Selling items : illogical rule ?

[darkrose50]

I am going to revise my previous statements. Those of you asking for "economic rules" might as well be asking for detailed instructions for what monsters do on each of their turns, when they are bloodied, how they move, whether or not they will attack a fighter who marked them or they run or they attack the wizard. All stuff that your DM ought to be doing.

I am not upset that they do not have well thought out economic rules. I am upset that they have illogical economic rules. A rule saying you must sell anything for 20% of its value is silly, unrealistic, stupid, and removes choices from me (choices are fun). Selling something for 20% should be one choice in a list of choices, not the only choice for selling stuff.

Now I do hope they come out with a crafting and economics book in the future. There is CLEARLY a demand for one.

 

[Grabuto138]

I am not upset that they do not have well thought out economic rules. I am upset that they have illogical economic rules. A rule saying you must sell anything for 20% of its value is silly, unrealistic, stupid, and removes choices from me (choices are fun). Selling something for 20% should be one choice in a list of choices, not the only choice for selling stuff.

Now I do hope they come out with a crafting and economics book in the future. There is CLEARLY a demand for one.

No offense, by why does it seem that the detracters of the 1/5 rule" are obtusely ignoring Skill Challenges?

For parties that prefer to hand-wave the economics there is a hard and fast rule. On the other hand, a DM can use Skill Challenges to create an entire campaign aroung commerce if they want.

I can envision a pretty fun campaign based on Skill Challenges and traditional encounters that focuses on finding and opening a business, negotiating with customers, deals gone bad, secret meetings, burgleries and all sorts of things.

 

[Thasmodious]

Six people in a thread on EnWorld constitutes clear demand? No wonder your little bullet lists are so wildly illogical.

 

[Goumindong]

1) Some people know how to sell stuff.

Indeed. Some people also know how to buy stuff. It seems like "selling something" is a skill challenge. And "selling something really expensive for as much as you could buy it" would be a really difficult one.
Guess what, you get to role play this. You do not get to roll a die and say "well my character knows how to sell it so i get x cash"

Selling stuff takes time, your cousin has built up connections over years that let him sell stuff fast, adventurers typically do not have this time and will not be able to sell ridiculously high value items at anywhere near what someone established will want to sell it to them without investing time.

Which is a quest, that you get to role play.

That is just the way the economy in points of light works. That is your hard and fast economic rule. Its like you are complaining that goblins have too high "to hit" values.

2) There is the real value of something, and than the value someone tries to sell it for. They are not the same things.

No. Value is based on what someone will buy it for and what someone will sell it for. And if you want to sell it without doing taking a long time to find a buyer who is willing to to pay what you want, then the answer to "what someone will buy it for" is "20% of its base value"

2b) Put mostly anything up on eBay, and you will get the real value for the item.

This is simply not true. You will get the highest value of the item of the users of the site at the time they viewed it minus transaction costs.

 

[Goumindong]

3) Supply and demand. It goes two ways. If something is worth a whole lot of gold, then people with a whole lot of gold want it. A demand for something means selling that something for what that demand is . . . is possible.

Now it becomes clear that you have no clue what supply and demand are. Supply is a line composed of all of the relative values of all the people in the land for the point at which they will sell some quantity of that item. Demand is the same, except its the buy value. Just because there is a high demand does not mean that people with a lot of gold want it. People will want what they want and are only allowed more as their ability increases.

Often times there is varying demands across different demographics. And merchants will partake in price discrimination in order to fully exploit that(E.G. kids prices at movie theaters). Now, demand for magic items might be very high among adventurers, and supply of magic items very low. And if demand for magic items is very low outside of adventurers then buyers, being intelligent are going to offer very low for buy prices and very high for sell prices.

Why? Because they can expect to get high prices from adventurers when adventurers are not expected to meet each other often and set up bazaars for trade. And only the adventurers need the items, so when those items become dead weight then they will have to sell them at a much diminished price from what they were previously valued.

4) Spotting people who make up the demand side of the equation in a feudalistic economy is not voodoo. They are the guilds, churches, merchants, gentry, nobles, and royalty.

Feudalism is a political system not an economic system. The guilds churches, gentry, nobles, and royalty might not need the items you are selling and are likely to invest in more prudent things, like castles, mercenaries, and minions. Would you rather have a +4 flaming sword or would you rather have 1000 level 5 minions, lieutenants, a castle, and all the necessary stuff needed to run said castle.

