D&D 5E Deconstructing 5e: Typical Wealth by Level

[5ekyu]

Well, yeah, a system where a PC can snap their fingers and convert gold into a magic item as a bonus action would be pretty terrible.

But availability of magic items is just as much in the DM's control as the presence of a wraith. Sure, if the PCs know they are going up against a bunch of undead, they could see that a mace of disruption only cost 755 gp, and try to buy one; but there's no guarantee that one is for sale. And personally, I find the rarity system perfectly fine as a gauge of availability. Universal solvent may only cost $100 because of how useless it is, but as a legendary item, it may be really really difficult to track down.

That's how to have it both ways. Provide the relative utility numbers for magic items, but make it clear to players up-front that the items they want might be hard to find -- they don't get to just pick and choose. Make that the baseline, and then DMs can relax it if they want.

Why develop a core system of an rpg around the availability to convert hold to magic items, only to then have it be driven by "no"?

That does not give any results that help anyone.

For some like me, the neutered driven-by-cost-assess rpg fails to meet our desires.
For those like Zapp, who see the inability of an outlet to spend gold for personal character bonus/power as a core system problem, having lists of prices and a deployment system driven by "no" fails to achieve that goal.

A system that only works when it's not used is not something yo wrap a rpg creation process around.

It would be like giving the rogue sneak attack but then balancing the class around them not getting sneak attacks in play and then saying yo the GM "dont give them too many."

The core purpose of putting prices based on power onto every single magic item in the game pcs might want is so that they spend gold to buy them, not to give the GM more frequent reasons and cases to have to say no.

It's a recipe for getting the absolute worst of both world and then some. There is a system built to make item pricing eork, throwing out all the ones that dont fit and then there is the core premise of the GM must say no for it to work.

Or maybe I am obviously wrong and maybe decades after decades of point buy systems have proven how easy it is and that's why it's now common and practically built in practice for every rpg cuz it's just so obvious.

What page was that agsin?

Why not just go grab hero systems 400 ph plus rulebook which is practically chock thru eith "effect value point buy msnsgrmrnt" and the, you got it, should take no time to stat out those 5e magic items and viola... it's done. I mean they have I think over 3 decades of honing that point buy for effect system, so its gotta be perfect or dang close now.

 

[Hussar]

Well, yeah, a system where a PC can snap their fingers and convert gold into a magic item as a bonus action would be pretty terrible.

But availability of magic items is just as much in the DM's control as the presence of a wraith. Sure, if the PCs know they are going up against a bunch of undead, they could see that a mace of disruption only cost 755 gp, and try to buy one; but there's no guarantee that one is for sale. And personally, I find the rarity system perfectly fine as a gauge of availability. Universal solvent may only cost $100 because of how useless it is, but as a legendary item, it may be really really difficult to track down.

That's how to have it both ways. Provide the relative utility numbers for magic items, but make it clear to players up-front that the items they want might be hard to find -- they don't get to just pick and choose. Make that the baseline, and then DMs can relax it if they want.

But here’s the question. Utility relative to what? Other magic items? In a vacuum that doesn’t work. You cannot ignore campaign when defining utility.

Monsters may vary in difficulty depending on the group but we know that. We KNOW that cr is based on a 4-6 pc group using standard array stats and no magic items. So we can adjust from there. And really the cr system is only for dms anyway to help them build encounters. It’s a pretty self contained system.

Buying magic items to spec completely changes every single aspect of 5e.

 

[CapnZapp]

First off: that players would accept a no-item campaign is a myth. WotC is both eating the cake and having it here. Their own campaigns shower adventurers in gold and items for chrissakes! The official DMG treasure hoard generation rules make for even larger hauls!

It makes no bloody sense! The system desperately screams out for a magic item pricing system.

And this absolutely has to be utility-based, or you can just randomize costs.

 

[S'mon]

Pretty sure my Primeval Thule players would accept a no items campaign. Just depends on the setting.

 

[5ekyu]

Pretty sure my Primeval Thule players would accept a no items campaign. Just depends on the setting.

Really, this gets a bit of mind boggling. There are a lot of settings and a lot of games where the gradual ush to Christmas tree of items "advancement" does not occur, much less the buy-shoppes of power goodes. Games where it's more about character than items.

I sometimes wonder if my experience having played a lot of different games, genres systems is so way out there. Cuz statements like how "players wont accept games...bla bla" just tend to bring up memories of other campaigns.

But then I remember to keep context and agendas in mind.

 

[Inglorin]

Or maybe I am obviously wrong and maybe decades after decades of point buy systems have proven how easy it is and that's why it's now common and practically built in practice for every rpg cuz it's just so obvious.

What page was that agsin?

It's probably on some page of this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?617363-Design-amp-Development-Magic-Item-Pricing

Zapp tried it here with the idea, that items could be assigned to character levels, where the items is appropriate for the character. Unfortunately the idea didn't produce a tangible result (say: a working price list by utility) and the promised follow-up thread never materialized.

 

[S'mon]

It's probably on some page of this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?617363-Design-amp-Development-Magic-Item-Pricing

Zapp tried it here with the idea, that items could be assigned to character levels, where the items is appropriate for the character. Unfortunately the idea didn't produce a tangible result (say: a working price list by utility) and the promised follow-up thread never materialized.

"Let's make DnD 4e again!"?

I think rebuilding 4e with lessons from 5e would be a lot more practical endeavour than rebuilding 5e to function like 4e.

 

[Maxperson]

First off: that players would accept a no-item campaign is a myth. WotC is both eating the cake and having it here. Their own campaigns shower adventurers in gold and items for chrissakes! The official DMG treasure hoard generation rules make for even larger hauls!

Because it's easier for DMs to remove items from official modules than to add them. Modules are there to minimize DM work.

 

[Oofta]

The rarity vs utility argument doesn't make any sense to me either. A high end Camaro or Mustang has about the same utility/speed as a Lamborghini but the Lamborghini costs several times more (talking about current generation cars, there used to be a much larger gap).

Price and utility don't always have much to do with each other. Personally I just use Xanathar's guidelines but then limit what's available for sale based on what I want to open up.

No matter what the system magic item prices are ultimately going to be arbitrary. A +2 sword should cost more than a +1, but should a +1 bow that imparts temporary magic to every arrow fired cost more than a +1 dagger? What if that dagger returns after thrown?

I wouldn't mind an official price sheet. But if there were one then you would have people clamoring to buy everything on that sheet and it limits my options as a DM to adjust prices based on my campaign. Not that I couldn't adjust prices or make limitations as a house rule, it's just easier to start with no assumptions and build what makes sense to me.

 

[5ekyu]

It's probably on some page of this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?617363-Design-amp-Development-Magic-Item-Pricing

Zapp tried it here with the idea, that items could be assigned to character levels, where the items is appropriate for the character. Unfortunately the idea didn't produce a tangible result (say: a working price list by utility) and the promised follow-up thread never materialized.

Exactly...