D&D 5E No Magic Shops!

[Kobold Boots]

In theory this post reads as very reasonable.

In practice, however, it completely ignores the vast amounts of gold showered upon heroes in every edition of Dungeons & Dragons, both in offical treasure loot distribution and in (most) official adventure supplements.

If you haven't checked up on the numerous bloggers and forumists that have analyzed how much gold a level 10 character (say) will have if you follow the DMG treasure guidelines, or if you play in (say) Storm King's Thunder, I strongly recommend you do so before posting.

The reason why it reads as reasonable is the same thing you ignored when replying to him.

Logic states that if his premise is to control the amount of gold given to his group that he'd be amending whatever comes out of a module's stat block to accomplish that or writing his own adventures.

So when you reply to the effect of "well what about DMG guidelines and modules" you kind of missed the boat there in the name of your own opinion.

Be well
KB

 

[jasper]

Or bring a caddie with them.

You say in need of caddie. Emcumbrance got feeling mightly SLLLLLOOOWWW.
AT JASPER CASH AND CADDIE we huge caddies, small caddie, limo caddie.. Call 1-800-Cad-dies!

 

[Xetheral]

In theory this post reads as very reasonable.

In practice, however, it completely ignores the vast amounts of gold showered upon heroes in every edition of Dungeons & Dragons, both in offical treasure loot distribution and in (most) official adventure supplements.

If you haven't checked up on the numerous bloggers and forumists that have analyzed how much gold a level 10 character (say) will have if you follow the DMG treasure guidelines, or if you play in (say) Storm King's Thunder, I strongly recommend you do so before posting.

I'm fully aware that there is usually lots and lots of gold available to PCs in campaigns, including in my own. I'm in favor of increased options for spending that gold, including better prices for magic items for those DMs who want them (including me). More and better options for spending money would avoid the need to introduce money sinks.

My point was that in a game where the DM doesn't want more support for spending money usefully, it's possible to simply restrict the supply of gold rather than introduce money sinks to artificially drain it. Inflation is a more easily-avoidable problem in a TTRPG with a DM than it is in a computer game.

Yes, that is one interpretation.

But you should be aware it also shorthand for ANY opportunity the heroes get to spend their hard-earned gold; including beneficial ones (useful ones, fun ones etc). In this context, it is used to mean the opposite of a game where you can't spend your gold (at least not on anything you're interested in).

If I have used the term, it is supposed to be this latter definition.

Oh ok, we're just using very different definitions. I was not familiar with your broader usage. In my experience, the term is much more limited (and usually derogatory).

 

[Fanaelialae]

It's easy to forget how very different 3rd edition was, especially in the now long-gone 3.0 ruleset. You could have a monster with "damage reduction 30/+2". This meant that the damage of any single weapon hit would be reduced by thirty (!!) unless delivered by a +2 or better weapon. That is not a per-turn reduction by the way, it really was per attack(!!). Clearly a boring +2 Longsword was MUCH more desirable than a +1 Flaming Longsword then. The pricing system in Sane can clearly be traced all the way back to 2000, despite these fundamental assumptions no longer holding.

That's only true of 3.0. IIRC, by the time 3.5 came out, that damage reduction would have been 15/magic. They roughly slashed the DR values in half and replaced the +1/+2/+3/etc progression with magic and epic (magic was +1 or better, epic was +6 or better). Unless I'm mistaken, however, the magic item prices didn't change significantly in most cases.

 

[Hussar]

Sorry but one +1 bonus is exactly worth as much as any other +1 bonus.

And in 5th edition you quickly reach the stage where you easily hit most foes, especially if you're good at minmaxing. (Note the edition was built that way and I'm not complaining).

I'm just saying that there is nothing special about going from +1 to +2.

In contrast, the difference between a non-magical axe and a +1 Axe or even a "+0 Axe" (some magical weapons do not give a plus bonus but still count as magical) is HUGE, since so very many monsters have resistance to non-magical blunt, slash and pierce damage.

No, you are mistaken. ANY plus from magic items is a huge bonus in a system where the monsters are not designed around those pluses. You're right, the PC's are easily hitting most foes without magic. That's the point of bounded accuracy. You don't need magic items to hit the bad guys.

But, if you have plussed items (and possibly other plussed stuff that stacks like stat bonus items), then you are going to hit that much more often, and get to do extra damage. Which then makes things like those +5/-10 feats just that much more effective.

In a system where the maximum bonus your character is ever going to see outside of magic is about +12 (ish) to hit, adding +1 or +2 from magic is HUGE. Compared to 3e/3.5 where that bonus is pretty much an after thought compared to your BAB for the most part.

In 5th edition, many gamers have concluded that all the damage reduction in the MM is mostly just fluff, since it is so easy to get hold of a magic weapon (even with zero shoppes!).

Again, you keep speaking for "many" gamers. How do you know this? in 3 campaigns, 24 levels of play, I have not found a SINGLE magic weapon for my three PC's. Not one. My fighter inherited a magic sword from another dead PC, my Ranger in Ravenloft went 8 levels and never did find a magic bow, and my cleric in Storm King's Thunder is now 6th level and has no magic weapons.

So, it certainly has not been my experience.

BINGO!

But seriously, have you even once considered that a group of players might not be interested in building churches or creating thieves guilds or donating money to orphanages...?

It would be nice if this edition continued supporting the playstyle where you spend gold on magical upgrades, instead of offering downtime as the ONLY gold outlet.