Would the church not spend it on charity? Take the Holy Roman Empire as a great example. There was only one church in the largest city in the world that had the wealth that you are describing and that city would be comparable to tiefling city that fell to the dragonborn ages ago. Guilds buy power and influence, merchants only want something they can sell(and they can't sell these easily to all the things you listed)

I am not upset that they do not have well thought out economic rules. I am upset that they have illogical economic rules. A rule saying you must sell anything for 20% of its value is silly, unrealistic, stupid, and removes choices from me (choices are fun). Selling something for 20% should be one choice in a list of choices, not the only choice for selling stuff.

Now I do hope they come out with a crafting and economics book in the future. There is CLEARLY a demand for one.

No, its not silly, illogical, and stupid. Low volume/turnover, high transaction cost goods often have large differences between buy and sell price. If you need an economic book there are plenty that can satisfy your thirst. I like this one

Then once you know what is happening all you have to do is role play it. I know this might seem strange, 4e being a role playing game and all, but its what I suggest.

 

[AllisterH]

Here's a contrary viewpoint: 4e magic item resale rules are in spirit the same as the 3e rules, only with better math behind them.

The point of having PCs able to sell found magic items is to allow them to choose between a GM-selected magic item that might not be exactly what they want and a lesser-powered item that meshes better with their character concept.

Take a look at the 3e magic armor costs (the magic weapon costs are simply double):
+1 - 1000 gp
+2 - 4000 gp (sell for 2000 gp)
+3 - 9000 gp (sell for 4500 gp)
+4 - 16000 gp (sell for 8000 gp)
+5 - 25000 gp (sell for 12500 gp)

Your GM gives you a magical heavy shield and you'd rather have a magical light shield. No problem. A +2 armor can roughly be sold for the cost of two +1 armors; a +3 armor can be sold for slightly more than the cost of a +2 armor; a +4 armor can be sold for slightly less than the cost of a +3 armor; a +5 armor can be sold for a little more than 3/4 the cost of +4 armor.

Now, let's look at the 4e magic item costs, using a flaming weapon for simplicity:
+1 - 1000 gp
+2 - 5000 gp (sell for 1000 gp)
+3 - 25000 gp (sell for 5000 gp)
+4 - 125000 gp (sell for 25000 gp)
+5 - 625000 gp (sell for 125000 gp)
+6 - 3125000 gp (sell for 625000 gp)

The 4e costs for magic items are related to the resale values in the same way as 3e items, just more precisely. If you sell a +X item, you receive exactly enough to purchase a similar +(X-1) item, allowing you to turn that +2 flaming longsword into a +1 flaming rapier, or +3 deathcut hide into +2 deathcut plate.

The lesser gold for resale also allows GMs to increase the number of magic items given out as treasure, without as much concern that PCs selling off old items and buying new ones will destabilize their power balance.

Exactly.

The more "simulationist" rules of 3E led to people stripping anything and everything because it meant more power in terms of magic items.

Yet at the same time,it meant that any treasure I put might well as been gold since unless it was the exact item they wanted, it would be sold for gold to buy the item.

What's the point of the random treasure tables in the DMG with these rules?


I honestly dont want that. Am I really that much of a bad DM in that I don't think the default situation should be PCs be looters?

 

[darkrose50]

None of these statements are necessarily unreasonable (well maybe the ebay one because it has no bearing on fantasy), but it's also important to note that expensive and specialized items, while they may have buyers, often take a long time to sell.

I think that we would see auction houses. eBay is the quintessential example of the real value of something. I love eBay.

I live in New York City. There is a huge demand for real estate here, which makes it really expensive. But the odds that any one person wants the exact piece of real estate your selling and has the money to pay for it is very low. As a result it often takes years to sell something for the "real" value.

PCs are like real estate sellers with no internet or phones. They might eventually be able to get a reasonable price for something if they hold on to it, but they will probably be waiting a long time.

Now if your playing a campaign that takes place over 100 years, then yeah your going to have to modify the rules a bit to adjust and maybe allow players to find better buyers for their items. As the DMG says, there is no way for the rules to cover all campaign styles, and DMs will have to come up with their own rules if they run an unusual campaign.

I love this example. Linking magical items to real estate in New York is brilliant. I think having the option of waiting years to sell an item for its full trade value would rock! I also think that some magical item agents are better than others. Some know how to sell things faster than others, by being salesman. Some understand the market better than others. And some understand how to modify the item to make it more sellable.

There would be magical item agents. It makes perfect sense to me. One would get a 5% cut for providing a buyer, and one would get a 5% cut for providing a seller. Crating a character who understands the magical item market should be an option (perhaps a feat).

It would be quicker and easier to sell a magic item priced lower than the market. Selling at 20% should be an option, not the only option.

Want to sell your house now? I bet you could get 20% of its going rate very fast. I however think you can likely do better than 20% in the same amount of time and effort.

 

[DM_Blake]

Um, to those that want a more realistic economic system, can I ask one thing?

