D&D and the magic economy

[Umbran]

I think even the wealthiest mercenaries don't pay that much for their gear

I think if you add up all the milspec equipment a mercenary group has, you might be surprised. But I could be wrong.

I'm not likening adventurers to real-world mercs. I am instead making a point about economy - people say all the expensive stuff PCs have breaks the economy, and I am not sure that's true.

In the real world, there's a whole lot of very expensive equipment that you don't think about. Garbage trucks aren't cheap. Neither are dentist's drills, or MRI machines. I'm in a Boston suburb, but within a couple miles of my home are a hospital and a university with research scientists - there's hundreds of millions to billions of dollars of equipment that I don't normally see or think about. Out of sight, out of mind - that stuff doesn't enter into my consideration when I think about "the economy", but it most certainly is part of it. Far, far beyond the buying power of the average individual person, but it is still there.

While it is put to different uses, and is funded differently, the adventurer's gear is like that very expensive equipment.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

II'm not likening adventurers to real-world mercs.

I'm having a hard time letting go of this idea, though. Then again, in real life, well-equipped mercenary groups really do charge a lot more.

Low-level adventurers (mid-heroic tier, say) are somewhat more powerful than town guards or mercenaries but have much more expensive gear. Is paying thousands of gold pieces for their gear really worth it, if they're comparing themselves to guards or NPC mercs? (And if a town is hiring adventurers to fight ogres or protect them from bandits, for example, one reason the adventurers should be charging higher prices is because their gear is so expensive, and needs constant upgrading. IIRC in Keep of the Shadowfell one of the rewards was 1000 gp. The town would probably be better off hiring a larger number of mercenaries.)

When you start hiring paragon adventurers, this little rant falls apart. They'll clearly outclass town guards and most mercenaries. Even if unequipped!

I almost think adventurer groups are really worth it to a patron because:
1) They'll get stronger, and hopefully still be friends (and remember your generosity, when it was worth a lot more to them than it is now).
2) They have a lot more spellcasters than the general populace. (Roughly half in a strictly generic group. Mercenary groups probably wouldn't have nearly as many.)

Some adventuring gear is also ridiculously costly. In 3.x, a light riding horse seemed worth a lot more than it should have been, even taking into account a horse is a lot more valuable than a cow. I think it's because of its use. (At the very least, you can really increase your overland movement speed, not to mention your carrying capacity.) I don't know if there's a cost for horses anywhere in 4e.

The horse might be a bad example though, along with basic military weapons. They're an area where adventurers and normal (but combat-capable) economies intersect.

I think you're better off just ignoring the economy. I like Chaochou's solution, personally.

 

[Incendax]

Separate the D&D Economy from the Real World Economy. Replace the majority of coins rewarded in the world with Residuum. Perhaps they find the monsters congregating around Residuum crystals that are growing out of the earth, or perhaps they find vials of Residuum in the necromancer's lab, or perhaps the faeries they just killed can have Residuum dust scraped off their wings.

In this way you've got a product that continues to drive the D&D Economy while being almost entirely incompatible with the Real World Economy. When you reward the party with gold they can shatter the economy. When you reward the party with Residuum they will be hard pressed to find anyone willing to buy it since it is of no use to anyone but other ritualists and you can directly control the amount of demand.

 

[FireLance]

And this is for a trivial +1 item. At +3 we’re talking twenty-one thousand gold pieces. At +6 it’s 2.6 million. That’s like assuming that instead of that tiresome trek to Mordor, Frodo could have popped down to Bree, sold the One Ring for 5 million and bought his own country somewhere out of harm’s way. It’s utter nonsense.

Funny you should mention that. Ridiculously high prices for magic items are a tradition dating back to Tolkien.

After all, according to Gandalf, Bilbo's mithril shirt was worth more than the Shire and everything in it. And it wasn't even an artifact-level item. If we assume that it was a run-of-the-mill suit of +6 mithral armor in 4E D&D terms (and we further assume that we are jaded enough to describe any +6 item as "run-of-the-mill" in the first place ), the by-the-book market price of 2.6 million gp seems (at least to me) that it would be fairly close to the theoretical value of the Shire.

