Players Whining that they Should be able to Buy Magic Items

[Belen]

Note he first mentions that he'll never, ever let PCs buy things - except they can buy them with things other than straight coinage, which can in turn be bought with coinage, etc.

Bit of an odd view to hold, but there you go ...

Anyway, there you go. The position that you claim is a straw man is in fact the position held by members of "the opposition" by their own words. Therefore, it isn't a strawman.

Note that I prefaced that statement by talking about player abuse of strong magic item market. The connotation being that having gold will not necessaily mean that the player will get all the items optimal for their character. Items that they want will be very hard to get.

Simplely having money will not get them what they want. Money only goes so far.

Of course, the part does not have a lot of liquid assets either.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I don't think that how long it takes is a minor detail. I don't think that whether the transaction goes through or not is a minor detail. I don't think that having to travel hundreds of miles to buy or sell is a minor detail.

If your established-but-inefficient market is the arms market in Somalia or Afghanistan, I don't think it's just an issue of pecuniary transaction costs. The non-pecuniary costs are substantial -- and full of dramatic potential.

The reason we would pay the big mark ups is exactly because we are dealing with professionals who know how to get things done for a healthy cut. And these markets exist in the real world in places that you name. Some how the silk and spice trade came into existence, in spite of the exact things you mentioned. Some how tin was mined in bronze age Britain and moved into the Med to be sold as a commodity in spite of the risks.

My POV is not that every item should easily available or even available at all on any given day or year. But eventually the campaign progresses to a point where it is not worth roleplaying out a PC traveling to the big city to cash in a +1 spear and a +1 dagger to acquire a +1 bow. It is not logical. It is not fun.

 

[atom crash]

My POV is not that every item should easily available or even available at all on any given day or year. But eventually the campaign progresses to a point where it is not worth roleplaying out a PC traveling to the big city to cash in a +1 spear and a +1 dagger to acquire a +1 bow. It is not logical. It is not fun.

Well put. Exactly how I feel. When gaming time is at a premium, I don't want to waste multiple game sessions on a shopping trip. I don't want my players to roleplay buying more oil for their lanterns. I don't want them to roleplay going down to the moneychanger to get that monetary loot converted into the coin of the realm. I want them to go track down the bad guys and bring them to justice.

(Unfortunately, the guys who happen to have magic items for sell from time to time are major NPCs in my campaign, so I've shot myself in the foot on that one. But we hardly ever roleplay selling off loot, and I check availability of a given magic item against a changing inventory I maintain for these dealers before players can put any new magic item on their character sheet. "Look, right now the weapons dealer has an axe +1, a flaming longsword +1, and a seeking repeating crossbow +1. No vorpal greatwords, sorry. Want something custom, go commission the blacksmith.")

Of course, I don't let them buy +2 weapons or major -- or even medium, for that matter -- wondrous items. Everyone wants goggles of night and a ring of invisibility. They won't find it, because no one in their right mind would pawn an item like that. And since my players are in the 6th-8th level range, I keep tabs on what they have and limit what they can get at this point. I feel it's part of my responsibility as a fair DM.

It strikes me that BelenUmeria responded to player abuse in one game by saying, "no buying magic items, ever (with gold)." Did it ever occur that another option would be to limit what would be for sale in any given market?

 

[fusangite]

You mean humans are radically different from the humans who populate our world? Because "capitalism" isn't an economic model that's new, and supply and demand isn't an assumption. If there is a demand for a good, and a supply for it, a market will ensure. Go back through history and try to find a culture in which this was not true.

Perhaps you could find an historian or anthropologist who supports your view here. I am not aware of any reputable scholar who would argue that society has always been capitalist.

Because as the price of magic items rose with inflation, other suppliers would step in and try to take advantage of the rising price, driving prices back down by increasing the volume of supply available to the market. This is basic economic market analysis.

So why does the consumer price index rise every year? Why is there annual net inflation in the economy of every industrialized country on the face of the earth? Surely based on your "basic economic market analysis" the buying power of the currency in a healthy economy should not decline annually. Or perhaps you don't actually know economics that well.

In Charlemange's world? Pretty damn easy if historical evidence is to be believed.

Really? Name someone who entered the aristocracy of the Frankish kingdom between 750 and 900 simply by paying cash.

You didn't even have to purchase it in many cases, just assert your authority and back it up with sufficient violence and it would be recognized.

Thanks for making my point Storm Raven! Violence, the capacity to exercise coercive force, was the real currency of vassalage. It didn't matter how much gold you had if you didn't have either violence, aristocratic blood or the church standing behind you.

Umm, the Norse Kings did sell titles. You could pay off just about anything with gold, including murder, Norse kings were greedy buggers!

I realize that I failed to express myself properly in my post regarding the purchase of office in the pre-modern world. My point was not that money was never a necessary condition to obtain office. My point was that money was rarely a sufficient condition.

The simple fact that one had money did not mean that one could buy whatever one wanted. One had to be entitled to that thing entitlement typically came from one of three places: ecclesiastical authority, aristocratic blood or force of arms. Without at least one of these things, it was extremely difficult to purchase anything of subtantial value.

Simony was indeed widespread in the Middle Ages. But how many people who did not have the backing either of blood, God or force ever bought office?

Yes. Offices were bought and sold, especially the office of bishop. But this does not mean that the simple possession of funds was sufficient to buy an office.

Departing the medieval world, let me pose a more modern problem that I posed earlier in this thread: Why are there billionaire untouchables in India today? If all other forms of status are convertible into money at all times, in all societies in all places throughout the entire sweep of human history, why can't people just put up enough money to turn into brahmins today?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

So why does the consumer price index rise every year? Why is there annual net inflation in the economy of every industrialized country on the face of the earth?

Usury.

 

[fusangite]

Usury.

Which is part of which economic system?

How can one have capitalism if people cannot mutually agree to borrow money at an agreed-upon rate of interest?

 

[Ciaran]

Thanks for making my point Storm Raven! Violence, the capacity to exercise coercive force, was the real currency of vassalage. It didn't matter how much gold you had if you didn't have either violence, aristocratic blood or the church standing behind you.

[snip]

The simple fact that one had money did not mean that one could buy whatever one wanted. One had to be entitled to that thing entitlement typically came from one of three places: ecclesiastical authority, aristocratic blood or force of arms. Without at least one of these things, it was extremely difficult to purchase anything of subtantial value.

Aaaaand... you're saying that D&D adventurers and adventuring parties lack the necessary force of arms?

 

[fusangite]

Aaaaand... you're saying that D&D adventurers and adventuring parties lack the necessary force of arms?

Depends on the power of the individual who can make the item (and his allies) and the power of the party demanding it. So, yeah -- in many cases, the party would not have the power but in many cases, they would. That would have to be assessed on a case by case basis -- which is my whole point.

Also, I'm not arguing, you may recall, that PCs should be unable to obtain magic items; I am simply arguing that cash is not, by itself, a sufficient condition for obtaining them. Remember: most magic items are obtained at swordpoint -- I'm not contesting that; but those magic items are considered "treasure" and are not purchased at all.

 

[mmadsen]

So why does the consumer price index rise every year? Why is there annual net inflation in the economy of every industrialized country on the face of the earth?

Because the supply of fiat money grows faster than the supply of real wealth. And because the CPI doesn't take into account that the "same" good can improve over dramatically over time (e.g., a 2005 model car or computer vs. an older model).

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Which is part of which economic system?

Anything more advanced than strict barter?