The Magic-Walmart myth

[Gentlegamer]

The real issue with 'magi-marts' isn't the magic items availability, its their mundaneness. When everything is quantified and magic swords are not items of legend but a collection of properties, it makes it just another piece of gear. It isn't thought of as any more different or special than the long sword he bought for 15 gp at first level, except its higher quality.

This is what people don't like when they complain about magi-marts. Magic items that feel like technology, not magic.

And this is the distinction between the comfort in handwaving the purchase of torches, suits of armor, etc. (though there are campaigns, like mine, that don't) and magic items.

Handwaving the purchase of magic items based on merely having the purchase price (listed in the rule book) and being in an "area" (nebulous term) that can support it goes too far (for flavor and mechanical/adventuring reasons) in a way that handwaving the purchase of mundane gear does not (I would argue that suits of full plate armor are not mundane and should not be available through handwaved-purchase, but I can see them still fitting into that category more than magic items).

For some, this is not an important distinction for their campaigns and have no problem using the default system for magic items (Magic-Walmart as characterized at times). Their style is comfortable with "magic as technology." Other styles aren't. Neither is more correct than the other, but there is a rational reason to seek to differentiate them, whether "aesthetic," mechanical, or something else.

I would like to add, that while personally I don't like using the "magic gear can be purchased easily" system, I prefer that system to "Monty Haul" gaming, as long as the resource (GP) that is being used for the purchases was obtained with effort through adventuring, and not just given away. In simple terms, players must earn their rewards. Perhaps it is the feeling that merely spending gold to obtain essentially whatever magic items desired is a kind of "Monty Haul" situation that makes it disagreeable to some.

 

[Nellisir]

Apparently, the OP has no relevance to the discussion.

Quasqueton

Not by page 6, no.

(you did get the in the other post, right? I mean, I know exactly who the OP is.)

 

[JiffyPopTart]

You claimed that there were significant similarities between Shadowfax and Pokemon that anyone familar with both couldn't ignore. To which similarities do you refer?

I think they claimed there were significant similarities between Shadowfax and a POKEMOUNT (not a pokemon). The simililarity being they are both semi-magical mounts that appear conveniently when needed and are off-camera when not.

DS

 

[Ourph]

In this thread we've gone from the term "Magic Wal-mart" being based on a myth, to being inaccurate, to being offensive to being simply not specific enough. Talking about this issue on ever-shifting ground is just wasting everybody's time. I think I'm done. I hope the OP found the discussion useful.

 

[Hussar]

Why can't it be all three?

The "Magic Walmart" as a single big store where the PC's can purchase anything has been shown to be pretty mythical - while it does exist in certain corner cases, it's not common enough to be considered normal.

Numerous posters, myself included, have seen the term "Magic Walmart" being tossed around as a wrongbadfun buzz word in numerous places, thus, using the term may be offensive, although, apparently, not to you. The term Walmart carries far too many negative connotations to be considered neutral.

While the idea of a "Virtual Walmart" does have more grounding in that I do think a lot of gamers hand wave shopping for magic items, saying "no Magic Walmarts" is very vague. Does it mean that there are no one stop magic shops? Does it mean that you can never buy magic items? Does it mean that certain items will be available but others not? In other words, it doesn't really tell me anything about your world. Unless, of course, you choose to add back in the negative connotations, which then take it to mean that magic shopping will not be allowed, it's an "Aulde Skool" campaign where we are dirt scrabble farmers and should bless the DM for gracing us with a +1 Spork.

 

[Quasqueton]

(you did get the in the other post, right? I mean, I know exactly who the OP is.)

Oh, yeah, I got it, and I was playing along.

Quasqueton

 

[bodhi]

We don't have Wal-Marts in the UK (though the company took over the ASDA chain here), so despite my pontificating in this thread, I'm one of the least qualified posters to talk about what the term implies.

It's not an issue. You're on the Internet.

 

[green slime]

The ability to appear when they are needed and remain off-camera when their existence isn't plot important (i.e. the most relevant similarity between them when it comes to discussion of the rules for the Paladin's mount in D&D, which was the context for the coining of the term "pokemount" in the first place).

LotR would be a bloody boring story otherwise...

Bilbo speaks "Yadayada, this ring business is stoopid", meanwhile Shadowfax munches on grass. Greybeard tries to reply to Bilbo, while Shadowfax lifts his mighty tail and craps. An ominious stench fills the air. Gimli deftly steps aside, seemingly unaffected of the stench "Reminds me of me Grandpa..." Shadowfax smiles with glee, and every mare within 100 leagues whinnies. Shadowfax promptly eats more grass. Aragorn swoons at the innanity of it all "Will it never end?"

I think you'll find most of the characters appear when needed, and remain off-camera, when not driving the plot, introducing important themes, yadayada...

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

The simililarity being they are both ... appear conveniently when needed and are off-camera when not.

DS

Eureka! Gandalf is a POKEMOUNT!!!!!

{except the part about being a horse...}

 

[Raven Crowking]

Sorry, Raven Crowking, I just can't believe you are seriously confused. I think you are being contrary to be silly. And now you are reduced to copying and pasting your arguments, I guess, because the statements didn't get a rise out of folks like you wanted.

Because the objection remains unanswered.

I didn't say I was confused; I said I think you are wrong. And I said why.

RC

EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION: Your argument about campaign norms requires that such a baseline exists. As the 1e discussions have demonstrated so amply, the "baseline" experiences and campaign settings of various groups have no direct correlation with what was written in the 1e books. It seems unlikely to me that 3e is any different. Indeed, since considering what you've said about 1e on this matter, I've applied that thinking to several other threads and I believe that 3e is probably to some degree in the same boat as 1e.

Therefore, I conclude that you do not have the means to speak with any authority about whether or not Magic Walmarts are the baseline. Nor do I. Nor do any of us.

Therefore, I conclude that people who say "No Magic Walmarts" are saying so because of the campaign norms of their experience or of their perception.