Do Magic Item "Shops" wreck the spirit of D&D?

[Aus_Snow]

Do Magic Item "Shops" wreck the spirit of D&D?

No. They form one part of the spirit of D&D.

Does the overcustomization and overtwinking of the game wreck the spirit of the game?

No. It's part of the spirit of the game.

Does it just become a Mario-Bro's game where you're just trying to get enough "coins?"

No. These are very different types of game.

Can you hear the blinging sound in your campaigns?

No. That would get irritating, no doubt.

 

[diaglo]

I think you just proved Vocenoctum's point

:doh:

 

[Vocenoctum]

Depends on the setting.

FR? Probably OK there.

3e mentions that the Wizards of Thay create plenty of items for sale. Not sure the players want a +1 Longsword made by High Wizard Doom the Slayer Of Men, but hey, his prices ARE 5% lower than the competitors.

FR has so many wizards as core, it almost has to have a magic item economy.

Contrast this with Eberron. Folks like to pick on Eberron for available magic, but they generally miss the fine details. Eberron has a lot of low-level magical types, so potions of CLW and low level wands are fairly common. But, there are less high level mages about, so high level items are probably a lot less common. With House Cannaith though, at least you have an idea of where you'd need to go.

In almost ANY setting, if there's a local cleric, then there almost has to be magical healing available. If the local clerics lets Little Bobby die because his CLW is not for sale, then I doubt he'll hold the locals faith very long.

Greyhawk? Could go either way. I've run Greyhawk as both uber-magic and low magic grim'n'gritty.

For myself, Greyhawk has as many mages as any other setting really, but I think Greyhawk feels more "obscured" in their magics. So sure, you can find a +1 longsword, or a mage to make it Flame, but not as much in a local Thayvian embassy or Cannaith Hold. You might have to be a member of a secret fraternity to get access. That's just my impression though.

 

[molonel]

Uh, perhaps you don't know it, but Conan OGL plays MUCH differently than standard D&D, which I believe this thread is addressing.

So you evidently didn't read what I was responding to, or even what I said, the point I am addressing is that people who played earlier editions of the game read Conan, while people who play the game now play Final Fantasy.

It is old, tired argument I've seen in these discussions so many times that it completely undermines itself and the credibility and intelligence of anyone who uses it.

This edition of D&D created a better version of Conan than any previous edition modeled. Hands down. If you don't want to play high magic, high fantasy and you read and enjoy Robert E. Howard, then you can play an absolutely delightful recreation of that world with mechanics that meld perfectly with the setting.

Did 1st or 2nd Edition AD&D model Conan as well as Conan OGL? Absolutely not. Does 3rd Edition model that particular world as well as Conan OGL? Absolutely not. But it shares that with both 1st and 2nd Edition, and saying otherwise is a laughable farce. The 1st Edition AD&D Unearthed Arcana offered you a twinked-out Barbarian class that was ubercheesy.

Midnight, A Game of Thrones, Black Company, and other D20 variants showcase how strong the d20 engine is, but D&D is not those things.

D&D is all of these things, and allows for all of them, as well.

 

[molonel]

No matter the backstory, that +1 longsword is still being tossed somewhere and not used once the Vorpal Blade is found. Stormbringer wasn't important because it had a backstory. It was important because of what it could do. I'm sure Elric was presented with many gifts of named +1 longswords, and they're all in some forgotten alcove next to the love letters from adoring fans. I've been playing D&D since long before computer games, and frankly no edition has ever supported making the magic items rare and wondrous. It is certainly possible to make them so, but that applies equally well to all editions. It's based on the DM and setting, not the rules for how a +1 item works. And, I often wonder, what about the other magic items such PC's had? When the +1 longsword has a rich and varied history, what does that mean for Armor? Did his mystic boots of swimming and climbing have a great story of helping Vladimir The Daft climb out of wells? Besides that, as I've said before, 3e is the first edition, IMO, that actually encourages the players to take that +1 longsword and keep it forever. Sure you can sell it, but you can also enhance it later on, making it +2, +2 Flaming, +2 Flaming Keen, +3 Flaming Keen Can Opening...You've got Craft Item feats, Ancestral Relic, Weapons of Legacy, the OA Samurai, the CW Kensai... there are a LOT of options for customizing a blade and using that same sword throughout your career.

Very well said.

And very true.

I've played 1st, 2nd and 3rd Edition, and Basic D&D, and there was simply no edition of the game that made characters swoon and fall in love with +1 swords, no matter how much backstory they had.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Well, based on that highly detailed and well-supported opinion, let me offer a valid counterpoint:

No.

