fiat money grows faster than the supply of real wealth.  And because the CPI doesn't take into account that the "same" good can improve over dramatically over time (e.g., a 2005 model car or computer vs. an older model).


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Which is part of which economic system?




Anything more advanced than strict barter?


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 27, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Also, I'm not arguing, you may recall, that PCs should be unable to _obtain_ magic items; I am simply arguing that cash is not, by itself, a sufficient condition for obtaining them. Remember: _most_ magic items are obtained at swordpoint -- I'm not contesting that; but those magic items are considered "treasure" and are not purchased at all.




I can agree with that.  But in my experience, it is not the norm for a heroically inclined party to have nothing but cash at their disposal.  Most earn positive reputations with some of the right kind of people.  Consider the classic adventure hooks: bandits/monsters preying on a road, a wizard needs an errand run, a village is attacked by mysterious assailants, etc.  Doing a number of these should eventually yield the requisite letters of introduction.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 27, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> Because the supply of fiat money grows faster than the supply of real wealth.  And because the CPI doesn't take into account that the "same" good can improve over dramatically over time (e.g., a 2005 model car or computer vs. an older model).




And how are these conditions different in a D&D economy, especially one in which the characters are adventuring?


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

I said: 







			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> I've never argued against the profit motive; I've only argued that we wouldn't necessarily see an efficient, modern, commodity market.



Storm Raven replied: 







			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> No one has argued that we would. What has been argued is that you'd see auction houses, merchants that deal in mid to high end trade, individuals accepting commsissions, and so on for most permanent items and a relatively bustling market in lower cost one use items such as scrolls and potions.



I don't think we disagree much at all then.

My point all along has been that an economically unsophiscated society is going to have difficulty matching buyers and sellers of very expensive, highly specialized goods.  If you can scratch off the gold pieces and get the item -- whatever you want, right out of the DMG -- then you're operating in a sophisticated market, a modern, efficient, commodity market, where goods and prices are standardized.

A quasi-Roman setting might feature fairly sophisticated markets.  A quasi-Venetian setting might, too.  A Tolkien-esque, Anglo-Saxon setting would not.  There's a lot of "friction" in a pre-capitalist economy, just like in a modern black market.


----------



## Kast (Jan 27, 2005)

Ourph said:
			
		

> Some things to consider i.e. the availability of purchasable magic.
> 
> Conclusion:  Spellcasters monopoly on magic gives them a huge amount of power.  It is greatly to the advantage of spellcasters to organize themselves and regulate the quantity and type of magic they produce and sell.  It's good to limit quantity because that keeps the price artificially high.  It's good to limit the type of items they produce because they can then assure that other (non-spellcasters) never achieve parity with them in terms of power.  It is good to limit the use of communication magic because that ensures the spellcasters will not only decide who knows what, but also that they know things well before others.  Therefore, an organized body of casters will limit the availability of magic items and powerful spells because it is in their own best interest to do so.



That is exactly the way OPEC keeps oil prices at what they consider optimum.
Only the desperate mage or cleric would even consider trading current or future power for money.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 27, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> - sale of magical items incurs heavy taxation in the region where it is sold.  This is to the point where most selling would be underground and thus hard to find for the players anyway.



Which doesn't equate to impossible


> - One must never ignore the expenditure of XPs.  While the DMG puts a value an XP (25 gp I believe?), it never directly addresses the "XP Limit" of a city (as it does GP limit).  One can pretty much take this how one sees fit.  In my experience (and this is my personal feeling on the topic as well), few players are willing to routinely expend XP just to make some money.  A DM could try to extrapolate an XP limit from the demographics, but it would be mostly hunches and gut instinct anyway, and would ultimately lead one to whatever conclusion one is looking for.



At a guess, this is because most players will expect the DM to screw them if they try to make money by trying to enforce the player gold/level limits. Otherwise a first level wizard can make himself a nice profit of 2500gp on his first orc. But of course the DM is going to say "oh, you can only sell for half price", or "noone wants to buy" etc etc...


> - Shady merchants dealing in fake or inaccurate magical wares.  This is a great deterrence to buyers, thus limiting a market for sellers.



Still means magic is for sale. You just have to be careful. And with the variety of ways there are for being careful...


> - The more a group of characters relies on magical items (especially at higher level) the more likely those items are going to be destroyed by some intelligent enemy with a penchant for Disjunctioning everything the players have.  While this is only available to higher level people, it can help explain why there aren't a slew of old magic items lying around.



Well - actually a high level party with any sense has backups. Especially in a world where magic item sales are impossible. And those backups are in a trove somewhere, ready for collection when the high level party cacks it. And then there are all the magic items that are just given away... Especially in a world without a market. Sort of devalues things, huh?


> - Think of wizards as the military.  Think of magic as guns.  Now think of all the people around the world that are for gun control of private citizens.  There may be groups that seek out and destroy magic items, whether this be a diorganized lot of people who snap any wand in half that they find, to entire subversive powerful organizations who routinely mug, rob, and steal magic items to keep them out of the hands of those who are not properly trained to use them (wizards).



Think of america. And again - you're not making magic items untradeable here.


> - Law.  In feudal society (the baseline for most any campaign I've seen, and most of my own), the ruler owns everything on his land.  He has full legal right to simply take your magic items, wish you a good day, and put you in the dungeon if you resist.  While many rulers might not choose to do this, a king recently finding himself at war against a greater power might take any offensive magic items, while another might like to keep the populace weak (see gun control above, where the organization might now work for the law).  These types of things not only might reduce the number of magic items, but would also be a serious deterrent for someone to start advertising (however discreetly) that they are selling magical items.



Again. Not impossible, just restricted.

Looks like you've got a lot of really awesome plotlines that you've destroyed by making magic totally unsaleable. Shame about that.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 27, 2005)

Stone Angel said:
			
		

> As most of the others I will go with the old it is your game and hey remember "No means No!"
> It is not like you have made magic items unattainable. They can create them if they want them or just take what was found and hope that it benefits for them. Takes away from the whole questing for a specific magic item.
> 
> "Well the ring is said to lay in a tomb over a week away"
> ...




"Bugger that for a laugh, lets just use resist energy (fire) spells"

Sorry, but magical item sale doesn't prevent you from positioning the fabulous ring of whozit, essential for the defeat of thingumy. It does however stop you from making lame quests that are easily defeated through the use of basic player abilities.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 27, 2005)

I wrote: 







			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> Because the supply of fiat money grows faster than the supply of real wealth. And because the CPI doesn't take into account that the "same" good can improve dramatically over time (e.g., a 2005 model car or computer vs. an older model).



Fusangite replied: 







			
				fusangite said:
			
		

> And how are these conditions different in a D&D economy, especially one in which the characters are adventuring?



The money supply in a typical D&D setting is not fiat money; it's not legal tender simply because the state says so.  And the state can't print it at will.

If the adventurers are plundering existing treasure, they should introduce no inflation; they're simply transferring wealth to themselves.  If they're bringing treasure from outside the economy into the local economy, as the conquistadors brought gold and silver from the New World to the Old, then they likely will introduce inflation.  (On the other hand, if there is a shortage of coinage, introducing plenty of gold and silver can help the primitive economy move away from barter and move toward a more modern monetary economy.)

As far as the CPI goes, first, of course, there is no CPI; no state bureaucrats are tracking prices and devising imperfect statistical measures.  Second, even if they were tracking prices, consumer goods aren't improving in a quasi-medieval D&D setting.  A wagon's a wagon, a chicken's a chicken, an ale's an ale, etc.

No pseudo-inflation shows up unless your categories shift over time, e.g., if you had a price for "longsword" that started off measuring a normal longsword in the Second Age, but later referred to a +1 longsword in the Third Age.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 28, 2005)

I said: 







			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> "Here's 50,000 gp. Bring back a +5 longsword." You don't see anything that might go awry there? Any "minor details" that might need looking after?



Storm Raven replied: 







			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> If I were dealing with a reputable dealer, probably not. There are people who specialize in working out such transactions. There always have been. And their stock in trade is their reputation, which would be ruined if they fleeced their clients. And those types of dealers usually make it a practice to let people know where they can be found (since that's how they get clients).



I think you're neglecting the many, many "minor details" that might go awry.  You're handing a king's ransom to someone who may or may not use it as you intended.  How well do you trust your agent?  How much does he fear and/or respect you?  Can he disappear to a tropical island somewhere with that kind of money?

If your agent's totally loyal, can he safely deliver the funds?  He's carrying a king's ransom; he needs a king's retinue to protect it.  That's quite a haul for a band of brigands or a crew of pirates.

Then he has to deal with the actual dealer, who may or may not respect him.  The dealer can simply kill him and take the 50,000 gp.  You'll never know what happened.  If the dealer works with that agent, or with you, on a regular basis, he has much to gain be staying on the up and up, but if not....  And he always has the option of making the deal, then having a "random" band of brigands steal the item back for him.

Imagine that you, personally, decide to do business with the Russian mafia.  Or with "business partners" in Columbia.  Everything _might_ work out just fine.  Or it might not...


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 28, 2005)

Ourph said:
			
		

> Some things to consider i.e. the availability of purchasable magic.
> 
> 1)  Spellcasters or those benefiting from an item created by spellcasters are generally the only people capable of high speed communications and rapid travel in the D&D world.
> 
> ...



Interesting analysis, Ourph.  I think you've got a cool campaign-setting idea there.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> I think you're neglecting the many, many "minor details" that might go awry.  You're handing a king's ransom to someone who may or may not use it as you intended.  How well do you trust your agent?  How much does he fear and/or respect you?  Can he disappear to a tropical island somewhere with that kind of money?




He's my cohort.  I trust him implicitly.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 28, 2005)

I said: 







			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> I don't think that anyone has said that no one would ever, under any circumstances, sell any magic item, even under commission, even for a non-pecuniary price.



Patryn of Elvenshae countered, "Not agreed.  Some people have, in fact, argued exactly this point," and cited National Acrobat's original point: 







			
				National Acrobat said:
			
		

> I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will.



I don't see that contradicting my point at all.  He says that he doesn't let his players buy magic items.  He doesn't say, _no one in the game world can ever exchange anything magical under any circumstances_.

If you're playing in a Tolkien-esque setting, you don't just buy magic items -- but certainly someone might reward you with a magic item, or you might perform a favor for a magic item, or you might give a magic item in return for a favor, or whatever.  Presumably someone forged the elf blade you're using, and someone else bought it, long before it ended up in the wight's burial mound you plundered.  You just don't find magic shops lining the streets of Gondor.  When your players say, "I want to buy a +4 longsword," you say, "No."  There's no plausible way they'd "just" go out and buy one.  If the halfling rogue says, "I want to sell my +4 mithril chain shirt; the wizard said it was worth a king's ransom," you say, "_Exactly_ how do you plan on selling it?"

I don't think a house rule of "PCs can't just buy magic" equates to "my campaign ignores supply and demand!"


----------



## Faraer (Jan 28, 2005)

Why would you want to DM for players who want the rulebook to take precedence over the campaign, or who make selfish powergaming demands?


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> A quasi-Roman setting might feature fairly sophisticated markets.  A quasi-Venetian setting might, too.  A Tolkien-esque, Anglo-Saxon setting would not.  There's a lot of "friction" in a pre-capitalist economy, just like in a modern black market.




For all that friction, in the historical medieval world, people did buy and sell horses and weapons and armor -- some of these items might be the equivalent of a year or two of income for a landed knight.  Only a few per cent of the population was allowed to possess these items.  Communication and travel sucked.  But the deals happened.  It often took weeks or months, but the transactions completed with little fraud and theft, and a typical commission tacked on in the 10%-15% range.  As for the social barriers preventing owning these items, a letter from a friendly baron or a fake title from a foreign land took care of that.

The world of D&D has much better communications.  There is really no logical reason that a PC who has done a few favors for locals could not get involved in very safe transactions in, I would guestimate, the 1000 gp to 5000 gp range -- much higher amounts if their reputation is positive and grows.  I would further note that a PC that is selling and buying is paying a rather high implicit commission.


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 28, 2005)

Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> Some how the silk and spice trade came into existence, in spite of the exact things you mentioned.  Some how tin was mined in bronze age Britain and moved into the Med to be sold as a commodity in spite of the risks.



Yes, and the individuals making those journeys and voyages to bring back valuable goods from faraway lands were known as..._adventurers_.

Any particular trip was a risky endeavor.  In the aggregate, of course, they paid off, which is why insurance was feasible (and thus developed).


			
				Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> My POV is not that every item should easily available or even available at all on any given day or year.  But eventually the campaign progresses to a point where it is not worth roleplaying out a PC traveling to the big city to cash in a +1 spear and a +1 dagger to acquire a +1 bow.  It is not logical.  It is not fun.



And no one's recommending playing out a trip to the big city to cash in a +1 spear.  We agree: it's not fun.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jan 28, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Only if you think xp aren't worth anything.




Well the DMG sets the XP cost for an item as 1/25th of the base value.  If you feel this is too low - more power to you.  I, on the other hand, will continue to use it.

Oh and for permanent magic items the PC usually has to supply the actual item (the Wizard or Cleric provides the addtional manufacturing costs).  AFter all what does your average wizard know about making a fine set of boots or a longbow?


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jan 28, 2005)

jasper said:
			
		

> Oh please I am old school too. I guess I played on the wrong side of tracks and with bad players. In the beginning magic shops were in every big town until we started knocking them off and stealing the loot. They did it to my world which in turn I did in theirs. Which then started either every magic shop being ran by a 20+ level wizard, or god. Then end with the magic shop from the n-dimension which would appear when you needed it and ran by a 20+ level wizard with lots of guards.
> Sorry played in different editions, on different coasts, on different continents. It is the players not the system or computer games or immature players or current culture.




Well said.  My sentiments exactly.  

If anyone needs proof that this is 100% true just read some of the old Dragon and Dungeon magazines letters sections.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jan 28, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> Not a surprising suggestion, considering that the topic is pretty much about DM control. Banning all sale of magic items lets the DM control when, how and what magic items the PCs use.
> 
> Next logical step is that if the DM has to concede and let some items be bought .. the items won't do what the players want, but what the DM wants.




Yes not really surprising just very dissappointing and probably something I would be tempted to quit the campaign over. 

Also  the original poster seems to really want his players to make the items themselves (which is one of the best things about 3.xx solid, usuable rules for making most any magic item you can think of - and limits on who and when you can make them!).  Frankly I have to think his players _are_ just whiny.


----------



## taliesin15 (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen writes:
A quasi-Roman setting might feature fairly sophisticated markets. A quasi-Venetian setting might, too. A Tolkien-esque, Anglo-Saxon setting would not. There's a lot of "friction" in a pre-capitalist economy, just like in a modern black market.


I just had to contribute after reading that--MC is basically Tolkienish/Anglo-Saxon, but with much more Viking/Lapps/Germanic "barbarians"/Celt, and kinda low tech high magic--no crossbows, tindertwigs, sunrods; very magic based, but the magic is more in the form of larger numbers of spells out there to choose from, much more low level magic

But while players cannot go to any shop and buy a +1 sword in any town or city--in fact, they can't even find things like composite bows in most shops, much less mighty composite bows--the people they could get them from are not that hard to find, since *everyone* on the continent has heard of the great (very high level) Wizard Folcwin, advisor to the King, with a high profile School of Dweomercraft in the only largish city on the continent

IOW, I guess it depends on the campaign--but I think with most DMs, the material is out there, this whining I think is more of a circumstance or reflection of the present consumer society we live in where one can buy even say Cuban cigars with a credit card over the internet even in the USA, or a $5,000 Bastard Sword, or even a full set of Plate Armor

part of the problem with this lies with the fact that the perception of availability is perpetuated by the fact that the commodification of the game itself lends to this mindset--IOW, Joe Blow can buy the Player's Handbook and all manner of Eberron material in a bookshop a ten minute drive from where I sit now in, let's see, easily 6 directions, and there it all is, detailed lists of potions, etc., and then this campaign says anytime my character kills a CR5 monster, there should be something like a +2 weapon & the like

kind of a failure in imagination, IMV--makes me wonder, why aren't there more players interested in playing heroes, or at least imaginative adventurers, rather than a bunch of shoe-shoppers at the mall


----------



## scourger (Jan 28, 2005)

The adventure I'm currently running, Flood Season from the Shackled City in Dungeon, had a web enhancment with a magic shop.  I decided to try it.  The players, all 25+ year veterans like me, loved it.  They just wanted to enjoy their rewards.  And, it seems to me that 3.0/3.5 presume a certian level of magic stuff.  As long as it's fun, I'm OK with it.  But I would run a game in which magic items are not commodities, either (which would make item creation feats worthwhile).


----------



## Ourph (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> Interesting analysis, Ourph.  I think you've got a cool campaign-setting idea there.




Thanks!  My players seem to think so (though sometimes the Wizards go a little cross-eyed when they start talking about covertly breaking guild rules and wake up with their familiar's head (and only their head) in the bed beside them.    ).


----------



## FireLance (Jan 28, 2005)

Faraer said:
			
		

> Why would you want to DM for players who want the rulebook to take precedence over the campaign, or who make selfish powergaming demands?



I don't think anyone would want to DM for such players, but I do think the question ignores the continuum of players and DMs that are out there.

