D&D 4E Game Economics: 4E Finally Got It Right

[Jhaelen]

Well, the article was a lot better than I expected after reading the initial announcement. I've used a variant of the parcelling technique in 3E, as well, so obviously I think that's a good solution.

In principle, I like it that items you get from monsters are always of a higher level than your own. I'm not yet sure, however, how enforceable that will be. If you're encountering a large number of humanoids shouldn't they have a larger number of lower level items?
I guess I'm still stuck in 3E thinking in that regard...

I'm indifferent about the 20% resale value but I like that item's for sale have a 10-40% markup.

All in all, it's probably about as good (or bad) as it was before. I'm noting some positive tendencies (the big three instead of the big seven...) but it's not yet the holy grail of game economics.

 

[TerraDave]

I wouldn't say "right economy"...I would say "better system" for managing rewards and magic items.

 

[Maximillian]

"better system" for managing rewards and magic items.

QFT. On the money.

I voted "unconcerned," because I don't plan to use the economic system. I've been trying to wrap my head around what magic does to an economy for a couple decades, and don't really think I'm any closer to a good answer.

But I, too, am curious if there are rules about parcels for bigger/smaller parties. It's easy enough to raise or lower the cash rewards by commensurate amounts, but the magic items are tricky, especially since it seems that the DMG wants us to hand out magic items equal to 4/5ths the party size.

 

[CaptainSpreadsheet]

Adjustable Party Size

My main concerns are balance and flexability. The Parcel system seems to require a bit of work to change for party sizes different from 5. What if I have a 3 or 7 person party? How should I change the treasure?

I also read a large part of thread discussing the article. It seems to be filled with people saying that they hate it. I wonder what type of system would make them happy? What exactly do they want out of the system?

I was thinking about this as my current campaign has 8 players (although I don't know how many will want to try 4e).

Here's an option.

Level    +1    +2   +3   +4   +1   +2   +3   +4
1         A     E    D    C    G    F    J    I 
2         B     A    E    D    H    G    F    J
3         C     B    A    E    I    H    G    F
4         D     C    B    A    J    I    H    G
5         E     D    C    B    F    J    I    H

Simply pick a letter for each member of the party. Unused letters are not awarded.

For the parcels:
The total value would be (Value of equal level item) * 2 * (Party Size /5)

You could keep the "cash" parcel count at 6, adjust down for the extra items if you want 10 "chunks" (for 10 encounters).

 

[Crothian]

It looks like a better system, but it doesn't look like it is done right.

 

[Henry]

20% resale rate is awesome from a cheapskate DM perspective. I assumed players would get 50% resale or re-enchant.

Actually, for my table's games, it works pretty well, because it gives the DM plenty of room for haggling from book price, be it through roleplaying or through use of the diplomacy skill. When everyone is expecting the default of 50% or 100% as in 3e, the haggling really shows up visibly, but when there's a 20% or so built-in screwing effect, then haggling could conceivably put those back closer to 50/100 values, rather than the 20/120 they suggest.

We've been using diplomacy as a means to improve pricing (and to induce players to do more with diplomacy), and for us this is a neat idea.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I didn't vote but would have voted for a 'It seems better than 3E but still not right' option.
I don't like the ridiculously high cost of upper level magic. It makes no sense to me.
I dunno how to make it a better system, I am no designer.

 

[jedrious]

Residuum actually makes sense when you look at its definition

 

[Oni]

The economy bit bothered me. I know it's a game and the rules that work best for play are the way to go, but upon reading the article a bunch of bothersome stupid questions popped up in my head.

Why does crafting cost the same as buying one. If I make something and I want to sell it I'm going to charge more than it cost me to make it for sure.

But wait...I'll be taking a loss because it cost me market price to make it but people will only by it for 20% of what I made it for?

Why couldn't I jsut sell my magic item to other adventurers for 80% market, it's cheaper than the dealer down street trying to fleece people and 4x more than he would give me?

What if I want to be a traveling, adventuring merchant, will I be able to get random magic items from other adventurers for only 20% of the cost it would take to make them?

I'm all for suspension of disbelief but I deeply dislike rules constantly bombard my brain, like a cracked out spidermonkey with a wiffle bat, with these kind of stupid thoughts.