How do I actually make finding magical items worth anything if the players can get 50% and more from it?

How do I not have the players scavenge the gold teeth from the bloody bandits because they can make more magical items?

I mean, I've read LotR and I don't remember any time peple scavenging stuff from the orcs and selling it or the hobbits hocking items.

That's two things

Finding magical items is always worth it. If I am halberd specced, and find a +1 halberd, then I rejoice. But if I find a +1 bardiche, then I start looking to trade that bardiche for a halberd of equal value.

Unfortunately, it's the 4e rule system that says I can't do this. Now I need 5 +1 bardiches at 20% each to get my halberd.

So now I'm totally dependent on my DM making sure there is a +1 halberd for me somewhere in this dungeon. And a +2 halberd in the next dungeon. And a +3 halberd in another dungeon. Etc.

Further, it begins to be strange when our group, after years of playing, looks back and reflects that we've found 15 different magical halberds, frost, flame, thundering, vorpal, varying plusses, etc., but we have never found a magical bardiche, or a magical longsword. Fate sure has been kind to us. That kind of catering to the players breaks down any reasonable sense of verisimilitude if you do it all the time, or even most of the time.

But without being able to reasonably exchange magic items, that level of catering to the players is almost required by the game system.

As for scavenging gold teeth from the bandits, that makes perfect sense to me. Why wouldn't an adventurer want to have the best equipment money can buy?

There are not many reasonable answers to my question:
1. Money cannot buy any equipment. Ever.
2. Money can buy equipment, but players can't do this. Ever. Only NPCs can.
3. Money can buy equipment, but the DM won't let players have money.
4. Money can buy equipment, but there's never any of the equipment you want for sale.
5. Money can buy equipment, so go buy what you want.

None of those are good answers.

Maybe this one might work better:
6. Money can buy equipment, sometimes you can find some equipment for sale, sometimes you have some money, so sometimes you will find something you can use for sale and that you will be able to purchase.

Reasonably, anyone who chooses to constantly put themselves neck-deep into life-threatening danger, over and over, will probably want to be armed to the teeth with every possible tool he can find that will help him survive all that danger.

Spending coin to purchase those tools makes more sense than hoping you happen to stumble onto a troll's cave containing several rare and ancient magical blades.

Which takes us back to Tolkein.

True, nobody in LotR was scavenging loot off of dead orcs and hocking it to hobbits.

But they had a few things going both for and against them.

Going for them was Tolkein himself. He gave them what they needed and made sure that stuff like Sting, Orcrist, and a mithril chain shirt all came into the story when they were needed. Which is great for a hero in a storybook, but not so practical for a real hero living a real life (which is what we role-play, after all - nobody was role-playing Frodo).

Going against them was a terribly impractical world that had two kingdoms containing exactly two cities, both ravaged by war, with a few scattered settlements such as Hobbiton or Bree or Rivervale, none of which had any evident outside trade with other settlements. Hence no economy to speak of. Given that perspective, Middle Earth has less of a viable economy than Star Trek.

Now, if you want to set up a campaign in that kind of world, then your players won't be very surprised to find out there is no economy and no market for the booty they haul out of a dungeon.

But that kind of setting belongs in a campaign guide, not a core rulebook.

The vanilla PoL setting seems to assume more cities, more towns, more economy, more trade, more goods changing hands. Quite a bit more. Which means the default PoL setting has an economy of some kind.

But apparently, according to the core books, this economy is wholly whimsical and entirely nonsensical.

 

[darkrose50]

No offense, by why does it seem that the detracters of the 1/5 rule" are obtusely ignoring Skill Challenges?

For parties that prefer to hand-wave the economics there is a hard and fast rule. On the other hand, a DM can use Skill Challenges to create an entire campaign aroung commerce if they want.

I can envision a pretty fun campaign based on Skill Challenges and traditional encounters that focuses on finding and opening a business, negotiating with customers, deals gone bad, secret meetings, burgleries and all sorts of things.

I would love examples of this in the rules. Just don’t say if you want to sell something, than anything you sell sells for 20% of its crafting cost. Say you have the option of selling for something for 20% of its crafting cost.

 

[darkrose50]

Six people in a thread on EnWorld constitutes clear demand? No wonder your little bullet lists are so wildly illogical.

This is something that is brought up over and over and over again. It will continue being discusses over and over again until someone fixed the issue.

This book fixed the issue in 3.0 and 3.5. It had an audience, and had multiple printings.

A Magical Medieval Society: Western Europe (Paperback)

http://www.amazon.com/Magical-Medieval-Society-Western-Europe/dp/0972937609

Okay so you first bit is debunked. Now about the wildly illogical list?