As the DM, I have the final say about what is allowed in my campaign. There are certain game elements that I don't allow, e.g. the Frenzied Berserker. However, I do allow most things that the players want, and will adapt my campaign to fit it in.

I wouldn't want to DM for selfish players, but I have no problem with powergamers. Practically everyone in my regular campaign is a powergamer, myself included, and we get a kick out of seeing well-tuned characters in action. Believe it or not, it's our idea of fun.

I allow my players to have full creative control over their characters, including the equipment they want. Some DMs will probably shudder at the way I handle equipment. Whenever a character gains a level, I just tell the player to delete his old equipment and select whatever new equipment he wants, up to the standard character wealth for his level. 

Magic shops don't even come into the picture. My standard handwave is that the character's organization provides him with appropriate equipment. To me, it doesn't matter where or how he gets his gear - gifts, rewards, trade, purchase, whatever. It simply isn't relevant to having a fun game.

I see my job as simply to present challenges to the characters, and believe me, it doesn't matter what races or classes or skills or feats or gear the characters have - I can still challenge them. Not having to worry about placing treasure in the adventure is quite liberating, too.

My DMing philosophy is probably quite different from many of the DMs who don't like magic shops, or the idea of PCs buying and selling magic items, or who want to control the gear that the PCs have access to. But, I don't think it's a wrong one.


----------



## Ace (Jan 28, 2005)

Faraer said:
			
		

> Why would you want to DM for players who want the rulebook to take precedence over the campaign, or who make selfish powergaming demands?




Or the correlary -- why should I want to play with a DM who ignore the basic rules and implied structures of the game? 

D&D3x has a set of rules that it lives by -- set amount of magic and treasure that balance encounters out -- DM's who want to ignore this for flavor reasons without being upfront about it should get used to savvy players like me telling them to follow the fricken rules

If you told me up front about these facts thats another matter -- I just will flat out refuse to play your setting with the D&D rules-- yes this includes good low magic like Midnight  and will cordially suggest you might prefer a different set of rules that supports what you are doing 

D&D is more than a toybox of fun stuff it is also a structure of advancement -- and escaltion in treasure and the like that is meant to provide a certain play experience that a lot of us come to expect from D&D 

Deviate from that and a lot of us just won't play and 

yes that means I expect my   49,000 (= or - 10%) GP worth of kit at 10th level in a world that makes sense (within itself) --

If you plan to change this and not compasate me with more cool stuff (level based bonus to AC, covennat items whatever) than I will pass on your homebrew  thank you very much 

The game is more important than "story" or "world building" -- it took me a long timne ot figure that out but I did and my game is better for it (and I have more fun too )


----------



## Ace (Jan 28, 2005)

FireLance said:
			
		

> I don't think anyone would want to DM for such players, but I do think the question ignores the continuum of players and DMs that are out there.
> 
> As the DM, I have the final say about what is allowed in my campaign. There are certain game elements that I don't allow, e.g. the Frenzied Berserker. However, I do allow most things that the players want, and will adapt my campaign to fit it in.
> SNIPS LOTS OF COOL STUFF .




I am the same way pretty much.

 you sir have a right proper DMing philosophy  and I hope if I am ever in Singapore I can grab a spot at your table


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jan 28, 2005)

My opinion is that the DM is welcome to run any campaign that they desire.  However, the DM that does not look to the desires of his players, is a DM that has no players.  Before just complaining that your players are whining, it might be advisable to consider that your players are looking for a different feel to the game than you seem to recognize.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Yes. Elves and magic are conventions of the genre. We assume reality differs from ours in that it has races of intelligent beings other than our own, and a form of physics that allows for manipulation of energy in ways other than those we understand.
> 
> Humans being fundamentally different in their nature than they are in our reality is not a convention of the genre. Humans failing to commodify valuable items (as they have always done with all items of value in history) is just beyond reasonable.




And generally speaking, buying and selling magic items are NOT conventions of the genre.

Let's see... Conan and the Phoenix Sword? found in a tomb

Bilbo and the ring? found in a cave

Aragorn and the sword? forged for him to become king of men by elves for his fight with evil

Frodo and the ring? Inherited to continue the quest

Thoth Amon and the Ring of Set? sold his soul to a demon for it (IIRC)

Not a shop in sight. 

Chuck


----------



## Orius (Jan 28, 2005)

vortex said:
			
		

> I think the 3e concept of mix'n'match magic items (eg +3 keen, lightening, pixiebane mercurial greatsword) cheapens the whole magic item expirience.




Like someone else said, make the item unique.  Give it a name, and a history, give it a reason to have all those unusual powers (although the weapon you mentioned does kind of stretch it a little).

Here's some examples that I rolled up randomly.  The items themselves were just random vanilla items, but I was still able to come up with a name and a very bare bones history for each of them:

_+1 frost ghost touch bastard sword_.  This would make a great weapon weapon for a ghost or some other sort of  incorporeal undead.  Maybe it was created by a lich for an undead minion to wield.  I call it the Chillblade.

_+1 monstrous humanoid bane scimitar_.  This sword is called Medusacleaver.  It was forged long ago in a desert kingdom that was at was with a kingodm ruled by medsuas.

_+3 gnome bane small-sized quarterstaff_.  A small sized gnome bane weapon was likely created by a kobold sorcerer.  This weapon is known as the rod of Kurtulmak, and is used by kobold clerics to slay gnomes.

Ok, so there's not really much to them, just some bare bones concepts that I can further flesh out when needed.  These were just items that kind of grabbed my attention when I rolled them up.



> So does the mechanical nature of magic item generation eg potions must be spells less than 3rd level with a target of blah, blah, blah. It makes magic items generic and, thus, interchangable chattles. I understand the game balance issues, and i understand item creation is now an important game concept.




It does help to make the magic item creation process more streamlined and easy to use.  Besides, old style potions that don't really correspond to a spell of 3rd level or less can be simply created as wondrous items.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 28, 2005)

Thanks for steering this away from the argument and back on-topic, folks. It's appreciated.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 28, 2005)

*For those who think that a lack of buying/selling items is "unreasonable"*

I keep seeing this argument. 

In effect people are saying that those of us who feel magic items shouldnt be bought/sold are stupid.

Furthermore they are saying a GM shouldnt have the right to make this call in some cases.

Well apart from my feeling that the cook decides the ingredients, and those who come to the meal can eat or not, let's look at a couple of historical examples and address the "reasonableness" issue.

*Samurai Swords* 

The makers of these weapons were quickly snatched up the ruling military elite. In many cases individual lords seeking an advantage over their foes. These lords would give these weapons to their followers, in order to gain an edge in the civil wars of the era. 

*Relics in Medieval Europe* 

These items were quickly snatched up by the ruling religious and cultural elite. In many cases these items were used to consecrate important events and places, but were occasionally given to those undertaking a quest (relics accompanied Crusaders if I am not mistaken).

Sometimes they were sold... but still only to the faithful.

In both cases... there were numerous conmen... and the buyer of such an item (when they could find the item in question) had to be VERY wary.

I think the Samurai Sword example is the better for my argument... since magic items (like the best swords in the world) could destabilize a government's hold on power.

Does anyone thing the sale of powerful items would not be regulated? Even +1 swords would be watched by the wise ruler. If someone were to acquire a few hundred of them (over a long period of time) they could mount an effective military force. Sieze control of a critical road and start "taxing" trade if not spark an outright rebellion.

Chuck


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> He says that he doesn't let his players buy magic items.  He doesn't say, _no one in the game world can ever exchange anything magical under any circumstances_.




Well, I guess that's different then, in that _everyone other than the PCs can buy and sell magic items, just not them_.

Frankly, that's an even more idiotic interpretation than "No one ever sells magic to anyone, at all."


----------



## Orius (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Wow.  My players' characters would be arrested, mutilated, publicly demoralized, fined, and imprisoned for committing murder and theft; not to mention any equipment used in the murder would be impounded by the state.  They'd probably also be banned by whoever ran the library or sage's guild.




No public executions?   If they're killing NPCs in the city for their magic stuff, I'd expect to see them hung or brought before the headsman.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 28, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> And generally speaking, buying and selling magic items are NOT conventions of the genre.
> 
> Let's see... Conan and the Phoenix Sword? found in a tomb
> 
> ...




On the other hand, Vlad Taltos tends to buy a cheap enchanted dagger every few months, and routinely hires sorceresses from the Left Hand. (in Steven Brust's Dragaera)

The Seanchan treat spellcasters as property, and buy and sell them. (Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time)

Selling off the quasi-magical treasure of a former culture is the basis of the economy of Bingtown. (Robin Hobb's Liveship Traders)

Goblin and One-Eye have no moral qualms with making and selling enchanted amulets -- and some of them even work. (Glen Cook's Black Company)


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 28, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> On the other hand, Vlad Taltos tends to buy a cheap enchanted dagger every few months, and routinely hires sorceresses from the Left Hand. (in Steven Brust's Dragaera)
> 
> The Seanchan treat spellcasters as property, and buy and sell them. (Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time)
> 
> ...




Ok... point taken.

However, if my campaign is more Tolkien or Conan... my players have no more reason to whine than they do if its drawn from one of those books.

Neither do my players have any reason to whine if I want to run an ice campaign with only humans, neanderthals and cromagnons as the player races instead of elves and dwarves. 

I guess Im not as up on current fantasy as I should be.

I picked the icons.

Chuck


----------



## Orius (Jan 28, 2005)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, but I miss your point. Why would reading the _identify_ spell in the PHB change the fact that classic modules had a lot of magic items, and the fact that most PCs of advanced level had a bunch?




diaglo is probably referring to the fact that pre-3.5 _identify_ *when used by the book* was not quite as easy or convenient to use as the current version of the spell.

In 2e (I can't coment on any earlier versions of the spell) _identify_ took 8 hours to cast, only lasted for a a number of minutes equal to the wizard's level, and finally inflicted the wizard with a temporary loss of Constitution points.  The wizard could only learn one power of the item, and could only use the spell on a maximum of five items.  The knowledge gained  about the item was rather vague; for example a _+1 sword_ would id as having a bonus to attack and damage rolls, but the exact bonus was not learned.  And exact number of charges was likewise not revealed, only an indication of magical strength from the item revealing an approximate percentage of remaining charges.   Finally the spell included, as it still does, an expensive material component.

In 3e the spell was changed a little bit.  The Con loss was removed, and the wizard learned only the most basic power of the item.  The 8 hour casting time and the material component remained the same.

The spell was further revised in 3.5:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Identify
> Divination
> Level: Brd 1, Magic 2, Sor/Wiz 1
> Components: V, S, M/DF
> ...




Although easier to use now, the spell does have a casting time of an hour and still has the expensive material component.  Identifying magic items by the book has never been an quick process.

In any case, back in the 2e days and probably earlier, there was absolutely no point in memorizing _identify_ or even _detect magic_ if your DM told you exactly what you had found.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> The money supply in a typical D&D setting is not fiat money; it's not legal tender simply because the state says so.  And the state can't print it at will.




My argument is not that the state controls money creation. Rather, my argument is that the money supply is in no way pegged to the quantity of goods and services in the economy. As I indicated in my post, the main thing determining the money supply may be adventurers finding coin hordes. 

I simply do not buy that the growth rate in the local economy is somehow matching the rate at which the average adventuring party pours money into it.



> If the adventurers are plundering existing treasure, they should introduce no inflation; they're simply transferring wealth to themselves.




Yes. But what percentage of the monsters in the Monster Manual are using money as economic actors as compared to the creatures that simply hoard it? Dragons, gelatinous cubes, etc. are not in the economy in any meaningful way.



> If they're bringing treasure from outside the economy into the local economy, as the conquistadors brought gold and silver from the New World to the Old, then they likely will introduce inflation.




I don't see how this is even an "if" unless the monsters presented in the campaign are from a very narrow band of creatures.



> As far as the CPI goes, first, of course, there is no CPI; no state bureaucrats are tracking prices and devising imperfect statistical measures.  Second, even if they were tracking prices, consumer goods aren't improving in a quasi-medieval D&D setting.  A wagon's a wagon, a chicken's a chicken, an ale's an ale, etc.




Again, this is my point. My argument was against Storm Raven's assertion that the D&D economy could both obey the laws of supply and demand and experience no inflation. My point was that in economies in which there are no massive coin hoards being unearthed, we are still experiencing endemic inflation. The fact that D&D is premised on the absence of inflation and clearly (based on the title alone) expects people to take treasure from dragons indicates to me that D&D is not modeling a capitalist economy.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 28, 2005)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> My opinion is that the DM is welcome to run any campaign that they desire.  However, the DM that does not look to the desires of his players, is a DM that has no players.




Nonsense. You run a game that works for you -- then you find the players who will enjoy it. Two players joined my latest campaign, decided they didn't like aspects of the campaign -- I didn't offer to change a single thing. I just moved to the next two people on my waiting list. How hard can this be? I've only lived in this city for five months.

Whatever style of game you run, if you run it well, there will be players. I find it far easier to find players for my style than I do to change my style to appease players.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> Bull's Str doesn't stack with the belts, which you'd rather be using (no round spent on boosting), and magic missiles from wands tend to be pretty pitiful compared to a real archer. One caster level of wizard on a multiclass character was at least in our games quite useless.
> 
> But at first I was just looking at the fact that he sould've taken only a level of cleric and wizard, and take Magic domain to use wizzie wands.
> 
> Of course if you say he's a powerhouse, I'll believe you, but the 1/1/1/X multiclasses I've seen thus far go against that experience, especially with spellcasters as the single level classes. 1st and 2nd level spells from wands don't count for much at higher levels (except for cure of wand ligh.. um wand of cure light wounds).




The cure light wounds one is definitely a biggie.  I wasn't aware the magic domain would allow him to use wizard wands (and he probably isn't either, or he wouldn't insist on the travel domain to increase his speed and whatever other domain he always takes for cleric).  As for magic missile, he goes for 9th caster level versions, which outclass all but the most dedicated archers.

He's just too versatile.  D&D is party-focused and I like the teamwork aspect of it, but he doesn't need a team, which just detracts from the fun.  At least by only giving out magic items in random treasure hordes or by DM placement, he can't plan all of his abilities around a charged magic item, and use them to make up for any area he decided to neglect.


----------



## Abraxas (Jan 28, 2005)

> Nonsense. You run a game that works for you -- then you find the players who will enjoy it.



and



> Whatever style of game you run, if you run it well, there will be players. I find it far easier to find players for my style than I do to change my style to appease players.




These are really only true if 1) there is a large pool of players in the area and 2)you don't mind that you may not be gaming with your friends.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 28, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Ok... point taken.
> 
> However, if my campaign is more Tolkien or Conan... my players have no more reason to whine than they do if its drawn from one of those books.




Standard D&D has a lot of core assumptions, one of which is a higher commonality of magic items than just about any non-D&D based fantasy I've read short of Brust's Drageara. Reconciling a standard D&D commonality of magic items with a lack of trade in them is very difficult, as is maintaining balance in a D&D game with a low level of magic items. It also assumes much more powerful magic than Third Age Middle Earth; mid-level wizards can accomplish things that Gandalf (a near-deity and one of the most powerful wizards in Middle Earth) wouldn't attempt, and can use their power far more freely. There are a lot of takes on low magic d20 fantasy (or just low magic-item d20 fantasy), which I'd use if I were trying to run a Middle Earth-esque or Conan-esque game, but D&D just isn't built for it.



			
				Vigilance said:
			
		

> Neither do my players have any reason to whine if I want to run an ice campaign with only humans, neanderthals and cromagnons as the player races instead of elves and dwarves.




If you've got a player who almost always plays elves, loves playing elves, and plays elves that are enjoyable to play with and DM for, then creating a game where he can't play an elf is still your call, but I wouldn't do it.


----------



## ptolemy18 (Jan 28, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Does anyone else have this problem? I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will.




Luckily, my players pretty much never read the rules, so they haven't developed to the point where they point at the DMG and say "I want to buy a Flail of Defending!"

They're pretty much at my mercy with magic items; i.e., they say "I go to the weaponshop!" and the weaponshop owner says "I've got something very rare and expensive that you might be interested in...  "

On the other hand, having players who don't know jack about the rules has its own set of disadvantages. :/ (To take one real example: "What?! The storekeeper said that arrow was magical! Didn't it do more damage than THAT?")

Jason


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Sammael said:
			
		

> From 5th to about 9th level, characters have enough wealth that they _should_ be able to purchase, commision, or upgrade their magic items. However, any one of those  methods can be an adventure unto itself - looking for a powerful spellcaster, traveling to a major city, doing favors to people, etc.




I often begin campaigns at about 5th level.



> From level 10 onward, characters have enough power, influence, and wealth that *not* letting them just buy magic items completely suspends realism. The party has access to _legend lore_, _teleport_, _locate person_, whatever... clerics are now bishops and can damn well order accolytes to make them magic items; rogues practically _run_ thieves' guilds; bards probably entertain kings and archdukes; wizards are guildmasters and sages; and fighters have probably saved their comrades' buts many, many times, and can expect to rely on their connections.




This is the point at which I begin letting them "quest" for magic items as they begin to know the legends of powerful artifacts and the histories and clues that might lead them to the items.

