D&D 5E The Case for a Magic Item Shop?

KarinsDad · Oct 21, 2014

Dausuul said:
For a market to exist, you need more than demand. You also need supply. The smaller the supply, the less of a market there is. In a low-magic world, trade in magic items is apt to resemble the trade in paintings by the Old Masters. If you want a painting by Raphael, you have to find someone who's got a Raphael and is willing to part with it. Oh, and you don't have the Internet, or even a telephone. Good luck. If you've got enough money and persistence, you can probably manage it, but it will take quite a long time--long enough that abstracting it into a simple "put down your money and take your items" is no longer reasonable.

Absolutely. In a low-magic world.

I would hope that the default DMG campaign world is not low magic, but some middle ground.

In a medium magic campaign world, magic items can be acquired via a few shops in extremely big cities and even some larger towns, and some back alley deals elsewhere.

In a high magic campaign world, magic shops might exist in nearly every large town and city.

Supply and demand as you state.

In medium and high magic worlds, the supply is greater. And even in a low magic world, there would be specialists who can acquire magic items, just like there have always been specialists who could acquire paintings by the Old Masters, even before the Internet and telephone.

Mishihari Lord · Oct 21, 2014

the Jester said:
Because putting the setting first automatically means your players are miserable?

That type of argument is used frequently; I think I even complained about it upthread. But it's a false dichotomy. One of the main reasons I play is that I enjoy exploring the worlds of someone else's imagination. This is where a lot of my fun comes from. And I don't want those worlds compromised by issues like those described in this thread, That diminishes my fun. It's kind of like how football is more fun for me than Calvinball. For players like me maintaining the setting is what makes the game fun, not something done at the expense of fun. We don't know much about the players in the OP's game, but if they're like me the DM may very well be doing the right thing to keep the game fun for the majority of his players.

Piston Honda · Oct 21, 2014

Tons of gold and nothing to buy. Money talks. Start spending it on information, throw out some money in search of contacts, put out a substantial reward if someone helps you locate where the item in question might have gone, a commission if they can find it in the possession of someone who is willing to sell it.

Your DM should be able to spin this somehow that the party could get involved. They were in the possession of some treasure hunter who went into some tower and never came out. Clearly there was something else there if the treasure hunter went in, treasure for the rest of the party, hooray! The wealthy collector wants an artifact or something else that could take them somewhere that has the potential for treasure as well. Maybe the specific magic item you want doesn’t exist in the setting, but your character finds of another way to have dark vision.

As far as magic shops, do the other players want magic shops? If they worked hard to get an item that can now be found on a discount rack, will that cheapen it? As a player I like magic items to be rare, and have been part of campaigns where suddenly a couple players were upset because they wanted several magic items and wanted them now and the DM caved and just started letting people buy them at will. It cheapened what we had before and overpowered the players who spent time poring over all the magic items in all the splat books. If it's what everyone wants, that's a different story.

Psikerlord# · Oct 21, 2014

epochrpg said:
My character is a human, very adept in stealth, re-skinned as a ninja. Sneaking and scouting for the party is her role in the group. But recently we've been in the underdark and it looks like we're going to be there for quite some time. My main role, sneaking ahead and scouting, is now useless because I:
A. Cannot see in the dark and
B. If I use a light-source, I am automatically not stealthed, making me the worst ninja ever.

Currently now that we're in the underdark, I still use stealth, but I have to travel with the "light pack" of other characters that need light to see, while others who can see in the dark, but aren't as adept at stealth, do the scouting. At best, this just gives me an edge in the first combat round when we're attacked, but I cannot do the scouting / recon that I'm good at.

If I want to keep doing what my character was built to do (and did very successfully before we got to the underdark) I *require* the ability to see in the dark. This would likely entail some sort of magic item (some sort of goggles, I guess) that would let me do that. At present, there is a 0% chance that I will get such an item (what are the odds of that being in a drow's random treasure pile)?

My options seem to be: A. multi-classing into Warlock JUST TO GET DEVIL's SIGHT, which is not fitting with this character's concept and totally cheesy and the GM HATES multi-classing level-dips for features (and I agree with him).
B. Beg the GM to drop a darkvision item for me in some future treasure pile. I hate the very idea of this; that monsters will carry custom-made treasure for whiny PCs.
C. make it possible for people to buy some magic items.

I've got THOUSANDS of GP and nothing to spend it on, because we cannot buy magic items, even minor ones. What are we supposed to DO with all that gold, anyway? Buy hexes on the world map?

