Players Whining that they Should be able to Buy Magic Items

[Ridley's Cohort]

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.

I can agree with that. But in my experience, it is not the norm for a heroically inclined party to have nothing but cash at their disposal. Most earn positive reputations with some of the right kind of people. Consider the classic adventure hooks: bandits/monsters preying on a road, a wizard needs an errand run, a village is attacked by mysterious assailants, etc. Doing a number of these should eventually yield the requisite letters of introduction.

 

[fusangite]

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).

And how are these conditions different in a D&D economy, especially one in which the characters are adventuring?

 

[mmadsen]

I said:

I've never argued against the profit motive; I've only argued that we wouldn't necessarily see an efficient, modern, commodity market.

Storm Raven replied:

No one has argued that we would. What has been argued is that you'd see auction houses, merchants that deal in mid to high end trade, individuals accepting commsissions, and so on for most permanent items and a relatively bustling market in lower cost one use items such as scrolls and potions.

I don't think we disagree much at all then.

My point all along has been that an economically unsophiscated society is going to have difficulty matching buyers and sellers of very expensive, highly specialized goods. If you can scratch off the gold pieces and get the item -- whatever you want, right out of the DMG -- then you're operating in a sophisticated market, a modern, efficient, commodity market, where goods and prices are standardized.

A quasi-Roman setting might feature fairly sophisticated markets. A quasi-Venetian setting might, too. A Tolkien-esque, Anglo-Saxon setting would not. There's a lot of "friction" in a pre-capitalist economy, just like in a modern black market.

 

[Kast]

Some things to consider i.e. the availability of purchasable magic.

Conclusion: Spellcasters monopoly on magic gives them a huge amount of power. It is greatly to the advantage of spellcasters to organize themselves and regulate the quantity and type of magic they produce and sell. It's good to limit quantity because that keeps the price artificially high. It's good to limit the type of items they produce because they can then assure that other (non-spellcasters) never achieve parity with them in terms of power. It is good to limit the use of communication magic because that ensures the spellcasters will not only decide who knows what, but also that they know things well before others. Therefore, an organized body of casters will limit the availability of magic items and powerful spells because it is in their own best interest to do so.

That is exactly the way OPEC keeps oil prices at what they consider optimum.
Only the desperate mage or cleric would even consider trading current or future power for money.

 

[Saeviomagy]

- sale of magical items incurs heavy taxation in the region where it is sold. This is to the point where most selling would be underground and thus hard to find for the players anyway.

Which doesn't equate to impossible

- One must never ignore the expenditure of XPs. While the DMG puts a value an XP (25 gp I believe?), it never directly addresses the "XP Limit" of a city (as it does GP limit). One can pretty much take this how one sees fit. In my experience (and this is my personal feeling on the topic as well), few players are willing to routinely expend XP just to make some money. A DM could try to extrapolate an XP limit from the demographics, but it would be mostly hunches and gut instinct anyway, and would ultimately lead one to whatever conclusion one is looking for.

At a guess, this is because most players will expect the DM to screw them if they try to make money by trying to enforce the player gold/level limits. Otherwise a first level wizard can make himself a nice profit of 2500gp on his first orc. But of course the DM is going to say "oh, you can only sell for half price", or "noone wants to buy" etc etc...

- Shady merchants dealing in fake or inaccurate magical wares. This is a great deterrence to buyers, thus limiting a market for sellers.

Still means magic is for sale. You just have to be careful. And with the variety of ways there are for being careful...

- The more a group of characters relies on magical items (especially at higher level) the more likely those items are going to be destroyed by some intelligent enemy with a penchant for Disjunctioning everything the players have. While this is only available to higher level people, it can help explain why there aren't a slew of old magic items lying around.

Well - actually a high level party with any sense has backups. Especially in a world where magic item sales are impossible. And those backups are in a trove somewhere, ready for collection when the high level party cacks it. And then there are all the magic items that are just given away... Especially in a world without a market. Sort of devalues things, huh?

- Think of wizards as the military. Think of magic as guns. Now think of all the people around the world that are for gun control of private citizens. There may be groups that seek out and destroy magic items, whether this be a diorganized lot of people who snap any wand in half that they find, to entire subversive powerful organizations who routinely mug, rob, and steal magic items to keep them out of the hands of those who are not properly trained to use them (wizards).

Think of america. And again - you're not making magic items untradeable here.

- Law. In feudal society (the baseline for most any campaign I've seen, and most of my own), the ruler owns everything on his land. He has full legal right to simply take your magic items, wish you a good day, and put you in the dungeon if you resist. While many rulers might not choose to do this, a king recently finding himself at war against a greater power might take any offensive magic items, while another might like to keep the populace weak (see gun control above, where the organization might now work for the law). These types of things not only might reduce the number of magic items, but would also be a serious deterrent for someone to start advertising (however discreetly) that they are selling magical items.

