Excerpt: Economies [merged]

[Intense_Interest]

Wait... if the weak weapons don't grow on trees (and are therefor rare) how are they getting the handwavium to make the mega-items?

Allow me to instruct.

Weak Weapons are useful to the more common man and more agreeable to a lord to arm his men with (no one gets more powerful than a king, etc). They have a higher utility because their cost makes them a more efficient purchase for an army, than a purchase one super sword for a soldier.

If Items could never be broken down into Radium, there would be a trend to having a +1 sword in every home after enough time. Not because they grow on trees, but that the Demand is comparable to Supply.

However because there is a possibility to combine a roomful of smaller swords into a single Super Sword so as to slay the dragon when you really, really need to, there is a sink to the supply of low-magic swords.

And considering that there is a cap to supply (only so many wizards working on magic swords in the world), the items would be rare in spite of their high demand.

 

[AverageCitizen]

It's strange to think about this, because it really never occurred to me. Most of my players get the vast majority of their magic items from dungeons. I think that we've been operating under 'Magic item creation is a lost art' as sort of a de facto standard. There are people who could make magic items, but they need a lot of gold to persuade them to stop what they were doing before, so its usually easier to just find them yourself. Unless you had something very specific in mind. Hence, you know, treasure hunting. I didn't realize we were the exception.

 

[The Little Raven]

The same thing a car dealer does when a new model comes out. Send their old customers a flyer. Repeat buisness is a good thing.

Man, the real world really breaks verisimilitude.

 

[quindia]

Congratulations! You are now the owner of ten bales of silk, two barrels of wine and a sack of spices .

Nothing but guards are stopping the PCs from becoming brigands, it's up to the DM what a merchant will carry.

That is the problem with the system. If the PCs play nice, the merchant has enough gold to buy whatever they are trying to sell and just happens to have some magic items of his own to unload. If the PC's go rogue, suddenly the merchant is a simple peddler or surrounded by umpteenth level mercenaries. The assumption is just way to contrived and dare I even mention, gamist.

I am looking forward to 4e in general, but things like this will quickly end up in the pile of things to ignore.

 

[The Little Raven]

If the PC's go rogue, suddenly the merchant is a simple peddler or surrounded by umpteenth level mercenaries.

Or they get caught with the goods they stole from the merchant they murdered, and have to face the consequences of being murdering thieves.

Contrary to popular belief, this isn't a binary issue.

 

[Lizard]

...but contents of the villain's treasure vault change depending on whether the Fighter picks Weapon Focus: Greatsword or Weapon Focus: Falchion.

Honestly? It depends on if the villain pre-existed.

If I've established that the evil blackguard uses a +2 Orc Double Axe (and it just so happens a PC is a half-orc), and then that character dies and is replaced by an elf, the blackguard doesn't get a +2 longbow instead.

But an evil bandit lord with a magic bow might appear...

One of my inspirations is J. Michael Strazcynski, even if I can't spell his last name. He talked a lot about the concept of trap doors, of ways to change the overarching plot going forward without changing what's already happened or introducing gross inconsistencies. He was dealing with actors and contracts and the variability of conducting an ongoing series; I (and every DM) is dealing with random rolls and the chaos known as "the PCs". You've got to be flexible.

I just think there's a difference between the DM altering the world, and the rules saying the world has no form.

God can work miracles, but when he's not paying attention, the world has natural laws which keep things going as they should.

Ultimately, a real problem for me is the way the current 4e rules seem to box me in. The 3e MM wasn't just a book of Things For PCs To Kill -- it was a book of starting points. The rules allowed me to staple any class, template, or level to damn near anything. Anything with an Int score could be an NPC, and have any skills, feats, classes, or powers I needed it to have. Kobold manservant? Hobgoblin bodyguard to an elf prince? Orc wizard? Ogre shaman? Half-silver-dragon artist/dilettante? Half-troll/half-green-dragon bandit chieftain? Half-fiend medusa rogue pretending to be a mind flayer? I've statted 'em all up.

4e, it's "Lurker, brute, controller". It exists to appear, beat up the PCs for five rounds, and vanish. It's boring and constraining and limits my creativity to deciding what combat role something should have -- as opposed to building a creature FIRST and then seeing where its abilities and powers naturally place it, if it even is SUPPOSED to be in combat. I've had a lot of fun with NPCs who wouldn't last five seconds in a straight-up fight, but 4e doesn't have any place for them as mechanically distinct creatures. Every ability in the game is centered around combat; anything outside of the battlemat is pure handwaving. Looking at the sample characters, and now we've seen a lot of them, I don't see a single feat or power which is intended to improve performance in "skill challenges" -- the system seems to be an afterthought. You can't, from what we've seen, build a scholar or a diplomat who is actually focused on those abilities; you are Trained in a skill, and that's it.

