Excerpt: Economies [merged]

[TwinBahamut]

In other words, you would expect the 1/5-7/5 rule to hold up to a simulation where the roles of the players and NPCs change around?

I don't really think that is the best way to rephrase my argument, actually.

That's a concept, AFAICT, that I've heard many times won't be valid in 4E. The players in your hypothetical example will fail at being merchants for the same reason that the 1/5-7/5 thing works - because DM fiat will absolutely trump any other rule or system.

The players will only be able to become merchants if the DMs vision of the "story" will allow this. Otherwise, a series of implausible events will occur to cause them to change their minds (at best). In fact, if they aren't careful, the merchant PCs might wake up and find that they've turned into minions.

It looks like you are just quoting other people you disagree with... I don't think you are even really addressing my point in a meaningful way. What you are saying I don't agree with at all.

If you have something to say about my point yourself, then please just say it yourself, in your own words. Don't just throw out your ideas of what "the 4E supporters" that you don't like would say. it just confuses the discussion and leads to misunderstandings and bad sentiments.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Not from me. The closest you'd hear from me is "There won't be vague wealth-based guidelines which do nothing to determine what items are necessary for game balance math to actually work."

I agree. I am one of the biggest 4E-supporters you will find, but I like magic item stores and would hate to see them go away.

 

[The Little Raven]

Apparently, "Detect Humor" is a ritual in 4e, 'cause it sure ain't an at-will power 'round these parts...

It made me laugh enough that a co-worker poked her head into my office to see what I was chuckling about, and my explanation garnered a blank stare, followed by rolling eyes and the everpresent "God, you're such a frakking nerd."

 

[pawsplay]

High Resale Value? To whom? A king that could purchase a 5,000,000 GP sword would likely much rather arm his entire army with 500 GP swords. You're going to always scale issues at the highest costs.

And therefore, a PC should find it easier to buy an entire kingdom than one sword. No, I'm sorry, this just does not fly. It's true, the value of items mighe be depressed relative to their theoretical intrinsic value... but that is all the more true for cash-strapped adventurers than kings. Realistically, the treasure-hunting PCs should be the merchants and the kings should be paying retail for loot they didn't even capture themselves. Those nutmeg hauling merchants.... think of PCs as merchants who transport +1 swords from ancient ruins.

There are many reasons to suppose that a sword forged by an archmage might not fetch full retail, but there is no reason to believe those reason don't apply to the presumed buyer as well. A PC would be an idiot to pay 5x what he knows to be the price of the item in general trade. Forget about driving the price of an item up... if it won't move, drive the price of items for sale down!

"Honestly, my man, where are you going to find someone willing to play 5,000,000 gp for that sword? I'll give 1,100,000 now and you can retire forever as a king, and equip your own army with ordinary longswords, with 100,000 gp profit on your venture. Or as an alternative, maybe I'll see if one of the local barons will give me 10,000 gp just to tell him the name of some scrub merchant with a sword he can't sell. It would be a shame if something were to... happen... to your little sword."

 

[mearls]

I noticed that too. Can anyone from WotC pop in and acknowledge whether that error is in the books too? Or just the web excerpt?

It was fixed. I'm holding a DMG in my hands, and the table is correct.

 

[Intense_Interest]

Realistically, the treasure-hunting PCs should be the merchants and the kings should be paying retail for loot they didn't even capture themselves. Those nutmeg hauling merchants.... think of PCs as merchants who transport +1 swords from ancient ruins.

PCs die, and at a significant rate higher than your bog-standard merchant. The reasons merchants don't die more often is because they aren't known to commonly be carrying stupid amounts of magic. +1 Swords, as I said before in the post you failed to quote entirely, are a higher risk of transport because of their high demand among people who like to stab other people and their relative size and portability. 90% of the +1 Sword trade would or should occur through a Teleportation Ritual Network, if we're going for Simulationism rather than swapping Combat Gamism for Merchant Gamism.

There are many reasons to suppose that a sword forged by an archmage might not fetch full retail, but there is no reason to believe those reason don't apply to the presumed buyer as well. A PC would be an idiot to pay 5x what he knows to be the price of the item in general trade. Forget about driving the price of an item up... if it won't move, drive the price of items for sale down!