Clerics in my campaigns don't advance because they are higher in level.  I don't feel that makes much sense, as they are always away.  I see them more as chaplain crusaders, favored by their chosen deity to perform miracles.  In a sense, they are beyond and above the mortal hierarchy of the church, yet still controlled by it to a certain extent.  This can vary by church, but this is the most common way I do things.  In my Kingdoms of Kalamar campaign that just ended, there are actually a nice set of rules to control advancement through the church seperately from that as a cleric.  You can choose to expend XP to gain influence and control in the church, or you can go independent.  I had one player who rose moderately within his church and attained several acolytes and an administrator to help him with his duties.  I digress, but basically just because a character is high level does not mean he has influence over others.  Conversely, a wielder of influence might be a charasmatic Commoner 1 who was in the right place at the right time.

If you allow Clerics to order acolytes to make magic items, then do you ever have the church order the PC to make magic items and give them up?  It's the only fair way of going about it.

As for wizards, they tend to create strongholds, but as they are never home, they hold little influence over any single individual.  Bards tend to be traveling minstrels, renowned through many regions and invited by kings to perform, but neither is obligated to the other, as the PCs are usually outlaws (in the literal sense).  Fighters would only hold influence if they controlled armies, and few of my players have ever been interested in becoming that indirect in playing the campaign (I've had a few players who are interested in that sort of thing, but they do not play fighters, so they use their funds to purchase land and influence to gain title, power, wealth, and armies - nevertheless, their holdings are dwarfed by any real kingdoms).

Basically, in my campaigns, personal power does not equate to political influence except in the most militaristic or violent cultures.  To me, it's like saying the United States Army Special Forces or Navy SEALs should have political influence over the President.  It doesn't make any kind of sense.

To cover one obvious retort, if the kings and nobles are afraid of what the PCs have the ability to do, then I liken that to a country capitulating to terrorists.  Again, this is not something that makes any real sense.



> In other words, my campaigns are such that by the time the PCs have enough money, they can pretty much expect to be able to obtain nearly any item they can afford, and I don't waste their time by requiring them to roleplay shopping trips.




I make sure the attainment of a magical item is never so trivial as to be referred to as a shopping trip in the first place.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> See _that_ I would have a problem with.  A completely undetectable curse worked into their magic items?  Wow.  What fun.




I'm with you.  If I curse something, it's because there's an important story reason to do so.  I don't do it just to keep the PCs in check.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jan 28, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> I realize that I failed to express myself properly in my post regarding the purchase of office in the pre-modern world. My point was not that money was never a necessary condition to obtain office. My point was that money was rarely a sufficient condition.




I am not entirely disagreeing - it is simply that the Norse kings were perhaps the worst choice to make your point.  They were arguably the most likely to do so, though also the most likely to change their minds and take them back again, or simply kill the poor sucker a few years later, Jutland being notorious in that regard.

Olaf Sandle did in fact sell patents of nobility to those who 'plunked down 50.000 GP' so to speak, though admitedly he was considered greedy and venal even by his fellows. Of course he was also 'king' of only one city.

Charlmagne would not have, but one of his sons if I recall did sell titles - one of the points of contention with his brothers.

Some, though not most, of the Norman kings were nearly as bad. (William Rufus, who on one occassion sold a title, then sent his army in to retake it...)

Other Norman kings of England refused to sell _English_ titles, but were quite willing to sell titles in Scotland and Ireland. For what it is worth England still sells Scottish titles along with the land...

Buying commissions in the British Army continued into WW1, where it caused considerable problems. Many patents of nobility, in the lower ranks (Baronette, Knight Banneret, and arguably squire) were essentially military commissions as seen through the feudal eye, and were sometimes purchased.

As I said, I allow the party to find people to commission the creation of magic items from, but do not just have a magic shop. But it was the sale of patents of nobility that amused me.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

atom bomb said:
			
		

> "So valuable that it will never be sold" and "plentiful" are mutually exclusive, in my book.




Hydrogen bomb.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> Seems like an irrelevant argument.
> 
> The price of a +3 Longsword in _gold_ is much less important than the value of the sword compared to a +2 Longsword.  The market for magic items does not exist because of my whim for a +3 sword, it _must_ exist if I can acquire a bag full of +1 and +2 weapons.  How coin figures into this is a minor detail.




That's exactly what I was saying.  The cost in making the item does not necessarily increase the value of the item.  Items have a marketable value cap, that when exceeded by the cost (as I was suggesting was the case when you have to pour your life force [XP] into it to make it), the number of items available in the world would plummet.  You just reinforced the point I was making.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

jasper said:
			
		

> Oh please I am old school too. I guess I played on the wrong side of tracks and with bad players. In the beginning magic shops were in every big town until we started knocking them off and stealing the loot. They did it to my world which in turn I did in theirs. Which then started either every magic shop being ran by a 20+ level wizard, or god. Then end with the magic shop from the n-dimension which would appear when you needed it and ran by a 20+ level wizard with lots of guards.
> Sorry played in different editions, on different coasts, on different continents. It is the players not the system or computer games or immature players or current culture.




I certainly agree with that.  If you have players who don't abuse the system, then it works out fine.  But that is not what I have.  People suggest adding history to magic items, giving them background and legends and names.  This does not help if the players don't care.  If I didn't describe a magic item's appearence, the player's wouldn't even ask.  The only way to get my players to care where the item came from is to almost entirely nerf the identify spell (which I usually do, depending on the campaign).

I have issues with 3e's presentation of magic items, but not the mechanics of them.  They present it in such a way that new players get the impression that that kind of stat mongering is what is expected of them in the game.  There is almost no information in the Player's Handbook on how to role-play, just loads of information for how you can change your modifiers and DCs.  I really feel that's the worst part of 3e, and it's almost a game-breaker for anyone who wants to play another way.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Why did you let them have so much money? Buying gear shouldn't be a problem if they're not overloaded with cash.




If you have decent players then the typical, expected level of wealth in D&D allows players to take on creatures with CRs well beyond their level.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> In many cases people believed that certain things required portions of their life essence, or even their soul to make or do. And yet those things were bought and sold, just like any other valuabnle commodity.




Attempting to avoid the whole religious thing here, but the belief of loss of life essence is dramatically different from tangible loss of life essence.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> That's what having rogues and other information gathering types in a party are for.




Gather Information is the best way to avoid role-playing I've seen.  It is not easy to find out this sort of information.  And often, the information just isn't there.  Just because the PCs want something doesn't mean it exists in the city they are in.  For instance, IRL it is rather difficult to purchase tanks on the black market in most countries.  Whether you have connections or not, some things are just not possible.

Even if they find someone dealing in such items, it is going to have ~400% black markup, and they usually won't want it, since they can get better things by just adventuring.  And the people dealing in such items aren't going to be able to just take an order and come back with what you needed.  If it isn't available, it isn't available.

Of course that players could do some such thing, but it really isn't worth it, so they don't.




> In my experience, most PCs (who can) are willing to make magic items in exchange to trade, even just to trade for cash. Not all the time, but every now and then during their career. If you want to come up with an "xp limit", a good rule of thumb would likely be 1/25th of the gold piece limit.




I disagree with that being a good rule of thumb due to markets not being completely based on supply-demand (I more thoroughly discuss this in a previous post).  I've never seen a PC who would be willing to sell their XP for gp unless they expected to purchase magic items with the gp.  It's a critical mass issue, which, in my opinion, would not be reached due to many of the other factors I talk about.



> This is an element of _every_ market. Magic items should be no different in this regard. But it hasn't killed the market in any other commodity, it just makes buyers cautious.




There is a recent trend discussed on Slate (I believe; I wish I could find the link to the article, but my search-fu is failing me) how spam/adware/spyware/worms have gotten so bad that there is actually a small market backlash against always-on internet.  These things do effect the market.  A healthy, thriving market can bear such things, but - due to the many circumstances I've illustrated - the market has never become so healthy.  so this type of activity is a significant detriment to the market.



> It can, but on the other hand, masterwork swords can be sundered quite easily too, but there are plenty of them available for sale. In reality, cars wear out after a few short years of use, but we have millions of them available for sale daily.




Masterwork swords are not nearly as expensive as magical items for their worth.  Cars do not wear out after a few years.  A part wears out after a few years and the machine can be fixed by the purchase of a cheap part.  The maintenance on a car is very reasonable for the first 10 years, after which many cars get junked when something minor happens.  It's just not worth repairing when the part costs half of what the car is worth (as is the case with magical items).



> Now think about all of the people around the world who have weapons. Especially in less than completely civilized areas of the world (which are usually analogous to the places that adventurers would spend lots of time in). Do you under stand just how easy is it to get weaponry in Afghanistan, or Sudan, or Somalia?




I'm not sure what you mean by civilized, but I guarentee the level of civilization has nothing to do with weapon availability.  Germany began to remove weapons from their citizen's hands before WWII; does that mean they were progressing towards a more civilized culture?  Weapons and warfare were always the domain of the civilized in feudal systems (knights in western feudalism, for instance, or samurai in eastern).  America in the 1920s could arguably be counted among the most civilized of nations in that period, yet tommy guns were available by mail order to anyone who wanted one.  I think on this point, you are just wrong.  Maybe you should define civilized.

Gun control is a cultural decision that is based upon huge variety of factors.  Again, this is just one of things that keep the magic trade down in the areas where "gun control" people are prominent, powerful, and active.



> I believe that your understanding of feudal law is somewhat lacking. Note, for example, that contrary to your assertions, historical feudal rulers often had to borrow heavily from those in their lands to finance their wars and other ambitions (rather than, for example, just confiscating their property as you would have them do). The very essence of fuedal law was reciprocating rights: the lord had power, but he also had duties and responsibilities to his vassals. Many feudal kings were overthrown (such as Richard II) or curbed by force (such as John Lackland) when they were perceived to have trampled on the rights of their vassals. What you assert as an example of "feudal law" is probably more like the law applied by the pre-Hellenic asiatic emperors of the middle-east.




I did not make it clear, but I was referring to lords vs. serfs, not liege vs vassal.  As most PCs can only be considered outlaws (or at best foreigners [there is a better term for this but I can't think of it] while adventuring), they would be at the full mercy of the lord on whose land they were.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> bregh said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Maybe the word buy should be more clearly defined from the original poster.  Usually the word buy (dictionary.com) is used to refer to exchanges made with money, credit, species, etc.  Exchange for magical items or services would not be "buy"ing in this sense, and would usually be referred to as bartering.  And so there would be no market, even if the goods were able to be acquired.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> The risk aspect of buying magic items has popped up a couple of times in this thread. I'm not saying that it would be impossible, but, how likely would the Thieves Guild or whatnot to piss of characters who evidently have earned 50k (or whatever large sum they're spending) in adventuring?
> 
> It's about the same as a shady used cars salesman tried to sell a lemon to person he knew to be Magneto / Superman. The thieves know that these are very tough hombres. Maybe there would be easy pickings elsewhere ..




My NPCs don't metagame.


----------



## FireLance (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> If you have decent players then the typical, expected level of wealth in D&D allows players to take on creatures with CRs well beyond their level.



You say that like it's a bad thing. 

Certainly, if your players know they are going to fight a white dragon and load up on _flaming, dragon bane weapons_ and _potions of cold resistance_, the fight with the dragon will be trivial. But it's the preparation, and not just the gear, that makes the difference. Even without appropriate (but still decent) gear, the right tactics and spell selection can make a normally difficult fight into one that is easy.

Anyway, I've read somewhere that CRs are pegged against a party of PCs who have not made optimal choices, so that inexperienced DMs (who may not be able to accurately judge the danger of the creature with respect to the specific mix of PCs he's running the adventure for) are less likely to throw something that will wipe out a party of inexperienced players (who may not make the best decisions for their characters). The philosophy behind this is that it's better to have several easy encounters than a single TPK. So, it's not surprising that the standard rule of thumb of:

CR = party level - standard encounter
CR = PL +2 - difficult encounter
CR = PL +4 - deadly encounter 

for sub-optimal characters may become:

CR = PL - easy encounter
CR = PL +2 - standard encounter
CR = PL +4 - difficult encounter
CR = PL +6 - deadly encounter

for experienced players who make good choices for their characters.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Kast said:
			
		

> If you want to bring economic realities into the picture, which is usually not a good idea in fantasy worlds:




Well, I disagree with you there  , but I agree with: 



> Permanent magic items (and to a lesser extent the charged ones as well) essentially have the same sort of market as art and antiques.
> 
> 1) Unpredictable Supply and Demand
> 2) Low real utility
> ...




Which is why I think the idea of selling a magic item would be weird.  A magic item only has a particular worth to its user (the market price listed in the DMG), but such a market would cause the sale price to be much higher than its worth.  To actually sell something, one would have to drop the price to the market value, thus making it an inefficient way to spend one's time.  A wizard willing to market out their skills would be much better off casting spells for a living, or becoming a full-time court wizard.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Humans being fundamentally different in their nature than they are in our reality is not a convention of the genre. Humans failing to commodify valuable items (as they have always done with all items of value in history) is just beyond reasonable.




Many primitive cultures never did this.  A true communist country would not, either (though there is that whole against-human-nature argument agaist communism).

But it also generally takes time, necessity, and excellent marketing to commoditize a market.  Could you just buy a telescope in the 1500s?  I do not know the answer to that question, but my gut feeling tells me no.  It was a specialty item that only a few understood, had a use for, and could make.  So those that were made were made to be used by their makers.  Computers in the 50s; same story.  No single individual could own a computer.  They were owned by organizations, companies and governments.

The commodization of magic items brings you strongly into the realm of Eberron-esque play style.  If that's how you want it, that's fine, but that doesn't mean that the rules and common sense dictate such a world.  My worlds happen to be set in times before magic was commoditized, because that's the type of world I like to run, and it makes sense.  Just as magic shops make logical sense in other campaigns.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> And all of these are just quibbling over the mechanic, not the existence of such a market. This is still buying and selling magic items, just with some market complications thrown in.




The original question was whether the PCs could buy magical items, not whether there was a market for them.  This is a perfect example of those are mutually exclusive.




> But if they offer enough money for it, someone will likely try to bring silk to where they are.
> 
> But if they offer enough money for it, someone will likely show up with some.
> 
> But if they offer him enough money, he will likely be willing to forego those potential future profits for actual current profits.




I do not allow the buying/selling of magic items in my campaign, true.  If a PC offered someone 10,000 gp for potion of cure light wounds, they'd get it.  Very true.  Enough money will buy almost anything.  But I don't think that's what the question was implying.  I apologize if I inferred too much.



> In which case, the characters will likely try to purchase noble titles. Which was a common enough practice that it would not be surprising. Or they could forge documents showing their pedigree, or pretend to be nobles from another country (both of which were common). Or bribe the guildmasters of the silk merchant's guild to make an exception. Or go to the black market and get what they want there. If they offer enough money around, they can get what they want.
> 
> Or, become the tailor who made a pile of money and bought himself another bolt of silk and had enough money left over from the transaction to buy two more.




I still think you are going beyond the scope of the question.





> If they offer enough money, they probably can.
> 
> 
> And? This makes it different from a market for any other commodity how?




When I see the word commodity in a discussion related to economics, I tend to assume the economic definition (from dictionary.com):

commodity

A generic, largely unprocessed, good that can be processed and resold. Commodities traded in the financial markets for immediate or future delivery are grains, metals, and minerals. They are generally traded in very large quantities




> I believe you are naive on this score. Of all the black market items one can get, children are probably one of the easiest to acquire.




I know connected criminals (in D&D terms rogues with high gather information checks) who would have no idea how to go about purchasing a child.  I just asked one to make sure.  He can get me fully automatic guns, better-than-homemade bombs (these are really expensive), and all the controlled substances one would ever need to be happy for the rest of their life and kill all the elephants in the world for good show, but no children.  No tanks, either.  Or F-22s.  Or MiGs.  Damn, he's useless...

You seem to play a campaign-style where the PCs are the most important thing in the world (or region) and enough ranks in gather information will get them what they are looking for, which is fine.  But that doesn't mean that's the only way to play.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> If it can be acquired, its value can be expressed in gold. This is a basic fact of life. Once you make something an item that can be owned or possessed, it has a value that can be expressed in gold. You may not like to deal with this basic and inalterable fact, but it can't be wished away. Certainly not by the sort of examples you've given here.




How much would it cost me to purchase children of my own blood?  How about a loving girlfriend?  Happiness?  A meaningfull life?  World rememberence?


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> I am sure that the next edition of the game will further isolate the role of the GM until we eventually get replaced in favor of adventure rules and pregen scenarios that run with a rules  judge.




Nah.  What you are describing already exists in the RPGA.  When 3e was being designed, they had in mind electronic tools, so they made the system unified so that programs could be more easily written for it.  The next edition of D&D will be a paid subscription (more per month if you want to use supplements) where you play scenarios dreamt up by an AI.  They'll just remove that pesky DM problem.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Picasso's are bought and sold. Perhaps you have heard of places like Sotheby's and Christie's? I can find a listing of Van Gogh's up for auction _right now_. Or works from just about any other notable artist out there. The simple economic truth is that items are more likely to hit the market the more valuable they are, there is just that much more incentive to make a pile of money by selling them.




Who do I talk to to buy Starless Night?





