D&D 5E No Magic Shops!

[CapnZapp]

Other than organized play, which has item regulation ostensibly as a method of balancing various tiers of play (with hit-and-miss success IMHO), I don't see any implied bad-wrong-fun implication. The models provided by WotC are suggestions that go along with their idea of bounded accuracy assumptions, ie magic is not essential to characters as they level. That's a base case, which they cater to, but in any home game the sky is the limit and has some level of support, especially with the release of XGtE.

Nothing forces you to use those systems in your home campaign, either, other than the collective echo chamber found on the internet which tends to be conformist so to avoid groupthink criticism (again IMHO).

Just to dispel a misconception (not to say "blatant falsehood"):

There is zero support for anything like a magic item economy as the ones supported the last twenty years or so.

The only value of the 5E rules for downtime and magic buy/sell is to be able to say "we do have something". Unfortunately, your post is proving that those rules provide a smokescreen that fools too many people.

Since it is all based on rarity, it is utterly useless for any campaign that hands out gold instead of magic items, so that the players can choose themselves what they want to buy.

The reason for the fan-effort "Sane Magic Prices" is exactly that the WotC support is entirely random... or as they would say: insane. Winged Boots more rare/expensive than the Broom of Flying? Weapon of Warning uncommon while Vicious Weapon rare?

Are they mad? A Weapon of Warning is a hundred times more valuable than a Vicious Weapon. (171 times more, in Sane's opinion)

So please don't tell us WotC is providing "some level of support". You aim to speak for us, but we do not want you as our spokesperson.

The first step in providing what you need for an utility-based economy is to tear out everything WotC as written so far, especially the faff in XGE.

Then... there is no step 2.

We're still waiting for step 2.

Thank you.

 

[Guest 6801328]

It always struck me as strange that 5e is designed to be the "power to the DM" edition, but that excising support for the magic item economy implies that it's bad-wrong-fun. I mean, enough people like that style of play that the "Sane Magic Item Prices" homebrew became a thing.

Could you help me understand this argument? How does not including an element that some subset of the community likes contradict "power to the DM" or imply anything about bad-wrong-fun?

If there was something in the DM's guide about "DMs can change any rules as they like except that under no circumstances may they include magic shops, and if they do it is not Dungeons and Dragons" then, yes, I could see your point.

 

[Fauchard1520]

Could you help me understand this argument? How does not including an element that some subset of the community likes contradict "power to the DM" or imply anything about bad-wrong-fun?

If there was something in the DM's guide about "DMs can change any rules as they like except that under no circumstances may they include magic shops, and if they do it is not Dungeons and Dragons" then, yes, I could see your point.

Oh sure. I just meant that there isn't official support for it. Fans had to invent a price list to support the magic shop style of play. Back in development, one of the big selling points of 5e was that it would be extremely modular, with optional subsystems (like feats) to increase or decrease complexity. My argument is that, by not including a price list, the "magic shop module" becomes a lot harder to implement. That seems at odds with the design philosophy.

Interestingly however, that decision sets up the "magic items aren't for sale" style as the default, which is arguably the lesser of two evils. I've seen my share of tables treat magic item lists like shopping catalogs, which can take a lot of the magic out of magic. Like I argued in the comic linked in the OP, giving something a price tends to make it less special. Like so many elements of design, it becomes a game of balancing pros and cons.

 

[Fanaelialae]

It always struck me as strange that 5e is designed to be the "power to the DM" edition, but that excising support for the magic item economy implies that it's bad-wrong-fun. I mean, enough people like that style of play that the "Sane Magic Item Prices" homebrew became a thing.

In my opinion, not setting prices on items IS DM-empowering.

There are guidelines in the book for setting prices based on rarity. I 100% accept that there are plenty of folks who are not satisfied with them, just pointing out that they are there. It isn't that there is NO support whatsoever, it's that a certain percentage of people isn't satisfied with the support that does exist.

However, a player cannot point at a price list and complain that the merchant is ripping them off for selling a longsword +1 (valued on this imaginary price list at 1K gp, for 2K gp. That is, IMO, empowering the DM, because the DM doesn't have to argue with the player about setting the price "unfairly".

 

[Krachek]

Magic item pricing is enough good for an RPG.
It don’t need the 1% accuracy of a war game.

 

[ccs]

You forgot the non-strawman options.

I'm sorry, I did forget one.
E) You're an AL DM & you CAN'T fix things.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Oh sure. I just meant that there isn't official support for it. Fans had to invent a price list to support the magic shop style of play. Back in development, one of the big selling points of 5e was that it would be extremely modular, with optional subsystems (like feats) to increase or decrease complexity. My argument is that, by not including a price list, the "magic shop module" becomes a lot harder to implement. That seems at odds with the design philosophy.

I don't think I agree (which is a nice way of saying I really don't agree at all) that not including a 'module' for every idea that has fans contradicts the philosophy, or that it says WotC thinks those ideas are bad ones.

I agree more with @Fanaelialae (despite the difficulty of typing that). WotC is leaving this to DMs to implement however they see fit. It's empowering.

 

[Hussar]

That is not in question. The only interesting question is if you want to deny that play style to those that like it.

What kind of support are you looking for?

What exactly do you want? A standardized price list for magic items? DM's Guild has you covered, and, if you don't like that, there's always 3e which gave you a price list as well.

What more do you need? You want fungible magic items built into every module? But, then you're throwing me under the bus, since, I certainly don't want that. How do you propose to get what you want without throwing me under the bus?

 

[Lanefan]

What exactly do you want? A standardized price list for magic items? DM's Guild has you covered, and, if you don't like that, there's always 3e which gave you a price list as well.

As did 1e, but neither list would be of much use without a lot of adjustment in the much-lower-treasure environment that is 5e.

 

[CapnZapp]

What kind of support are you looking for?

What exactly do you want? A standardized price list for magic items? DM's Guild has you covered, and, if you don't like that, there's always 3e which gave you a price list as well.

What more do you need? You want fungible magic items built into every module? But, then you're throwing me under the bus, since, I certainly don't want that. How do you propose to get what you want without throwing me under the bus?

Don't be ridiculous.

Go look up the magic item pricing and formulas of d20. Now update them for 5e (a non-trivial work). Then publish that in... not the DMG, nobody is gonna magically insert things into the DMG in your bookshelf... but in a supplement, clearly making the content non-core and optional.

The part about DMs Guild got me covered, well, considering your stance on this, I choose to not believe you. You profess ignorance of the entire idea, after all.

Plus: Why are you so eager to dismiss a core playing style for twenty years to third-party products? Obviously we deserve the full official first party WotC support, after all, they promised they would support previous editions.

Ps. Don't set up strawman buses, thank you very much.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app