D&D 5E "Auction-style" magic shoppes

[CapnZapp]

In my games

Please start a new thread instead of drawing away from the focus of this one. Thanks

 

[Lanefan]

That seems simple enough. The PC determines a starting price, and the system kicks off from there. The merchant probably takes a cut of the final price as commission, or maybe a flat commission.

And if the PC has to wait for a few price drops to occur it might be months before any return comes in. And, you're assuming a merchant or middleman - what if the PC wants to sell the item direct-to-buyer?

This strikes me as an excellent opportunity for roleplaying. The characters find a valuable item. How valuable? They're not sure. They've got to negotiate a division based on imperfect information. Maybe they divide the gold evenly and then bid portions of their treasure on magic items, so the amount each one gets is dependent on his or her tolerance for risk.

Quite right, and in the OP's system this would (probably) be the case. My point is that - in a typical 5e game that doesn't have a magic item economy or item values - once an item is thus claimed at a value that item then has...wait for it...a value, which flies in the face of 5e rules as written.

Lan-"the one huge headache I can see arising with the OP's pricing tables is the game might devolve into a mind-numbing exercise of 'buy low, sell high'"-efan

 

[CapnZapp]

I do think the math could be cleaned up a bit for ease of use. I don't think you need to introduce a formula to calculate the current asking price. Oh, there can and should be a formula, of course, but you can just plot it all out on a big table tying asking prices to ratings. That way a DM only has to look up the number, not do any multiplication (or exponentiation, as you threatened). So something like...

I'm trying to understand how you feel this is easier.

I might add that I won't be making any manual calculations like in my example above.

This is much more easily handled by a spreadsheet. Doing the = X^2/40 * Y calculation is no bother there.

Having prices fluctuate by a factor of nearly two million is too hardcore even for me...

 

[CapnZapp]

I wouldn't set the "disappear" price with a d12 die roll, where it's nigh impossible to have not at least one price decrease and several price decreases are very likely.

Instead, if I was reducing by d6, I'd have a 6 means someone else bought it or the seller took it off the market. So there would always be a threat of letting it tick.

Hmm, nice simplification.

The probability of not rolling any sixes out of three tries is (5/6)^3 or 57%. So this actually has the same property I desire, that if you risk letting the item stay on the shelf for three consecutive weeks

But that's very rough math. Without doing it more properly, I'd say we probably want to up the disappear risk slightly, perhaps by simply stating we reroll all ones on the d6. This makes the risk go up to 1-in-5 instead of 1-in-6.

 

[CapnZapp]

the predicate for it is different in 5e than 3e- specifically, 5e runs fine without magic items

It's not that I need magic items to make 5E work. In other words I don't disagree.

But my players have specifically asked for ways to spend their gold on worthwhile things, and as I've said, we don't focus on downtime.

Being able to turn your loot into personal power ups is fun!

So this isn't about fixing what's broken, it's about bringing back a layer of fun customization to the game.

Specific to this thread is: do you feel something of this nature would work in "hiding" the lack of framework visavi item pricing? I mean, Sane prices is better than nothing, but this way it hopefully matters much less whether the prices are an accurate reflection of the item's utility in game and in combat.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[CapnZapp]

This is fine for buying items, if perhaps a bit over-complicated to be practical at the table.

But, (as usual for me) some questions:

No problem. In fact, I welcome them

- how does it work if you turn it around to where the PC (or party) is the seller?
- is it random which items come up for sale when, and if not how is the 'available inventory' determined?
- where does the initial 'list price' come from, and how is that set?
- how long needs to pass between price checks? (the write-up seems to imply one check per adventure, which is too slow given most campaigns only seem to go for 5-10 adventures)
- how does this work, if at all, with internal party treasury division?

Different editions of D&D have set selling prices to 20% to 50% of the list price (not counting haggling and bargaining systems).

We have found that in order to not focus on hauling loot a lower percentage works best, for us. (At 50% I have at least one player who can't resist spending the whole session on figuring out ways to bring back every. single. scrap. of inferior armor, various knick-knacks and even low-grade ore. Making looting a non-issue seems to help him focus on actually having fun... )

Yes, random. In my example, I made rolls on the DMG magic item table. In actual play, I'd do pretty much the same, but with one eye to serving the actual characters and their classes.

List prices: you can use the DMG. I use Sane Prices.

Not once per whole adventure, but once per visit. Between visits you need to perform at least one quest or mini-scenario. This would pretty much boil down to once every session for us, since we level up every three sessions or so.

Treasure division: my players have never had any issues with this. They have an internal round-robin list where you get to pick an item (and be placed last on the list) or keep your spot (but get no item).

Once everybody passes, any remaining loot is sold for cash. Cash is then split equally.

But that's just one single group. Other groups do it differently.

It's not part of the rules in any case, so my answer can only be "do it as usual"

 

[CapnZapp]

Sure! Seems pretty cool, for your needs.

I think the best way to find out is to run it.

I would probably error on the side of caution, and both start with higher prices, with a higher chance of an item disappearing. Just because it's easier to start with scarcity and make it more generous, than the other way around.

Are you merely erring here, or are you saying you believe the prices and risks need to be higher?

Very few items will have a starting asking price of less than five times its list price (unless my math broke down). To me, that sounds very high.

And my goal was that every other item disappears before it reaches list price. That would make the list price the actual <s>average</s> median, assuming you can keep your cool and never jump your gun.

These assumptions are definitely up for scrutiny (as is the math!)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[CapnZapp]

Wait, what? What makes you think you can't do that? Is the money you get all glued together in a giant sticky ball or something?

No, it's that by the rules you can't get money for an item in the first place.

5e as written has no magic item economy, meaning items cannot be bought...or sold.

It's a stupid rule, to be sure...but a rule nonetheless, for those as likes their games RAW.

Lanefan

My easiest answer would be: when you sell a magic item, you get half the list price.

I'd add: but not in cash; only as a part payment for something more expensive. But in practical play that doesn't make a difference.

The convenience in simply converting that +1 Longsword you found into 500 gp is that then you can share that to give 100 gp to each party member. This convenience is so great, I see no reason to make the above qualification.

Especially considering how all those gp will probably end up in the pockets of the magic item merchant anyway....