Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5006552" data-attributes="member: 51942">Well, you know - if you're 1st level, sure, then a +1 weapon is pretty much the best of the best.  But once you have that +1 weapon, then it's worthwhile filling other slots.I assume most people will have the crucial slots filled as early as they can (or deem them necessary - you might easily do without a neck slot, early on).  But as soon as they do, they'd want to spread out.So this problem is really a 1st, maybe 2nd level only problem.  And even then, if the item looks like an item they might want to keep, they'll certainly be loath to sell it (wasting time and 50% of the value in the process) if they expect to find or be able to buy a +1 weapon soon later.The system expects you to sell 50-75% of the items.  But I expect those many of those will be things like, say, a Rod of Reaving in a group without a warlock, or whatever.  You're still wasting a lot of money by selling something you might use if you can sell stuff you really don't need.Right now, nobody even puts and instant campsite on their wishlist, and if the DM gives you one (daily wondrous item!) before giving you a +1 weapon, well, he's screwing you.Part of the fun in previous editions was finding (or handing out) items with interesting properties: the trick is; can we use this, how can we use this, and is it worth it?  That was actually much harder to do in 3e, though, because item power varied so wildly.  In 4e, that's relatively easy.  You can now easily hand em a bunch of items that are tangentially useful, but where it won't be easy to sell em and get some massively more powerful item instead.  If you already have the few key items, when is it worth sellling something that's not optimally suited to you?  Its not that easy, since money isn't something you can do much with.  Even if you try to save up, you're not getting the next iteration of the "big three" much earlier, prices rise too quickly for that.With the new system, you can do this: you can give items that are attractive both to sell, but also attractive to keep.  I mean, if that 1st level party holds out a little bit longer, maybe they'll find a crown of leaves and decide that selling that nets them 3.6 +1 weapons, and decide to keep the instant campsite instead.How would you value that kind of treasure in the old system?  Do you let the instant campsite count as a full parcel (doing so is certainly not in the spirit of the DMG wealth rules and your party will end up with less wealth than expected).  Or do you discount it somehow?  A problem is that PC's really want somewhat up to date "big three" items.  If you hand out parcels, that means you need to carefully select enough of those (but also not too many) so that players can keep up.  Now, maybe they'll sell an item or two - but you don't need to worry about it.  And let's be frank, handing out Yet Another +2 sword is pretty boring.  Frankly, I think I'd only fuzzily recollect the less flashy items the PC's have - armors, neck slots - but you do need to take into account proficiencies and whatnot when selecting items.  Handing out leather armors to a guy with hide proficiency isn't good.  Nor is handing out a neck slot with a neat - but ultimately useless - daily power if it's high level.So, that's my inspiration here.  You hand out about 10% that's stuff that's good enough that PC would have bought it themselves (though typically of a level that they can't afford to do so).  That doesn't imbalance the wealth, and it's rare enough to actually make a memorable impact.  The rest can be good enough to at least consider keeping - stuff like the instant campsite might be here, but where the trade-off is tricky; the full price is definitely not worth it, but is it worth selling? (I expect them to keep 25-50% of all items).</blockquote>

Verification