I get why some items should be rare; it makes magic more special, yada yada. But relying on the kindness of others... both the GM to drop the exact treasure I need and THE OTHER PLAYERS TO ALLOW ME HAVE IT (seriously I've played in a party before where the dwarf would INSIST on taking goggles of darkvision and had some sort of logic-gymnastics spectacle as to why that would be appropriate just to grief other players).

I understand not having enchanted weapons, armor, rings, and such "legendary" things for sale. But making small, utilitarian items purchasable might give us something to spend our gold on and allow characters to do things like adventure in hostile environments (like under water dungeons or the underdark, etc.).

I think you should have picked a race that can see in the dark if this was your plan. You choose human for the free feat instead. Also can't you take the skulker feat? I most certainly don't want magic item shops in my campaign. Or just have your PC request this item from a local wizard, the dim can make it into an adventure.

MoonSong · Oct 22, 2014

the Jester said:
Sorry, but that's just ridiculous.

How is the DM being deceitful when she's clearly said, "Here's how you can do it, but it's not going to be quick or easy or maybe ever"? And what, she should ban the pc from collecting eyes to save him time or something? That's absurd. The pc is run by the player, not the DM, and doesn't have complete information about everything in the world. He needs to find out by exploring and doing, and there's nothing deceptive- or wrong- about letting him choose his own goals, even if they can't be attained.

It is deceitful, because the DM is telling " it won't be quick nor easy and there are no warranties pf success" but has already decided he will never hand out the item nor allow the ritual to work out of principle. One thing is pursuing an impossible goal knowing it is impossible and one very different being given hope it is possible when the DM has already decided that it is indeed impossible. It is entirely possible to want to play a tragedy, I could enjoy doing that, but when I just want to have something, get it and enjoy it -because it is an important facet of the character I want to play- the inly reason to go through the hoops and all the exploration and entertain the DM for as long as it is needed is to get and enjoy the reward. This player wants to play a halfling that can see in the dark, and she wanting to do anything to make it possible just shows how hard she desires it. That the DM gave hope to the player instad of making explicit he had no intention of ever allowing it would be taking advantage of that desire. That is what would be unfair.

Would you argue the same way if the pc's desire was for a way to turn into an ancient dragon? The DM must accommodate this desire or say, from the beginning, "No way, never, no how"?

It depends, will I ever want this on the campaign?, if the answer is no and I'm sure I won't change my mind, honesty is better. BTW nice way to overblow something by turning it into a strawman, a halfling with darkvision isn't even on gamebraking territory. Would a halfling rogue with goggles of darkvision be broken? I don't think so, it sounds like something fun to play, but hardly gamebreaking. Even this dragon can be a goal for the end of a campaign (for example if the player picked the " really a dragon' background)

And it's the DM, not the player, who ultimately decides what goes in her game.

In your table the DM may own the game, but some of us actually think it is everybody on the table's game.

Hussar · Oct 22, 2014

The Jester said:
Would you argue the same way if the pc's desire was for a way to turn into an ancient dragon? The DM must accommodate this desire or say, from the beginning, "No way, never, no how"?

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...se-for-a-Magic-Item-Shop/page19#ixzz3GqH52hE1

For me? Absolutely yes. If it isn't going to happen, I would never string the player along. In some campaigns it might be possible. Note, possible doesn't mean easy and doesn't guarantee success, but, if it is possible, then there is a chance of success.

Gaming story:

I played a 2e game as a magic user, years ago. At chargen I created a scholarly wizard and talked with the DM and got approval from him that I would be able to create my own spells using the Complete Wizard 2e book. Now, this is a pretty involved process - you need to find a location, need to buy a library to stock that location and need to buy ingredients to create the new spell and, even when you do all that, you have about a 30% chance of success. Not great and it's expensive.

So, I went through the whole deal - got a place, got the library, got the ingredients, spent several levels building this and a butt load of time. So, I try to create a new spell, a second level version of Unseen Servant (or maybe 3rd? I forget what level unseen servant is in AD&D) that lasted for an hour per level instead of 10 minutes per level and I think extended the range a bit. In 3e terms I was adding two feats, although, this was years before 3e, so, I was combining the two since I didn't think it was a huge deal. I think I extended the range to like 20 feet/level instead of 10. Something like that. Long time ago.

Fine, I get everything ready, go to the DM and get approval for my new spell (which wasn't a problem) and then, and only then, the DM announced that my chances were actually 3% per attempt rather than 30. IOW, I had pretty much zero chance of success and the price meant that I wasn't going to get enough tries to actually succeed. When questioned, he claimed that new spells, having a name attached to them was reserved for very powerful wizards, not my measly fifth or sixth level magic user.

