The Magic-Walmart myth

[Raven Crowking]

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.

Well said.

IMHO, it has been demonstrated conclusively that the "Magic Walmart" is not a myth, that it is sometimes accurate, that some consider it offensive, and that it is shorter (and hence easier to type, and hence a "shorthand" term) than some longer, but more accurate phrases that could spell out exactly what can and cannot be purchased, and where.

I think that there is also considerable (but not conclusive) evidence that there is no more a universal "campaign norm" in 3.X than there was in 1e.

EDIT: Hussar, a thing is mythical when it doesn't exist, not when it is (questionably) uncommon among a couple dozen posters on an Internet forum.

SECOND EDIT: Going back over this thread, I am also struck by the observation that "Magic Walmart" or similar terms are considered offensive (as "slaps" to their game style) only by people who deny the existence of "Magic Walmarts". Rather as though I said my game had no gumwizzwams, and the only people who were offended were those who thought gumwizzwams didn't exist. Food for thought.

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Apparently your saying that this happened to you in your game is no more evidence to this crowd than those who said the same earlier.

No doubt you are just saying that to take a slap at wrongbadfun.

Clearly, this was all just a metaphor and not what the OP was talking about.

No evidence can be presented to those who choose to ignore the presented evidence.

Well, now you come to mention it... was it a metaphor? This is really an issue that strikes at a fundamental question in roleplaying, which is: who within the game gets to determine reality?

Now it's often an assumption in traditional games that this role is performed entirely by the GM, with it often being stated: "If I haven't said that it happened, then it didn't happen!" However, many modern games, particularly those in the "indie" sector, challenge this assumption, with "reality" being defined not simply by the GM's narration, but by a consensual and collaborative narration by both the players and the GM.

i.e. Instead of the following sequence:

Me: I roll 18.

GM: That's a success. Your sword slices through your opponent's neck. He falls to the ground dying.

...we have the following sequence:

Me: I roll a success. My sword slices through my opponent's genitals. He screams like a freshly minted eunich, and then falls to the ground dying.

(I like groinshots... sue me).

Anyway, where am I going with this?

The point is that in our Thursday night campaign, any character could - off camera - purchase any item whatsoever, including custom-designed items and spells cast upon the person, wherever we were. I stated my opinion that the only way this would be possible would be if there were a chain of huge magical superstores that sold magical swords like golf superstores sell golf clubs. (I also envisaged that poisons and potions would be sold in nicely labelled jars with colour coded lids much like you get racks of Schwartz herbs and spices at your local supermarket). I suggested that this chain of superstores was called Joe's Adventure Barn, and would often state that my character was going to Joe's to pick up some stuff.

At no point did any other participant, either GM or player, dispute what I said. Equally, at no point did any other participant offer any other alternative explanation as to where or how any of the characters (i.e. either mine or their's) were obtaining these items.

At all times the only narrative explanation was the one offered by myself. I think it's reasonable therefore to claim that my narrative wins, simply by virtue of the fact that all other possible narratives stayed at home.

So there was a chain called Joe's Adventure Barn, and it was where we bought and sold our stuff.

 

[Hussar]

*snip*

SECOND EDIT: Going back over this thread, I am also struck by the observation that "Magic Walmart" or similar terms are considered offensive (as "slaps" to their game style) only by people who deny the existence of "Magic Walmarts". Rather as though I said my game had no gumwizzwams, and the only people who were offended were those who thought gumwizzwams didn't exist. Food for thought.

You might want to go over the thread again. I never said whether or not I handwave shopping or whether or not I have one stop shopping in my campaign. I don't believe Nellisir did either.

I have said that I find the idea of a single large store located conveniently and easily accessable by just about anyone to be present in a very small number of campaigns. Granted, it's not mythical, just legendary.

 

[Raven Crowking]

You might want to go over the thread again. I never said whether or not I handwave shopping or whether or not I have one stop shopping in my campaign. I don't believe Nellisir did either.

I rather think that there might be two camps of people offended then:

(1) Those who read the rules, determined that easy sale was the default, and are miffed that others apparently take "slaps" at that default, and

(2) Those who read the rules, determined that easy sale was not the default, and are miffed that others apparently believe that to be the default.

Granted, it's not mythical, just legendary.

What actual information do you base that conclusion on?

 

[Felix]

What actual information do you base that conclusion on?

Transportation costs, for one thing.

Wal-Mart is successful because it saves money by buying and shipping items in bulk, establishes itself where the land is cheap, and relies on its customers' willingness to travel a distance to get there.

In a Mideval world transportation costs would be much higher, both on the buying and the selling side. Teleportation, though fast, is costly. Goods would be shipped there by land, which would take a while. Travel routes would likely not be as safe as they are in the US, so there is that cost. Similarly, there would be the associated costs of protecting the Magical Wal-Mart; so many valuable items inventoried at one central location is a tempting target for anyone; you'd have a bevy of thieves, both mundane and magical, attempting to make off with the treasure within.

There would also be costs associated with the people who want to buy items at this Magical Wal-Mart. For an average member of society, it would take much longer to travel a distance than it does now; even traveling across a moderately-sized city could take all day for one on foot; this Wal-Mart couldn't rely on a large number of customers from the population, or sell to a very large demographic. It would have to be more of a specialty store than a bulk store. Which is precisely not what Wal-Mart is.

