Excerpt: Economies [merged]

[Rex Blunder]

I don't like nested forums myself however.

Neither do I, normally. But sometimes I'm like, "Can I skip to the next post that is NOT about the Duke's resistance to Intimidate?"

 

[Thyrwyn]

Can you list an example of a real world good where:
It sells for 5 times as much as the vendor buys it for
The vendor adds no value to the good (either by changing it, or moving it from point A to point B)

Buy a bottle of wine at a restaurant. Compare price to same bottle at a retail store (state/package store). Compare price to that offered if you purchase said bottle at the winery.

I can tell you that in Pennsylvania:
1) If a local winery sells a bottle for $6, the Liquor store will have it for $10.
2) If the Liquor store sells it for $10, a restaurant will ask at least $30.

The last ratio is, in my experience, an industry standard - the food service industry generally adheres to a minimum 33% food cost (or a minimum 200% mark-up, however you prefere to look at it.

Fountain Soda is one notable exception to this rule: the last time I worked in the industry, the amount of syrup/water/CO2 in a 32 oz. soda cost less that $.15 - you would be hard pressed to convince me that the convenience of combining the ingredients for the customer justified a $1.54 mark up we charged.

 

[Kraydak]

One interesting thing about this article is that it is the first one where the mechanics don't feel like they were written for the developers. Previously revealed mechanics tended to create evil corner situations, and so really aren't good for the DM.

This set of mechanics poses severe difficulties either for module developers or for module running DMs. In 3e, where a PC's magic items are purchases rather than found, it really doesn't matter what magic items are placed in a module, but only the total value. In 4e, each and every magic item has to be tailored to the party or problems will ensue. If module writers place magic items and your party can't use it? Sucks to be you. Alternatively, module writers can say: 1 level Y item in room Z, of the DM's choice. The probably result is that if you are going to be running modules, you *really really* want to be running the "standard" party. Like how in 2e the fighter specialized in longsword as opposed to halberd: thats what the magic weapons were.

Very awkward. 4e might be conceptually simpler, but the DM gives up 3e's ability to *not care* what items he placed beyond getting the monetary conversion value approximately right.

 

[Protagonist]

Great, now 4E even has it's own travelling salesman problem.
What's next? Waiting for the encumbrance rules to find the perfect mix of items to fill a bag of holding?

 

[Stormtalon]

But isn't the "Cough wandering merchants cough" rule in the excerpt a way of saying, in effect, "No matter where the PCs are, there will be someone to buy their items" -- as opposed to the 3e wealth limits/town size rules, which meant PCs couldn't sell their +4 sword in every hamlet they came across? I read those rules (or guidelines, or suggestions) in the excerpt as saying to DMs, "Don't you worry your pretty little heads about where the money comes from or goes to; if the PCs have loot to get rid of, Travelling Joe will be in the nearest village to take it off their hands."

I'm probably gonna have a random table at hand in regards to that travelling merchant.

d10 roll:

1-2: "Ahh, sorry lads, but ye just missed him. Think he was headed towards [next town]."
3-5: "Aye, he's here, but ye'll have to wait a bit. Word is he got into a bit o'carousin' last night and is sleepin' it off. Don't go tryin' to bother him, neither -- his bodyguards be rough customers."
6-7: "Think he's off in [tavern name] settin' up shop. Better get to 'im quick afore the womenfolk pick his wares clean."
8-9: "Hrm, well, there be a merchant what comes thru here, aye, but he ain't due for another [d6+1] days yet, I don't think."
10: "Funny ye'd ask that, he shoulda been here by now. Sure as hell hope nothin' happened to 'im, as Betsy (she's me wife, ye see) had her heart set on some new pots & pans, and maybe some of them dragon-spices we've heard tell about. Could we bother ye to go look for him? He usually comes in from [town name]."

So, a 50% chance he's in town, but even then he might not be easily accessible. At best, they'll have to push through something resembling a christmas shopping frenzy, at worst they'll have to wait for him to sleep off his drunken stupor. Plus there's a 10% chance something happened to him, and who knows where that'll lead....

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

To the Pro-4E Magic Item System Crowd:

My question is, is there a better system out there that creates similar disincentives without such a clumsy mechanic? Aside from the "I tell my players that if they swap too many things, they will get less" types?

-Cross

My solution in my best 3E campaign was rather extreme.. I shipwrecked my PCs on a huge deserted tropical island at the start of my campaign with an assortment of mangy piratey sailors, a mysterious dark ship captain, a conniving whiny navigator, and an assortment of would-be colonists who never reached their final destination.

The island had ancient ruins (Tomb of Absynthor and Rappan Athuk), dangerous critters, a bunch of cannibal savages, and a big red dragon who lived in a volcano and burned ships that got close to the island.

So, no merchants, and no selling items!

Ken

 

[AlphaAnt]

This set of mechanics poses severe difficulties either for module developers or for module running DMs. In 3e, where a PC's magic items are purchases rather than found, it really doesn't matter what magic items are placed in a module, but only the total value. In 4e, each and every magic item has to be tailored to the party or problems will ensue. If module writers place magic items and your party can't use it? Sucks to be you. Alternatively, module writers can say: 1 level Y item in room Z, of the DM's choice. The probably result is that if you are going to be running modules, you *really really* want to be running the "standard" party. Like how in 2e the fighter specialized in longsword as opposed to halberd: thats what the magic weapons were.

Not necessarily. If the rules for parcels are good enough, you don't need to put treasure in a module at all. Just list what encounters give parcels and how many, and the DM can use the parcel rules to determine what that parcel consists of.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Cross - let's put this in game terms: let's say that it would take the characters a month to find a buyer for their precious magic item; how many encounters could they have had if they were out adventuring? certainly more than 10, which means they could have more raw wealth by doing what they are good at, and letting the merchant do what he is good at.

In terms of real time and opportunity cost, they are better off selling at 20% than they are spending month to sell at even 140%

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

I can see why WoTC went with these rules -- 4E is designed with the idea that fast fun gameplay absolutely trumps simulationism. It's just that I prefer more simulationism in my games.

Really, what an adventuring group ought to do is to make ties with several other adventuring groups, one of significantly higher level and several of lower level. Then magic items could get passed down the chain, eliminating the 20% markdown.

Either that or just kill the guaranteed wandering merchant in each village and take his stuff.

Ken

 

[TerraDave]

I cannot believe the concept of an illiquid market is so hard to accept.

Damn it man, when did you start making so much sense!