 

[Intense_Interest]

4e, it's "Lurker, brute, controller". It exists to appear, beat up the PCs for five rounds, and vanish. It's boring and constraining and limits my creativity to deciding what combat role something should have -- as opposed to building a creature FIRST and then seeing where its abilities and powers naturally place it, if it even is SUPPOSED to be in combat. I've had a lot of fun with NPCs who wouldn't last five seconds in a straight-up fight, but 4e doesn't have any place for them as mechanically distinct creatures. Every ability in the game is centered around combat; anything outside of the battlemat is pure handwaving. Looking at the sample characters, and now we've seen a lot of them, I don't see a single feat or power which is intended to improve performance in "skill challenges" -- the system seems to be an afterthought. You can't, from what we've seen, build a scholar or a diplomat who is actually focused on those abilities; you are Trained in a skill, and that's it.

How does the 4e MM's Roles prevent you from making NPCs instead of normal Monsters?

If I want to make a 2-headed Ogre with Warlock and/or Wizard spells plus some rituals and special abilities, I could do that. I'd call him mostly artillery with some leader abilities. He would have some amount of Ogre brutes he bullies around.

Just because the NPC doesn't have a set "role" doesn't mean I'm forbidden from using him.

 

[jackston2]

uh oh here it comes

 

[JohnSnow]

"Your Majesty, those orc-slaying fellows are here. Shall I meet with them?"

But how about one +1 sword? What's the problem there?

Sure. That works. Sell your old blades to the king's armorer one at a time. You just have to convince someone to get you an intro. Then beat off the thieves trying to take it from you when word gets out that you've got a magic sword. Finally, you have to meet with the fellow responsible, and then convince him to buy it at your asking price. Of course, he's interested, but he could see clear to giving you full price if you'd just take care of this wee little problem that he has with a troll over in Greendale. Naturally, any treasure you find is yours to keep. Too bad the troll's been doing nothing but pillaging chicken farms.

That's what I mean when I say you can't "beat the system." The DM is the system. If the players try to exploit loopholes, it's the DM's job to close said loopholes.

Utter nonsense. what is to stop PCs from acquiring more loot while looking for buyers with the rest? Could they not, in fact, form relationships that lead to both loot and the opportunity to sell it?

Limited time. And again, the DM is an adaptable human being, not a dumb machine. Only a DM who's an utter moron would let the PCs "beat the system."

What's unethical about it? It may not be nice, but why should they put up with bullying from the merchant?

How is the merchant "bullying" anyone? He's just charging a fair price. Or are you claiming that the markup is unfair? Quite honestly, how do you have any idea what a "fair markup" would be on a magic item?

Or is this back to the theory that because the PCs are powerful, they should be able to take whatever they want?

Either the merchant's guild has a bunch of +1 longswords, in which case they ought to be selling them for a reasonable price, or they don't, in which case their "wrath" will be short-lived.

Because nobody ever hoards anything to keep the price up. Tell me, how much do you know about the diamond trade?

My example posits nothing of the sort. I was suggesting the PCs sell out the merchant to a local noble, someone actually the legal authority over the merchant.

Because the local nobility is going to think that the merchant is the problem with all these armed ruffians about. Yeah right. The merchant is just making his living.

Yeah, right.

So PCs can slay dragons and become immortals, but can't take on the fearsome Merchant's Guild? Okay, sure.

Here's an idea for a PC: a lone freedom fighter, striking out against the tyrranical Merchant's Guild, grown rich off the blood of heroes, who stand between the local lords and heroes and the magical items they need to stem the attacks by local monsters.

Of course, the merchant's guild is responsible for maintaining whatever passes for civilization in this god-forsaken country. For heroic PCs, the merchant's guild is probably composed of people much like them. And, moreover, they probably have clients who are at least as powerful as the PCs, but don't mind playing by the rules.

Besides, I thought we were talking about +1 sword, so the PCs are hardly dragon-slaying immortals just yet. By the time they are, they're probably trying to trade with an Efreeti merchant in the city of Brass, and I doubt he'll appreciate being pushed around either.

You're predicating a whole lot on the theory that these markups are thoroughly unreasonable. I take it you never pay retail?

Or you perhaps think that if you were just tougher, like your PCs are, you wouldn't have to?

Because, you know, that's the way the world works, right? (Where's that :rolleyes smiley when I need it?)

 

[AZRogue]

What's really funny is a good "Bind On Pickup" rule would help eliminate the PCs reselling the items that you don't want them to resell. Which is very funny.