Magic Item Cost Analysis (might be useful for non-RAW campaigns)

[nnms]

So what's the biggest implication of treasure as a form of experience?

Player choice.

When character's advance in level, they get a bunch of things they get to choose as well as a universal bump in effectiveness that they don't get to choose.

They get o choose feats to modify or grant new abilities. They get to choose new at-will, encounter or daily powers. They get to choose stat upgrades

Basically at every level there's some sort of choice to be had.*

To some players this is sacrosanct. And they see the abilities, powers, bonuses, etc., that a magic item gives them to be no different than their choice of what encounter to take when they hit level 3.

If you want to see evidence of this, go to Wizards of th Coast's online D&D community and start a thread saying that magic items should be up to the DM and players shouldn't feel entitled to choose magic items with rituals or by buying them in a shop. You'll get jumped on in that thread and accused of being the worst DM ever.

They basically see a DM choosing which magic items you get as being exactly the same as one dictating which encounter power you can choose at third level.

The CharOp Optimization approach is based on the notion that players have the right to choose their magic items in the same way they have choices over what they get when they level.

To others it's less important. They're alright with whatever they find and don't see magic items as a source of more character development/advancement choices.

So when you modify the underlying economy of D&D, restructure how magic items are made, found and/or purchased, you may want to consider what level of choice over character advancement you and your players want for your group.

Having started with Moldvay, then BECMI, AD&D, 2E and largely skipping 3.x, I definitely favor the idea of magic items being completely in control of the DM. To many players, especially those who started in 3.x or 4E this can seem like an utterly alien and unfair approach.

*Essentials classes change this a bit. Some classes get very little in the way of choice. Like the Knight. But once again, different players value the amount of choice they get to different degrees.

 

[CovertOps]

So what happens when you level up?

- Your 1/2 level bonus adds to attack and damage

Small correction:

- Your 1/2 level bonus adds to attack

 

[nnms]

Small correction:

- Your 1/2 level bonus adds to attack

Oops. Copy and paste error. Good catch.

 

[nnms]

In another thread, pemerton made this excellent post:

One annoying feature of the 4e system is that the growth in XP over levels is out of whack with the growth in gp over levels: XP for encounters doubles every 4 levels, but gp for items multiplies by 5 every 5 levels.

This means that you can't just associate a given treasure with a given encounter and plug it into the gameworld and wait for the PCs to stumble across it. The higher level the PCs, the larger the amount of treasure you have to associate with an encounter of a given level if you are to make sure that the PCs get their full quota of treasure parcels for their level.

In some previous editions of the game, monsters had a treasure type which determined how much treasure and of what type the players would get for defeating the monster.

It wasn't wonderful. Some would say it worked fine, but if you rolled an outlier result, you could have a treasure pile that was way, way more valuable than normal.

But what if we could figure out something similar? Something that takes into consideration everything we know about the math behind the treasure system?

Some things that need to be considered:

1) According to the DMG, a monster of up to party level + 5 and as low as party level -3 should appear in an encounter.

That's a potential of 8 levels of difference. If you used the 5x treasure value, a monster could end up supplying way, way too much treasure or way, way to little (though that is less of a risk).

2) There's no connection in the DMG between encounter level and treasure amount. The DMG provides a variety of advice ranging from having one huge treasure pile for all ten (on average) encounters/parcels of that level, to really splitting it up. So if we make a system where the monsters themselves determine the treasure, it'll likely be more like the splitting it up side of the spectrum.

3) How do we determine items vs treasure? If you analyze the treasure parcels, you'll see that each one gives you twice the value of an equivalent level magic item in monetary rewards and then 4 items ranging from level+1 to level+4. As we have seen, when you go up an enhancement level, the value increases dramatically. The difference in value between level 1 and 6 is not evenly distributed between levels 2-5, but heavily weighted into the jump between 5 and 6.

This means that any treasure parcel for a level where the items are of a higher enhancement bonus, a much lower proportion of the treasure for the level will be monetary rewards. And when a level includes items of an enhancement bonus in the same level, the monetary rewards will make up a much larger percentage.

