D&D 5E 5E's "Missed Opportunities?"

CapnZapp

Legend
I checked the DMG again, and it specifically calls out Rarity as tracking with utility.

And I am specifically calling out everything the DMG say as simply uninformed at best and intentionally misleading at worst.

Please stop repeating the company line and telling me what the books say - that doesn't give us any basis for discussion. Form your own opinion.

I'm telling you rarity is just useless, and in no way shape or form an adequate replacement for utility-based pricing.

Worse is if it's used as a smokescreen, to claim the pricing issue is solved, when it really isn't. That is, the worst thing about rarity is when decent people like you believe the hype and think the issue is settled. Then rarity is worse than no system at all - because if there weren't any system at least the basic question of whether we have a functional system would be a clear and resounding "no".

Now. This thread can't be made into yet another one about pricing, so please - I am not dismissing you, but I'd like for you to read up on the arguments, learn about the worst examples of where rarity goes wrong, find out how utility-based pricing is supposed to work... Maybe check out Sane's price list for a quick primer on the issue?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

CapnZapp

Legend
I understand why they didn't have a magic item price list, because it's easier to add things in later than it is to take things away. Because no matter how much you say everything is optional, some people will inevitably assume it's core.
Well, while the point "should it be in the DMG" has been well and truly settled for five years now (it isn't), I'm still sceptical, since you have worked against utility based price lists in every. single. one. of the threads discussing it, so allow me to remain sceptical of your sincerity here...

Oh, and as well as i'm wishing for things a pony would be nice too.
...and, oh, it didn't take long for you to reveal your true colors.

Again.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
Thank you for going constructive - it's all too rare.

I absolutely agree 3E was far from perfect, and made several missteps.

But detractors all simply wash their hands, saying "that proves it's impossible". And WotC likes this idea (which is nothing less than pure FUD), because they (not so) secretly don't want to do the hard work.

They much rather continue on the path to destroying the core gold hunt that is D&D - just look at Xanathar and the excrecable "treasure point" system. It's abominable to think this would ever be adopted wider than just the AL.

A much more constructive and positive way forward is to tackle the design issues right on. You mentioning the shopping menu nature of it all. We all agree that's probably not what was intended, but we also acknowledge that's how it ended up.

This situation demands that the system is complemented by a rule detailing availability, and not merely as a vaguely optional/variant rule either, but as something that's built into the core of the system.

And item creation probably needs the "formula" or "ingredient" solution, again as a core non-optional system, where you can't create diddly squat unless you have the items required (thus allowing the DM to veto specific items). I prefer ingredients over formulas, since with a formula, once you've opened the gates to a certain item, it can be manufactured over and over again. For some items, that's fine. For others, not so much. With ingredients, the DM can control not just which items that are possible to make but also how many.

What is absolutely necessary is much more robust DM assistance. What items are appropriate to hand out to your heroes?

If the rules mandates formulas and ingredients, it should also provide default recommendations. Something 3E never did until it was way too late. The devs did learn loads about the way the system worked (as opposed to how it was intended to work). And I'm sure Pathfinder ("version 3.75") have amassed even more knowledge.

So creating a second (third? seventh?) version of d20 item pricing and creation should be entirely possible.

You touch upon more points, but I'll stop here. My point is none of this is easy. Anyone claiming this could be whipped up by just some fan on DMsG is just talking through their ass.

In fact, this is hard. Very hard to calibrate just right. And time-consuming since attention to detail is paramount. The ones that ought do it is the core dev team of WotC.

And even the highest seller on DmsG reaches just a fraction of the audience of the worst-selling official 5E publication. To gain system-wide adoption (while still entirely opt-in), it absolutely must be in an official hardback like Xanathar.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
A lot of these ‘missed opportunities’ are opportunities to make your game your own. Magic item economy being one of them. I know that means taking responsibility for ones own game but... welcome to being a DM.

Creating an updated improved version of chapter 8 of the 3.0 DMG is a mammoth task. It is entirely inappropriate a task for a single DM, not to mention suggesting several DMs all reinvent the wheel individually.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
I would say that at this point, it is exceedingly unlikely that (1) will happen, so you are probably better off with (2) or (3). I feel like this conversation has occurred before. :)
Thank you.

I will especially like to thank you for acknowledging that now you have switched the subject. Convincing the detractors and denouncing their arguments is still a worthwhile endeavor - because how will we ever convince WotC if there are still people genuinely (or disingenuously!) believing rarity is a functional replacement for utility?

That said, I am convinced (3) is not merely impossible, it is also entirely inappropriate. Creating your own monster, sure. Even a whole scenario? Why not.

But item creation pricing and creation is a very intricate subject of the highest complexity that warrants a full chapter of whatever book it is published in. It is a task far more difficult than writing entire rpgs!

Suggesting (3) therefore mostly just reveals your own ignorance of the sheer complexity of the task. I truly believe it is as useful "why don't you just write your own rpg if you want one to play". That is, asking each and every DM to reinvent the wheel when one wheel that we all focus on perfecting would be infinitely preferable.