So while it would be possible for conditions to exist that would encourage a Magical Wal-Mart's existance, each of those conditions themselves would be extraordinary. Legendary, perhaps?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Transportation costs, for one thing.

Assumes that this isn't handwaved/ignored, which, in light of many other aspects of the game, is probably not a fair assumption.

Please note, I am not asking for the logical reasons that a MagicMart wouldn't exist, I am asking where Hussar draws the conclusion that such contrivances are so rare in actual campaigns as to be "legendary".

There is no good source of data, to my knowledge, from which such conclusions may be drawn.

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Transportation costs, for one thing.

Yeah, but if you're going to start applying logic to a typical D&D fantasy world, it all falls apart anyway.

Put simply, there's far too much money and not enough inflation.

(And that's before you consider the fact that in D&D, gold is only a semi-precious metal).

In one of our campaigns, using (I believe) published adventures, my hippy Ranger had accumulted enough gold pieces by about 7th level to buy 37 town houses in Waterdeep. (He didn't, that's just what I worked out enroute to his motivations in life totally crumbling - he ended up going to Joe's and spending 25k gps on a magic bow and another 10k gps on some kind of mega arrow of undead slaying).

What's the motivation for anything, when there's huge wealth just lying around in holes in the ground? Why work 50 years building up a business only to see your nephew make that much money in single dungeon crawl?

Sure, you stand a damn good chance of getting killed if you head down a dungeon. But then again, you stand a damn good chance of dying of disease if you stay around in town. And who'd be a soldier on silver pieces a day when for the same risk as a few battles, you could makes sureself several tens of thousands of GPs on a private expedition?

 

[Hussar]

Purely anecdotal. True. Although, looking at published campaign worlds, the idea of magic walmarts are pretty much a myth. Other than perhaps Planescape, there are vanishingly small numbers of places where you can simply walk in and buy magic items.

Looking at Sasserine - a pretty decent example - I find:

• 4 curio shops (not listed what they sell
• 1 Magic Light shop
• 1 Minor Magic shop
• 4 magic shop
• 1 Arcanists guild
• 1 black market

So, we have scattered throughout the city, about a dozen places where magic can be bought and sold (if you include the curio shops). So, yup, you have stores that sell magic. And, certainly, DM's could hand wave shopping. Does that mean that Sasserine is an example of Magic Walmartism? I hardly think so. It's a reflection of the core demographics listed in the DMG, but, that's not the issue.

We have no main, easily accessable store where you can buy any magic item. So, yes, I'm thinking the literal "Magic Walmart" is an internet myth. Sure, there might be a few people out there that have them, but, it certainly isn't reflected in published settings.

Honestly though, I'm not sure why you cannot see that Walmart is meant to be perjorative. Given the rather large number of negative connotations that come with the concept, it's pretty hard to think that it's a completely neutral term.

 

[Doug McCrae]

In one of our campaigns, using (I believe) published adventures, my hippy Ranger had accumulted enough gold pieces by about 7th level to buy 37 town houses in Waterdeep. (He didn't, that's just what I worked out enroute to his motivations in life totally crumbling - he ended up going to Joe's and spending 25k gps on a magic bow and another 10k gps on some kind of mega arrow of undead slaying).

35k is somewhat over the wealth by level guidelines for 7th level. The system expects 19k.

All D&D PCs are fantastically wealthy compared to the average peasant. I would suggest that a character whose motivation is to strike it rich then settle down isn't going to work long term. In fact, he won't work beyond the first adventure. As a player you have a responsibility to come up with motivations to go on adventures, whether the desire to do good, defeat a great evil, or thrillseeking.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Purely anecdotal. True. Although, looking at published campaign worlds, the idea of magic walmarts are pretty much a myth. Other than perhaps Planescape, there are vanishingly small numbers of places where you can simply walk in and buy magic items.

Spelljammer, I think, makes the myth much less of a myth. Since Spelljammer tied together Faerun, Oerth, and Ansalon, you could presumably find Arcane on every official D&D world (except Athlas) in 2e anyway, which means that, from an "official" standpoint, MagicMarts were pretty widespread. I've heard on this thread about Dragonmarked Houses and Red Wizards setting up MagicMarts in Eberron and Faerun.

You absolutely may be right -- everyone who ever used a MagicMart might have chimed in on this thread. That might be it. But I don't think that we can say how common MagicMarts are with any degree of certainty.

You're thinking the literal "Magic Walmart" is an internet myth, but that requires you to disbelieve or ignore each and every claim to such on this thread (and others).

Honestly though, I'm not sure why you cannot see that Walmart is meant to be perjorative. Given the rather large number of negative connotations that come with the concept, it's pretty hard to think that it's a completely neutral term.

Admittedly, I prefer "MagicMart" to "Walmart". But I believe that when people say "Magical Walmart" they are trying to denote that the concept reminds them of Walmart, and ruins the sense of immersion for them. Just as, when I say "Pokemount" I mean to imply that the flavour of the 3.X paladin's mount reminds me a bit too much of Pokemon, which ruins the sense of immersion for me.

That doesn't mean that people who feel differently suck because they don't think the same way I do. Different strokes for different folks.

RC