> For the same reason that the Catholic Church sold indulgences, pieces of the true cross and other relics and just about anything else they could think of: to finance church operations.




That's because indulgences were ephemeral, pieces of the true cross phonies, and everything else of no worth in some way.  You are describing the charlatens many people have pointed out for selling magical items.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Children are probably easier to get as a black market commodity than firearms or automobiles (cheaper in general) and depending on the bulk that you want easier to get than most significant narcotics transactions. I think you are underestimating just how easy trade in children truly is in the world, and how awfully omnipresent it is.




LOL!! And very few posts make me do that.  Are drug dealers really that incompetent in Virginia, or the police who are supposed to be looking for missing children?  Or both?


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Anything that a person wants can be replaced by sufficient qualtities of "mere money".




Bill Gates, that guy from Ikea, and the Wal-Mart familiy combined could not buy the Sistine Chapel.  Are you trolling?


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> You mean humans are radically different from the humans who populate our world? Because "capitalism" isn't an economic model that's new, and supply and demand isn't an assumption. If there is a demand for a good, and a supply for it, a market will ensure. Go back through history and try to find a culture in which this was not true.




Some of the more isolated Native American tribes never came up with a trade system as it wasn't necessary.  They were completely communist.




> Because as the price of magic items rose with inflation, other suppliers would step in and try to take advantage of the rising price, driving prices back down by increasing the volume of supply available to the market. This is basic economic market analysis.




Are you under the impression that the world is all capitalist?  What caused the Cold War in your alternate reality?


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> How do you think, for example, Microsoft acquired Q-DOS? They purchased it (the only operating system intellectual property owned by the seller) for cash.




And what did they do?  Turn around and revolutionize the world by making it so that modern commercial software is no longer for sale.  You can only license it.  Go make an offer to Microsoft for Windows.  See how much you have to offer to make them sell.  I guarentee it is an amount so insurmountably larger than its value that no one would ever buy it.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Explain the demographics, economics, and culture that override basic human nature.




Well, since you asked, I'll give you an example demographic.  My family.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> People want to have wealth. It's that simple.
> 
> You can quibble over the volume of wealth an individual wants, or how much they are willing to do to get it, but people want wealth (or more accurately, the things wealth represents: food, shelter, security, and so on).




What exactly then is the motivation for someone who has everything they want and need to sell anything?  I would certainly assume powerful wizards are in this position.  What could they possibly want that they could not have?  And why would they care about money when they can fabricate, summon, call, etc.?



> In any given population, a substantial number of people will want lots of wealth. That's generally why people invent things, go on dangerous journeys to strange lands looking for spices, gold, and other rare commodities, and otherwise do things they might not otherwise do.




Are you really intentionally ignoring all the pure scientists, garage-techies, thrill-seekers, etc. in the world as insignificant to your argument?



> To avoid a market economy arising in a campaign, you must posit a human nature in which humans do not desire wealth (as in, do not desire to secure food, shelter, security and so on), changing the basic nature of humanity into something so unrecognizable that you cannot reasonably call them "human" any more.




OK, but the only people who have the skill to create such items are invariably the same people who have met these desires.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Probably easier. The di Medici's purchased huge volumes of art on a regular basis, and are resonsible for the mere existence of a substantial  chunk of Italian renaissance art being produced (as a result of their financing). Prior to the romanticization of the past that has taken place in the modern era, these sorts of things were regularly traded.




You are talking about the seller again because you can't make an argument for the buyer.



> Where do most adventurers operate? Is it a vanue more like the United States and Canada? Or more like Somalia? Do you fully comprehend just how much ordinance is available for sale in most of the Third World?


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> Wouldn't that kind of thinking require that all wizards and sorcerers be banned and / or closely monitored too? Because a spellcaster packs much more punch than magic items, aren't they more dangerous than magic items you labeled as equal to WMDs?




Wizards are simply people with specific knowledge.  We do not outlaw the free exchange of knowledge among scientists.  In fact, the American nuclear bomb was only possible due to the knowledge we got from Russian scientists.  Russia was working on a bomb of their own, but they never outlawed the science behind it.  That's not to say all cultures would act like this, but there would at least be some, just as there would be some cultures who would allow the sale of magic, and some that would not.



> And of course, your analogy only holds for doomsday device magics, i.e. artifact level stuff. +3 sword is not a threat to stability. It's equal to non-masterwork sword wielded by a stronger person. Do strong persons cause instability? Why should they be banned or restricted from sale?




An M16A2 is not a massive threat to stability, but they are still outlawed in many a country.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Staffan said:
			
		

> The normal rate of XP to gp is 5 gp per XP. And when I offered the artificer in the party to trade in XP for gold (at a rate of 625 gp per 30 XP, due to having the two feats from Eberron that let him make items for 75% of the normal creation cost in gold and in XP - normally, it would be 500 gp per 40 XP), his reaction was "Whee! I'm rich!"




And what did he spend the money on?

If it is magic items then you are using circular reference.  The market for magic items has to be there before the artificer is willing to sell XP for GP.  And the people have to be willing to sell XP for GP before there is a market for magic items.  Critical Mass much first be reached.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> Whether you can do that today or it take several weeks is just quibbling over mechanics.  I believe the going rate for buying healthy babies is around US$30K on the black market.  (These are often mostly legit adoptions, it is just the manner of involving money in the transaction is considered unethical & illegal -- for good reason.)
> 
> That is pretty cheap considering how many XP the mother sunk into making that baby.




True, but if you cut out those women who accidentally got pregnant or circumstances changed since conception to warrent the giving up of the baby, and only focus on those mothers who actually set out to get pregnant to earn money, you have a market so small that not all those willing to pay are going to be able to find a seller.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Too much to reply to to actually go back and quote it all...
> 
> *Item Creation Feats:* Do you allow the players sufficient down time to make proper use of Item Creation? I have stopped getting item creation feats for my mages and clerics because most campaigns I play in ramp up to rollercoaster speed in a hurry and you just cannot stop for a week to make an item.




May campaigns are very reactive.  If the players want to chill for a while, they have ample opportunity.



> *Mideval Times and the lack of Inventory:* Someone put forth that the modern concept of Shops in general do not exist in a feudal world. If this was the world put forth by the rules, then all items, magical and mundane, would be listed with a price and a time. "I'd like to buy a grappling hook, good sir." "Smitty can probably make you one in about 2 weeks time. You should go ask him."




Yup, that's how I do things.  I assume a smith has a small supply of daggers, shortswords, and whatever regional weapon is popular.  Beyond that, you wait for it.  Items often times sell for prices that differ from that in the PHB as well.  As a rule of thumb, a regional weapon is cheaper, while an ordered item is more expensive.  War-torn regions also have cheaper or (once they become extremely wartorn) more expensive weapons.  Plate Armor is never bought off-the shelf (breastplate, full plate, etc.).  Only very rarely would one find a masterwork item on the shelf (unless it is a regional thing; i.e. all bows sold in the Elven lands might be masterwork by default).  The Craft skill gives you a time to make, though if you do this stuff all the time, as I do, you tend to ignore that for more reasonable numbers.



> *Questing for Item Components:* The inherent flaw with this is by time I have quested for the item components, I'm 3 levels higher than when I started out and I no longer desire that item, but a more powerful item instead. And again, this puts the main plot on hold for long periods of time.




Why weren't you questing for the item you wanted to have in 3 levels?  And not every adventure is part of some story arc.  Maybe the last main BBEG was just taken care of and now the characters want to go out and do some personal questing.  Players should create their own hooks and not rely on the DM to.  Especially if they expect the DM to do things how they want.



> *Magic Item Shop:* You see a nicely appointed room with a single desk in its center. There is a large, stuffed chair behind the desk and two smaller chairs on your side of the desk. In the far corners of the room are two finely carved statues of strong fighting men. A curtain blocks your view of the room off to the right. The middle-aged man behind the desk stands and greets you in the customary way. "How can I help you?" he asks.
> 
> The important fact here is that there are no magic items on display. Everything in the room can be commands to attack with a single word from the broker. His "stock" is located elsewhere in a place proof against detection and whose only means of entry is teleportation. There is also a similar room called the treasury. The stock room and the treasury are not connected. Behind the curtain is an empty room which he uses to teleport to the stock room. He casts teleport to get in and out of the stock room. He accepts payment up front and takes the payment to the treasury. Leaving it there for at least a week before moving it to his "bank" of money. If payment is not in gold, he takes the payment to the treasury, then goes to the stock room for the item. Thus trojan horse payments never arrive in the stock room. This is doable by a 10th-12th level wizard on his own. With a few partners and some ambition the number of shops can be very plentiful.




Never been a fan of teleportation myself.  My players and I have an understanding that if they don't abuse it, I won't abuse it.  My players can only do one of two things if they are attached to their characters.  Piss me off or Make me abuse things.  If they do both, they will lose.  Ultimately, again, it boils down to the flavor you want for a campaign.  If you want magic items for sale, there's nothing wrong with that.  I don't.  And there is no argument of logic that would make this decision wrong.



> *Purchasing Magic is a Video Game Idea:* The 1e DMG has prices listed for magic items. Please reconcile these two contradictory concepts.




Prices on magic items are intended to rate one magic item against another.  Not to relate them to GP.  They chose GP because it is useful if you do want to have magic items and GP relate.  IIRC, Monte Cook wrote about this.  You could have just as easily rated them in Magic Item Value Units (MIVUs).  The cost of creation could be based on the MIVUs rating and XP cost to create the item.  This would have worked just as well, except those people who want to convert MIVUs to GP can save themselves a step by just using GP in the first place.



> I've played in games where you could buy magic items in all editions of the game. It's just more commonplace in 3e.




Well, most video games are based on D&D, but with permutations different focus.  But then D&D 3e is marketed towards a generation that grew up with video games.  I'm not saying that selling magic items is a video game thing, but D&D 3e is a lot closer to all those video games based on 1e than 1e was.



> *Trading Rare Items:* The Shroud of Turin is not for sale because it is unique, not rare. Individual paintings are unique, but Van Goth's paintings (on the whole) are merely rare. While each one is unique, any one of them could be on sale at any given time. How does one find out one is on sale? Any number of divinations would probably work.




If it's not for sale?  There are still a very limited number of many items.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

> It seems to me like has a lot of expenses. A lot of debts to pay back. Are you arguing that someone with this sort of financial investment and debt load _wouldn't_ be out trying to make that money back? It seems to me like clerics and wizards (given the economic conditions you describe with long years of study and training) are almost _driven_ to market their services and ware just to pay for all of these expensive things you assume they have.




I think what was being argued was that the price would be much higher than market price.  The market price would be the sale of an item from consumer to consumer.  But the price from supplier to consumer would much higher.  This creates an unsustainable market.  For instance, if I want a table that is exactly ergonomically fit to my specifications and of a particular material, I might spend quite a bit of money getting it made for me.  If I went to sell it to someone, they wouldn't pay me half of what it cost me, even if it were brand new.  The item's value isn't actually that high.  So, yes you can just throw more money into the equation, but see how many players are gonna do that.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Not agreed.  Some people have, in fact, argued exactly this point:




I can not speak for everyone, but at least the quote from me was not intended to be taken as absolute.  It's a lot easier to skip writing ", except under unusual circumstances" and ", unless they are willing to put hordes of money into it" after every sentence.  I think the straw man comment was on the ball.









Note he first mentions that he'll never, ever let PCs buy things - except they *can* buy them with things other than straight coinage, which can in turn be bought with coinage, etc.

Bit of an odd view to hold, but there you go ...

Anyway, there you go.  The position that you claim is a straw man is in fact the position held by members of "the opposition" by their own words.  Therefore, it isn't a strawman.[/QUOTE]


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Ridley's Cohort said:
			
		

> I can agree with that.  But in my experience, it is not the norm for a heroically inclined party to have nothing but cash at their disposal.  Most earn positive reputations with some of the right kind of people.  Consider the classic adventure hooks: bandits/monsters preying on a road, a wizard needs an errand run, a village is attacked by mysterious assailants, etc.  Doing a number of these should eventually yield the requisite letters of introduction.




I usually use classic and cliche interchangably and shy from both.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> At a guess, this is because most players will expect the DM to screw them if they try to make money by trying to enforce the player gold/level limits. Otherwise a first level wizard can make himself a nice profit of 2500gp on his first orc. But of course the DM is going to say "oh, you can only sell for half price", or "noone wants to buy" etc etc...




This is still a style consideration.  My players may feel free to earn as much money as they want.  If that is really the number for an orc's value, then that's just absurd.  The designers would have to be on crack.  (I'm not saying they weren't, just that it is the first reasonable explanation I could think of).  Suffice to say that my orcs' large, ugly leather armor doesn't go for much, and neither does his shoddy short/long/great-sword (only 20/x2 and less hardness).

If there is reasonably a buyer for something, then the players can sell it.  But sometimes they can not.  And if they enter a town with a wagon full of old equipment, the authorities are not likely to believe they are not merchants, and so should be taxed for importation of goods.  They better be careful if they try to sell one of those items, cause they very well might get hit for evading taxes.



> Well - actually a high level party with any sense has backups. Especially in a world where magic item sales are impossible. And those backups are in a trove somewhere, ready for collection when the high level party cacks it. And then there are all the magic items that are just given away... Especially in a world without a market. Sort of devalues things, huh?




Stockpiles of magic items are exactly what draw other groups of adventurers.  And there's no telling what level they are.



> Looks like you've got a lot of really awesome plotlines that you've destroyed by making magic totally unsaleable. Shame about that.




I don't see how magic not being saleable removes any more plotlines than making magic buyable.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jan 28, 2005)

Hi Reanjr, nice to see someone making good use of the "flurry of posts" class feature 

I would like to remind you (and everyone else) that we like to keep personal attacks or snide remarks out of debates though - play nice everyone!

Regards


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

Ace said:
			
		

> Or the correlary -- why should I want to play with a DM who ignore the basic rules and implied structures of the game?
> 
> D&D3x has a set of rules that it lives by -- set amount of magic and treasure that balance encounters out -- DM's who want to ignore this for flavor reasons without being upfront about it should get used to savvy players like me telling them to follow the fricken rules
> 
> ...





That's fine.  You play DnD your way and I will play it in the manner for which I choose.  The DMG flat out calls the rules guidelines only.  Magic items and wealth by level are NOT in the PHB, so therefore, they are NOT mandated by the RAW.  If the PHB said, players need to have such and such wealth by level, then maybe it would be different.

The game is about more than quantitative challenges and the GM should be more than just a referee.  Otherwise, we're just playing a computer game or reading a choose your own adventure novel.

Trust me, I would not GM for a player like you, just as you would not play when I GM.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> If you have decent players then the typical, expected level of wealth in D&D allows players to take on creatures with CRs well beyond their level.




Not IME. I find that PCs have lame AC and saving throw values if I skimp on the items, and of course it hurts the fighter, rogue, ranger and barbarian the most, which isn't surprising since characters can't learn to defend themselves, defensive items stack better than offensive items, and some classes are more dependent on these items.


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Not IME. I find that PCs have lame AC and saving throw values if I skimp on the items, and of course it hurts the fighter, rogue, ranger and barbarian the most, which isn't surprising since characters can't learn to defend themselves, defensive items stack better than offensive items, and some classes are more dependent on these items.




In my last campaign, my five 13th level players defeated a CR 22 blackguard death night with no loss of life.  They simplely had good equipment.  Then they whined because I do not give them enough xp as if I should have counted them an EL 13 party rather than the EL 17 or 18 they were because of superior equipment.

Heck, I figured they would have RUN away from the death knight as I had been playing up how dangerous they were since they had been 3rd level.

I have found that my players enjoy the game much more when they find random equipment as part of treasure or make it themselves.  A character means more when they find creative uses of the equipment they have rather than being optimized for equipment.  They seem to have a lot more fun when they are challenged on a deeper level than throw monster x four times a night then rinse and reuse.


----------



## jasper (Jan 28, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> And generally speaking, buying and selling magic items are NOT conventions of the genre.
> 
> Let's see... Conan and the Phoenix Sword? found in a tomb
> 
> ...




Harry potter bought his wand off the shelf and had thousands to choose from.
Found is owl in shop
His broom of flying was mail order and delievered by owl

some one mention money from treasure is not fiat money or real money authorized by the realm. That depends on how complex and detailed your world is. With the standard of money changers (if anyone uses them) you would have the case of Jasper the moneychanger in Greyhawk exchanging 140 silver minted from Castle GreySkull to 100 Greyhawk silver. This would include the official exchange rate and his cut. Or just do the 10% cut to  keep things interesting.


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Now, rule 1 is of course, the DM sets the rules..




No

Rule Nr1 Everyone is to`ve fun.

Followed by t
The Fair Judgement of the GM.



			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I see it as a recognition of the reality that in any environment in which valuable items exist, a market will arise in which people buy and sell such items. History teaches us that valuable items _will_ be bought and sold. No matter how "sacred" or "cool" the thing in question might seem to be, people will sell it if there are people willing to buy it. There is no persuasive reason for magic items to be an exception.




Amen, the silk road had this name fora reason.



			
				Turanil said:
			
		

> If you go to the magic shop with your big bag full of 50,000 gp or so to get a +5 stuff, this isn't magic anymore. This is the fantasy equivalent of a modern technological equipment. As such, IMO it loses all flavor of what magic is supposed to represent.