As a few others have mentioned, the problem is assuming that finding a buyer who is able to purchase it for this amount (or even for one-fifth the book value) is a simple or trivial task. The game abstracts it for the purpose of simplicity of play - the standard assumption is that the player deletes the item from his character sheet and add the relevant amount of cash - but the DM could choose to make the character play out the selling process if he wants. For example, in a Middle-Earth campaign, playing out the process of selling a suit of +6 mithral armor might involve negotiations with an elf or dwarf lord who would have both an interest in obtaining the armor and the resources to actually purchase it.

As for the One Ring, I'm fairly sure that Sauron would be both willing and able to buy it from you for 5 million gp, assuming you are powerful enough that simply taking it from you is not an option, and that you are willing to simply sell it back to him in the first place...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

For example, in a Middle-Earth campaign, playing out the process of selling a suit of +6 mithral armor might involve negotiations with an elf or dwarf lord who would have both an interest in obtaining the armor and the resources to actually purchase it.

And that doesn't even address the issue of the kind of attention that putting something like that in the market might bring. Some less scrupulous types- lords or lowlifes- might be tempted to steal what they cannot afford.

 

[Grabuto138]

And that doesn't even address the issue of the kind of attention that putting something like that in the market might bring. Some less scrupulous types- lords or lowlifes- might be tempted to steal what they cannot afford.

I think it is important to emphasize this concept in the context of the OP's concerns. On one level treasure acts as a secondary pool of experience points in so far as the party pretty requires a baseline of gear (especially weapon, armor and neck slot) in order to function using standard encounters. (Assuming you are not using inherent bonuses and what not.)

But the DM always controls the details of how treasure is acquired and sold. If it works for the party the details can be glossed over and the party can just erase the treasure and add on the gold. Or it can be roleplayed, or converted to residium or whatever.

If the economics are important to you as a DM then there are a variety of ways to deal with it:
1. Use inherent bonuses
2. Don't allow magic to be bought or sold. They must convert, create and find all magic items.
3. Buying and selling magic items are a skill challenge at least, and adventure at best. The treasure parcel(s) the party would receive for overcoming the challenge/adventure are reflected in the final profit. This also overcomes the common complaint the resale value is too low.
4. Focus on the art rather the science of DMing and play it by ear. In a big town and don't want to deal with it? Let them sell it. Gave them an item that is disrupting balance? Have someone steal it. Hold back giving that Warlord his magic greatspear for a few levels until the player starts to get really annoyed at being behind the curve. Then throw in a killer custom-made spear that makes everyone jealous. Then a few level's later he finds out it is cursed and he is growing profuse body hair (acts as hide armor but with no armor check penalty).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

2. Don't allow magic to be bought or sold. They must convert, create and find all magic items.

Personally, that makes the economist in me cringe.

Magic items are a good, therefore, they are subject to the laws of supply & demand. But just because you can put a price on something doesn't make it easy to buy or sell it.

I went to a guitar show and saw a sign that said "SHOW SPECIAL: pristine ________ guitar, only $35,000!". I can tell you that that was a GREAT price for the guitar- I'd seen others at the show for twice the price- but I certainly couldn't buy it.

Just because the party has a +2 sword to sell doesn't mean they can easily find a buyer. But to just simply ban sales of magic? Not unless there is a bona fide in-campaign reason to do so.

Besides, how common a trope is it to find sellers of magic in fable and legend? Magic beans, cloaks and potions of all kinds have been sold in those tales.

The difference, of course, is that magic is rarer in the stories than in the typical FRPG setting. To which I can only reply that magic rarity is within the DM's control.

Besides...we're talking about commerce: caveat emptor! Perhaps that item you're trying to buy is a fake...or at least less powerful than you've been led to believe.

And what if the purchaser of your +2 sword used counterfeit currency...

 

[Destil]

The intrinsic Bonuses option from the DMG2 lets you keep the core 4E math and ditch the need to keep people's magic items on a treadmill. Simple way to cut down on the need for core 'Big Three' (weapon/implement, armor, neck) items that the rules assume.

Do that, and magic items pretty are just cool bonuses, nothing that needs to be kept up. This lets you use as many or as few as you like, and since they're no longer required you can go ahead and do what you like with pricing, too.

 

[Grabuto138]

Personally, that makes the economist in me cringe.