So, basically, in one line, he nerfed the entire point of my character. Had I known from the outset that I would have had virtually no chance of success, I would have played a different character. I was, to say the least, somewhat put out.

From that point onwards, I've always been very frank and honest with players about their chances of success for doing something during chargen. It saves a lot of pissed off players in the end.

Li Shenron · Oct 22, 2014

pemerton said:
This is another playstyle thing. The notion that quality of the player's play experience should be subordinated to the GM's unilateral conception of how the gameworld should be is very foreign to me.

"Quality of player's play experience" is not univoque, and neither is "GM's conception of how the gameworld should be", they can be adapted to each other. The latter is not "unilateral" because it can be discussed and agreed between players, and it sounds to me as if you threw the word "unilateral" in because you want to imply it is negative.

For me the "conception of how the gameworld should be" sets the genre, similarly to a movie genre. You don't have to watch a sci-fi or a horror or a noir. You can watch all of them, just not at the same time. Some movie can be a mix of many genre, and that's fine, but other times you just pick one genre.

What is important to me is consistency with the chosen genre. There is hardly anything I despise most, than movies that "promise" me to be horror and then all of a sudden turn into farce or viceversa. It's very difficult (tho not impossible) to make such change in a movie without breaking suspension of disbelief or spoil the mood.

As far as the similitude go, whatever genre my DM is running, I expect consistency because that's very much part of my own "quality of play". If there's a problem it should be solved, and there are multiple ways to solve any problem. Solutions must not come at the expense of completely losing consistency, but some compromise can be found.

Just to be more clear what is my own opinion... if someone's playing this Rogue character uneffectively because of the adventure environment, the game sucks. But if the DM "solves" this issue by turning the low-magic fantasy world where magic shops don't exist into a high-magic fantasy world where magic shops are normal, the game sucks. I am so much more in favor of letting this PC find exactly one perfectly tailored magic item in a treasure hoard or in an otherwise normal shop (or as I suggested, create an ad-hoc feat for this character) which might break suspension of disbelief for one time only rather than making a permanent change to the whole campaign.

Hussar · Oct 22, 2014

I'd agree with that Li Shenron.

Majoru Oakheart · Oct 22, 2014

KaiiLurker said:
But you still plan to do it at some point right? right?

No. For a number of reasons:

I'm running the Starter Set as an Adventurer's League adventure. Which means that in order to follow the rules, I cannot hand out any magic items that are not listed in the adventure ever. I've already explained this to the player in question who keeps asking for it anyway.

After the adventure ends, we plan on disbanding the group. I run too many games and I only agreed to finish this adventure and then end. If I was planning on handing it out, it would probably be after level 5. The adventure only goes up to level 5.

Going on a quest to find a wizard to insert some darkvision eyes is kind of beyond the scope of the starter set. There are no towns or cities on the map anywhere nearby who would have a wizard of that power. Even if there was, the wizard would likely charge a fee beyond what the PCs can afford.

The character in question works perfectly fine in terms of mechanics. It is sufficiently powerful and capable. Having Darkvision would make the character a decent amount more powerful. I'm not a big fan of using magic items to cancel out people's disadvantages unless the magic items come up randomly. I don't like the idea that players can just choose to cancel their disadvantages.

If she had darkvision the game would likely have to focus on her too much since she'd insist on scouting ahead and likely attacking every encounter by herself just to see if she could beat them without the rest of the party present. Anything that encourages splitting up the party is something I'm not a big fan of.

I've had this discussion in a previous thread but my experience with "scouting ahead" normally involves the scout dying as they make one poor stealth check and then get attacked by an encounter designed for 7 players while they are the only one present. Normally they die in the first round of combat when the entire encounter attacks them. Most of my players realize this, but this group is filled with newer players and this player in particular is intent on scouting ahead constantly. That's the entire reason she wants Darkvision. She is currently staying with the party because she realizes she has to bring light with her and will be immediately spotted.

Scorpio616 · Oct 22, 2014

Piston Honda said:
Tons of gold and nothing to buy. Money talks. Start spending it on information, throw out some money in search of contacts, put out a substantial reward if someone helps you locate where the item in question might have gone, a commission if they can find it in the possession of someone who is willing to sell it.

Unfortunately, many players are not willing to take these steps with sufficient GP. They don't see anyone in town openly selling magic items, they just mope about not being able to spend their gold on anything.

D&D 5E The Case for a Magic Item Shop?

KarinsDad

Adventurer

Mishihari Lord

First Post

Piston Honda

First Post

Psikerlord#

Explorer

MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin

Hussar

Legend

Li Shenron

Legend

Hussar

Legend

Majoru Oakheart

Adventurer

Scorpio616

First Post

Similar Threads