D&D 5E How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?

Savevsdeath · Jun 4, 2019

Draegn said:
Also have consequences for using "powerful" magic. Eddings did this in his novels. The main character Garion creates a huge storm to stop a battle, after which his uncle has to travel hither to "reset" the proper weather patterns to avoid droughts, floods, etc....

This can be okay, but i personally don't want to punish players for using their powers. That's an old and overused trope that is almost never fun to play with at the table; having a power and not being able to use it because 'oops, you screwed up everything in a ten-mile radius' gets old very quickly. I know some settings use similar ideas - Dark Sun's world of Athas comes to mind - but i have lost count of the number of times i've seen 'the whole world hates magic and you will be hunted down with torches and pitchforks' or 'magic always has bad side-effects' or 'magic makes you go insane' as a 'limiter' on magic use. That runs counter to letting players have and enjoy being powerful, though again it can create adventures on its own those adventures nearly always involve the player character using magic and by extension their partymembers working outside of law or tradition and being, if not badguys, then at least outlaws by default. Some players won't like that (I hated it).

Stalker0 · Jun 4, 2019

Savevsdeath said:
This can be okay, but i personally don't want to punish players for using their powers).

I think it comes down to what level you think your game may go to. If certain level spells will never happen, then putting a setting restriction on them explains why they don’t effect the world in a reasonable way.

darkrose50 · Jun 4, 2019

[1] I suppose it would depend on:

(a) how common a casting type is,
(b) how common a caster of the level of the spell would be, and
(c) the social-economic ramifications of wealth-transfer

[2] For example, say that for a human we start at adulthood ~18 that on average it takes a number of years equal to the next level to gain a level.

[3] Figure ~100 years life expectancy.

33 was the average medieval life expectancy for a male. If a male survived until 25, then his average life expectancy bumped up to age 58. This would somehow influence the numbers somewhat, but let us leave that one with a pin in it.

[4] Then say each level above has ½ the number.

1st = 1-year = age 19 . . . ~2048 / ~4095
2nd = 3-years = age 21 . . . ~1024 / ~4095
3rd = 6-years = age 24 . . . ~512 / ~4095
4th = 10-years = age 28 . . . ~256 / ~4095
5th = 15-years = age 33 . . . ~128 / ~4095
6th = 21-years = age 39 . . . ~64 / ~4095
7th = 28-years = age 46 . . . ~32 / ~4095
8th = 36-years = age 54 . . . ~16 / ~4095
9th = 45-years = age 63 . . . ~8 / ~4095
10th = 55-years = age 73 . . . ~4 / ~4095
11th = 66-years = age 84 . . . ~2 / ~4095
12th = 78-years = age 96 . . . ~1 / ~4095

[5] Then let us compare these numbers to ~ historical medieval England. Evidently there were ~6000 knights and/or knightly manors . . . so let us multiple the above ~4095 numbers by 1.5 for simplicity sake.

1st = 1-year = age 19 . . . ~2048 x 1.5 = ~3072
2nd = 3-years = age 21 . . . ~1024 x 1.5 = ~1536
3rd = 6-years = age 24 . . . ~512 x 1.5 = ~768
4th = 10-years = age 28 . . . ~256 x 1.5 = ~384
5th = 15-years = age 33 . . . ~128 x 1.5 = ~192
6th = 21-years = age 39 . . . ~64 x 1.5 = ~96
7th = 28-years = age 46 . . . ~32 x 1.5 = ~48
8th = 36-years = age 54 . . . ~16 x 1.5 = ~24
9th = 45-years = age 63 . . . ~8 x 1.5 = ~12
10th = 55-years = age 73 . . . ~4 x 1.5 = ~6
11th = 66-years = age 84 . . . ~2 x 1.5 = ~3
12th = 78-years = age 96 . . . ~1 x 1.5 = ~1.5

[7] There were likely more than one knight per manor (brothers, uncles, sons, and so on).

So likely more than the above.

[8a] Then share those casters somehow among the eight (?) classes.

1. Bard
2. Cleric
3. Druid
4. Paladin
5. Ranger
6. Sorcerer
7. Warlock
8. Wizard

[8b] Perhaps we use the numbers in step 5 to estimate the number of divine casters, and we also could assume an equal number of arcane casters . . . this could make figuring out the probability for a given spell being cast a bit more simple. This would also make 1-mage-ish = 1-cleric-ish = 1-knight. I would think that they would at the least have equal social standing.

Gwarok · Jun 4, 2019

Stalker0 said:
Some campaigns couldn't give a hoot about economics, in which case this discussion isn't really for you....