Again. Not impossible, just restricted.

Looks like you've got a lot of really awesome plotlines that you've destroyed by making magic totally unsaleable. Shame about that.

 

[Saeviomagy]

As most of the others I will go with the old it is your game and hey remember "No means No!"
It is not like you have made magic items unattainable. They can create them if they want them or just take what was found and hope that it benefits for them. Takes away from the whole questing for a specific magic item.

"Well the ring is said to lay in a tomb over a week away"

"What does it do, it is said that it's bearer will become immune even dragons fire, which we need to get past Old Snarl and get to cave that contains the magical waterfall of Lei Tu Jaani"

"Bugger that for a laugh, lets just use resist energy (fire) spells"

Sorry, but magical item sale doesn't prevent you from positioning the fabulous ring of whozit, essential for the defeat of thingumy. It does however stop you from making lame quests that are easily defeated through the use of basic player abilities.

 

[mmadsen]

I wrote:

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 dramatically over time (e.g., a 2005 model car or computer vs. an older model).

Fusangite replied:

And how are these conditions different in a D&D economy, especially one in which the characters are adventuring?

The money supply in a typical D&D setting is not fiat money; it's not legal tender simply because the state says so. And the state can't print it at will.

If the adventurers are plundering existing treasure, they should introduce no inflation; they're simply transferring wealth to themselves. If they're bringing treasure from outside the economy into the local economy, as the conquistadors brought gold and silver from the New World to the Old, then they likely will introduce inflation. (On the other hand, if there is a shortage of coinage, introducing plenty of gold and silver can help the primitive economy move away from barter and move toward a more modern monetary economy.)

As far as the CPI goes, first, of course, there is no CPI; no state bureaucrats are tracking prices and devising imperfect statistical measures. Second, even if they were tracking prices, consumer goods aren't improving in a quasi-medieval D&D setting. A wagon's a wagon, a chicken's a chicken, an ale's an ale, etc.

No pseudo-inflation shows up unless your categories shift over time, e.g., if you had a price for "longsword" that started off measuring a normal longsword in the Second Age, but later referred to a +1 longsword in the Third Age.

 

[mmadsen]

I said:

"Here's 50,000 gp. Bring back a +5 longsword." You don't see anything that might go awry there? Any "minor details" that might need looking after?

Storm Raven replied:

If I were dealing with a reputable dealer, probably not. There are people who specialize in working out such transactions. There always have been. And their stock in trade is their reputation, which would be ruined if they fleeced their clients. And those types of dealers usually make it a practice to let people know where they can be found (since that's how they get clients).

I think you're neglecting the many, many "minor details" that might go awry. You're handing a king's ransom to someone who may or may not use it as you intended. How well do you trust your agent? How much does he fear and/or respect you? Can he disappear to a tropical island somewhere with that kind of money?

If your agent's totally loyal, can he safely deliver the funds? He's carrying a king's ransom; he needs a king's retinue to protect it. That's quite a haul for a band of brigands or a crew of pirates.

Then he has to deal with the actual dealer, who may or may not respect him. The dealer can simply kill him and take the 50,000 gp. You'll never know what happened. If the dealer works with that agent, or with you, on a regular basis, he has much to gain be staying on the up and up, but if not.... And he always has the option of making the deal, then having a "random" band of brigands steal the item back for him.

Imagine that you, personally, decide to do business with the Russian mafia. Or with "business partners" in Columbia. Everything might work out just fine. Or it might not...

 

[mmadsen]

Some things to consider i.e. the availability of purchasable magic.

1) Spellcasters or those benefiting from an item created by spellcasters are generally the only people capable of high speed communications and rapid travel in the D&D world.

2) Spellcasters are the only ones capable of creating the items we are talking about.

3) Spellcasters are much less dependent on magic items to achieve greater power as they go up in level than are other, non-spellcasting, classes (in other words, a 12th level Fighter with no magic items is at a significant disadvantage, compared to a 12th level spellcaster with no magic items).

Conclusion: Spellcasters monopoly on magic gives them a huge amount of power.

Interesting analysis, Ourph. I think you've got a cool campaign-setting idea there.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I think you're neglecting the many, many "minor details" that might go awry. You're handing a king's ransom to someone who may or may not use it as you intended. How well do you trust your agent? How much does he fear and/or respect you? Can he disappear to a tropical island somewhere with that kind of money?

He's my cohort. I trust him implicitly.