Magic items are a good, therefore, they are subject to the laws of supply & demand. But just because you can put a price on something doesn't make it easy to buy or sell it.

I went to a guitar show and saw a sign that said "SHOW SPECIAL: pristine ________ guitar, only $35,000!". I can tell you that that was a GREAT price for the guitar- I'd seen others at the show for twice the price- but I certainly couldn't buy it.

Just because the party has a +2 sword to sell doesn't mean they can easily find a buyer. But to just simply ban sales of magic? Not unless there is a bona fide in-campaign reason to do so.

Besides, how common a trope is it to find sellers of magic in fable and legend? Magic beans, cloaks and potions of all kinds have been sold in those tales.

The difference, of course, is that magic is rarer in the stories than in the typical FRPG setting. To which I can only reply that magic rarity is within the DM's control.

Besides...we're talking about commerce: caveat emptor! Perhaps that item you're trying to buy is a fake...or at least less powerful than you've been led to believe.

And what if the purchaser of your +2 sword used counterfeit currency...

This is EXACTLY what I am getting at. The OP was concerned because the rules as he or she interpreted them did not make sense from an economic standpoint. My point is that any DM worth the job description can easily make it work, and actually make it fun rather than simply a work-around. And they can make it work if the party is just interested in killing stuff without all the fiddly details, or if the party wants a more realistic world.

Of course everything is for sale. But if the DM is interested in cleaving to these basic economic principles than I assume the DM is also willing to run their game in a way that reflects the consequences of scarcity. My issue is with the complaint that since magic items are really freaking expensive but also, in theory, available to buy and sell, since the available wealth of any given population is comparitively small then their must be a flaw in the mechanics.

What I am saying is, if you are the kind of person who is annoyed by this, then take the next step and use this is your campaign. Meaning, selling a magic item is akin to selling a rare work of art or an expensive and specialized piece of industrial equipment. Where in the heck does one go to sell a used MRI machine? I have no idea. But I suspect it is at least a skill challenge to get rid of it in a timely fashion. I also suspect that the kind of instituitons that need an MRI are not inclined to buy them from a group a five dubious gangster-types who happen to show up at their door. So there needs to be either an intermediary and a deep discount (the standard "hand-wave and drive on" sell rate) or a complicated process of meeting the right people and convincing them you are on the level (a skill challenge or adventure).

Edit: And the same logic goes for buying items. If the economic issues bother you imagine a world without eBay and modern telecomm. Your party decides they want to buy a rare work of art. Once they know what they want they need to find a seller, most likely an intermediary, and then they need to arrange a purchase, make sure it is not fake etc. Basically, if you are uncomfortable with the economics remember that the cost of an item is not just in gold.

 

[chaochou]

More interesting replies - thanks!

I think the Tolkien examples are interesting. Because what Tolkien didn't do is have Bilbo sell Sting when he found a +4 flaming shortsword in Smaug's haul. He didn't have Bilbo say 'I'm a rogue - I don't wear chain, I'm flogging that stupid +6 mithril for sure.'

The magic sword which Bilbo picks up in the Hobbit is the same one Frodo is using throughout the whole of LotR. How many levels does Frodo gain in LotR? I'd say a lot.

Valuable magic items are a stock in fantasy, but selling a fabled sword so you can afford to buy a better fabled sword most definitely is not, and this is what I'm trying to achieve.

The way I'm thinking of doing this is simply by levelling gear when a player levels. That +1 sword will level up to level 2 when the player does. At level 6, bam, it's a +2 sword.
Extra powers may appear when the sword (not the PC as is currently the case) reaches certain levels. Holding onto a magic items to level them becomes interesting.

I want to tie in the idea that's been mentioned on this thread of basing new, funky extra powers on what the item has already achieved.

Killing lot of undead with it - maybe it becomes radiant. Hacked through a load of trolls? Maybe it steals some troll regen and gives it to the wielder. Hell, that's a decent weapon - a +3 radiant longsword which gives Regen 5. What's more it's got a reason for being what it is, and one the PCs can identify with.

Combining those ideas, I think the party can stay up to speed in terms of difficulty and will feel ownership of the powers they have developed. And it undercuts the need for a second-hand magic item economy. In my GM-ing brain that looks like a total win.

Cheers all.