In D&D Magic is theequivalent of technology.



			
				Hitokiri said:
			
		

> DM's do have absolute power, it kinda comes with the title.
> .




No, only Power GMs have them.
A good GM hold himself bond at the rules of the group.



			
				Mallus said:
			
		

> For example, if you're shooting for Tolkienesque epic fantasy, magic shops (and beholders) are right out....




If i´m shooting for Tolkienlike fantasy I wouldn`t use core D&D, also goes for Conan.



			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> There are plenty of persuasve reasons for why you wouldn't have a magic _shop_ -- and especially why you wouldn't have one conveniently nearby, that you could easily locate, that had what you were looking to buy sitting on a shelf.
> 
> Buying a powerful magic item is a bit like buying a man-portable F-22 built by da Vinci.  It's a _tremendously_ concentrated store of wealth (i.e., it's easy to steal), it's a potent weapon (i.e., the state expects to control it), very few people can create anything like it (there's no mass production), and very few people can legitimately afford to buy it (and know how to use it).




No, the "state" in standard D&D isn`t a modern state, where your right to own weapons etc is legallyrestricted.
It`s a "feudal" State where every knight owns heavy arms, and every freeman is expected often forced to´ve arms.

Where theprivacy ownership of warships(orat least warworthy) is more common than of the state or better king



			
				fusangite said:
			
		

> I'm guessing that the campaign world is the good old fashioned pseudo-medieval D&D world. If that's the case, the most important thing to realize is that in the pre-modern world, there aren't shops in the modern sense of the idea; anything expensive or worthwhile was commissioned. .



Knightly Plate armour was mass produced in the Rhineland and the Ruhr territorry,
Kings ordered weapnas and armour in the thousands for their troops





> Now, I suppose the characters could go to a local temple or mages' guild to commission magic items for a special purpose. The people at that place would not only be selling very expensive materials in exchange for gold; they would also be selling their XP.



For special Items go better to the Alchemists/Thaumaturgists/Magesmith guilds, they are specialoced in making such items.

XP are an outgame Mechanic.

Wieland the smith forged Weaponsand armour(who protected better than rune magic), his own blade Mimung  cut Hildegrim, the work of an dwarven Master Smith*, topieces.

*Thesame Smith Alberich forged also Nagelring, for which to harden thesmith seached in a dozen Kingdoms or so, to find the right water.

Heroes and Kings came to Wieland tolet him craft Weapons, Armour and maybe magic jewelry.


----------



## Azgulor (Jan 28, 2005)

Here's another argument against the olde magic shoppe - the heist.  Maybe the players feel cheated, maybe an item costs too much.  Whatever the reason, the players get the idea of robbing the shop, obtaining some cool new toys, and selling the items they don't want/need for $$$$.

Now, before everyone goes overboard providing magical defenses equal to Fort Knox for said shop, remember that most of these shops would presumably be in cities or at large towns, the shops are likely to appear as any other building, be built very close to surrounding buildings, etc. so strong external defenses would likely be poorly received by the local authorities.  ("I don't care if that fireball is a magical theft-deterrent, you fried 8 citizens walking in the street!")  Also, it's a shop, so lethal traps in the showroom might not work very well.  Also, the shop keeper is presumably running the place to make a profit - excessive security measures add expenses that may be cost prohibitive.  If the shopkeeper is a high level mage, he can probably summon/conjure what he needs, but I have yet to encounter a player who makes a spellcaster and says "Thurfgar's goal is to become powerful enough to open his own magic shop!"

I do, however, believe the purchase and sale of magic items make sense in the following two cases: the "alchemist" who sells easily-produced items such as potions, scrolls, etc. and the "private collector" - the affluent citizen who buys and/or sells items that are of historical interest, add to his/her power, are cultural curiosities, etc.  They would be rich enough to own that villa/mansion with the perimeter wall, can make sizeable "contributions" to the government for any curious habits or unfortunate consequences. ("Yes, it's unfortunate the displacer beast escaped, let me pay the funeral expenses and taxes of the slain citizens.  Oh, and I heard the council has finally agreed to build a new barracks, here's a donation towards the project...")

By the way, the heist scenario happened in two separate campaigns with different players.  Given the habits of adventurers, it's pretty easy for them to conclude, it's a low-med risk for high reward.  One group liked the idea so well they began considering traveling to other cities expressly for the purpose of knocking over the magic shops.  The olde magic shoppe made no appearances in later campaigns....

Azgulor


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> In D&D Magic is theequivalent of technology.




Bull.





			
				sword-dancer said:
			
		

> A good GM hold himself bond at the rules of the group.




No one disputes that statement.  However, the rules for the game are set when the campaign begins.  They do not change due to player whim during a campaign.  If a player wants a different set of rules, then they are free to be the GM.

In fact, any of my old group were free to GM.  If a player does not like the game, then they should find a new game or agree to GM.  I would have been more than happy to play for a change.

In my experience, players who whine that the RAW must be enforced at all costs want to make certain that they control the game and dictate how it is played and do not care in the slightest whether the GM has fun.  These players NEVER GM.  

Or these types of players want the RAW strictly enforced when they play, but strictly enforce their own set of standards when they GM because it is a control issue.

I have seen both types of player and will not longer game with the type.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> Knightly Plate armour was mass produced in the Rhineland and the Ruhr territorry,
> Kings ordered weapnas and armour in the thousands for their troops




A few problems with this statement:
(a) for most of the medieval period, there was not plate armour so your example refers only to the late medieval period 
(b) when armour was mass-produced it was produced for military campaigns using state resources at the behest of the state; it was not mass-produced and then kept in inventory on spec in the anticipation that someone might buy it
(c) the situation you are describing here is not maintaining an inventory in anticipation of sale; it is a very large-scale commission


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> A few problems with this statement:
> (a) for most of the medieval period, there was not plate armour so your example refers only to the late medieval period



Yes, at thesame or later times as most D&D worlds are.


(







> b) when armour was mass-produced it was produced for military campaigns



Or for the knighting, or forming of an "standing" armed force like the ordonnance Companies of the Dauphin or france, or the house troops of kings and Princes.



> it was not mass-produced and then kept in inventory on spec in the anticipation that someone might buy it



it was buyerssend or go to the Ruhr/rhineland and searched for fitting pieces of armour.



			
				BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> Bull..
> RAW




Meaning?



			
				Azgulor said:
			
		

> Here's another argument against the olde magic shoppe - the heist.  Maybe the players feel cheated, maybe an item costs too much.  Whatever the reason, the players get the idea of robbing the shop, obtaining some cool new toys, and selling the items they don't want/need for $$$$.



If they could get past the defences of said shop, who should be to difficult to make it worth, and if they found the Items still there.

1 I don`t need any excuses to use deadly force at my own territory to fight illegal intruders.
2 I don`t bet, that MI at least the better ones, actually stored in the shop.



> Also, it's a shop, so lethal traps in the showroom might not work very well.  Also, the shop keeper is presumably running the place to make a profit - excessive security measures add expenses that may be cost prohibitive.



This depends on what the shop normally sells.
Look at a modern Bank, Jewelry and so on.
Also the security is partz of the Price tag.


----------



## National Acrobat (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Maybe the word buy should be more clearly defined from the original poster.  Usually the word buy (dictionary.com) is used to refer to exchanges made with money, credit, species, etc.  Exchange for magical items or services would not be "buy"ing in this sense, and would usually be referred to as bartering.  And so there would be no market, even if the goods were able to be acquired.




To clarify, my players (since I am the original poster) may not buy magic items with any meaning of the word buy.

The only exception to the rule is potions and scrolls, which they may buy from their own temple if they are a divine class or from the wizard's guild if they are an arcane caster who is a member.

I give magic items as treasure, loot and rewards, and I choose the items that I place to ensure that the party has a balance of needed items appropriate for the challenges they will face, and to ensure that no one character has more items or more powerful items than any other player.

I think that should clear it up.

They certainly recieve enough gold to where those in the party who could create items would, and to be honest, the other characters (and their players) have offered to pay said players above and beyond the value to create items. They simply won't do it.


----------



## Bryan898 (Jan 28, 2005)

My question to the people who don't allow magical items to be sold (I'm one) is this:  Do you allow PCs to commission something to be made?  I know that quite a few people said that they stressed item creation feats in the party, but is this person supposed to create everything for the party?  For example, if you have a ranger with a favored enemy of undead who wants a disruption weapon, yet the only spellcaster is a wizard (who doesn't have access to the heal spell), can he commission it from the local clergy or druids?  What if he had to do a quest for them?  On another note, could he quest for such an item as the Paladin would quest for his holy sword?  

Personally, I allow rather easy access to items like a suit of +5 Plate Mail, or +5 Longsword if the PC is willing to take the time to get it.  When I played if I saw a +5 Longsword as compared to a +1 Longsword I wouldn't get any sense of wonder... If in the same token I found a +1 Flaming Burst Longsword I would think it a lot cooler than the +5 Longsword.  I also found that some of the more enjoyable items I've ever had were ones that one of my paladin created.  The DM allowed me to spend several days in prayer at the local church to have my weapon better affect evil, the creation cost was given in tithing and the XP cost payed by the character.  Occasionally I had to do some minor quest for my deity, but it wasn't anything major.  The item had a real feel of being part of the character, and something that he worked hard for as he paid the cost for it.  I would much rather my players have weapons they grow with, than new weapons they find or buy.


----------



## Staffan (Jan 28, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> A quasi-Roman setting might feature fairly sophisticated markets.  A quasi-Venetian setting might, too.  A Tolkien-esque, Anglo-Saxon setting would not.  There's a lot of "friction" in a pre-capitalist economy, just like in a modern black market.



The default "civilization level" of human society in D&D is a lot closer to Galileo than to William the Conqueror.


----------



## Staffan (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> And what did he spend the money on?
> 
> If it is magic items then you are using circular reference.  The market for magic items has to be there before the artificer is willing to sell XP for GP.  And the people have to be willing to sell XP for GP before there is a market for magic items.  Critical Mass much first be reached.



IIRC, he spent most of it on components for more magic items - there aren't many other expensive pieces of equipment a PC would want. He also spent a bunch on getting a nice place to live.

Also, it should be noted that the party is based out of one of the biggest cities in the world, so if there's a market for magic anywhere it's there.


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> The funny thing about this thread is that is further highlights the 3e divide.  Even in an area where the GM should have full control, magic item distribution, you get a rules argument that a certain level of items are owed to the players and that it is a rule!.



I considered a guideline/rule of thumb...
If your PCsare sohould be ready for facing Challengerating X they should beLevel Y and `ve the appropiate gear fpr that Level.



			
				Mallus said:
			
		

> But any civil society developed enough to have that kind of market economy is also going to have laws restricting the sale of goods that represent a massive threat to its stability. When you're talking magic the correct analogy is the arms trade. Often in WMD's. ...




Normally foreigners/Non Citicen wouldn`t be allowed to sray overnight in a city, and even Knights or at last lesser nobility wouldn`t be allowed with weapons and armour in a city.



			
				BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> Oh yes....please keep giving examples of organizations that are post printing press.




The Hanse?



			
				Vigilance said:
			
		

> I keep seeing this argument.
> 
> In effect people are saying that those of us who feel magic items shouldnt be bought/sold are stupid.
> k



No, wrong in the standard CS.





> *Samurai Swords*
> 
> The makers of these weapons were quickly snatched up the ruling military elite. In many cases individual lords seeking an advantage over their foes. These lords would give these weapons to their followers, in order to gain an edge in the civil wars of the era.




1st the last Sword i want to use on a battlefield is the katana, the steel is of low Qualitie.
This is a Problem of the Japanese Mines not of their Craft.
2 Most Bushi fought with Yari/Spear and Bow
3 No army had the sword as a main weapon.
4 Farmers in Japan were known as on swordsman, they were allowed to own the katana, the wakizashi was priviliged to the nobility and the samurai.
As Hideyoshi disarmed the farmersm hecalled their weapns in to make buddhastatues of them, great benefit tokarma and so on.




> *Relics in Medieval Europe*
> 
> These items were quickly snatched up by the ruling religious and cultural elite. In many cases these items were used to consecrate important events and places, but were occasionally given to those undertaking a quest (relics accompanied Crusaders if I am not mistaken).
> Sometimes they were sold... but still only to the faithful.



Or stolen.
The bycanteanssold the hedgecrown of Christ to Louis the saint.
The Banner of Outremer or the Patriarch of Outremer marcged to war with a Piece of the true cross.
But relics of saints were sold and given freely through europe.



> In both cases... there were numerous conmen



Sometimes the bishops.




> Does anyone thing the sale of powerful items would not be regulated? Even +1 swords would be watched by the wise ruler. If someone were to acquire a few hundred of them (over a long period of time) they could mount an effective military force.



Only if you`ve enough Quality Soldiers to use them efficient, and if you´ve the äquivalent of the Knights Templar against you, a few swords+1 1 were the very last of your concerns.


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Hi Reanjr, nice to see someone making good use of the "flurry of posts" class feature




Yeah, I usually do most of my posting from work; if I don't respond to comments message by message, I'd quickly lose track of what I was going to say as I was interrupted by responsibility.


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

Bryan898 said:
			
		

> My question to the people who don't allow magical items to be sold (I'm one) is this:  Do you allow PCs to commission something to be made?  I know that quite a few people said that they stressed item creation feats in the party, but is this person supposed to create everything for the party?  For example, if you have a ranger with a favored enemy of undead who wants a disruption weapon, yet the only spellcaster is a wizard (who doesn't have access to the heal spell), can he commission it from the local clergy or druids?  What if he had to do a quest for them?  On another note, could he quest for such an item as the Paladin would quest for his holy sword?




Yes, the ranger could commission the item or quest for it.  In the case of commissioning, the ranger would need to find the right church.  Either the Ranger would need to find a church whose goal was eradicating undead or one that was somehow aligned with the PCs or party.  The Ranger would then have to offer something to the church or perform some deed for them.

As for the quest, the Ranger could gather the information needed to find the location of an undead slaying sword.

Heck, I love to see this type of thing because it can really help to flesh out the story, the world, and the character.


----------



## Klaus (Jan 28, 2005)

National Acrobat -> Take a look at the recent Rules of the Game article series in the WotC site. In part 7, Skip Williams mention a variant guideline that lets other characters constribute with the XP for making Magic Items. If the players who want the items can chalk up the XP and gp, maybe the players-who-won't-make-items will warm up to the idea.

Also, show them a couple of items they *could* make with the resources they have available. If it's something they really want, they might warm up to the idea.

Thirdly, nowhere in the core rules does it say that there are magic shops. The rules state the gold piece limit of communities. By simply saying that no community in your campaign has a gp limit higher than 1800 gp, you rule communities that sell magic arms and armor (since those start at 2000 gp).


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> I considered a guideline/rule of thumb...
> If your PCs are should be ready for facing Challenge rating X they should be Level Y and have the appropiate gear for that Level.




Not at all.  I design the challenges.  I give out the equipment and experience.  Thus, it is relatively easy to design encounters that challenge the PCs.  And I never design a challenge for my players that has no solution.

Thus, wealth by level is irrelevant.  There is nothing they NEED that will not be provided.  Wealth by level and the CR system is a guideline.  Not a rule set in stone.  They are good for inexperienced GMs and give provide an example.

An experienced GM should feel free to create his/her own set of guidelines for PC awards.

Heck, I no longer even use the CR system for XP.  Instead, I assign a specific amount of XP for each goal completed, length of time for game session, and role playing.  XP in my game does not come from killing stuff, although I do make sure to get a general idea of the worth of encounters when designing the goal awards.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Bill Gates, that guy from Ikea, and the Wal-Mart familiy combined could not buy the Sistine Chapel.  Are you trolling?




We aren't talking about buying the Sistine Chapel, however (which would, in D&D magic item terms, be an artifact).

We're talking about buying a church (rare, maybe not available here).

And since, in Boston, at least, there's an _apartment complex_ that's a remodeled church, it's doable.

So, are *you* trolling?


----------



## reanjr (Jan 28, 2005)

Bryan898 said:
			
		

> My question to the people who don't allow magical items to be sold (I'm one) is this:  Do you allow PCs to commission something to be made?  I know that quite a few people said that they stressed item creation feats in the party, but is this person supposed to create everything for the party?  For example, if you have a ranger with a favored enemy of undead who wants a disruption weapon, yet the only spellcaster is a wizard (who doesn't have access to the heal spell), can he commission it from the local clergy or druids?  What if he had to do a quest for them?  On another note, could he quest for such an item as the Paladin would quest for his holy sword?




If it's an item that fits the character concept and something I agree the player should have story-wise, then I will usually place an appropriate item (usually greatly changed; I rarely use magic items from the DMG) somewhere in the world and somehow have the information that the item exists filter on through to the party.  They may then quest for item itself, rather than for someone else to make it for them.