(And now I am not saying this to you specifically. After all you did say you widened the discussion to design in general, and so I choose to not read your (1) as actively suggesting "create your own magic item pricing and creation framework")

That leaves (2) - which I am not above acceding that a dedicated group of fans could pull off.

I remain convinced, however, that (1) is the best option (and the option WotC owes us, unless they're prepared to finally admit they never had any plans to offer the full previous edition compatibility they promised)

I do agree it is currently somewhat unlikely (given WotCs path with "treasure points"), but rpg companies have wildly changed course before, and they will do so again.


Zapp

PS. If anything, option (1b) is the most likely solution in the short term = Paizo for its Pathfinder 2 system. Compared to the DmsG Pathfinder have a far superior reach and "officialness", even if conversion between systems would be required. I really have no clue what they're gearing up for, though.
 

Sadras

Legend
But item creation pricing and creation is a very intricate subject of the highest complexity that warrants a full chapter of whatever book it is published in. It is a task far more difficult than writing entire rpgs!

I'd go so far as to say much more than that.

The complexity of marrying/reconciling item creation, magic item pricing, the economy, to innate abilities - especially with the inclusion of cantrips into the game and the variables of low and high level magic campaigns, larger and smaller settlements...etc
We are looking at tables and tables of details required.

Our group went to the City of Splendours, the best I could do was provide a list (30-40 items) of consumables, potions and enchantments that I was comfortable to include in the campaign and at a reasonable pricing based on utility. And this took me some time.

I just don't think one chapter can cover this properly. It needs an entire book IMO.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
We are looking at tables and tables of details required.

It needs an entire book IMO.

Well, if you're including lots of juicy new actual items, as well as a compliation of all existing items (possibly with errata), then yes, obviously.

But the actual magic item pricing and creation framework doesn't rely primarily on tables, it relies on formulas. And it doesn't need a whole book of its own. (Saying this mostly because otherwise it would appear scarily difficult to use, when that is not the case).

The idea is to not just give us a fish, but teach us how to fish.

The dev team of any edition of D&D has internal guidelines for pricing items. It is this internal process that we want externalized. The book should show the DM how to price entirely new items. Not by "look at similar items" but "look at what abilities the item confers".

So, sure, some tables will be used, but at the core of it, the framework should be characterized as based on formulas, not tables.

If it fills a book, it does so much in the way the d20 Magic Item Compendium filled a book, not because of the fishing instructions, but because of all the individual fish descriptions. :)
 

cmad1977

Hero
5E's "Missed Opportunities?"

Creating an updated improved version of chapter 8 of the 3.0 DMG is a mammoth task. It is entirely inappropriate a task for a single DM, not to mention suggesting several DMs all reinvent the wheel individually.

It’s also completely unnecessary and would be a titanic waste of resources.
Any time players want to buy magic items I ask myself...
Is it there?
If yes then I charge them an appropriate amount.
If no... then it’s not there.

It’s a 1 minute or less process at the table.

Seize the opportunity to make the game your own instead of relying upon people to do it for you.

Lots of times this has led the heroes onto entire adventures we didn’t expect.
 

Sadras

Legend
Any time players want to buy magic items I ask myself...
Is it there?
If yes then I charge them an appropriate amount.
If no... then it’s not there.

It’s a 1 minute or less process at the table.

And how many minutes does it take when the group wants to go to the apothecary shop and peruse the list of magical potions, balms, oils and elixirs? Or when one of the martial characters visits the guild of magists to obtain various quotes on numerous types of enchantment on weapons, armour and shields? ...etc

For myself, I'd honestly prefer to have that pre-prepped for consistency purposes, but with no structure provided on what could be found in various settlement sizes in high or low magic campaigns that makes sense with the economy, it does become a little bit of a chore if I have to do all that legwork myself. I could do with less tables for NPC names and more information on magical item availability and the like.
 
Last edited:

cmad1977

Hero
5E's "Missed Opportunities?"

And how many minutes does it take when the group wants to go to the apothecary shop and peruse the list of magical potions, balms, oils and elixirs? Or when one of the martial characters visits the guild of magists to obtain various quotes on numerous types of enchantment on weapons, armour and shields? ...etc

Maybe... 5? Seriously...

‘I want to look for some potions and stuff’
‘Ok the apothecary has a variety of things here
Various healing potions, a potion of invisibility, a bottle of healing ointments and some magic glue. What would you like?’

‘I want to head to the magic smith’
‘Ok, it’s actually a smithing pair. An elf and a dwarf here mix their talents to produce high quality goods. What are you looking for?
‘Well... actually I kind of want to enchant my shield to protect me from fire’
‘Sure! It’ll take a couple days but Enlarion the elven Smith can knock that out for you.’

Seriously. Not that hard.
 

Remove ads

Top