selling loot vs. created items

[dcollins]

Hey, it sounds like when your PCs want items, they have to wait after the creator, but when your NPCs want items, the creator PCs have to arrange their schedules around the NPC. Or was that a mistake ?

Two-way street in both directions. Sometimes an NPC needs an item right now and can't wait. Sometimes a PC needs an item right now and can't wait. Sometimes not.

 

[Staffan]

That's a very good point.

The rule also screws up the wealth per level thing pretty much because if the DM follows guidelines for treasure per encounter, then you will gain just as much loot value as necessary to keep you at the "right" wealth for your level. However, if that loot is randomly generated, you are going to have to sell most of it at half price, resulting in characters with half the wealth they "should" have at their level.

On the other hand, a significant portion of the magic loot comes from NPCs, who generally have gear worth a lot more than the normal treasure for their level (e.g. an EL 5 encounter having an average value of 1,600 gp, but a 5th level NPC having 4,300 gp worth of gear). Even if you only get half value for that gear (and it's likely that the PCs can use at least some of it), that's still 2,150 gp - you're up 550 gp.

 

[Scharlata]

[...] correct? unless he opens his own shop? i'm just searching for thoughts/opinions here.

Hi!

When you go shopping in reality you'd expect to get a brand new item with full warranty and no scratches etc., if you pay the full price at the counter.

The advice in the DMG to "pay" only 1/2 the market price for looted items suggests that the buyer doesn't get a pristine item from the seller (looter).

If your Wondrous-Item-Crafter creates a polished, all-new, shining pair of gauntlets of ogre power, why should he expect less than the standard market price from any buyer? He could sell the item for more or less than indicated in the DMG, but that's your option (or that of your DM) and would go astray into the complex world of economics...

Enjoy!

 

[Trainz]

Scharlata,

You bring an absolutely interesting point.

That said, when the PC's sell loot, they don't have to bust their cojones: they can most of the time sell it. Meaning the assumed buyer doesn't necessarily NEED them right away, but he buys them. Much like when you walk in a sotre nowadays and sell your stuff. Some stores will buy it, but very low so that they can potentially make a profit.

OTOH, when your PC's buy an item, they want an item from a very small list. They won't buy any random item the shop keeper has.

So, in that way, the system does have a certain verisimilitude.

Back to your post Scharlata: if an NPC comissions the PC's for a specific item, I think it's safe to assume that the PC's can expect full price for it.

 

[Scharlata]

[...] if an NPC comissions the PC's for a specific item, I think it's safe to assume that the PC's can expect full price for it.

Yepp, I expect as much.

I never felt comfortable about the possibility that a shopkeeper or a smith had an item which marketprice is in the 100 grands (100.000+) stored for the rarest of occasions when a charcter walked by asking her for that specific item. That's an entirely modern economic concept.

"Back in the days", when someone walked into a store/smithy to "buy" something she did first the "talkings" of what she wants and how the item should look like. The second step would have been the customfitting of the item for a long duration (lifetime) use. After this mandatory steps were "debated" and haggled, the shopkeeper - which almost as often was the creator/artisan of told item - sat down to produce/create the requested item after purchasing the raw material. This could take days, weeks, months or years (in the case of armor or weapons).

People had time - in spite of the fact that they did not live very long. They were used to wait for a - often masterwork - item customized to their physiognomical properties and mental necessities. To produce items (in this case very expensive items) and store them for the probability that someone could walk into his shop/smithy would have been outright silly. Why should his shop/smithy be the one from which someone would buy a +5 holy keen adamantine avenger of devil-slaying? The neighbouring smith would have to have to same item, if we'd apply D&D economics. Where did the smith get the money to make that item to have it "just in case someone would ask for it"? What would he do with all the money if he sold that item?

A number of questions arise that are best unanswered if you want a fast game, but if you want a campaign background that considers medieval economics you have to familiarize yourself with the concepts of mercantilism, protectionism, taxes, tithes and all other old-fashioned shopping. Did you know that in times long ago (14th century +) inflation was unknown just because the concept of inflation was not intended to exist - even if inflation did take place until it was plain to see when the Spanish economical system broke down because the Kings/Queens of Spain "imported" gold and more gold from The Americas instead of producing wares to sell and keep the economic system balanced?

Kind regards

 

[CRGreathouse]

My opinion is that the rule about selling magic items for half value is kind of dumb in most campaigns. Magic items don't really wear out, so the whole "previously-owned" discount doesn't seem like it should ever apply.

I just don't agree with your fundamental premise here. Items are sold at half price assuming their condition is perfect (or at least nearly so); 'used' items that are in poor condition should sell for less than half the market value of similar items in better condition.

The half-price condition represents the fact that you're selling to someone who doesn't see the item as being worth its core price. You aren't expected to find someone who has a burning desire for just the item you're selling. Perhaps it's a longsword when he's specialized in bastard swords, or an amulet of wisdom when he already has an amulet of natural armor. Maybe it's just irrelevant to him, but he hopes to wait around long enough to sell it to someone with greater need.

If PCs in my campaign want to hold out for better prices, they take ranks in PRofession (fence) and take some time out to find someone with particular needs. Otherwise, half value means that they're selling to a subpar buyer -- a closeout sale mentality, if you will.

Edit: This is a little redundant, now that I've read Scharlata and Trainz respective posts. I'll keep it here to show my support....

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

The half-price condition represents the fact that you're selling to someone who doesn't see the item as being worth its core price.