> Personally, I allow rather easy access to items like a suit of +5 Plate Mail, or +5 Longsword if the PC is willing to take the time to get it.  When I played if I saw a +5 Longsword as compared to a +1 Longsword I wouldn't get any sense of wonder... If in the same token I found a +1 Flaming Burst Longsword I would think it a lot cooler than the +5 Longsword.  I also found that some of the more enjoyable items I've ever had were ones that one of my paladin created.  The DM allowed me to spend several days in prayer at the local church to have my weapon better affect evil, the creation cost was given in tithing and the XP cost payed by the character.  Occasionally I had to do some minor quest for my deity, but it wasn't anything major.  The item had a real feel of being part of the character, and something that he worked hard for as he paid the cost for it.  I would much rather my players have weapons they grow with, than new weapons they find or buy.




That's one of the reasons I don't let players buy magic.  I would never give someone something as mundane as a longsword +4.  I'd much rather give them a khopesh used by some ancient king that casts mass suggestion once per week and light three times per day, and happens to be a +2 weapon.  I also have alchemical versions of potions where it makes sense (no alchemical fly potions, for instance).  Rather than give a player a wand of cure light wounds, he's got a pouch filled with soil and maggots.  By crushing a maggot and smearing it in his wounds, it acts as a cure light wounds after a few minutes.  The maggots themselves are mundane and can be found in nature, but the bag is magically enchanted to keep up to 10 maggots fed and healthy inside.  Each week there are missing maggots (less than 10), I roll 1d10; if the result is less than or equal to the number of maggots, one of them asexually reproduces and he gets a new maggot.  This magical bag was gifted to him by the shaman of his tribe after he discovered an approaching enemy and saved the tribe.  Or I could have let him buy a wand of cure light wounds as he wanted...  I don't know, to me the "bag of worms" (as it is serendipitously referred to as) is a much better item to have in the game.


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

Klaus said:
			
		

> National Acrobat -> Take a look at the recent Rules of the Game article series in the WotC site. In part 7, Skip Williams mention a variant guideline that lets other characters constribute with the XP for making Magic Items. If the players who want the items can chalk up the XP and gp, maybe the players-who-won't-make-items will warm up to the idea.




We started doing this around a year before 3.5 came out.  You'd be surprised at how few peole actually used this method.


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> Yes, the ranger could commission the item or quest for it.  In the case of commissioning, the ranger would need to find the right church.  Either the Ranger would need to find a church whose goal was eradicating undead .



Let me get that clear, a church in your campaign expect to be rewarded, thar someone further their goal?



			
				BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> Not at all.  I design the challenges.  I give out the equipment and experience.  Thus, it is relatively easy to design encounters that challenge the PCs.  And I never design a challenge for my players that has no solution..




And the relevance to my post is?

.  







> Instead, I assign a specific amount of XP for each goal completed,  ... XP in my game does not come from killing stuff,



maybe they changed that in 3.5 but IIRC XP were gained for overcoming obstacles.



> role playing.




Perhaps you could give me an objective definition how to measure role playing that it would be an objective and fair to give XP for it.


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> Let me get that clear, a church in your campaign expect to be rewarded, thar someone further their goal?




Yep.  No church is going to make something for someone just because they ask for it.  That person will need to prove that they deserve the item.  After all, the church will be directly harmed if someone misuses an item they made specifically for them.



			
				sword-dancer said:
			
		

> maybe they changed that in 3.5 but IIRC XP were gained for overcoming obstacles.




As the GM, I set the obstacles/ challenges.  



			
				sword-dancer said:
			
		

> Perhaps you could give me an objective definition how to measure role playing that it would be an objective and fair to give XP for it.




Depends.  There are objective and subjective RP awards.  Everyone agrees at the end of the night who did the best RP job and they get and award.  Below is another set of more objective RP awards.


Action	Example	Award
Donations to NPCs	1000 gold (4th level) = 250 xp	1 gold / level = 1 xp
Successful Diplomacy	Negotiate NPC change of behavior	10 xp x DC
Successful Bluff	Talk your way past the guards	10 xp x DC
Successful Intimidation	Extract information from NPC	10 xp x DC
Successful Perform	Impress an Audience	10 xp x DC (must aim)
Play a Quirk	Get Drunk before a dungeon crawl	50 xp to 200xp
Play Alignment to one's Disadvantage	CE character threatens an NPC with valuable information.	100 xp to 400xp
Ignore Alignment to one's advantage.	NG character uses threats against commoners to get information	-200 xp to -500xp
Support Party	Make effort to encourage self and others to work with PL.	100 xp to 400xp
Hinder Party	Resists the plans of the PL and/or hampers the play or party unity.	-100 xp to -total award
Establish a Relationship	Make a friend of an NPC alchemist	10 xp x DC
Make a Good Soliloquy	Give a speech to townsfolk	50 xp
Stay in Character	Use 1st person, avoid rules terms	100xp (whole session)
Enhance Genre to own detriment	Sleep out of armor, carry real food, eschew watches, go unarmed in town, force marches, keep fires, etc.	50xp to 200xp


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> Perhaps you could give me an objective definition how to measure role playing that it would be an objective and fair to give XP for it.




And sometimes, it is a GM call.  Subjective rulings do not automatically equate with unfair.  Not everything can be measured and quantified.  It is a ROLEplaying game.  Everything is not meant to be quantified.  If you want number heavy and extreme quantification, then there is always the computer.

In a game designed for the imagination, then you had better expect some degree of subjectivity.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jan 28, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> We aren't talking about buying the Sistine Chapel, however (which would, in D&D magic item terms, be an artifact).
> 
> We're talking about buying a church (rare, maybe not available here).




I wanted to add the following:

In many cases, you aren't even talking about buying churches.

You're talking about buying statuary or ornamentation that *used* to be in a church.  Again, still rare, but there's a dealer in Boston who specializes in such things.

So, still doable.


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> Yep.  No church is going to make something for someone just because they ask for it.  That person will need to prove that they deserve the item.  After all, the church will be directly harmed if someone misuses an item they made specifically for them.




There is a difference between proving his worth/trustworth and rewarding/paying.





> As the GM, I set the obstacles/ challenges.



  Meaning?



Depends.  There are objective and subjective RP awards.  Everyone agrees at the end of the night who did the best RP job and they get and award.  Below is another set of more objective RP awards.




> Action	Example	Award
> Donations to NPCs	1000 gold (4th level) = 250 xp	1 gold / level = 1 xp
> Successful Diplomacy	Negotiate NPC change of behavior	10 xp x DC
> Successful Bluff	Talk your way past the guards	10 xp x DC
> ...



These are nothing else than buying XP and overcoming obstacles.




> Play a Quirk	Get Drunk before a dungeon crawl	50 xp to 200xp






> Play Alignment to one's Disadvantage	CE character threatens an NPC with valuable information.	100 xp to 400xp



Disadvantage?


> Ignore Alignment to one's advantage.	NG character uses threats against commoners to get information	-200 xp to -500xp



Ignoring Alignment?


> Support Party	Make effort to encourage self and others to work with PL.	100 xp to 400xp
> Hinder Party	Resists the plans of the PL and/or hampers the play or party unity.	-100 xp to -total award



Roleplay XP? I would call Plot following XP



> Establish a Relationship	Make a friend of an NPC alchemist	10 xp x DC]



Overcoming Obstacle, build an advantage


> Make a Good Soliloquy	Give a speech to townsfolk	50 xp
> Stay in Character	Use 1st person, avoid rules terms	100xp (whole session)
> Enhance Genre to own detriment	Sleep out of armor, carry real food, eschew watches, go unarmed in town, force marches, keep fires, etc.	50xp to 200xp



What if these actsaaredetriment to the Character concept, and btw is perfectly possible, but not convenient, to sleep in armour, whichleads to theinteresting Quetion why thePCs do this?
If every 5 Minutes dark Elven Vampire Assassins with poisoned Adamanteen swords +7 pop out of the Limbo it`s perfectly justified and reasonable, it not to do would be the mistake.
In safe cities and so on my PCs usually don`t wear (heavy/medium at least) armour and weapons(except for Stament like it has ab symbolcal/spiritual etc meaning)


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> Not at all.  I design the challenges.  I give out the equipment and experience.  Thus, it is relatively easy to design encounters that challenge the PCs.  And I never design a challenge for my players that has no solution..




And the relevance to my post is?

.  







> Instead, I assign a specific amount of XP for each goal completed,  ... XP in my game does not come from killing stuff,



maybe they changed that in 3.5 but IIRC XP were gained for overcoming obstacles.



> role playing.




Perhaps you could give me an objective definition how to measure role playing that it would be an objective and fair to give XP for it.


----------



## National Acrobat (Jan 28, 2005)

*Cool*



			
				Klaus said:
			
		

> National Acrobat -> Take a look at the recent Rules of the Game article series in the WotC site. In part 7, Skip Williams mention a variant guideline that lets other characters constribute with the XP for making Magic Items. If the players who want the items can chalk up the XP and gp, maybe the players-who-won't-make-items will warm up to the idea.
> 
> Also, show them a couple of items they *could* make with the resources they have available. If it's something they really want, they might warm up to the idea.
> 
> Thirdly, nowhere in the core rules does it say that there are magic shops. The rules state the gold piece limit of communities. By simply saying that no community in your campaign has a gp limit higher than 1800 gp, you rule communities that sell magic arms and armor (since those start at 2000 gp).




Thanks, this is just what I need. This will make things a lot easier. Cool.

As for the GP Limit for settlements,  I use that. The campaign takes place in a very remote, rural part of the world. Everyone likes the wilderness adventures and exploring, but the same pair grumble about the small villages and hamlets. 

However, the variant creation rules will be well used. The other players will love them.


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> And sometimes, it is a GM call.  Subjective rulings do not automatically equate with unfair.  Not everything can be measured and quantified.  It is a ROLEplaying game.  Everything is not meant to be quantified.  If you want number heavy and extreme quantification, then there is always the computer.
> 
> In a game designed for the imagination, then you had better expect some degree of subjectivity.




I expect, that everyplayer IMG plays his character as "good" as he can, in the way he envision his PC and how he expect to be the most fun.
With respect to the other players and my approval of fitting the Campaign.

If someone plays "worser" than the other, my first Question would be?
Where had I misunderstood the Character/Players desire

The second what goes wrong, what make I wrong ?

Abd that didn`t take into account that the "worser" player has less routine, is a less gifted actor or had an character who fals outside his normal stuff.

Is these anything deserving less XP?

I don`t believe I´d any right to educate any other player.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 28, 2005)

jasper said:
			
		

> Harry potter bought his wand off the shelf and had thousands to choose from.
> Found is owl in shop
> His broom of flying was mail order and delievered by owl
> 
> some one mention money from treasure is not fiat money or real money authorized by the realm. That depends on how complex and detailed your world is. With the standard of money changers (if anyone uses them) you would have the case of Jasper the moneychanger in Greyhawk exchanging 140 silver minted from Castle GreySkull to 100 Greyhawk silver. This would include the official exchange rate and his cut. Or just do the 10% cut to  keep things interesting.





Ok... for the nitpick impaired... when I pointed out Tolkien and Conan... do you think I am not aware there are other subgenre of fantasy out there?

My point was, by pointing out two of the pillars the game of D&D was built on (by Gygax's own admission)... NEITHER of which had handy dandy market economies of magic items, that it is clearly a legitimate choice for how you run your game.

If people want to run a Harry Potter game, more power to them. Sounds fun, I'd play.

If people want to run a Tolkien style game, which includes such irrationalities as Dragons, Elves, Dwarvwes, undead and *gasp* no market economy for magic... that is ALSO a legitimate choice.

As long as the game master is making legitimate choices... players should either stop whining, shut up and play or man up and run their own game. 

Chuck


----------



## Jack of Shadows (Jan 28, 2005)

National Acrobat said:
			
		

> Does anyone else have this problem? I'm old school, been playing DnD since 1979, and I have always been firm that players can't buy magic items. Without getting into the pros and cons of it, I never have and never will. It's just me and my style, and I am very up front with it when starting a new game or group. However I've noticed that with the advent of 3E, a few of my players are very adamant that the rules indicate that they are allowed to purchase magic items.
> 
> Now, rule 1 is of course, the DM sets the rules. I have never allowed this, and am fairly good about providing treasure in the form of items the party will need and will find useful and beneficial, and even after all of this, they are telling me that I am missing the boat on 3E rules.
> 
> Am I? I don't think I am, but some opinions and experiences would be helpful.




Well,

In my view, you are. Here's why. 3E assumes a certain amount of equipment is carried by characters at each level. This is an element of how CR's are determined. If a character has a large number of magic items they can't use or aren't motivated to use (A fighter specializing in axes with a pack full of magic longswords) or a trunk full of unspent gold, they aren't going to be comparable to an equal CR creature (assuming a party of 4 etc...). 

3E added this wonderful little tool that tells you the most expensive items you can buy within a settlement. Makes it very easy for a DM to determine what the characters CAN get their hands on. In my campaign the characters befriended a local merchant to do their buying for them. He regularly sends orders to the capitol at the players bequest. This of course takes 'time'. It also means that if I want to drag the players off somewhere I can have the merchant caravan raided. Nothing sets a group of players off like having their parcels pillaged (note: don't over use this ploy). 

Now, providing you're willing to adapt to the fact that the characters won't be up to the challenges a more "commercial" adventuring group would then by all means go with your own story. Just remember, players who are not having fun stop playing.

Jack


----------



## Belen (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> I expect, that everyplayer IMG plays his character as "good" as he can, in the way he envision his PC and how he expect to be the most fun.
> With respect to the other players and my approval of fitting the Campaign.
> 
> If someone plays "worser" than the other, my first Question would be?
> ...




There is a difference between making the attempt to roleplay and not roleplaying at all.  If someone comes to my tables and just rolls gather info etc all night long, speaks in the 3rd person, and just speaks in gamer speak, then they are SOL for RP award.

If someone tries, then that is all I require.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> 1st the last Sword i want to use on a battlefield is the katana, the steel is of low Qualitie.
> This is a Problem of the Japanese Mines not of their Craft.
> 2 Most Bushi fought with Yari/Spear and Bow
> 3 No army had the sword as a main weapon.
> ...




The mastercraftsmen in question made Bows, Swords and Spears. Did I really need to point that out? My point was that these craftsman were capable of making weapons that could tip the balance of power, and therefore those IN power took the material to make those weapons and the craftsmen capable of making it into their castles to gain an advantage over their rivals and to keep the peasants in line.

The analogy seems pretty clear here to magic weapons. If the peasant armies, led by the priests that took to the fields in revolt against the Samurai had been as well armed, do you think the Samurai would have prevailed? As it is a couple of these peasant revolts came dangerously close to succeeding, and one was only narrowly put down with the aid of Dutch ships firing cannons (another reason why the Japanese government kept modern gunpowder weapons out... even a good sword requires a lot of training to use... peasants can learn to use firearms effectively without a lot of training).

In other words... anything powerful enough to challenge the ruling elite (sophisticated firearms, high quality swords and spears, etc etc) was kept out of the hands of the ruled and in the hands of the rulers whenever possible.

This is a logical reason why there might not be any magic shops in a campaign. The government would see to the training of certain individuals (mages, priests, paladins) in an attempt to indoctrinate them and make them loyal to the state or king. They would also give these individuals significant societal perks (lands, titles, prestige, wealth) in an attempt to make them support the status quo (and thus the state) that was giving them these perqs.

Finally, they would regulate the items these individuals (the mages and the priests) could make so that anyone receiving them did so on the condition that they were supporting the state, not working against it.

Would this always work? No. Would revolts inevitably happen? Yes. Would items be sold by the churches and mage colleges who had them on the black market? Of course.

But all of this is dicier (and to my mind more compelling) than a Magic R Us Store.

Chuck


----------



## sword-dancer (Jan 28, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> There is a difference between making the attempt to roleplay and not roleplaying at all.  If someone comes to my tables and just rolls gather info etc all night long, speaks in the 3rd person, and just speaks in gamer speak, then they are SOL for RP award.
> 
> If someone tries, then that is all I require.




For what did he then come?


----------



## VirgilCaine (Jan 28, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Wizards are simply people with specific knowledge.  We do not outlaw the free exchange of knowledge among scientists.  In fact, the American nuclear bomb was only possible due to the knowledge we got from Russian scientists.  Russia was working on a bomb of their own, but they never outlawed the science behind it.  That's not to say all cultures would act like this, but there would at least be some, just as there would be some cultures who would allow the sale of magic, and some that would not.
> 
> An M16A2 is not a massive threat to stability, but they are still outlawed in many a country.




A mid-caliber bolt-action hunting rifle with a telscopic sight isn't, and neither is a small-caliber, concealable handgun, however the former was allegedly used, and the latter verfifiably used to assasinate U.S. Presidents. The latter was also used in several other assassinations or attempts--Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul II, Archduke Ferdinand. AFAIK.

The hunting rifle is legal in lots more countries than the handgun is, I'd bet.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 28, 2005)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Thirdly, nowhere in the core rules does it say that there are magic shops.



From the DMG 3.5, page 142: 







> The magic items described in Chapter 7 all have prices. The assumption is that, while they are rare, magic items can be bought or sold much as any other commodity can be. The prices given are far beyond the reach of almost everyone, but the very rich, including mid- to high- level PCs, can buy and sell these items or even have spellcasters make them to order. In very large cities, some shops might specialize in magic items if their clientele is very wealthy or includes a large number of adventurer [sic] (and such shops would have lots of magical protections to ward away thieves). Magic items might even be available in normal markets and shops occasionally. For example, a weaponsmith might have a few magic weapons for sale along with her normal wares.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 28, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> My point was, by pointing out two of the pillars the game of D&D was built on (by Gygax's own admission)... NEITHER of which had handy dandy market economies of magic items, that it is clearly a legitimate choice for how you run your game.