Hang on, you've shifted the goal posts. You went from Utility based pricing for magic items, which the game has never had in any edition, to simply being able to spend gold on magical upgrades. Well, if all you want is to be able to spend gold on magic upgrades, the rules are right there. You might not like the pricing, and that's fine, but, the rules ARE right there.

And, again, since you ignore it the first time around, how are you going to account for the idea that you turn gold into direct PC power in a game which does not presume ANY magic items? You are asking for a complete rewrite of the game from the ground up on the DM's side. EVERY monster has to be rewritten since bounded accuracy is now completely shot to hell if you allow the players to use the DMG like an Amazon.com listing.

Which spins back around to "D&D on easy mode" complaints that are fairly common.

I do kinda wonder if there isn't some correlation between folks complaining about how easy D&D is and folks who see magic items as standard power ups.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I have an idea: spend gold hiring NPC adventurers to go loot dungeons for you, in return for getting all the magic items they discover. That way you get a place to spend your gold and you get magic items! If you feel like you're missing out on the fun, ask your DM for permission to control the NPCs, since your PCs will be resting at home. It's a win-win-win.

 

[Nevvur]

And, again, since you ignore it the first time around, how are you going to account for the idea that you turn gold into direct PC power in a game which does not presume ANY magic items? You are asking for a complete rewrite of the game from the ground up on the DM's side. EVERY monster has to be rewritten since bounded accuracy is now completely shot to hell if you allow the players to use the DMG like an Amazon.com listing.

No one has suggested players get to use the DMG like a shopping list. Advocates for "magic shops" just want baseline pricing for each item for those times PCs want to buy or sell a particular item as the opportunity presents itself. For instance, if the players meet a vendor of rare and spectacular items (with a small collection of randomly generated doodads), what would be considered a fair starting price for each of those items? You've been in this discussion almost the entire time, I'm not sure why you're putting such words in their mouths (or under the fingers, anyway).

Not saying I agree with their position. I stand by my assertion such prices should be determined WHOLLY by setting and context. If my PCs meet a knight who has been stranded in the wilderness for 2 weeks and is starving to death, he might sell his +1 longsword for a pack of rations. A +1 longsword family heirloom belonging to a noble seeking to fund his army might settle for no less than 50,000 GP.

The very idea that a baseline price exists suggests such items are traded with enough regularity to establish a price people generally agree is fair. That just doesn't happen in any of my settings, nor is it assumed to happen in the default game/world settings put forth by the developers. I can sort of see it happening with common and uncommon items, particularly +1 weapons/armor without additional effects, but how many Immovable Rods and Ioun Stones are in circulation that the inhabitants of the world can agree on their value?

 

[Satyrn]

But doesn't that go directly against 5e RAW, which says magic items cannot be bought or sold at all?

That isn't what 5e's rules say. The rules say it varies from setting to setting, and comes down to what the DM says.
Sure, the DMG then goes on to offer a brief description on how buying and selling them tends to be difficult for setting reasons, but it immediately offers up Eberron and Sigil as a counter. And it always comes back to "it depends on the setting and DM."

There just aren't any good rules for comprehensive standardized pricing for DMs to use.

And I guess that leaves the impression that the DMG is saying "you can't buy magic" despite explicitly saying it depends on the setting.

 

[5ekyu]

I do kinda wonder if there isn't some correlation between folks complaining about how easy D&D is and folks who see magic items as standard power ups.

It is entirely possible and not surprising - carryover of expectations from prior editions often has multiple side effects and unintended consequences when certain elements get significantly changed.

I have an idea: spend gold hiring NPC adventurers to go loot dungeons for you, in return for getting all the magic items they discover. That way you get a place to spend your gold and you get magic items! If you feel like you're missing out on the fun, ask your DM for permission to control the NPCs, since your PCs will be resting at home. It's a win-win-win.

Actually that is not a bad approach at all for "what to do with our gold" as a downtime activity. it can take many forms even if not going the full "basically we play that game instead" approach.

And it gets to what I see as a fundamental issue with the issue of DND 5e gold and "inflation"...

its actually not on the Gm to provide them something to buy or shops to buy it from. No more than it is the Gms job to give them dragons to fight if they find a dragonslayer axe or chasms to cross if they find a fly potion. In short, its not up to the Gm to make "using their treasure" an automatic or obvious thing - not like they found an amazon gift card.

What the GM IMO **should** do is focus on showing them a robust world where they can use that gold and treasure and see it has value depending on how they decide to use it. Maybe they set up their own "guild" and start buying info or secrets or maps that can lead them to goals they seek. maybe they do setup an adventuring "outfit" that also can use the info gained from the other. maybe they startup a "spell exchange or scroll exchange" kind of place to let their gold and a place of safety bring to them opportunities to expend their spellbooks.

The key is that **because** there are not Amazon.magic stores at will they may have to find ways to turn that gold into :value" and interact with the world to do that depending on what they individually consider "value" to mean.

Drawing from my experience with a game where magic items and gold were interchangeable pretty much on a whim, there would never have been anything that would be considered worth "spending gold on" of the sorts of things i mention in this post because there were always bigger more expensive items to be bought and available as easily as pretty much clicking "confirm order" and even without a two-day wait.

 

[Maxperson]

Call 1-800-Cad-dies!

Noooooooo! Alas, poor Caddie, I knew him well.