The lowest ratios can be found at the end of every enhancement band (5, 10, 15, 20, 25) where monetary rewards makes up 14.28% of the treasure. This is 1 GP for every 7 GP worth of magic items.

The highest ratios can be found at the 2nd level of each enhancement band (7, 12, 17, 22) with about 19.4% of the treasure will be monetary. This is just about 1 GP for every 5 GP worth of magic items.

Not counting levels 27 and above, the average is 17.42% monetary rewards, 82.58% magic items. At levels 27 and above, the magic items start to cap at level 30 and you end up getting more treasure relative to the magic item values.

So what are the implications of all this? Where do we go from here in figuring out a per-monster or per-XP treasure system? I'll explore that in my next post.

 

[Kerrus]

Very interesting and well thought out, I think. And quite accurate in general.

Personally, I think that the greatest reason for resistance of sticking magic items entire in the DM's hands is not because it's a bad idea, so much as experience- many players, myself included, have experienced the game under the so named 'bad DM', whom for whatever reason makes the game un-fun and/or exerts control over the game through domination of magic items.

I believe that, given that sticking magic items firmly in the hands of the players, is a necessity in order to avoid the underhanded tactics of such a 'bad DM'- now obviously a competent DM can just ban items and use inherent bonuses, or adopt a different distribution method, or disallow people from crafting infinite amounts of any given item.

But it's the sad truth that not everybody has a DM who is both competent and fair-minded about this sort of thing. Consider items in the hands of the players as almost a sort of... failsafe, I guess.

Now that being said, I absolutely agree with the ideas you've presented here- items in the DMG aside- given how rapidly the value of magic items outstrips the value of everything else, I often find my suspension of disbelief guttered and left for dead. I play the game both to have fun and to immerse myself in the world, but it's rather difficult to do so when you can craft a legendary sword in your sleep, or when they become so common that every NPC at your level has his hands on one.

Squishing the magic item values, as presented here, is a very nice solution to the various problems- magic items are attainable, but at the same time, they don't so rapidly outvalue everything else.

 

[eamon]

Shameless plug:
I explored similar ideas from the perspective of enabling truly random treasure in the motivation for a house rule of mine: A Simpler Treasure System with Mostly Random Loot.

 

[nnms]

Shameless plug:
I explored similar ideas from the perspective of enabling truly random treasure in the motivation for a house rule of mine: A Simpler Treasure System with Mostly Random Loot.

The exponential price hike is good because it makes it very very hard to sneak past fundamental assumptions by saving smartly or by a party pooling their money. It's a very solid fundamental building block that gives solidity: by having the price rise by a factor 5 every five levels, even a factor 2 or 3 imbalance in wealth just means a few levels advantage in wealth - not even a single +1 on a weapon. That's robust; I don't want to get rid of the exponential scaling for that reason.

I picked that paragraph out of your thread because it's the most interesting to me right now.

It's an interesting point that the high exponential growth in item prices that it can serve to smooth out any balance wrinkles over time. As well, it manes that giving too much treasure can hardly even amount to getting another +1.

I personally think the cost is too high. That it results in a ridiculous inflation rate in both treasure found and market size. It also makes saving worthless as the amount you save becomes proportionately worthless in a very short period of time.

I think your idea of increase treasure parcels by a level, increasing sale prices to half cost and letting characters buy whatever they need to will work, but I don't think it'll provide what I'm looking for.

I don't want lots of magic item sales and purchases. Nor do I want a lot of crafting. I'm going to be running a sandbox type game where the players are building their noble realm. There will be lots of magic items to be found adventuring. I'm going to use the inherent bonus system but really can't see myself having them ever be needed. They're more of a backup in case I miss something.

I'm seeing magic items being more about their properties, encounter and daily powers. I want to flatten the curve so that when people do craft, there will be little incentive to settle for a level 1, 6, 11 weapon that's just a +1/2/3 and it will be more affordable to go for an item that has the enhancement bonus and a property or power that makes it unique.