Gygax took the works of Tolkien and Howard (and those of many other writers) as inspiration and used elements from them to create something new. Something different. D&D is a genre in and of itself the nature of which can best be determined by reading the game rules.


			
				Vigilance said:
			
		

> If people want to run a Tolkien style game, which includes such irrationalities as Dragons, Elves, Dwarvwes, undead and *gasp* no market economy for magic... that is ALSO a legitimate choice.



But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 28, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.



In the core books I have, "default D&D" isn't expressed, its implied. What's expressly stated is that you should make the game you want to play...


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 28, 2005)

sword-dancer said:
			
		

> In D&D Magic is the equivalent of technology.



Word.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 28, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> Gygax took the works of Tolkien and Howard (and those of many other writers) as inspiration and used elements from them to create something new. Something different. D&D is a genre in and of itself the nature of which can best be determined by reading the game rules.
> But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.




Ummm... I see dwarves with guns in my DMG... and obviously... given the wide range of settings the game supports (Greyhawk, Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Thieves World, Black Company... and homebrews with no magic shops) Id say you cant make a blanket statement like that for any campaign you dont DM.

D&D is something creative... the rules are there as a springboard... not a cage.

I can game anyway I want and its just as "legitimate" as yours or anyone else's

Chuck


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 28, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> From the DMG 3.5, page 142:



So, the multiple use of the word "might" makes it a fact that magic shops exist in everyone's D&D game as per the RAW?

Got any other convincing gems?


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 28, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> I can game anyway I want and its just as "legitimate" as yours or anyone else's



But is it D&D?


----------



## Ourph (Jan 28, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> But is it D&D?




Who cares?

Seriously, what does that question have to do, in any way, with the subject of the thread?


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 28, 2005)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> So, the multiple use of the word "might" makes it a fact that magic shops exist in everyone's D&D game as per the RAW?
> 
> Got any other convincing gems?



There's no 'might' in this bit:







> The magic items described in Chapter 7 all have prices. The assumption is that, while they are rare, magic items can be bought or sold much as any other commodity can be.



So according to the DMG, in the default D&D universe, magic items _can_ be be bought and sold. I feel that's the main question here, and indeed was the one posed by the OP, rather than whether well-stocked magic shops exist. (IMC they don't, but that's irrelevant.) At least one poster in this thread stated that in his game magic items can't be bought for 'mere' money. I can only imagine that mere goods or mere services must be required instead.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> There's no 'might' in this bit:So according to the DMG, in the default D&D universe, magic items _can_ be be bought and sold. I feel that's the main question here, and indeed was the one posed by the OP, rather than whether well-stocked magic shops exist. (IMC they don't, but that's irrelevant.) At least one poster in this thread stated that in his game magic items can't be bought for 'mere' money. I can only imagine that mere goods or mere services must be required instead.




Whoa there!

In your campaign well stocked magic shops dont exist?!?

But the ASSUMPTION is that they will bought and sold "as much as any other commodity". Why that means that they should be freely available everywhere. 

So you are violating the TRUE D&D way just as much as I am. 

Chuck


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 29, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> But the ASSUMPTION is that they will bought and sold "as much as any other commodity". Why that means that they should be freely available everywhere.



The quote from the DMG does go on to stress that they are rare and expensive items.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.



I would not base any notion of artistic legitimacy on mere legal ownerships of trademarks.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 29, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> So you are violating the TRUE D&D way just as much as I am.




Let's not bait people, okay?  That goes for Doug, too.  Please keep the thread focused, instead of spiraling towards insults.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 29, 2005)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Let's not bait people, okay?




Understood

Chuck


----------



## Hitokiri (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.



This has to be the single most extreme sample of STUPID I've had the misfortune of reading.

Congrats Doug, you've made it onto the "The List" in a single post.  A new record I think.  Thank you for saving me the trouble of determining the validity of your posts, as I can now feel free to skip them as meaningless drivel.

AS for ad hoc exp. awards for RPing.  definately a good idea.  Remember folks, ALL of the rules in D&D are optional.  They are hints and guidelines, not straight jackets.


----------



## replicant2 (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> .But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.




What exactly are you implying here? That someone else's style of play is somehow inferior to the "one true way" of D&D?

Here's some news for you: there is no one true way to play D&D. There is no canon. The core books are rife with statements that the rules are flexible, and that imagination is the only limit on what form your world will ultimately take.

The core books are a flexible, ever-changing set of guidelines, at all times subject to rule zero. There is no "legitimate D&D that is."


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 29, 2005)

Change too many rules and what do you end up with? Powers & Perils. And no one wants that.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> Change too many rules and what do you end up with? Powers & Perils. And no one wants that.




Actually it appears that all one has to do to deviate from the true way is violate an assumption that appears in one paragraph of a 300 page book.

I never knew it was this strict.

Chuck


----------



## fusangite (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug,

Thanks for posting this text from the DMG. Although I agree with others that it contains a number of disturbing statements whose letter and spirit I intend to keep out of my games, it doesn't actually say what you claim it does. You produced this quote to argue that all D&D worlds must, by edict of the rules, contain magic shops. In fact, according to your own post, the DMG says, 


> In *very large cities*, *some* shops *might* specialize in magic items if their clientele is very wealthy or includes a large number of adventurer [sic] (and such shops would have lots of magical protections to ward away thieves).



Please find a requirement that all campaigns must have "very large cities" in them. Then find a requirement that all things that all things that are _permitted_ by the rules to exist in a D&D world are therefore _required_ to somewhere in every D&D world created. Does the existence the the Beholder in the MM require that all D&D worlds contain beholders?


----------



## replicant2 (Jan 29, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> Change too many rules and what do you end up with? Powers & Perils. And no one wants that.




What's so wrong about modifying rules for flavor? Maybe you enjoy campaigns where characters can go the nearest magic shop and swap their grandfather's +2 sword for a bigger and better +3 model. Others like magic rare and awe-inspiring.

Is it any "less D&D" to want to run a Lord of the Rings inspired campaign? How would that work if magic shops were scattered across Middle-Earth? "Hey Aragorn, Narsil is only +4, but if we throw that in with the Palantir we could get you an upgrade to a +5 holy avenger!"

The point is, by letting arbitrary rules dictate the shape of your campaign you're really limiting yourself.


----------



## ssampier (Jan 29, 2005)

*ye olde magic shoppe - gasp*

I consider myself a classic D&D fan, I like dwarves to be dwarves and elves to be elves, and my dungeons crawled. However, I have been warming up to the idea of buying magic items, simply because I cannot fanthom why they shouldn't. I encorporated this idea into my home brew, stating that one of the major faiths sells minor magic items, such as potions, scrolls, etc. The other major faith think this is a terrible idea and forces all sorts of unnecssary taxes, tithes, and restrictions to the buying and selling of magic items (not bad for a LN faith).


----------



## ragboy (Jan 29, 2005)

replicant2 said:
			
		

> The core books are a flexible, ever-changing set of guidelines, at all times subject to rule zero. There is no "legitimate D&D that is."




I think a lot of the 'add-ons' are flexible and ever-changing, but there's also a core set of 'precepts' that you can't get away from without the campaign spiraling out of control or putting yourself (as a DM) through a ton of work that ultimately probably yields little return. The d20 ruleset is so diverse now that you don't have to settle for D&D with a lot of custom mods if you want a different 'genre' of campaign. 

As a DM, I am the arbiter of the rules, but not the 'god' as in 1st edition AD&D. It's really a partnership between whomever's running the game and those that are playing. The contract explicitly states that you're all getting together to entertain each other. If it states anything like "I'm the god and you are my minions." or "We're not going to play unless +5 Vorpal butter knives are cast at our feet everywhere we go." then you're starting off on the wrong foot and your campaign is doomed to failure. But, that being said, the contract has to take both sides' 'styles' into account. If the players prefer Forgotten Realms and you prefer a low-magic gritty campaign, then unless someone compromises, neither side is going to be happy.

Anyway...


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 29, 2005)

ssampier said:
			
		

> I consider myself a classic D&D fan, I like dwarves to be dwarves and elves to be elves, and my dungeons crawled. However, I have been warming up to the idea of buying magic items, simply because I cannot fanthom why they shouldn't. I encorporated this idea into my home brew, stating that one of the major faiths sells minor magic items, such as potions, scrolls, etc. The other major faith think this is a terrible idea and forces all sorts of unnecssary taxes, tithes, and restrictions to the buying and selling of magic items (not bad for a LN faith).




This is a wholly legitimate way to play. 

Ive played in campaigns with magic shops and found them enjoyable.

My only bone of contention is that the reverse (no magic shops) is not a legitimate way to play "true D&D".

Chuck


----------



## replicant2 (Jan 29, 2005)

ragboy said:
			
		

> I think a lot of the 'add-ons' are flexible and ever-changing, but there's also a core set of 'precepts' that you can't get away from without the campaign spiraling out of control or putting yourself (as a DM) through a ton of work that ultimately probably yields little return. The d20 ruleset is so diverse now that you don't have to settle for D&D with a lot of custom mods if you want a different 'genre' of campaign.
> 
> As a DM, I am the arbiter of the rules, but not the 'god' as in 1st edition AD&D. It's really a partnership between whomever's running the game and those that are playing. The contract explicitly states that you're all getting together to entertain each other. If it states anything like "I'm the god and you are my minions." or "We're not going to play unless +5 Vorpal butter knives are cast at our feet everywhere we go." then you're starting off on the wrong foot and your campaign is doomed to failure. But, that being said, the contract has to take both sides' 'styles' into account. If the players prefer Forgotten Realms and you prefer a low-magic gritty campaign, then unless someone compromises, neither side is going to be happy.
> 
> Anyway...




I agree that the DM is not god, but nor should he be beholden to the core rulebooks. After all, what is canon in 3.5 was certainly not always so in 1E or 2E, and I'm sure changes -- perhaps quite major -- will be made for 4E.

Besides, the particular rule I'm advocating here is hardly a wholesale change or one that requires a ton of work. You can bypass magic shops by making players *want * to hold on to the magic they get. Make it rare, make it memorable. Put in a rule (as from Arcana Unearthed) where weapons "level up" with their users, and you've circumvented the problem of dimestore magic items pretty easily.


----------



## Shellman (Jan 29, 2005)

*Buying magic items.....*

First of all,

1. Your the DM, its your world and the PC's should have known this tidbit of info before you started this campaign.

2. There is absolutley nothing in 3.5 that states PC's must be able to buy Magic Items.

3. Your style of DM and type of campaign should drive that stuff in the game. If your campaign is in Forgotten Realms (a High Fantasy/ Magic world) then not allowing players to buy magic items can come across as too restricting.

4. If your not going to allow PC's to buy magic items, then you need to really make sure you allow them the opprtunity to find that stuff as treasure.

    I played a game with a DM that practically starved the PC's for both money and magic items. He tried to emphasize more of the roleplaying than combat, so the entire game was low magic. The problem was that he also required us to pay for training to level up, which compounded the problem of not being able to buy magic items or find enough gold to train.


----------



## Klaus (Jan 30, 2005)

Just to throw more wood into the fire:

There *is* a precedent in sword & sorcery literature for magic shops:

The Bazaar of the Bizarre.

Sure, it was a *spoiler* whose owners *spoiler* the *spoiler* in order to *spoiler*, but even then it *spoiler* some *spoiler*.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 30, 2005)

Indeed. And part of the point of Leiber's story is precisely that the idea is so absurd, a satirical mixing of topoi.


----------



## Numion (Jan 30, 2005)

I think that magic feels pretty wondrous in Harry Potter books, even though its for sale  

What do you think?


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 30, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> I think that magic feels pretty wondrous in Harry Potter books, even though its for sale
> 
> What do you think?




I think its a perfectly legitimate way to game.

As is the opposite.

In other words... its the GM's call... its a legitimate call for a campaign, and there's no need for whining.

Chuck


----------



## Numion (Jan 30, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> I think its a perfectly legitimate way to game.
> 
> As is the opposite.
> 
> ...




Of course, it's the DMs call. But I do think that players are entitled to whine or air their grievances with the game. If they're not enjoying their pastime, they're IMO free to express it, within limits of course. Just like with any other pastime. If I was doing anything else with my friends, I'd also be free to express how I feel about said pastime. If we were out on the beach and I got bored, or the beach was somehow cruddy, I'd say it.

Also I'm just giving an example that having items for sale doesn't necessarily take the wondrousness out of them.


----------



## fusangite (Jan 30, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> Of course, it's the DMs call. But I do think that players are entitled to whine or air their grievances with the game.



Nobody is entitled to whine in any social dynamic I am part of. People are entitled to _request_ things.


----------



## Numion (Jan 30, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Nobody is entitled to whine in any social dynamic I am part of. People are entitled to _request_ things.




Ok, maybe whine is the wrong word .. but I've only heard it used on inet forums, so I don't even know what might constitute real life whining in the sense we use the word here. Maybe I was wrong.


----------



## haakon1 (Jan 30, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> The risk aspect of buying magic items has popped up a couple of times in this thread. I'm not saying that it would be impossible, but, how likely would the Thieves Guild or whatnot to piss of characters who evidently have earned 50k (or whatever large sum they're spending) in adventuring?
> 
> It's about the same as a shady used cars salesman tried to sell a lemon to person he knew to be Magneto / Superman. The thieves know that these are very tough hombres. Maybe there would be easy pickings elsewhere ..




Scene from Conan the Barbarian:

Trader:  "Black lotus.  Stygian.  The best!"

Subtai (thief and archer):  "It better not be hagga!"

Trader: "I would sell hagga to a slayer such as you?"


----------



## haakon1 (Jan 30, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Picasso's are bought and sold. Perhaps you have heard of places like Sotheby's and Christie's?




Interesting.  Those places are in London & New York.  Which also happen to have the biggest stock exchanges, the world capital (UN Building), etc.  And of course, we're a world with with much better telecommunications than a typical D&D world, so that an oil sheik in Brunei can know about a 16th century Dutch painter and talk to the guy in London who can get it for him -- which makes it easier for the Londoner to make a living.

If we think more D&Dish economy -- let's think colonial America, would a colonial in Philly be able to get a Van Gogh?  There MIGHT be an art gallery in colonial Philly, or perhaps a rich collector who deals on the side, but he is unlikely to have anything more than minor (cheap) artists, most likely locals, in stock.  To get the Van Gogh, he needs to connect with Sotheby's back in London . . . if they even have it "in stock" (unlikely for an auction house), it will take months of shipping and guarding to get it to Philly.

Greyhawk analogy:  Magic shops are a DM option for places like Greyhawk and Rel Astra.  Places like Furyondy or Urnst or the Pale are likely too podunk for the really good stuff, but there might be somebody who deals in "local artists".  In other words, buying +1 short swords or CLW potions, that's a DM option.  Buying +5 holy avengers, again a DM option, but a bit silly without making it hard on the players and making them go to Greyhawk to buy it.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 30, 2005)

Numion said:
			
		

> Of course, it's the DMs call. But I do think that players are entitled to whine or air their grievances with the game. If they're not enjoying their pastime, they're IMO free to express it, within limits of course. Just like with any other pastime. If I was doing anything else with my friends, I'd also be free to express how I feel about said pastime. If we were out on the beach and I got bored, or the beach was somehow cruddy, I'd say it.
> 
> Also I'm just giving an example that having items for sale doesn't necessarily take the wondrousness out of them.




Players are entitled to air their grievances. According to the original poster, they did that, he explained why he did things the way he did and why he felt no reason to change.

That's an airing of grievances. Ultimately its the DM's call. He is making a legitimate campaign decision. Everything in the book is his call. 

When they continue to bring up the same point again and again... harping on it... that's whining, its immature... and its lame. 

As for shops making items less "wondrous" I never made that claim, anymore than I have claimed that not allowing items to be bought and sold like any other commodity automatically makes them "wondrous".

What I am contending is that the GM has the right to alter the game mechanics to suit the style of campaign he wants to run. Almost all published settings do this that aren't aiming to run a Forgotten Realms style campaign, the type of campaign that 3E was designed for (in my humble opinion). 

If the players cant be adult and accept that not everything in the game will suit their desires, in my opinion they have three adult choices: 1) run their own game 2) act like an adult and just play (I honestly cannot believe that the inability to buy magic items could harm your game experience to the point that you need to complain about more than once) 3) find another game that suits their tastes better.

Chuck


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 30, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> This is still a style consideration.  My players may feel free to earn as much money as they want.  If that is really the number for an orc's value, then that's just absurd.  The designers would have to be on crack.  (I'm not saying they weren't, just that it is the first reasonable explanation I could think of).  Suffice to say that my orcs' large, ugly leather armor doesn't go for much, and neither does his shoddy short/long/great-sword (only 20/x2 and less hardness).



