Proposal: Magic Item trade caluse

Tenchuu · Jan 17, 2011

Proposal: A player may trade with a merchant or another player. If trading with a player, the level and cost of the items must be equal. If trading with a merchant, the level and cost must be equal or lower.

Why? This proposal is aimed to fix some of the problems raised Proposal: Let Players Sell Stuff to Other Players, while still maintaining the integrity of the D&D wealth curve.

Allowing players to trade their magic items for items of an equivalent value addresses the issue of DMs giving unwanted loot, whether it be items that the player dislikes, or if an item type (sword, shield, armor, etc) is replaced before other item groups are filled out.

Also, it just makes sense. For example, let's say I go adventuring and find a L4 Shielding blade. Then I go back to town to see the merchant and he's selling a L4 Sunblade which I like better. It's nonsensical that the vendor would offer me only 168gp for the Shielding blade, but pay the full 840 for the Sunblade.

This would essentially allow players to sell at 100%, if and only if, they spend that gold on an item of equal or lesser value. Therefore, the wealth of the player has not changed (in fact, it may have gotten lower), but the player is happier.

The Result:The player wealth will remain essentially the same, players will be able to generally have the items they want, and DMs will not need to be as concerned with picking the "right" item for the player.

renau1g · Jan 18, 2011

Well, the underlying economics of D&D has never made sense. Truthfully it makes no sense for any merchant to carry any magic items....outside of maybe +1 items, as having thousands of gold pieces tied up in inventory on the hopes that someone comes buy to pick it up? Not likely.

Currently the system forces people to decide whether they want to upgrade their main 3 items (weapon/implement, armor, neck) or grab some misc. items. Not sure I like the swapping at will. At best I'd allow this "re-train" instead of your regular retrain of a feat/power/etc.

covaithe · Jan 18, 2011

Seems to me like this would effectively limit DMs to awarding "the L4 item of your choice".

Tenchuu · Jan 18, 2011

covaithe said:
Seems to me like this would effectively limit DMs to awarding "the L4 item of your choice".

For me, in my role as DM, I'd be okay with that. I find it a constant struggle, with my players who don't provide a wishlist, to pick out a magic item that fits them well. Maybe I am just overly-concerned with it, but I don't want to hose the players, and I certainly am no expert when it comes to D&D items.

covaithe · Jan 19, 2011

I struggle with that, too, as a DM. As a judge, I'd have no problem at all if you want to award your players the L4 item of their choice. Suitably fluffed up (e.g. their patron commissions the finest magical craftsmen to do a personalized order) that sort of thing can be a great RP experience and a fun way to end an adventure. But it's not appropriate for all adventures, and as a DM, I'd want to have the option to give specific items.

Also, IMO allowing players to trade one-for-one with merchants freely makes it too easy to customize their equipment for specific adventures. "What's that you say? You've got a problem with undead? Pardon me while I go turn in my necrotic weapon for a radiant weapon..."

Son of Meepo · Jan 19, 2011

I play WotC's Living Forgotten Realms campaign. With the introduction of item rarity into D&D, they added a generic treasure option to all of their adventures.

Pick an uncommon item of your level or less, or a common item of your level+2 or less.

Rare items are only given out as specific rewards.

You are allowed to purchase common items, but not uncommon items or rare items.

You can sell common items for 20% of their price, uncommon items for 50%. You cannot sell rare items at all.

You are limited to owning a number of uncommon items equal to your level and one rare item per tier.

Perhaps something similar can be formulated that would work with L4W. Personally, I think the LFR rules have a big hole when it comes to consumables.

Tenchuu · Jan 20, 2011

We could further stipulate that the trades must be approved by the DM if the player is actively in a quest, to address the specific-adventure problem. Or limit the time period for swapping to in-between adventuring only.

H.M.Gimlord · Jan 20, 2011

Weren't the original rules for reselling and buying weapons designed to give deference to the DMs choice of items to give out? I mean what would be the point of the 20% rule if you could just trade one for the other.

My opinion (house rules in L4W not withstanding) is that DMs should be making the decision as to what they give out, with the understanding that their players have certain preferences. This isn't because I'm a power hungry DM or anything. I just know that sometimes DMs like to use treasure parcels to foreshadow things that are to happen later in the adventure, or provide an edge to PCs in an upcoming encounter.

If a character has something that he/she feels would be useless later on, then the item can either be sold to an NPC after the adventure or an arrangement could be made with the DM to conveniently "lose" the item once its usefulness is expended while "finding" another that is more desirable (O.K. it's a hokey idea, but you get my point).

To Covaithe's point, if trading were to be allowed, it would definitely need to be outside the context of adventure recruiting.