Why, exactly, would an Archmage produce an item on Spec? Anyone who demands a 5,000,000 GP sword should really, really have a good reason to want it. And an Archmage would not create it unless he had a buyer set to purchase. Your presumed roleplay only occurs if you think that the Archmage only existed to assembly-line out 5mil GP swords. In reality, he would be like an artist creating items for patrons and on specific demand.

Again, the Simulationism and an understanding of Supply curves would entail that the 5mil sword would never be crafted unless there was demand for it, therefore keeping the price as high as it is.

 

[pawsplay]

Why, exactly, would an Archmage produce an item on Spec? Anyone who demands a 5,000,000 GP sword should really, really have a good reason to want it. And an Archmage would not create it unless he had a buyer set to purchase. Your presumed roleplay only occurs if you think that the Archmage only existed to assembly-line out 5mil GP swords. In reality, he would be like an artist creating items for patrons and on specific demand.

You misunderstood my example. I meant only "a magical sword that is very powerful."

 

[malraux]

A PC would be an idiot to pay 5x what he knows to be the price of the item in general trade.

I've been somewhat involved in helping deal with my grandmother's estate. Antique dealers seem to follow roughly this model as well. Sure it might be crazy to sell something for a quarter of what someone would pay in an antique shop, but the reason for that is I really can't find the person who wants to pay that full price, but I can find an antique dealer. That's the way it works. As I've said previously, if the party is interested in giving up adventuring to establish a shop, develop a reputation, join the right guilds, etc, then they can sell items at retail price. But that's a game best simulated by a different system.

 

[pawsplay]

PCs die, and at a significant rate higher than your bog-standard merchant.

Which should make the PCs asking price... higher.

 

[JohnSnow]

Realistically, the treasure-hunting PCs should be the merchants and the kings should be paying retail for loot they didn't even capture themselves. Those nutmeg hauling merchants.... think of PCs as merchants who transport +1 swords from ancient ruins.

And when did the PCs build up those contacts? How do they know the king?

You don't just show up one day and say "Hi your majesty, we have a bunch of +1 swords for sale." By the time you CAN do that, the extra profit isn't worth it. Or you've been holding on to the damn things for 4 years.

The point is that the fundamental economics are just fine. Furthermore, becoming a merchant is one available path for adventurers. That's not a bug - it's a feature. A PC who wants to get retail for his old swords should have to go through all the steps needed to establish himself as a merchant. Of course, at this point, he's not acquiring magic swords anymore, but whatever. If that's the route you want your game to go, there's nothing wrong with it. And the system won't break. The extra profit you make on the sale is the reward you get for accomplishing all those challenges that found someone willing to pay full price for your sword.

Again. There is nothing wrong with this.

A PC would be an idiot to pay 5x what he knows to be the price of the item in general trade. Forget about driving the price of an item up... if it won't move, drive the price of items for sale down!

"Honestly, my man, where are you going to find someone willing to play 5,000,000 gp for that sword? I'll give 1,100,000 now and you can retire forever as a king, and equip your own army with ordinary longswords, with 100,000 gp profit on your venture. Or as an alternative, maybe I'll see if one of the local barons will give me 10,000 gp just to tell him the name of some scrub merchant with a sword he can't sell. It would be a shame if something were to... happen... to your little sword."

Shocker! You mean a PC willing to bully merchants around can essentially steal from them? Sure. If he's unethical and more powerful than the merchant, that's absolutely true. And if the merchant refuses, he can take what he wants. Of course, now he's got to face the challenge presented by the merchant's guards. And perhaps deal with the wrath of the merchant's guild.

If your PC wants to operate outside the laws of society, he's an outlaw. Now we have another path of adventure to pursue. And those challenges won't necessarily be packing "level-equivalent treasure packets." Which means that sooner or later, everything will be back in line - again.

The default is the result if you're obeying the rules, and as far as that goes, it's perfectly realistic. Accept it and move on. Alternatively, you can try to defy it (or work around it) and embrace the new form of adventure you've embarked on - which still won't get you ahead in the end.

You literally can't beat the system.