The lowly mage goes off and makes 100 scrolls of the various spells he knows, doubling his cash every time he sells them off. It takes him roughly 3 months to do the whole lot. That's how little the XP from the orc is really worth to him. At a guess, even nonadventurers can gain enough XP to balance out a full-time crafting job. So this talk about "XP is too valuable to ever sell" is rubbish.


> If there is reasonably a buyer for something, then the players can sell it.  But sometimes they can not.  And if they enter a town with a wagon full of old equipment, the authorities are not likely to believe they are not merchants, and so should be taxed for importation of goods.  They better be careful if they try to sell one of those items, cause they very well might get hit for evading taxes.



Why the hell do you think that PC's are expected to only get half the value of an item when they sell it? Are they getting screwed on every single deal? NO. They ARE paying taxes.


> Stockpiles of magic items are exactly what draw other groups of adventurers.  And there's no telling what level they are.



Since this is a stockpile of backup gear, probably lower level than the PC's that stowed it? Therefore unlikely to bust through and get the stuff before the adventuring party pops home... And if they're high level, then either they're stockpiling it themselves, OR they're selling it for cash.


> I don't see how magic not being saleable removes any more plotlines than making magic buyable.



Did you read the post, or were you too busy hitting "submit reply" and carefully editing entries from dictionary.com to match your argument? Pretty much everything I responded to was "selling and buying is more difficult - to buy or sell magic you must perform plot hook X". The only plot hook you get from banning magic trade is "gee guys, we need some magic, lets go searching for the ancient gee-gaw of boredom".


----------



## drothgery (Jan 30, 2005)

haakon1 said:
			
		

> Interesting.  Those places are in London & New York.  Which also happen to have the biggest stock exchanges, the world capital (UN Building), etc.  And of course, we're a world with with much better telecommunications than a typical D&D world, so that an oil sheik in Brunei can know about a 16th century Dutch painter and talk to the guy in London who can get it for him -- which makes it easier for the Londoner to make a living.
> 
> If we think more D&Dish economy -- let's think colonial America, would a colonial in Philly be able to get a Van Gogh?  There MIGHT be an art gallery in colonial Philly, or perhaps a rich collector who deals on the side, but he is unlikely to have anything more than minor (cheap) artists, most likely locals, in stock.  To get the Van Gogh, he needs to connect with Sotheby's back in London . . . if they even have it "in stock" (unlikely for an auction house), it will take months of shipping and guarding to get it to Philly.




It's been mentioned up-thread that major auction houses -- and stock exchanges, for that matter -- predate anything resembling modern communications by centuries. Moreover, in a D&D world magical communication and transportation _is_ available.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 30, 2005)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> The only plot hook you get from banning magic is "gee guys, we need some magic, lets go searching for the ancient gee-gaw of boredom".




Gee let's see... since I believe the state would realistically make the skills to make magic items and then use those items something taught as part of an indoctrination process to support the government (instead of overthrowing it)... 

sort of like the way swordsmiths in ancient Japan were taught that their art of swordmaking was a Shinto religious rite which required them to be spotless in character and serve a higher power (the gods... from whom the Emperor and thus the state were descended)... 

And then the users of those weapons, the Samurai... underwent a process that started at about age 6 that included how important it was to be a faultless servant and never disobey their superiors (the Daimyo... the guys in charge)...

I see the following plotline possibilities by banning sale of magic items:

1) PCs are assigned to hunt down a cult of rogue magicians selling magic items to the local thieves' guild in order to finance a planned coup against the local government

2) PCs are given a quest by the only authorities licensed to make magic weapons and armor (the local temple)... perhaps #1... in order to gain access to those services...

3) A collector of fine wares has kidnapped the most brilliant maker of magic weapons who has ever lived in order to create a copy of the famed sword that slew Emperor Lucius IV

4) After rescuing the swordsmith the PCs learn he has already completed his masterpiece... upon searching the house of the collector the PCs find the weapon has been stolen and now must hunt it down before it falls into the wrong hands...

Hmmm... and not a geegaw in sight.

Chuck


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 30, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Gee let's see... since I believe the state would realistically make the skills to make magic items and then use those items something taught as part of an indoctrination process to support the government (instead of overthrowing it)...
> 
> sort of like the way swordsmiths in ancient Japan were taught that their art of swordmaking was a Shinto religious rite which required them to be spotless in character and serve a higher power (the gods... from whom the Emperor and thus the state were descended)...
> 
> And then the users of those weapons, the Samurai... underwent a process that started at about age 6 that included how important it was to be a faultless servant and never disobey their superiors (the Daimyo... the guys in charge)...



Hints: The ellipsis is to be used to signify something meaningful being left out, not wherever you might think to pause - use a full stop instead. "And" is not the beginning of a sentence. Capitalize. This part of your post was very difficult to read. The rest was a lot better.


> I see the following plotline possibilities by banning sale of magic items:
> 
> 1) PCs are assigned to hunt down a cult of rogue magicians selling magic items to the local thieves' guild in order to finance a planned coup against the local government



So sales of magic items are occurring. Just like I said - plotline spawned of magical item sales.


> 2) PCs are given a quest by the only authorities licensed to make magic weapons and armor (the local temple)... perhaps #1... in order to gain access to those services...



Ahhh, so the PC's are exchanging services for magical items. In other words they are (despite reanjr's incomplete dictionary quote) buying them. Another plot spawned via the trade of magic items.


> 3) A collector of fine wares has kidnapped the most brilliant maker of magic weapons who has ever lived in order to create a copy of the famed sword that slew Emperor Lucius IV



Ok, you've got one. And even then, the fact that the collector exists at all points to the existence of a trade of magic.


> 4) After rescuing the swordsmith the PCs learn he has already completed his masterpiece... upon searching the house of the collector the PCs find the weapon has been stolen and now must hunt it down before it falls into the wrong hands...



How will it fall into the wrong hands? Is someone going to SELL IT?


> Hmmm... and not a geegaw in sight.



Nor a "magic items cannot be traded" policy in sight.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 30, 2005)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> So sales of magic items are occurring. Just like I said - plotline spawned of magical item sales.




Stopping a black market in something is not the existence of trade. 

Here's a quick snapshot of how wrong you're reading that sentence: if the PCs were assigned to break up a slavery ring, would that mean they were trafficking in slaves?



> Ahhh, so the PC's are exchanging services for magical items. In other words they are (despite reanjr's incomplete dictionary quote) buying them. Another plot spawned via the trade of magic items.




If a quest to gain an item counts as buying it, then Elrond in LOTR was running a magic shop? Try again. 



> youu've got one. And even then, the fact that the collector exists at all points to the existence of a trade of magic.




A black market trade in magic. Which the PCs are trying to stop. Again, breaking up a slavery ring is not the same thing as the PCs being able to buy and sell slaves themselves. 



> How will it fall into the wrong hands? Is someone going to SELL IT?




See my earlier statements. A black market is commerce, but not the sort of commerce you are proposing, where the PCs go shopping for what they need. 



> Nor a "magic items cannot be traded" policy in sight.




And again I point out, if you consider a quest for an item "buying it" then King Arthur bought Excalibur from Merlin. In the words of Andre from the Princess Bride "I dont think that word means what you think it means".

Chuck


----------



## The Shaman (Jan 30, 2005)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> But it deviates from the default D&D world as expressed in the core rules and is therefore not as legitimately D&D as one that is.



Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I vaguely recall the subject of magic shops coming up in the 1e _AD&D DMG_ and their use was discouraged - can someone fact-check that for me?

If that's correct, then legitimacy changes by edition.

Certainly that's true of prestige classes - the 3.0 text about making them campaign-specific with roleplaying requirements for entry was seriously watered down in 3.5, as the popularity of PrCs (and the demands for books containing them) soared.

If I'm understanding you correctly, *Doug McCrae* (and please forgive me if I'm not), that would mean a GM who places strict controls on PrC availability through roleplaying requirements isn't playing "legitimate D&D," either.

Personally I don't buy that argument - D&D has been described by its own rulebooks as something intended to be personalized for the twenty-five-plus years I've been playing the game.

I agree with the suggestion that D&D is its own genre at this point - after 30 years and tens of thousands (at least) pages of text, that should be expected. In my view that doesn't mean that it must be played strictly by those genre conventions, however.

As a general rule, magic is not the "technology" of my campaign-settings - it's not a commodity in the traditional sense, something to be bought and sold, because it carries costs that are difficult to repay. I've made house rules that make magic a more dangerous and unpredictable force in the cosmos. For example, magic item creation is much more difficult and demanding - forget losing XP, how 'bout a little permanent ability drain instead? Spell-casting acts like a flare to magically-attuned monsters - cast too many spells and you're likely to bring on some powerful baddies drawn to your "light." The whole purpose of this is to get away from the "genre conventions" regarding magic in D&D, to personalize my campaign and give magic its own flavor specific to the setting.

As far as I understand it, that's still D&D.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jan 30, 2005)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Stopping a black market in something is not the existence of trade.
> 
> Here's a quick snapshot of how wrong you're reading that sentence: if the PCs were assigned to break up a slavery ring, would that mean they were trafficking in slaves?



Are you thick? If the PC's are breaking up a slavery ring, then a slavery ring exists.

That means that trade in slaves exists. That means that IF the players wanted to, they could conceivably buy slaves.


> If a quest to gain an item counts as buying it, then Elrond in LOTR was running a magic shop? Try again.



"I'll pay you five bucks to go down to the corner store and buy me a sandwich"

"I'll give you this powerful sword if you run down to the corner dungeon and quest for a sandwich"

Get it? You TRADE your services for a magical item.

From what I remember, Elrond handed over the sword without any necessary payment. I don't ever recall him saying "hey - if you go help frodo, I'll give you this shiny sword".


> A black market trade in magic. Which the PCs are trying to stop. Again, breaking up a slavery ring is not the same thing as the PCs being able to buy and sell slaves themselves.



And if the trade did not exist, there would be nothing to break up. And if the trade DOES exist, the PC's CAN buy and sell slaves themselves.


> See my earlier statements. A black market is commerce, but not the sort of commerce you are proposing, where the PCs go shopping for what they need.



So, what? Only people with a birthmark that says "I'm a member of the black market" can buy on the black market?


> And again I point out, if you consider a quest for an item "buying it" then King Arthur bought Excalibur from Merlin. In the words of Andre from the Princess Bride "I dont think that word means what you think it means".
> Chuck




It means "To get possession of by giving an equivalent, usually in money; to obtain by paying a price; to purchase."

From what I understand of the legend, Merlin didn't say "Go to the lake and chat up the lady for me, and when you come back, I'll give you this shiny sword", did he now?

Now, try a convincing argument.


----------



## haakon1 (Jan 30, 2005)

Azgulor said:
			
		

> By the way, the heist scenario happened in two separate campaigns with different players.  Given the habits of adventurers, it's pretty easy for them to conclude, it's a low-med risk for high reward.




Not an issue in my campaign so far, since I've mostly had good parties, and the one magic shop is a town ruled by LG folks.  

So what would happen if an evil or neutral party tried to steal from my 2nd-4th level sorcerer with his potions and +1-+2 type items?  They'd achieve the robbery, but I'd feel the need as a DM to change the risk-reward ratio from just bumping off the sorcerer to something much more . . . . appropriate.

This sorcerer has been helping the local rulers with their magic needs in wartime.  And helping several adventuring parties . . . and is a member of the magic guild.  Perhaps not just a local guild, but one spanning many cities.

So, the magic guild magically detects "whodunnit", and hires a party to go after the party (takes a thief to catch a thief).  Plus, the local government gives all aid it can to the magic guild, perhaps arresting the PC's the time they try to enter a walled town.  And some of the magic dealer's friends -- perhaps a party 4 levels higher than the PC's -- are unhappy with what happened, especially with that +2 platemail that they owned and were selling on commission going missing.

All told, the PC's are in a world of hurt, in a situation like when "The Blues Brothers" have an angry country band, the Illinois Nazi Party, and several hundred members of "the Illinois law enforcement community" on their tails, with the all points bulletin being: "Unnecessary violence in the apprehension of Jake and Elwood Blues . . . has been approved."  Sounds like fun to DM!

DMing PC actions into "game world consequences" is a whole lot more fun and "educational" than saying "you can't do that in my game 'cause I said so".


----------



## Staffan (Jan 31, 2005)

haakon1 said:
			
		

> Greyhawk analogy:  Magic shops are a DM option for places like Greyhawk and Rel Astra.  Places like Furyondy or Urnst or the Pale are likely too podunk for the really good stuff, but there might be somebody who deals in "local artists".  In other words, buying +1 short swords or CLW potions, that's a DM option.  Buying +5 holy avengers, again a DM option, but a bit silly without making it hard on the players and making them go to Greyhawk to buy it.



And that's what the gp limits based on city size are for. I'd also note that a holy avenger is too expensive to find even in a place like Greyhawk City. Smaller towns will have progressively lower amounts of magic.

Hmm. It would be interesting to check the gp limits of various categories of communities, and compare them to what sort of items that actually means, as well as the highest-level NPCs in the cities. Let's see:
Metropolis: 100,000 gp, level 13-18. The money includes up to +7-equivalent weapons (as well as rings of protection and amulets of natural armor), +9-equivalent armors (and cloaks of resistance), +6 stat items, +3 tomes, elemental-summoning items, and rings of spell turning.
Large city: 40,000 gp, level 10-15. +4-equivalent weapons, +6-equivalent armors. +6 stat items, +1 tomes, 
Small city: 15,000 gp, level 7-12. +2-equivalent weapons, +3 equivalent armors. +2 stat items (almost +4), ring of minor energy resistance, rod of wonder, no staves, 3rd-level wands, monk's belt, Boccob's blessed book, periapt of wound closure.
Large town: 3,000 gp, level 4-9. +1 weapons or armors, 1st-level wands, +5 skill enhancers, rust bag of tricks, lesser metamagic rods of +1-equivalent feats.
Small town: 800 gp, level 1-6. No magic weapons or armors, 1st-level wands, 2nd-level potions.


----------



## haakon1 (Jan 31, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> It's been mentioned up-thread that major auction houses -- and stock exchanges, for that matter -- predate anything resembling modern communications by centuries. Moreover, in a D&D world magical communication and transportation _is_ available.




The first trading of stock was in the 1600s in London and the Netherlands . . . the main cities of their world.  And in London, it involved physically going to a particular guild hall or coffee shop to meeting with other traders.  My point is -- in London, yes, you can and could even in 1600 buy anything the world has to offer.  But in the Outer Hebrides, not so much before telecoms . . . so, I'm suggesting magic shops in the world's main city = yes.  Magic shop in the Keep on the Borderlands = maybe, but unlikely to have much good stuff.

As for communications by magic, it's very limited in my game, which I guess is generally a "low magic" world . . . at least, it's a medieval world with magic used only for "magical" reasons, like good old dungeon stomping and wars.


----------



## haakon1 (Jan 31, 2005)

Staffan said:
			
		

> And that's what the gp limits based on city size are for. I'd also note that a holy avenger is too expensive to find even in a place like Greyhawk City. Smaller towns will have progressively lower amounts of magic.
> 
> Hmm. It would be interesting to check the gp limits of various categories of communities, and compare them to what sort of items that actually means, as well as the highest-level NPCs in the cities. Let's see:
> Metropolis: 100,000 gp, level 13-18. The money includes up to +7-equivalent weapons (as well as rings of protection and amulets of natural armor), +9-equivalent armors (and cloaks of resistance), +6 stat items, +3 tomes, elemental-summoning items, and rings of spell turning.
> ...




Excellent.  Thanks for cracking open the rule book on this one.  Sounds just about right to me.


----------



## Vigilance (Jan 31, 2005)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> Now, try a convincing argument.




You claimed that no interesting stories could come from banning a trade in magic.

I came up with 4 ideas in the span of about 30 seconds.

You of course then piped back in saying that all of them, somehow, revolved around the sale of items.

Maybe you should quit grasping at straws and just admit that not allowing the PCs to buy and sell magic items is just as valid a campaign style as the other way.

The thing that I find annoying about this argument, is that I have no problem with campaigns that allow the buying and selling of magic items, I just prefer another style.

What I am continually confronted with are people telling me:

1) No, really I'm buying and selling magic items.

2) I'm not playing "legitimate" D&D.

3) I'm a power hungry control freak because I wouldnt tolerate whining over the topic.

I have no problem with your asserting that allowing magic item sales works FOR YOU and generates plot lines FOR YOU.

Why do you insist on telling me banning the sale of magic items doesn't work FOR ME. 

Or even sillier... that I am in face buying magic items.

Chuck

PS Elrond makes the sword for Aragorn when he has decided to take up his father's mantle and lead his people against the BBEG.

In other words, he had to PROVE HIMSELF to Elrond, which is all I stated about the quest in my post above. That the PCs were PROVING THEMSELVES worthy of being allowed a grant of items from the temple.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 31, 2005)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> . . .Are you thick?
> 
> . . .Get it? You TRADE your services for a magical item.
> 
> . . .Now, try a convincing argument.




Apparently, multiple warnings about tone and not being rude didn't get the idea across. Thread closed.

This thread is a good example of how the initial post and the title have a huge affect on the content and tone of posts. By calling it "whining," I think people started off a lot more defensive and confrontative than they would have been otherwise. There's probably a lesson in that somewhere.

All together, everyone, 

Klunk.


----------