To balance this out, then, why aren't PCs (who obviously have more disposable income than many other people in many typical campaign settings) constantly being barraged by offers to buy items that they don't particularly burn with desire for, at bargain-basement prices?

Funny how it's the NPCs who seem to have an endless opportunity to pick up items at half or less than the default market value. Even in settings where magic items are described as being incredibly rare.

I'll stick to my guns on this: if you, as a GM, don't want players to sell something, then why not just say that there aren't any buyers instead of imposing a half-price rule? And if there aren't merchants who buy magic items just so they can keep them on the rack in case a rich adventurer drops by (and in many settings, the supposed rarity of magical items and/or scarcity of cash means that there probably AREN'T any merchants like that), then who exactly is supposed to be buying these items at such a deep discount? Why don't PCs ever get the chance to buy low and sell high like these NPCs are apparently planning on doing?

If PCs in my campaign want to hold out for better prices, they take ranks in PRofession (fence) and take some time out to find someone with particular needs. Otherwise, half value means that they're selling to a subpar buyer -- a closeout sale mentality, if you will.

Meh. If that's fun for all of you, then by all means continue. The group I play with typically has 5 players, which would leave at least 3 people (and probably 4) sitting on their hands waiting for all the rolling to be finished and for the big production of "finding a buyer with particular needs" to conclude. Very boring for them, and not (I think) sufficiently interesting for the player/fence and the GM to justify monopolizing our limited game time with it.


Of course, there might be another option, somewhere in between the two of us. A canny GM might actually look at the item being sold and make a good estimate about how many people in the area would be interested in such a thing. Try selling something intensely stupid like a dire flail +1 basically anywhere, and you'll probably have to mark it down to half or less before anyone would bother buying it...but that chainmail +1 will have TONS of potential buyers just about anywhere, all of whom would be more than happy to pay full market value for it, since, y'know, they're in the market for it. That wand of mage armor might go for a good 80-90% of its market value (adjusted for charges, of course) near a cabal of wizards, but far less out in the barbarian hinterlands.

Of course, you might notice that this is just a covert way of saying "if you don't want them to sell it, just say there aren't any buyers," only tarted up a bit with some off-the-cuff percentages. I'm incorrigible.

--
go ahead, just try and corrige me

 

[Evilhalfling]

I stick with the half price rule for selling found junk, but will lower it if the item is intensly stupied - a bow with a 20 str pull, a elemental bane weapon in a area that has few elemental problems, the aformetioned dire fail +1 etc.

Occasionally I will have a buyer who is willing to pay more than 1/2 price -
the captain of the guard who uses a ratstaff will pay more for a good one.
usually 75-90 % if they wanted to pay full price they would just commision it.

If the PC's get a commission it is for full price, which also happens occasionally. There is also a holiday for the god of trade where everything is
15% off - and the PC's get offered random stuff for 85% of market and they can make a tidy profit selling wands of CLW, healing potions, cloaks of reistance and other high demand items.

 

[HeavyG]

Let's talk about the merchant for a minute.

Let's make him a pretty high level merchant, with magical items to boost his skill check and all. Say, he has Profession (magical item fence) at +20.

He should be making a profit of about 15gp per week at this, on average (half of his profession check). Assuming that he spends 50% of his income as operating costs (buying Identify spells, rent, an employee or two), that means his job brings him about 30gp a week.

Now, when I sell my +1 long sword to that merchant for 657.5 gp and he sells it to another dude for 1315gp, it would mean that it takes him about 22 weeks to find a buyer for a pretty standard, low powered item. That is much too long.

I'd say that the 50% thing is somewhat low. A higher percentage would be more reasonable. Unless of course the item is actually damaged, like CRGreathouse mentioned, in which case the value of the item would be diminished (and thus the price the merchant is willing to pay).

And there is no reason selling magical items for, say, 80% of market value would be unbalancing. After all, right now, coins and gems are inherently better than magical items as treasure, from a PC standpoint. And, what's more, magical items can also be used against the party, adding insult to (monetary) injury.

I remain unconvinced.

Two-way street in both directions. Sometimes an NPC needs an item right now and can't wait. Sometimes a PC needs an item right now and can't wait. Sometimes not.

I had a feeling you didn't really mean to say that you screwed your players at every turn.

On the other hand, a significant portion of the magic loot comes from NPCs, who generally have gear worth a lot more than the normal treasure for their level (e.g. an EL 5 encounter having an average value of 1,600 gp, but a 5th level NPC having 4,300 gp worth of gear). Even if you only get half value for that gear (and it's likely that the PCs can use at least some of it), that's still 2,150 gp - you're up 550 gp.

True, but that's balanced by the fact that a lot of monsters don't have treasure at all.

Trust me, in the adventure path modules (and you can't get more "typical situation" than that), this is a problem (unless you just happen to like weird, almost useless magical items). Of course, in a campaign with a lot of adventurer types as enemies, this would be pretty benefical for the PCs.

Both of these illustrate that it's important that the DM understand how "treasure per encounter", "encounters per level", "wealth per level" and "selling loot for half price" interact. A DM that understands these things can compensate for weird situations (such as the one presented by the default guidelines ). However, when a DM doesn't understand that dynamic, he can give out too much treasure (with lots of adventurer encounters) or find himself with a PC party with half equipment value without realizing it.

 

[dekrass]

This is handled IMC by the PCs interacting with other adventurers.
The PCs find a guild, or established adventuring band, or even rivals they've met that might want the items.
If there aren't any that want it, and the players really insist on getting rid of the gear, I throw in old wizards that collect magic(if it's cheap).