Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ycore Rixle" data-source="post: 4390087" data-attributes="member: 675">Tell me about it! D&D has never had a working self-consistent world. Eberron was the first serious attempt by the brand owners to make a world that operated, at least to some extent, according to the D&D rules. I share your respect for Gygax - I think the 1e DMG is an unrecognized literary classic - but there is always room for improvement in any art form. I think one way that D&D could improve is by having a world that makes sense according to its rules. As Andor said, one wonders why the non-sensical economy is a sacred cow that the designers decided to keep. I suppose the answer is that it's not an easy cow to slay (maybe a +6 Holy Avenger would help).Tom is right about the F-22 comparison. Going from +5 to +6 on a Holy Avenger is nowhere near the benefit of going from air equality to air superiority. (I've seen reports that F-22's can score something like 100-to-1 or better kill ratios. Makes you wonder if Air Force colonels are allowed to say ZOMG in official reports.)I understand the point about "no one makes these items; they're leftover artifacts of an earlier age, or they appear by DM fiat, or whatever." That makes sense, and it's all good. I could totally see a world where such powerful items are not fashionable with current knowledge/skill/conditions. But such items could still be sold. They would have a market price, but not a manufacture cost. Unfortunately in the RAW anything with a market price also has a manufacture cost via the Enchant Item ritual. Which means, assuming that Ted DiBiase was right and everything has a price, that un-manufacturable items do not exist (barring Rule Zero, of course). Or, I suppose, it means that only the PCs can manufacture such items. But in that case the PCs are playing by rules different from the rest of the world, and that doesn't sit well with me because I find it much more impressive to be heroic without being the favored son of the gods or physics.It comes down to, as Shemeska said, the fact that 4e is all about the primacy of the game over the consistency of the world. Earlier versions of D&D had messed-up economies too. And that's ok; game design decisions get made one way or the other all the time. I disagree with this decision, and I think it's important to point out the economy and world-simulation as possible areas of improvement for future games, but I still enjoy playing D&D in all its versions.</blockquote>

Verification