The Magic-Walmart myth

[Ourph]

It's not a euphemism.

From Wikipedia:

"A euphemism is an expression intended by the speaker to be less offensive, disturbing, or troubling to the listener than the word or phrase it replaces

How do you know "Magic Wal-mart" isn't less offensive than the word or phrase it replaces?

The phrase 'Magic Walmart' is almost the exact opposite of a euphemism, designed to be *more* offensive than saying magic items can be bought and sold. It's an exaggeration.

Why is it offensive? Where's the proof that it was originally coined specifically to be offensive? It seems pretty innocuous to me. I thought the problem was that the phrase is (supposedly) inaccurate, not that it is offensive.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Why is it offensive? Where's the proof that it was originally coined specifically to be offensive? It seems pretty innocuous to me. I thought the problem was that the phrase is (supposedly) inaccurate, not that it is offensive.

In order for 'Magic Walmarts' to be a euphemism saying that magic items can be bought and sold must be regarded as taboo or offensive so that our delicate sensibilities could be protected with the perfectly acceptable notion of a vast store containing many magic items.

This is clearly not the case, hence not a euphemism.

 

[JustKim]

is a euphemism

not a euphemism

Guys, let's figure this out or I won't be able to sleep at all!

 

[I'm A Banana]

Dude, comparing magic item shops (historic items of legendary power encompassing power beyond most mortal ken sold in bizarre antique shops by eccentric and dangerous individuals) to Wal-Marts (well lit zits of commerce bursting with generic value and lowest-common-denominator thinking) kind of robs all of the mystery and power out of magic items in a way that magic item shops don't necessarily do.

So either it's insulting (your magic item shops rob all the mystery and power out of magic items!) or it's useless (applying only to the fringe cases of campaigns that actually don't care about the mystery and power of magic items).

 

[Ourph]

If "My game doesn't include Magic Item Wal-marts" is a euphemism for "I'm ignoring the economy rules in the DMG because, IMO, they're a game-wrecking, steaming pile of poo." I'd say it's not only a euphemism, but an eminently useful one as well.

Dude, comparing magic item shops (historic items of legendary power encompassing power beyond most mortal ken sold in bizarre antique shops by eccentric and dangerous individuals) to Wal-Marts (well lit zits of commerce bursting with generic value and lowest-common-denominator thinking) kind of robs all of the mystery and power out of magic items in a way that magic item shops don't necessarily do.

Is anybody making that comparison? I haven't seen that. In fact, I don't see the "Wal-mart" label as a reference to magic item shops at all. As I said above, it's referential of a play-style, not a specific in-game entity. It's shorthand for a style where buying magic items is as fast and convenient as shopping at Wal-mart (not everyone considers Wal-mart a "zit of commerce" after all, some of us like the convenience of being able to buy our chocolate milk, shotgun ammo and bubble bath all in the same place).

So either it's insulting (your magic item shops rob all the mystery and power out of magic items!) or it's useless (applying only to the fringe cases of campaigns that actually don't care about the mystery and power of magic items).

That's funny, I find it very useful shorthand and not insulting at all. On the other hand, I find the "mystery and power of magic items" to be kind of a goofy concept. Does anyone really get all goose-pimply about magic items after their first couple of years of playing RPGs (even if they aren't sold on every streetcorner)?

Anyway, this is all off topic. As I said above, I thought the problem was that the term "Magic Wal-mart" was inaccurate not that it was offensive. If the term is shorthand for a certain playstyle, how is it inaccurate?

 

[Hussar]

How do you know "Magic Wal-mart" isn't less offensive than the word or phrase it replaces?


Why is it offensive? Where's the proof that it was originally coined specifically to be offensive? It seems pretty innocuous to me. I thought the problem was that the phrase is (supposedly) inaccurate, not that it is offensive.

The problem is, it's generally used as a term to mean, "My campaign is so hard core that my players cannot just buy whatever item they want willy nilly." The corollary to that is any campaign which does allow PC's to buy magic items is somehow inferior, immature and stupid. It's also typically used as a proxy term for edition war as well since earlier editions either didn't allow the purchase of magic items or made it a very niche element.

Either way, whenever "Magic Wal-Mart" gets trotted out, you can almost guarantee it's a shot at 3rd edition.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Anyway, this is all off topic. As I said above, I thought the problem was that the term "Magic Wal-mart" was inaccurate not that it was offensive. If the term is shorthand for a certain playstyle, how is it inaccurate?

The OP doesn't seem to be talking about a playstyle. He seems to be talking about a specific descrete location in the game world.

The setting suggested in the core rules has no "Magic-Walmarts". Greyhawk has no Magic-Walmarts. I'm not real familiar with Eberron or Forgotten Realms, but I don't think they have Magic-Walmart-style stores either.

Buying magic items as suggested in the core rules (and thus in Greyhawk, Eberron, and FR) is all fairly hassle-free and convenient, however.

So saying that "MagicWalmarts make perfect sense if you define them as X, and not Y" doesn't really address the OP, who obviously doesn't share definition X with quite a few posters who apparently are fond of the term, right?

 

[Raven Crowking]

In general terms, they must make a Gather Info check to point them at someone capable of "bending the rules, just for them." That's a small risk of gp for no reward right there (and the weirder the request, the higher the DC). And once they find such an individual, it tends to be an "in over your head" scenario.

If you follow the Wealth By Level guidelines, then, there's no risk.

Also, I would concede that if you could simply teleport to any location you wanted to to pick up any magic item you wanted to, then the entire campaign world would be one gigantic MagicMart. I, for one, would see very little point in playing in such a world. But then, what I want from a game is different than what you want. I rewrote the rules to prevent that sort of play.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Very true, but I do find that most players prefer solving mysteries, overcoming terrible monstrous threats from the dawn of time, foiling the plans of mad sorcerers, and preserving the very fabric of existence from the eldritch horrors lying just beyond visible reality to... SHOPPING.

Examine KM's story about having to sneak the desired item out from under the sleeping Tarrasque.

Obtaining magic items can involve solving mysteries, overcoming terrible monstrous threats from the dawn of time, etc. etc.

I am currently reading Hour of the Dragon by Robert E. Howard. In this story, King Conan loses his kingdom due to the powers of an undead sorcerer. The sorcerer is invincible except to a jewel (magic item) called the Heart of Ahriman. Conan has to go on a quest to gain this magic item (there being no MagicMarts for him to shop at) in order to oust the sorcerer and regain his throne.

Is Conan trying to get a particular magic item that he wants to meet a particular threat? Yup. Is trying to get it equal to boring old shopping? Nope. Is this a scenario that has played itself (or similar) out in hundreds of D&D games since Gygax first set pen to paper? Yup. Is it one that works well in a MagicMart world?

Well, maybe. But eventually someone's going to say, "Why is it we can buy any item we don't actually need, but when we really need something it's under the sleeping Tarrasque?

 

[Raven Crowking]

The problem is, it's generally used as a term to mean, "My players cannot just buy whatever item they want willy nilly."

FIFY.

Either way, whenever "Magic Wal-Mart" gets trotted out, you can almost guarantee it's a shot at 3rd edition.

I thought it came from the 2nd Ed High Level Option Handbook, where it was described as something one shouldn't do.