I think now we have a slap-fight to see who wins.

Hey, he asked, I answered. A yes or no question shouldn't require a 5 page essay.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No matter who was running the game. Magic in D&D has never been wondrous or mystical. The rules of the game simply make it not work that way.

No matter who was running the game in your experience.

Until 3e, there was never an assumption of "if the NPCs can do it, the PCs can do it" or (vice versa), which led to all sorts of unique magical effects in various modules, campaign settings, and homebrewed worlds. And, of course, in many worlds, one never knew for sure that the "+1 sword" was, in fact, a +1 sword. Even after you'd figured out the mechanical bonus, you didn't know if some wierd power(s) would later manifest, nor did you know for sure that the thing wasn't cursed (acts like a +1 sword until....). There was a lot of room for variety, and divination spells explicitly didn't tell you everything.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Magic items have lost their magic... I really miss getting a cool item in a dungeon and actually keeping it instead of trading it in for something from munchkinland...

Well, if you got a decent item in a dungeon, wouldnt you keep it? So really its a DM issue, of not giving you anything but a jar of vastly overpriced keoghtom's ointments and a bunch of weapons and armor subpar to what you're already wielding. What the hell else are you supposed to do with your 5th cloak of resistance +1 in a 4 person party?

The current system creates a way to turn the scads of +1 swords you aquire into something worthwhile.

The magic item compendium remarks on this. A lot of items are just overpriced even at half value. Unless you just have some kind of wacky sentimental attachments to that cube of frost, you'd be a sucker NOT to sell it for 13500. Censor of Air Elemtals Market Price is 100k, another item that seems worth way more than its actual practical value.

If players arent keeping loot, a) give them more stuff that they want, and b) drop the market price of items that are overvalued to encourage players to keep them.

 

[Abraxas]

Until 3e, there was never an assumption of "if the NPCs can do it, the PCs can do it" or (vice versa)

In your experience...in my experience there was nothing the NPCs could do that the PCs couldn't try to do (or vice versa) - it was just that sometimes the cost of doing it was too high, or the attempt killed them.

To the OP's question . . .

The presence of magic shops where you can buy and sell magic items is a great idea and has no detrimental effect on the game - in the right setting. In a setting where PCs don't have access to item creation feats, where magic items were all created in an age long past and no one remembers how or creating magic items is so mind numbingly difficult that it is a world shaking event to try, etc etc - they don't make much sense. But if the prevalevnce of magic items isn't also reduced significantly there is also a problem...

In 1E and 2E, the games I played in typically used the standard treasure distribution as described in the DMG. By the time our characters got to levels in the teens we had so many back up items it wasn't even slightly funny. Granted we somtimes needed them - because a single failed save could destroy everyhthing you were carrying, but man, we didn't need as many as we had. Also, in 1E and 2E the cost to the character of using an item found wasn't as high as it can be in 3.XE.

In my Eberron campaign - the presence of artificers who buy items to fuel xp costs to make other items is really cool. The players dig it and if they choose to sell off some magical doohickey cause they want something else, its no bother to me - of course they might actually need that magic doohickey for something later. Thats when they get to figure out how to solve a problem when they've sold the solution and its been turned into an xp well to make a magical chandelier.

 

[Vocenoctum]

No matter who was running the game in your experience.

Until 3e, there was never an assumption of "if the NPCs can do it, the PCs can do it" or (vice versa), which led to all sorts of unique magical effects in various modules, campaign settings, and homebrewed worlds.

I don't think that's automatically true of 3e, but I agree that NPC's are created from the same basis as PCs. In earlier editions, NPC only classes changed things some, but that as about it. As for "unique magical effects", I don't see that being any element. In regard to NPC magic items, I never saw anything in the rules that said NPC's get different items than PCs, especially when the PC's end up with the stuff anyway.

And, of course, in many worlds, one never knew for sure that the "+1 sword" was, in fact, a +1 sword. Even after you'd figured out the mechanical bonus, you didn't know if some wierd power(s) would later manifest, nor did you know for sure that the thing wasn't cursed (acts like a +1 sword until....). There was a lot of room for variety, and divination spells explicitly didn't tell you everything.

This is another thing where I think folks confuse "earlier editions" with "how I ran the game". Identifying magic items isn't really different in 3e, it's still not a matter of "cast this spell, get a detailed listing". Most DM's I've encountered identify the loot as a convenience, to allow the players to track such things instead of them having to constantly refer to their Secret List. Have I as a DM hidden certain features of magic items before? Sure, and I can do so as easily in 3e (if not more so) than in previous editions.