Now what I'm thinking about (given that sandbox style is the goal) is finding a relationship between monster xp value/encounter level and treasure distribution.

 

[nnms]

Now that being said, I absolutely agree with the ideas you've presented here- items in the DMG aside- given how rapidly the value of magic items outstrips the value of everything else, I often find my suspension of disbelief guttered and left for dead. I play the game both to have fun and to immerse myself in the world, but it's rather difficult to do so when you can craft a legendary sword in your sleep, or when they become so common that every NPC at your level has his hands on one.

Squishing the magic item values, as presented here, is a very nice solution to the various problems- magic items are attainable, but at the same time, they don't so rapidly outvalue everything else.

It can definitely be a problem if setting verisimilitude is important to the group. You're suddenly dealing with huge multiples of thousands of gold in a very short period of time. It just feels artificial. Which makes sense, I guess, because it's an artifice for the purpose of game play.

Another sad thing is that because of leveling being a pacing mechanic, you end up paying huge sums of gold for the same relative bonus. Monster defenses all went up, so if you don't get that better plus weapon, you'll be behind. It's the same situation whether your level 4 or level 24. The only difference is the number of gps is higher. At level 5, I paid 1800 gold to get that extra +1 and at level 25 I pay over 1.1 million and get the same +1 more onto my die rolls.

As for squishing, it has two additional effects that I didn't really touch on until I read the other thread:

1) Saving can matter. If you can purchase or craft items and are not dealing with a huge inflation rate, you can actually save up for higher levels items. If you make a x2 multiplier instead of the usual x5 and still follow the normal treasure parcel system, the party will have enough gold to buy someone a +2 item (level 6) at the end of level 1.

2) Errors will have a greater impact. Because you can afford higher plus items more easily, if you end up having too much gold in your game, the party can buy higher power items more easily.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It can definitely be a problem if setting verisimilitude is important to the group. You're suddenly dealing with huge multiples of thousands of gold in a very short period of time. It just feels artificial. Which makes sense, I guess, because it's an artifice for the purpose of game play.

Another sad thing is that because of leveling being a pacing mechanic, you end up paying huge sums of gold for the same relative bonus. Monster defenses all went up, so if you don't get that better plus weapon, you'll be behind. It's the same situation whether your level 4 or level 24. The only difference is the number of gps is higher. At level 5, I paid 1800 gold to get that extra +1 and at level 25 I pay over 1.1 million and get the same +1 more onto my die rolls.

As for squishing, it has two additional effects that I didn't really touch on until I read the other thread:

1) Saving can matter. If you can purchase or craft items and are not dealing with a huge inflation rate, you can actually save up for higher levels items. If you make a x2 multiplier instead of the usual x5 and still follow the normal treasure parcel system, the party will have enough gold to buy someone a +2 item (level 6) at the end of level 1.

2) Errors will have a greater impact. Because you can afford higher plus items more easily, if you end up having too much gold in your game, the party can buy higher power items more easily.

There are other effects too:

With a flatter curve the players are much more able to grab some control of the system by for instance pooling all their cash. Looting behavior is also encouraged because cash value of mundane items is now significant. Looting the fallen also becomes a lot more attractive. This last is especially interesting (and annoying). In the current system it doesn't do you a lot of good usually to loot your comrades bodies. Sure the stuff they have is hard to come by and close to impossible to buy, but it is also only worth 20%. You may get some better stuff by looting but due to the steep curve getting ahead doesn't do you much good for long. With a flatter curve you get ahead a lot more for a longer period.

I think the main thing that people discount with the 4e treasure system is its HUGE robustness. Eamon mentioned that but it is worth mentioning again. Having played in a large number of games I can say that one of the primary factors that causes campaigns to collapse is the players ending up with too much loot. In the 4e system the NUMBERS get large, but the PCs relative purchasing power tends to stay firmly controlled in a way that has never been true of earlier editions. The system is self-correcting. If the DM gives away 5x too much loot at one level it won't break the game much at all. If he takes away all the PCs wealth entirely, including all their stuff, they'll be right back on the curve a couple levels later.

