Excerpt: Economies [merged]

[Lacyon]

Where do NPCs get their items? From looting monsters or from making them, just like PCs. I don't think any player of mine has ever asked why a 10th level evil fighter has level-appropriate gear. He GOT to be 10th level by slaughtering things and taking thier stuff. This happened "off screen", but if one begins with the idea one is playing in a full world, instead of stepping onto a shabby set, it makes perfect sense that Lord Eevyl The Foul was busy killing good-aligned creatures off over yonder hill while the PCs were leveling up somewhere else, and now they meet at last!

Well, it makes perfect sense if you don't look to hard at why Lord Eevyl The Foul has only 1/3rd the gear of an average 10th-level PC. Even a 7th-level PC will be better equipped than he is.

3E has the same game balance concerns that (if you look behind the screen*) lead to wonky simulationism as 4E, it just goes about satisfying them in a different manner (and ends up poorly serving both, IMO).

*Satisfyingly, my players rarely do. Thus, I expect 4E will give me about as much trouble in this regard as 3E did - which is to say, none.

 

[DandD]

there are still mighty nobles, kings, dragons and even supernatural patrons who will want those pieces of art. And hey, even in a points-of-light setting, decadency in cities will ensure that art will always be highly valued. Especially thanks to decadence, where people in the big safe cities don't care one bit about the plight of those farms and villages out there.

 

[catsclaw227]

Also, Disenchant Magic Item? All I can say is "In before the latest tidal wave of D&D is WoW!" posts.

I haven't read all the way through yet, so I may have missed other posts with similar experiences. Disenchanting items is something that has been done by my group going back to 1e. Most of the groups in the area I grew up in did it as well. I wonder what percentage of other groups have houseruled this into their game...

As far as we are concerned there is nothing WoW about it. Kudos for making it an actual game element.

Oh... and Residuum? I kinda like the name.

 

[Deadstop]

Maybe you should read my posts again. I am against magic items speculators as they don't make much sense. Instead magic items are a great opportunity for regular merchants. The problem with that is thatit doesn't really meshes with the Points of Light setup as in such a setting there wouldn't be that much merchant travel as there is according to the economy article.
Personally I never liked the PoL setting anyway and see this article as proof that it isn't really supported anyway.

Ah, forgive me then. I took your earlier post as suggesting that all the merchants were supposed to be was magic item speculators, who had no reason to be risking themselves for profit unless there happened to be loot-heavy adventurers at their destination.

As for PoL, I like it myself and I suspect they are leaning in that direction with the core (else why talk about it so much?), but I'm also thinking that the "points" aren't as small and unconnected as we fans (or some of us, at least) have been thinking.

You can still get lots of untamed wilderness and towns that are effectively cut off from outside aid even if there is periodic communication and trade between different places.


Deadstop

 

[Delgar]

What I find most entertaining is that in the DMG they provide options for:

-Running a High Magic Game
-Running a Low Magic Game
-Running a game with Magic shops
-Running a game without magic shops
-Giving you an idea of what treasure to hand out and telling you, that you can do it differently

Yet people are complaing that Option A exists or Option B exists. Even though their option C exists as well. I guess people just like to hear themselves bit@h.

 

[catsclaw227]

Well, when I start to rant, I'll let you know. But you folks have consistently done a poor job with it, and I was hoping for a bit more from the new edition. Previews with obvious errors aren't exactly a great way to sell a product.

The column name mix up on the XP table is an HTML editing error by someone posting to the website. Not a big deal.

 

[Primal]

actually a good idea... but then you need to know such groups... but usually it breaks down, when one group reaches Level cap...

But such groups do not exist in 4E -- it's only about the PCs, period! There are *no* other adventuring parties competing for the "spotlight" and making your PCs feel "insignificant". In fact, there won't be any high-level NPCs in most campaigns, unless they're villains.

 

[med stud]

But such groups do not exist in 4E -- it's only about the PCs, period! There are *no* other adventuring parties competing for the "spotlight" and making your PCs feel "insignificant". In fact, there won't be any high-level NPCs in most campaigns, unless they're villains.

Pardon, but what are you basing that assertion on? That's something you made up yourself.

 

[Derren]

The table was corrected before printing, and the "omissions" in KotS were not, as Mike pointed out, actually errors but decisions made for space reasons.

But please do continue to rant about how the editing sucks. It's really bracing.

Then change it to "online editors".
A missing ability on monday, a wrong table today, what will happen on friday? Considering how important this phase is, especially with DDI as new feature, this doesn't look to reassuring.

 

[Lacyon]

But such groups do not exist in 4E -- it's only about the PCs, period! There are *no* other adventuring parties competing for the "spotlight" and making your PCs feel "insignificant". In fact, there won't be any high-level NPCs in most campaigns, unless they're villains.

...?

I think you forgot to close your sarcasm tag or something.