I bring this up because I was thinking about the threads on magic item shoppes and/or gold in 5e. More often than not, there is a discussion (and/or argument) between those who want more detailed rules for spending gold, and those who argue that gold has so many uses. I tend to fall in the latter camp (my campaigns always have uses for gold), but then I realized that this is precisely because I am used to campaigns that spend gold on things other than magic items, and I have rules and heuristics for doing so, and my players have well-defined goals for their PCs that involve the use of gold. But maybe I'm just used to that, and the idea of spending gold on absolutely anything causes the same paralysis in some players that wishes cause in me.
Across multiple editions and groups, I've observed that some of my players are more comfortable than others with open-ended decisions. I've seen that varying comfort level in multiple contexts, such as creating character concepts, strategic-level IC decisions in non-linear/sandbox campaigns, and use of strategic resources (e.g. gold, influence, etc.) in any campaign type.
Interestingly, I find that limited-use items almost always seem to fall into the "strategic resources" category, even if they're combat-only (and thus more tactical than strategic). I suspect that's because the decision regarding
in which encounter to consume a limited-use, non-refreshing tactical resource is itself a strategic decision. (By contrast, the decision regarding in which encounter to use a limited-use character ability is comparatively more tactical due to the fact that abilities refresh.) I theorize that players less comfortable making such an open-ended strategic decision are far less likely to ever use the item, just as some players never get around to using gold or accumulated favors from NPCs.
I found that a semi-reliable method to assist less-comfortable players in making such open-ended decisions is to provide a
detailed set of available examples, even/especially if the examples are not intended to be exhaustive. For example, it's not uncommon for me to recruit a new, totally-inexperienced player to my game in a social setting where the books aren't on hand. For some such players, a brief description of the game's setting is enough for them to come up a full-fledged character concept that we can later work to model in the mechanics of 5e. For other such players, they don't have any idea where to start. For these players, I tell them to wait until they have a chance to read the first few chapters of the PHB--seeing the examples is almost always enough to give them an idea. Interestingly, I would guess that over 50% of the time, that idea is
not one of the standard archetypes in the PHB--the examples gave them the necessary starting point, but they were not then constrained by those examples. (Admittedly, any one DM's sample of players is unlikely to be representative.)
A similar thing happened in a 3.5 campaign where a player was having a hard time contributing to the group's plans to refurbish and occupy a fortress. Giving the player the Stronghold Builder's Guide fixed the problem, even though most of her (awesome) subsequent ideas weren't options from the book.
So while my games certainly fall into the category where there is
plenty to do with gold, I'm also in favor of having more published uses for gold, including both non-magical strategic resources and more example magic items. They're useful inspirational tools for the players that would benefit from the inspiration. Even for the players who have plenty of ideas on their own, if the listed options have well-defined, utility-based prices, they provide useful points of comparison to let the player filter their wide-ranging ideas for feasibility without having to inquire with the DM on each possibility.
For example, let's say a player wants to add an observatory to their stronghold. In 5e right now, there isn't much in the way of guidelines as to what that would cost. Figuring out if the player can afford it would involve (depending on the campaign style) either inquiring with the DM OOC about if it might be affordable, or else IC tracking down tradesmen to get quotes that may or may not be affordable (or honest!). By contrast, if 5e had more detail about strongholds, while there may not be a listed price for an observatory, there would likely be a price for a ballista tower (i.e. weight-bearing tower with large, rotating special equipment) to serve as a starting point. That would give the player some idea regarding affordability in advance (and a method for gauging the appropriateness of IC tradesmen's bids). For a single example this doesn't save much time, but if the player is deciding between a dozen different potential uses for their gold, the easier access to comparison points dramatically speeds up the process of deciding which potential uses are worth following up on. (And for games where pricing inquiries must be made IC, avoids turning the game into Construction and Contractors just to discover if an option is feasible.)
(Note: Relying on previous editions' utility-based pricing can sometimes be a substitute, but the ability to make useful comparisons is lessened due to needing to adjust for differences in utility between editions. New players may not have suitable familiarity with both editions to be able to make that adjustment at all.)
In a similar vein, there is one final advantage I see to having expanded published uses for gold, but it's a personal quirk. I
like expedition planning when it's just a question of juggling weight and affordability and doesn't involve tons of research into imperfect substitutes. In 3.0/3.5 I could get out Arms and Equipment and the Magic Items Compendium and go nuts selecting fun, minor gear options for an overly-prepared or pack-rat character. In 5e, without such published options, each and every such item requires the DM to set a price (and weight, if it's being tracked), and it's not worth asking the DM to do that for unimportant items just so that I can choose between them. I'd rather use the DM's time inquiring about out-of-book possibilities that will be central to the plot (or at least fun for the party) rather than the minor items on my personal equipment list. (And no, the DM saying "spend 100gp and we'll just assume you have any minor item you can think of" isn't a good susbtitute, because there isn't the same sense of accomplishment in having exactly the right minor item at exactly the right time.)
Thanks for making this thread! It's given me a chance to formalize the ideas above that have just been floating around hapahazardly in my head. Next time I give the my PCs a limited-use item I'm going to encourage them to make
in advance the strategic choice about what sorts of circumstances would justify its use. Hopefully that will help make sure the items get used (or at least that the players are satsified that they were prepared for a specific contingency, even if it never happened to arise).