Obviously if you have a game where everyone is on the same page and creating a story together and they'll all watch out for things that will make it not work out right then you can do anything with treasure. Heck you don't need a treasure system at all, just let the players do their thing and items and treasure are pure story hooks. In most games though it isn't like that. I think people that play a lot lose sight of the most common game where the players mercilessly exploit any mistake the DM makes and maybe now and then contribute to the story, if there is one beyond the dungeon crawl. In that type of game you really want the 4e treasure system, and verisimilitude is pretty much irrelevant.

Lots of people have criticized the design of the current system, but I think they mostly just aren't judging it against the criteria it was built to fill.

The other part is that again when people complain about huge absolute numbers in high level treasure it is sort of irrelevant really. Wealth is in what you can do, not what you have. Someone with infinite or effectively infinite wealth really has an illusion. There is only so much stuff in the world, you can't buy it all. 30th level PCs with millions of GP won't actually be able to own anything they want and won't collapse the economy either. They can offer to buy the whole city, but the inhabitants will just laugh at them. Things don't work that way and there's no reason it has to undermine verisimilitude.

 

[nnms]

There are other effects too:

With a flatter curve the players are much more able to grab some control of the system by for instance pooling all their cash. Looting behavior is also encouraged because cash value of mundane items is now significant. Looting the fallen also becomes a lot more attractive. This last is especially interesting (and annoying). In the current system it doesn't do you a lot of good usually to loot your comrades bodies.

I covered the pooling of money in my example of an entire group saving enough together to buy a single level 6 item with their level 1 monetary treasure. I'm not sure it's that big of a deal. In fact, I see it as a feature.

As for looting falling comrades, I don't see this as a bad thing at all. The party is supposed to what? leave the magic items and his gold down in the dungeon? In the current system, the found magic items are much, much more valuable than bought treasure. And unless you have very different characters, a comrade's items are going to be useful to someone. I always saw a party looting their fallen comrade as a combination of friendly ribbing and a consolation prize for losing a party member. I've never actually had it be a negative or annoying in any games I've been a part of over the last couple of decades.

Different groups obviously are into different things.

As for mundane items, I haven't talked about changing the PHB rules that you simply can't sell them. That solution works whether an item of 5 levels higher is 5 times as expensive, 2 times or 20 times.

I think the main thing that people discount with the 4e treasure system is its HUGE robustness.

Yes it is. But robust doesn't equal "does everything anyone could want it to do."

In the 4e system the NUMBERS get large, but the PCs relative purchasing power tends to stay firmly controlled in a way that has never been true of earlier editions. The system is self-correcting.

It's never been true of earlier editions because earlier editions had leveling as a power mechanic and 4E also has it as a pacing mechanic. Every PC bonus is offset by an increase in monster and skill difficulties. And exponential system with 3x or even 2x still doesn't allow PCs to get their hands on bonus level items way out of the appropriate range. At 2x, at level 1, if the entire party pools for one item-- and gets it at list cost-- they can have one +2 Level 6 item. One.

The exponential system works with smaller numbers. at 2x the DM has to pay passing attention to treasure. At 3x or above, it runs on autopilot.

I think people that play a lot lose sight of the most common game where the players mercilessly exploit any mistake the DM makes and maybe now and then contribute to the story, if there is one beyond the dungeon crawl. In that type of game you really want the 4e treasure system, and verisimilitude is pretty much irrelevant.

Absolutely. Why would you change something that doesn't matter to the participants? But for those to whom verisimilitude is not irrelevant, the exponential amounts of treasure can be jarring.

Lots of people have criticized the design of the current system, but I think they mostly just aren't judging it against the criteria it was built to fill.

This thread isn't about criticizing it. It's about understanding it. No one is attacking it. No one needs to defend it. You must agree that if a DM finds the existing system doesn't do what they want, they should atleast understand the underlying math before making any changes, right? That's what this thread is about.