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

[billd91]

There simply comes a point where you can paint the lily however you like it. But a +1 sword is a +1 sword is a +1 sword. The Hammer of Thunderbolts is a special, magical, mystical weapon. I've had a character who wielded it in 1st Edition AD&D. I found it in the Against the Giants series of modules. That's a special weapon.

A +1 sword is kinda sorta cool. But in ANY edition of the game, it is nothing particularly special.

And that hasn't changed.

Well, no Mercury Tracer is going to have quite the cachet of a Ferrari either, yet that Tracer may still have character and be beloved for many years. So a +1 sword may be just a +1 sword mechanically, it may have a great deal more sentimental value than a simple +1 would indicate.

 

[Hussar]

Well, no Mercury Tracer is going to have quite the cachet of a Ferrari either, yet that Tracer may still have character and be beloved for many years. So a +1 sword may be just a +1 sword mechanically, it may have a great deal more sentimental value than a simple +1 would indicate.

Fair enough, but, it would take an extremely rare and special person (in the short bus sense of the word) to pass up a free Ferrari for a Mercury Tracer. The same goes for magic items. In all editions of the game, PC's dump their magic goodies for something better. I've never seen anyone get particularly attached to a +1 sword. When that Frost Brand get's trotted out in the dragon's hoard, Mr +1 Whacker goes away pdq.

 

[Baron Opal]

Haven't waded through the whole thread yet, but...

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

Define "magic shop". I've seen everything ranging from Thingizzard's Hut (hermit in the woods) to a Thayvian Enclave ("Wal-Magic"). Each has their own in game reasons for existence. Personally, I find that having the player opening a book and saying "I want this" to be a bit unrealistic. I have no problem what so ever with a player buying a case of CLW potions from the temple of Avanthe, three sunrods and a shortsword of alchemical steel from the natural philosopher and a lucky charm (+1 to saves) from the astrologer down the street.

So, I guess it matters how you define "magic shop".

No, sure, the occasional item might come on the market - stolen goods to hot to retain, an item discovered which the discoverer has no use for, the occasional item from someone who had to part with it, or who died without heirs - but these items are snatched up quickly by the power brokers, and unless the PC's are themselves power brokers with good contacts, they'd never be a part of this. A market in magic items would be much closer to a market for weapons technology and national security secrets than a corner store, and its operation would be invisible and inaccessible on average.

But, once characters reach appropriate levels they become part of that culture and that economy. There have always been multiple economies where there is civilization. There are items for sale today for outrageous amount of money that you or I would never even consider buying. Million dollar jewelry*, for example. Once you reach "name level" you would certainly be considered a "power broker", wouldn't you? Spend a feat or two on leadership and you can have, potentially, your own private army. A bard, paladin, cleric or anyone else with a deceint charisma and Gather Information should be able to put you "in the know". Or have all of those nobles and their daughters you have rescued completely ungrateful? Surely they can put you in touch with the right people. It makes sense to me that there would be a limited supply of powerful, exotic items that are privately sold through exclusive channels. For me, that means rolling up 5-8 items, half of which are magical weapons (it's a dangerous world). I customize them a bit so that I think they're cool, and there you go.

Even here, however, I would employ some limits. For example, +3 keen adamantine longsword. I consider weapons in the +8 range and items in the 100,000 range not for sale ant any price simply for the fact that any item priced like that is too useful to too many people to be sold. But, if the players discover who has it they may be able to barter a deal.

Also, at this level of economy you have to consider what you are exchanging. The aforementioned sword is not for sale just for a collection of gold coins. There would have to be other items on the table, large gems, rare materials (ivory, ambergris) or other such things. Any noble worth their title has a mine or other resources. It needs to be something not so "easily" available like gold.

Anything that exists that is useful, pretty or confers status will be desired by people. There will arise other people who will broker those things in return for some kind of compensation. If there is a meaningful civilization there will be enough societal penalties to prevent adventurers from ransacking the town. At worst, other adventurers will be called upon to put down these villians like the rabid dogs they are. And, if there aren't any, well, there is a reason evil overlords come to power.

* = http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/2004/02/10/cx_ns_0211guideslide_12.html?thisSpeed=6000
Hmm, being a bit dim with formatting my linkage.

 

[JoeGKushner]

The story of the blade of the longdead Hero of Midora's Field would beg to differ.

at least in our campaigns we have always given backstory and such to every magic item. mechanically it may be a +1 sword. but you'd never know it in game.

And there were several excellent articles in Dragon magazine suggesting this very thing.

Background and history can make an item more interesting.

However, like describing monsters in Ravenloft, sometimes an ogre is just an ogre, not an omnimus creature that towers over even the largest of you and whose drool splatters evily as it hits the ground and it's stench makes your eyes water and...

Depending on the campaign base power level and player's using of item creation feats, the need for description on item histories may vary.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No, in 3.X, you can customize your character using your imagination, role-playing, diverse stat block differences, AND magic items.