So this is in reply to the original poster, as I'm not reading all the way through a berjillion other posts on the topic. It reminded me of a similar conversation I had with my brother who didn't like high level because the power of high level characters was "game breaking". When you have just a few individuals who can slaughter hundreds, maybe thousands of regular soldiers, it would all fall apart. That someone who could blow up a whole platoon with a wave of their hand, soldiers wouldn't be able to cope and just flee the battlefield. My response will be the same for the economic side of things.

Look at modern society. We have increased production to levels that actually far exceed what you're describing. We've achieved military power that can level, even with conventional weapons, square kilometers at one shot. Artillery and missile strikes that make Meteor Swarms look like a backyard firework. Yet we haven't "broken the game" of real life. Just keep that in perspective and you can DM it from there.

WaterRabbit · Jun 4, 2019

Gwarok said:
Yet we haven't "broken the game" of real life.

I think that is up for debate -- especially depending upon where one lives.

darkrose50 · Jun 4, 2019

Horwath said:
This could turn into philosophical debate but,

Poverty comes from; available resources in any given area vs. number of people in that area. Attitude of governing bodies towards it's general populace and also ability of general population to use available resources.

Just if you give someone house and land and car/farming equipment does not mean it will work for them in the long run. Or that will be used to max of it's capacity.

Removing poverty starts with education and self-control, not with money being thrown your way.

Social capital is the idea that behaviors are learned and passed down. A first generation fisherman would be at a disadvantage competing against another fisherman with generations of built up social capital. Money works the same way.

Stress causes people to do stupid things. Lacking resources is stressful. People lacking resources do stupid things due to stress.

Effort and money are not always coupled. It is my experience and observation that they are often not related.

I have a 4.0 GPA in grad school, but could not finish student teaching. No matter the effort. I will not earn money as a teacher.

I nigh-effortlessly earn on average a 13.3% return on my stock market investments (2004-2018).

I work as an insurance agent. I am taxed at a higher rate for my work, than for my nigh-effortlessly generated investment money. My actual work income is temporally bound (a flat amount), and my nigh-effortlessly generated investment income is not temporally bound (a percentage). People power-game the heck out of this!

Make no mistake those with money can be lazy all-day-long, and those with little money can work all-day-long. I would wager that there are a lot of lazy wealthy folks (making money with money is the ultimate super apex of effortless work). Being poor . . . that is often, but not always, hard work.

Money does not care how hard you work.

Give me $100,000 and I will make it earn more money (I am from a middle class background, I learned the some merchant skills from my police-officer father who likes antiques, but otherwise I collected ideas about money from curiosity). Give someone without money skills $100,000 and perhaps see them buy a fancy car, and a trip to the Behamas. Poor people have little experience with money. This is often true. Not having experience with a topic is not the way to excel at a topic.

Krachek · Jun 4, 2019

I think it’s more interesting to dream about how « raise dead » can influence a society.
How much power can such a spell give to caster? How much a church leader will ask to raise a dead king or heir?
Our historical Pope were having a strong power just by allowing divorce. Imagine now raise dead!

cbwjm · Jun 4, 2019

Krachek said:
I think it’s more interesting to dream about how « raise dead » can influence a society.
How much power can such a spell give to caster? How much a church leader will ask to raise a dead king or heir?
Our historical Pope were having a strong power just by allowing divorce. Imagine now raise dead!

The benefits with being the dominant religion. The good thing about most DnD worlds is that if one High Priest won't do it, then there are others who will likely be more willing to gain favour with the king. Of course, that's assuming the next in line doesn't actively work to prevent it.

Krachek · Jun 5, 2019

cbwjm said:
The benefits with being the dominant religion. The good thing about most DnD worlds is that if one High Priest won't do it, then there are others who will likely be more willing to gain favour with the king. Of course, that's assuming the next in line doesn't actively work to prevent it.

And some bard and sorcerer can be in line too to do the job.
Dm interested in building world with different kingdom or culture have a wide possibility of outcomes.
The different ways magical power can be applied can produce very different setup.

gyor · Jun 5, 2019

Krachek said:
I think it’s more interesting to dream about how « raise dead » can influence a society.
How much power can such a spell give to caster? How much a church leader will ask to raise a dead king or heir?
Our historical Pope were having a strong power just by allowing divorce. Imagine now raise dead!

In Cormyr resurrecting the King is illegal, and the raised King would no longer be allowed to remain King. When this became law I don't know.

A lot of laws would exist to regulate powerful magic realistically, so that economic and social chaos does not result fromnabusing certain spells. Just like counterfeiting money is a crime, using magic to mess up the economy would be banned or regulated.