Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
No Magic Shops!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7334815"><p>But if the gold has no value (because it's not your character, and you will never have an option to spend it on anything else) then it has no value. It's meaningless to ask players whether they would be willing to spend 50,000 gold on a sword if they will not only never have another opportunity to spend the gold, but will also never have an opportunity to use it.</p><p></p><p>Milton Friedman used to say that there are four ways to spend money:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can spend your own money on yourself, in which case you are most likely to get a good deal on a desired good.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can spend your own money on somebody else, in which case you are likely to get a good deal but it may not be a desired product (e.g., socks as gifts)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can spend somebody else's money on yourself, in which case you will get a desired product but not necessarily at a good price (e.g. expense accounts)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can spend somebody else's money on somebody else, in which case all bets are off (e.g. government spending).</li> </ul><p></p><p>Simulating the purchase of magic items falls squarely into the last category. There are no actual incentives to balance </p><p>cost vs. utility. All you are measuring are players preconceived notions of value vs. utility, by players who already have an opinion of such things.</p><p></p><p>To go back to the example of spells, it's kind of like asking players for their opinion on a spell, as opposed to having them actually playtest it.</p><p></p><p>And maybe that's what you want: player opinions of the relative worth of magic items. But that is heavily, heavily biased by subjective perception, because nobody has enough objective data to determine an item's actual worth. Deck of Many Things might be over/under prices for reasons (nostalgia?) that have nothing to do with it's actual utility. </p><p></p><p>And if you are going to base it off something as variable as opinion, why bother? Why not just tell DMs, "Charge whatever you think is appropriate." <em>It just doesn't matter.</em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, not their gold, not their character. Bad data.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7334815"] But if the gold has no value (because it's not your character, and you will never have an option to spend it on anything else) then it has no value. It's meaningless to ask players whether they would be willing to spend 50,000 gold on a sword if they will not only never have another opportunity to spend the gold, but will also never have an opportunity to use it. Milton Friedman used to say that there are four ways to spend money: [LIST] [*]You can spend your own money on yourself, in which case you are most likely to get a good deal on a desired good. [*]You can spend your own money on somebody else, in which case you are likely to get a good deal but it may not be a desired product (e.g., socks as gifts) [*]You can spend somebody else's money on yourself, in which case you will get a desired product but not necessarily at a good price (e.g. expense accounts) [*]You can spend somebody else's money on somebody else, in which case all bets are off (e.g. government spending). [/LIST] Simulating the purchase of magic items falls squarely into the last category. There are no actual incentives to balance cost vs. utility. All you are measuring are players preconceived notions of value vs. utility, by players who already have an opinion of such things. To go back to the example of spells, it's kind of like asking players for their opinion on a spell, as opposed to having them actually playtest it. And maybe that's what you want: player opinions of the relative worth of magic items. But that is heavily, heavily biased by subjective perception, because nobody has enough objective data to determine an item's actual worth. Deck of Many Things might be over/under prices for reasons (nostalgia?) that have nothing to do with it's actual utility. And if you are going to base it off something as variable as opinion, why bother? Why not just tell DMs, "Charge whatever you think is appropriate." [I]It just doesn't matter.[/I] Again, not their gold, not their character. Bad data. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
No Magic Shops!
Top