Maybe...but the quote I was responding to from the MC said that at certain levels, players can ONLY use magic items to customize their characters....and that is so deep in the doo doo that I had to call it out.

RE: What PCs/NPCs can/cannot do in various editions of D&D, I think if you examine the 1e modules in particular, you will notice that NPCs are given the ability to do things PCs cannot (such as fight blind, in one of the Slavers modules), and weird effects are created in dungeons that PCs have no means to duplicate.

Even the obvious "human/half-orc leading a band of orcs" can be a PC/NPC divide in games where orcs attack you on sight.

On EN World, we have threads where people have argued that NPCs shouldn't be described as having their heads stove in, or as having wounds beyond the power of magic to heal, because (1) there is no mechanic in the rules for it, and (2) it doesn't happen to PCs/PCs can't create that effect.

Earlier editions took a different view.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Because in OD&D your level 8 fighter had the same chance to smack anyone around with a stick as well as a halberd. If a snazzy +3 stick of smiting came along, you would start to use that instead of your +1 axe of flaying.

In 3.X your level 8 fighter is based on a Weapon Finesse build, using two handed weapons. When you kill a dragon and find a +4 two-handed vorpal backscratcher your character can't really use it withing negating your "build". "Build" in this case means you have decided your character likes to fight with two smaller weapons instead of one big one because he uses his speed instead of his might in battle. Ditching his 1 handed and light backscratchers for a MORE MAGICAL AND FUN +4 two handed backscratcher makes him a worse fighter.

DS

How, exactly, does that make it sensible that the 3.X character, at certain levels, can ONLY be customized by magic items? How does that make skill points unfun? How does that somehow remove the ability to customize via in-game story and imagination?

Moreover, the choice to follow "build" or circumstance is a meaningful choice, and, IMHO, making meaningful choices is not only inherently fun, but is also part of the spirit of the game.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The idea that the items in a common D&D game are concentrated in one store that has loads of magic items is mostly a strawman created by those that don't like players having free choice in magic items.

If you cannot locate the item in question, how exactly can you have free choice? If you can locate any item you want, how is the idea a strawman?

EDIT: I think that there is a very wide difference between magical artisans who are willing to craft items for you for a price, and a store that sells magic items in anything more than the most rudimentary way. Places like the trader shop in Village of Hommlet or Keep on the Borderlands, for example, are not "magic shops" in this sense.

At the entrance to the Dungeon of Thale in one of my past campaigns, there was an outpost that sold minor magic items found in the dungeon by one party to other parties. You could use that place to turn minor magic into cash, and it was heavily guarded. (This was in 2e.) Still, there were no custom orders, no ability to determine what would be available ahead of time (I had a random chance for any of a number of common items), and if you went out of the dungeon that way they taxed you on your "take". That's about as close to a "magic shop" as I've ever come.

If you mean things like this, then you don't mean what springs to my mind with the words "magic shop" -- and you are certainly getting less than "free choice" as to what your character can buy.

I think that the main difference is whether or not you want your fantasy world to feel that it has an industrialized economy. I, for one, do not.

RC

 

[Storm Raven]

If you cannot locate the item in question, how exactly can you have free choice? If you can locate any item you want, how is the idea a strawman?

There usually isn't one store, any more than there is one store which stocks all of the mundane weapons and armor desired by the players. But for game purposes, like many things in D&D, the process of wandering about town, checking out different curio dealers and haggling to locate private stocks is dealt with in an abstract manner.

 

[Ealli]

If you cannot locate the item in question, how exactly can you have free choice? If you can locate any item you want, how is the idea a strawman?

I, the player, have access to a DMG and/or the SRD for magic items in addition to what is listed in the various splat books. It is quite easy for me to locate items in these sources. Vocenoctum was talking about the players having free choice you will notice.

There will be things I notice about my character that the DM does not. I will notice before he does that my character is having trouble hitting with consistency, or is falling too far behind in damage potential, or is too regularily getting screwed over by failing saving throws and I will look for the remedies and that will mean I will want my character to acquire certain items.


The strawman is saying "Wal-Magic, isn't that rediculous, having so many magical items in one place store." Pretty much everyone who argues for magical items being able to be bought and sold without great hassle are assuming that there are many stores each having just a couple items, but the abstraction of any buying/selling in the game doesn't worry about interacting with ten differenct NPCs to make your purchase.

 

[Raven Crowking]

There usually isn't one store, any more than there is one store which stocks all of the mundane weapons and armor desired by the players. But for game purposes, like many things in D&D, the process of wandering about town, checking out different curio dealers and haggling to locate private stocks is dealt with in an abstract manner.

Then, one might just as well say that the city is a magic shop, in the same way that one might say "a +1 sword is a +1 sword". The mechanics are the same, right? That's all that counts, right? In which case, the idea isn't a strawman.