D&D 5E [+] Design & Development: Magic Item Pricing

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Kinematics]

When I speak of the generic +1 weapon, I mean the best-in-class +1 weapon.

In some sense, I could agree to make the rapier that weapon. But at least in game with feats, all my players that has created martial characters has opted for the "big guns", and so two-handed weapons see much more use, relegating one-handed weapons to specialist usage (such as Rogues and Monks).

So in my view, the +1 weapon we need to price first is the two-handed weapon. Whether we end up selecting the glaive, the greatsword or the hand crossbow is, in my opinion, not a primary issue, and I'm happy to leave that for later. After all we're in agreement it ain't the longsword or the sickle and that's good enough for now!

While I understand your point, I still think the longsword is a better baseline. Its popularity isn't the point.

It can be used one-handed, with top-end one-handed damage. It can be used two-handed, with 'typical', if not 'best' two-handed damage. It can be used with GWM if needed, but does not have the additional skew of PAM that complicates what you'd consider for the glaive. At the same time, since you're trying to make this a very "5E" implementation, you must consider that feats may not be used, which means this has to work even without the extra advantage of those feats. For that situation, it's equivalent to the glaive in damage, but doesn't have the extra reach, which is another factor to consider.

Basically, for the same reason that Cap'n Kobold is wanting to divest the attack/damage bonus from the basic magic damage property, I'd want to divest the extra weapon features from the baseline. The baseline weapon should be very vanilla. Things like reach, feats, ranged, finesse, dual-wielding, etc, should be removed as much as possible, because not doing so complicates the comparison of all the other weapons to your baseline. If you have to constantly un-factor some property from your baseline, you didn't choose a good baseline.

Of course, the longsword has versatile, which is yet another factor, but at the same time means it can be compared just as easily to the one-handed weapons as the two-handed weapons, which is another thing to make the relative values easier to design.

 

[CapnZapp]

I am not "misleading" I just truly don't understand why you are overcomplicating this?

First off, apologies if you thought I accused you of misleadery (is that a word?) - what I meant was that you happened to use an example where the low and high points just happened to be one power of ten lower and higher respectively, which is not true in general.

Look at the curves. There are no single static multiplier that takes us from one curve to another.

At level 11, the blue curve is at .2 of the red while the green is at x2.3
At level 17, the blue curve is at .06 of the red while the green is nearly the same (x1).

You simply cannot use the red or any other specific curve as a baseline and apply a static modifier to arrive at the other curves.

And am I really overcomplicating things? The end result will be something similar to this

+1 Accordion of Joy
Price: 8th (Typical: 6,000 gp, Starting: 1,000 gp, Pathfinder: 11,000 gp)​

Except it's far too early to even begin discussing which wealth curves should be in the main document, or even if it's wise to use more than one. Instead let's focus on the "8th", the price expressed as a level.

In this case, I've assumed "one third" is the share of total wealth you can pour into a single item. In other words, the curves say an 8th level character can be expected to have 18000, 3000 and 33000 gp, respectively. Divide each number by three and you end up with my example. This might sound difficult, but will of course be handled by Excel later on

The point is, with only "6000 gp" and no "8th" it becomes impossible to use our work for other wealth curves. And that seemed like a shame, since it really is no more difficult to discuss "should it be 8 or is 7 better" than "is 6000 gp good?"

Easier really, since we have effectively only twenty numbers to argue about. We will never have to kill each other over "it should be 5500 gp, not 6000 gp. No, I prefer 7200 gp!!"

Having only 20 numbers reinforce that specific numbers matters little. It's really only the magnitude that is important here.

Hope that helps... and thanks for forcing me to verbalize what otherwise could easily have been overlooked!

 

[Kinematics]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] — Can you better explain your wealth curves from the graph in post #21? While the "Starting" curve is easy enough — it's a flat value per tier from the DMG — I just can't figure out how you arrived at that curve for the 5E Treasure line. It doesn't match anything I've been able to put together. (And I have no 3.e or Pathfinder materials, so can't make any analysis of those.)

The DMG info provides only linear data for the various tiers, but at least for levels 11-16, you are clearly not using linear results.

 

[CapnZapp]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] — Can you better explain your wealth curves from the graph in post #21? While the "Starting" curve is easy enough — it's a flat value per tier from the DMG — I just can't figure out how you arrived at that curve for the 5E Treasure line. It doesn't match anything I've been able to put together. (And I have no 3.e or Pathfinder materials, so can't make any analysis of those.)

The DMG info provides only linear data for the various tiers, but at least for levels 11-16, you are clearly not using linear results.

You've caught me red-handed. Barring a real calculation of this, I've cheated (=extrapolated)

And made mistakes too... I think it's best if you read the first and last 2 posts of this thread:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?402507-Deconstructing-5e-Typical-Wealth-by-Level

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[CapnZapp]

Oh, okay. I think I get what you're saying. I don't know that I would agree with that approach, if I was to have magic shoppes (I love the "pes" at the end!).

If you are assuming that character wealth is the correct measure, and basing it on level (for example, 1/3 of your wealth at level 8), then you would run into two problems-

1. Either it's a fixed amount (how much "should" you have, based on a standard campaign), in which case it's the same as a fixed price list that you can easily vary based on a multiplier depending on the campaign type; or

Except there is no "should" and no "standard" in 5th edition

If we all ran our campaigns the same, handing out 33000 gp on average at level 8 or whatever (you handing out 27000 gp one campaign and 39000 gp the next, me handing out 33000 gp every time, averaging out to the same)... then we could skip this step... but we don't so we can't. The point is to make people handing out exceptionally small gold rewards feel included, especially since it isn't a real sacrifice to do so

2. It's a variable amount based on the amount the characters accrue, in which case gold doesn't matter, again, because magic items just accrue with level (because why bother slaying the dragon when you know an item will just be 1/3 of whatever you have at that level).

Sorry don't understand what you mean. Why would you ever want to not slay dragons, creatures famous for having extra goldy hoards?

I get that you're restricting it to twenty numbers (based on levels), but that still feels like it's slotting magic items into "gain as you go slots," as opposed to being "for sale." Which, if that's what you're going for, that works, but I think I misinterpreted the assignment.

Well, it will be easy to produce a price list with only a single gold price (omitting level-prices and alternate wealth curves) once we're done if that helps the average DM that does not want to think about the underlying mechanics. Would that help?

It also seems you're forgetting the main draw of having shoppes (apart from them ending in "es" ) - the fun in being able to customize your character yourself.

The monster does not drop a +1 longspear and 3 potions of heroism, the monster drops 7600 gold. This means you get to choose yourself whether to equip yourself with a magic longspear or something entirely different!

 

[CapnZapp]

(And I have no 3.e or Pathfinder materials, so can't make any analysis of those.)

Here you go

https://www.dndarchive.com/forums/depth-roleplay-qa/character-wealth-level

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[CapnZapp]

[MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION] - at this stage I think we better call off our discussion.

slotting items based on level? gold is useless? all of this money and nothing to spend it on? the cost always adjusts? money not a reward??

I must have rolled a critical failure of the highest order since to me, you appear to have gotten it completely and utterly backwards.

This will have to end here - I have replied three or four times already... but nothing I say seems to get across, like at all.

Best of luck in your future endeavors
Zapp