Excerpt: Economies [merged]

Stalker0 · May 14, 2008

I think the 1/5 Gold rate for magic items works well in their default "points of light" setting.

In such a setting, trade is very dangerous because of the constants dangers away from civilization. But that trade is very lucrative, considering I'm basically getting 5 times my investment when I sell a magic item. In a way, it turns traveling merchants into their own kind of adventurers. Instead of killing monsters, they brave the road of commerce.

In fact, I bet that would make an excellent campaign idea

Rechan · May 14, 2008

Fallen Seraph said:
Or when he fell dead all his potions broke open and the contents spilled out (I have never done this myself, least face the wrath of my group).

If you're mean, have an NPC who intentionally fills empty potion flasks with water, and puts them in treasure hoards.

Or worse, have a snake-oil salesman who sells water in holywater flasks.

Mort_Q · May 14, 2008

Retain Essence (ecs 32) = Collect Residuum

A'koss · May 14, 2008

Rechan said:
The one problem is that if you have a player (or a group) who do not care about building castles or nationbuilding, or any of that jazz, then gold becomes worthless to them.

I would be very surprised to find a player who couldn't find some way to spending his hard-earned gold in the game.

After all, PCs had been doing it right up until 3e...

Fallen Seraph · May 14, 2008

Rechan said:
If you're mean, have an NPC who intentionally fills empty potion flasks with water, and puts them in treasure hoards.

Or worse, have a snake-oil salesman who sells water in holywater flasks.

I've had players do that, they would after finishing off their potions, fill the flasks with fake potions and sale them.

Family · May 14, 2008

Rechan said:
Or worse, have a snake-oil salesman who sells water in holywater flasks.

Adventure hook, then you have to track him down and "disipline" him and "confiscate" pertenant "evidence".

Rechan · May 14, 2008

ForbidenMaster said:
Well first I want to make the distinction between magic items and wondrous items. D&D with less magic items means more mundane items. D&D with less wondrous items means less winged boots.

Now how I understood it Wizards meant that there would be less wondrous items so that you arent a "Christmas tree". That doesnt mean that there will be less magic items. What I think it does mean is that magical items like potions and rituals are going to be more common and more prevelant. Thats what you will be spending your money on.

And to me, I'd much rather there be more wondrous items, and no magical swords/armor/amulets. Ergo what I meant by the "You get the +x you're supposed to have for your weapon/armor/amulet this level, and the wondrous items are the magic equipment you get." I like the flying carpet and slippers of spiderclimb and suchlike a lot more than +1 Flaming Sword.

Though I'm not sure how I would ration out the weapon/amulet/armor powers, since I think those are cool too.

FadedC · May 14, 2008

Fallen Seraph said:
Well we don't know just how expensive the material component will be, or even if all have it. Hell, if need be, I will equate the cost to having to buy a new knife since the process of prying off melted the knife he was using.

.

Well they said that the material component cost was enough to make the disenchant ritual inefficient, and that removing ti would completely change the balance of the economy towards making magic items. So I'm guessing it's a pretty big cost.

Also remember that you need to learn rituals from a book or use a one shot scroll. So while you could justify the rogue having to throw away a diamond plated knife, and needing to read a scroll on how to pry out rubies which then disintigrates into dust......you are starting to push things a bit. But to each their own.

Gloombunny · May 14, 2008

Rechan said:
The one problem is that if you have a player (or a group) who do not care about building castles or nationbuilding, or any of that jazz, then gold becomes worthless to them.

That's not really a problem. He may not have any particular use for the gold, but having it isn't making things any less fun for him. On the other hand, if the player who's interested in nationbuilding has to make his PC severely underpowered by the party's standards in order to nationbuild, that's not gonna be much fun for him.

CleverNickName · May 14, 2008

Breaking down the rate of level-ups

WotC's Article said:
You plan treasure in terms of the eight to ten encounters it takes characters to advance from one level to the next.

So on average, it takes about 9 well-balanced battles to gain a level in 4E.

For a character to go from 1st level to 30th level, he will need about 270 encounters.

Assuming two encounters per hour, that would take ~135 hours of game play.

At four hours per gaming session, it will take about 34 games.

At one game per week, this will take you 7-1/2 months.

Just for grins: if the folks over in the WoW message boards can be believed, an experienced World of Warcraft player can max out a character's level in about 100 total hours of play.