Standard DM behavior?

[Ariosto]

It has been the default in every official D&D edition I have seen, from the little brown books to 4e. It's in the Dungeon! board game and similar ones, and has been taken for granted in most other fantasy RPGs. After 35 years, I think "long proven" is a fair characterization.

The assertion that it cannot work in a game of high adventure seems to me not only pompous and dismissive but utterly absurd as contra-factual on the face.

I have offered nothing remotely like that assessment of the "just pick it from a book" method.

Falsely accusing me of having done what you are presently doing is a poor plan. Even if the claim were true, it would founder on the observation that two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[Janx]

My group started in 2e by ourselves. No other influence other than fiction.

We long ago came to the conclusion that the laws of supply and demand apply and if PCs have money, they'll want to buy an item. If they have extra items (which was quite common), they''ll want to sell or trade them for what they really want.

Playing in a game where "you can't sell or buy magic items" strikes me as a campaign where the only items you get are by random chance (treasure tables) or DM fiat.

In my games, players don't just get to buy whatever they want. However, in larger towns, they might find a shop that has a selection of items. They can also sell unwanted items in sich a venue (and do to random treasures, players do get crap they don't want).

The DM should always have some control over what the PCs get, this maintains balance. But in the same vein, if a player wants a longsword +1, rationality and economics indicate that it should be possible to buy one.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I know it doesn't sound romantic, and it's pretty much not, but there you have it. Gold is 3e/4e D&D's point-buy character building.

Yeah, this is it. Going on a Big Damn Quest for a super-weapon of the ancients is cool as heck, ofc it is. But a lot of players *really* enjoy the point spending, decision making aspect of the game too. What we now call 'builds'.

Ariosto's 'kids today', blah blah, 'instant gratification' rant doesn't change the fact that a lot of ppl like building a character. And get this - they always have done. We used to do it in 2e in the early 90s, using the magic item lists in the DMG much like a powers list in a supers game. Magic item shops have been around since forever, in large part inspired by the gp values in the 1e DMG. D&D is just adapting to what ppl want.

 

[Ariosto]

If it mattered what I told ya
I could dance like Ray Bolger
But here we go again

 

[Primal]

Yeah, this is it. Going on a Big Damn Quest for a super-weapon of the ancients is cool as heck, ofc it is. But a lot of players *really* enjoy the point spending, decision making aspect of the game too. What we now call 'builds'.

Ariosto's 'kids today', blah blah, 'instant gratification' rant doesn't change the fact that a lot of ppl like building a character. And get this - they always have done. We used to do it in 2e in the early 90s, using the magic item lists in the DMG much like a powers list in a supers game. Magic item shops have been around since forever, in large part inspired by the gp values in the 1e DMG. D&D is just adapting to what ppl want.

And some don't; we've never done that around here (in my home town, that is) in any edition of D&D, not even when you're rolling up a higher-level replacement PC (yeah, I know the 3E books have 'Wealth by Level' tables and all, but I see it as a rough guideline that a group can freely ignore). Instead, the DM hands out items for such characters, and in general place items in adventurers -- it works just as well if you're fair, even if half the monsters or NPCs wouldn't be carrying items that would be instantly beneficial or even on the PCs' wish list. There might a magic item shop in capital cities and in areas close to adventuring "hot spots", plus -- anything beyond +2 bonus or with special abilities is not possible to acquire unless you track down a powerful adventurer and are willing to pay at least double the price (and even then you can't buy Vorpal weapons or Holy Avengers).

4E already covers rules for running low magic campaigns, and you can also do it in 3E, if you're not "min-maxing" NPC abilities or deliberately designing their abilities to work around items none of the PCs can use effectively (for example, every evil champion wielding a magical double axe). Balance and fairness are key to that.

However, although I'm of the mind that whatever suits your group is fine, I agree with Ariosto on the "instant gratification" part; I honestly believe video games, CRPGs and MMORPGs have influenced RPG design to accomodate to this, mostly for younger generations. As for whether it *actually* is what the majority of D&D players want, I can't say (and I suspect there's not a lot of research done on this subject). All I know is that I know pretty much every D&D group in my home town and they are non-existent in local campaigns. Having said that, if it works for you, feel free to magic item shops and shopping/wish lists -- I don't endorse them in my games, but that's my business (just don't expect me to include them because they would be the "norm").

 

[Barastrondo]

However, although I'm of the mind that whatever suits your group is fine, I agree with Ariosto on the "instant gratification" part; I honestly believe video games, CRPGs and MMORPGs have influenced RPG design to accomodate to this, mostly for younger generations.

I think that's only part of the story. Another part is the idea that character concept isn't really universally perceived as a curve that begins with scrappy underdog and might or might not eventually become a potent hero. Sometimes a concept is more akin to 5th or 10th or 15th or higher. If you've ever seen someone say "I don't want to play six months to eventually get the character I have in my head, I want to start the game playing the character I have in my head right now," you've seen that difference in perspective.

Consider the difference between magic item as reward, and magic item as part of character concept. To really understand the difference, you have to utterly divorce the two. Someone who has a magic item as part of a character concept is not trying to game the system to get rewards without "earning them" — the magic item just isn't a reward in the first place. It's considered part of the concept, as much as being 3rd level might be part of a character concept for a game that begins at 3rd level. While starting play with a magic item or being guaranteed a particular item in the near future may be antithetical to the concept of magic as rewards, it isn't even close if the game in question doesn't limited magic items to the campaign role of rewards.

I think saying that video games and the like have conditioned people toward "instant gratification" misses the point, a bit. The most competitive bit of quick gratification that video games have over tabletop RPGs is the ability to start playing more quickly: to be having fun within 5 minutes of getting your game home. Beyond that, "instant gratification" may mean you get nice loot within minutes or an hour of playing — but it may also mean that you're playing someone as brutally skilled as Kratos, as nimble as the Prince of Persia, or with as kickass a weapon as Soul Calibur right from the start. And even borrowing from literature, some people might want to play someone so strong he was strangling serpents while he was still in his crib. Or to start play as Colossus without having to work your way up from Fabulous Frog-Man.

Is the ability to start with a stronger character concept something D&D has borrowed from other sources? Yeah, probably; but in a way, I think that's just D&D trying to expand its paradigm. "Start at first level" wasn't really ever the dominant story model in fantasy literature or myth. It was certainly present, but only in D&D is it prevalent enough that you see people noting that it might be unusual to start strong in the first place.

 

[Ariosto]

I think that's only part of the story.

I think those are different stories.

Consider the difference between magic item as reward, and magic item as part of character concept.

Bingo! It's the difference between playing a game and writing a story. Wake me when the game's on; that's just my preference when it comes to D&D. Biography? I'll take steel and write one in blood!

"Start at first level" wasn't really ever the dominant story model in fantasy literature or myth.

Neither was "start at 4th and go to 24th" (which is fine and dandy per E.G.G. in the First Edition DMG, if the players are already experienced). Classic Traveller would more accurately reflect the sword-sorcery field, in which the emphasis is on protagonists already at or past their prime. "Everyman (or Chosen One) coming of age" is more a Tolkien-style thing, and maybe 1st-6th or so typically; I at least associate it with more "human" heroes (however super their mentors).

That's another matter altogether to my mind. You want to play a game of superheroes toting legend lore worthy gear? Done and done! Now, can we get down to the actual adventure?

Hey, I know there can be quite a game of "builds". There's nothing inherently incompatible in that with playing a challenging game, although it may be a notably different game from one designed with an emphasis on strategic maneuver objectives.

As I wrote before, it's a "flavor" issue -- not only how often we're buying and selling magic items but how. It's not an "all or nothing" choice, so it does not follow from my dislike of "all" that I expect a diet of "nothing".

 

[FireLance]

Consider the difference between magic item as reward, and magic item as part of character concept.

In addition to these two ideas, I would throw in a third: magic item as part of an evolving character concept. In a way, it is a mixture of the two ideas. It is similar to the idea of magic item as reward, but the reward is chosen by the player, not the DM. It is similar to the idea of magic item as part of character concept, but with less instant gratification.

It's the idea that your 1st-level paladin will eventually own a holy avenger at some point in the future, say at 24th level, provided he manages to survive the intervening levels and arrives at that point. It makes some (not necessarily all) magic items an anticipated benefit of levelling up, similar to access to higher-level abilities, more hit points, better ability scores, attack bonuses, defenses, etc.

 

[zlorf]

Personally i think it better if the DM controls how magic items are introduced in the game, whether its treasure, rewards for completing quests or just a lucky find. So many issues start creeping into the game if you give the players free reign of magic items by picking what they want. If you really want a item, see if the DM can introduce it to the game as part of the adventure at least the DM will have a chance to see if it will cause issues with the adventure/plot etc.

Cheers
Z

Hi. We're currently running a 4e campaign, with 7 players. We're up to level 8 now. We have 2 people that are DM'ing - swapping out every few rounds, and running as a player when they are not DM'ing.

We've had some issues with the DM's over items. During one encounter, we wiped a group fairly handily that the current DM thought should give us trouble. Encounters after that were much, much harder. During the RPG segment, part of the DM's storyline was derailed because I had the headpiece that allows you to read any language. I had purchased this at the Adventurers Vault, with gold acquired from the campaign. I was able to read a parchment he had introduced into our story. He was not happy.

Now, the 2 DM's have ruled that we can't buy any items from the Adventurer's vault, except consumables. Also, one of the DMs has indicated that when its his turn next, that probably no items will be allowed except that were actually found during the game. Even items you bought with gold you made during the game.

Is this normal practice? I've been gone from the game for some time and I'm relearning but I always remembered the DMs letting you use your gold as you wanted to - as long as it was legally acquired.

Thanks!

 

[Ariosto]

The "but the reward is chosen by the player, not the DM" bit might seem to suggest that player choice does not enter the picture except with the dissociated "pick from a book" method.

It's the idea that your 1st-level paladin will eventually own a holy avenger at some point in the future ... provided he manages to survive the intervening levels and arrives at that point.

Yeah, I do that by actually directing my activities toward reaching that point. Doesn't a paladin get benefits enough for just racking up levels? Keep removing objectives, and even gaining levels will become just another entitlement for "time served".

Oh, yeah. Some folks are there already (or maybe, per the 4e DMG, getting levels for time absent).

Be sure to mail your unneeded experience points to ariosto@foxbat.comedy!

If you're barefoot because no one's selling magic sandals this season, send your excess gold as well!