The Magic-Walmart myth

[Warren Okuma]

p137, Community Wealth and Populations:
"Anything having a price under that limit [GP Limit] is most likely available, wheter it be mundane or magical."
Quasqueton

Ooo. Anything? It says anything. I understand what anything is. Neat...
Magic items is a thing is it not?

 

[Warren Okuma]

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.

Greed is a funny thing.

 

[Warren Okuma]

Well I think that's kind of my point. When we talk about money we're using a modern mindset that doesn't fit a primative economy.

You could say there are three stages an economy can go through. (I'm making my own terms up by the way):

Stage One - Barter Economy: I will swap you a valuable item I have that you need (food say) for a valuable item that you have that I need (some cloth say). The problem with a barter economy is that it isn't very liquid in that it relies of me finding someone who has what I need who also happens to need what I've got.

Stage Two - Coin Economy: We will agree to use a particular portable and long-lasting substance whose quantity available is reasonably fixed as a standard item to barter. Gold, say. So I can swap my food for some gold you have and then later swap some gold for some cloth. This removes the need to pair up producers. However, it only works if I'm happy to swap gold for food today knowing that my gold won't be halved in price by tomorrow.

Stage Three - Money Economy: Now we agree to have a concept of money, represented by abstract tokens. I'm happy to swap my food for some otherwise meaningless bits of paper because I have enough faith in the future of civilisation (i.e. the government and the rule of law) to believe that tomorrow I will be able to swap those bits of paper for some cloth.

The key thing here being that a government can't just print more gold. Gold's rarity is intrinsic; it would stay rare even if the government fell and anarchy reigned. Whereas the paper currency would then be nothing more than arse-wiping material.

Nice to know I'm not the only one.

Stage Four - Worlds made by writers that do not understand economics or do not even pretend that their game engine stimulates reality. Generally it's worlds that have magic and can somehow turn lead into gold or have the correct epic feats that eschew material components combined with fabricate.

 

[Warren Okuma]

Off-topic:

That's not how money is created in modern times. Money is created when governments borrow fiat money through a financial system that that has no limit to borrowing because the money is not a commodity. Because modern financial systems count both money on deposit and money that is loaned at the full amount, instead of the actual amount in the vault, money is "created." This lessens the value of each unit of money, therefore creating inflation. This inflation is a tax levied on the economy by the government.

Ex: if you have $100, and inflation reduces the value of that $100 by 10%, that means you can only buy $90 dollars worth of goods with that $100 . . . essentially government caused inflation has taken $10 from you as a tax.

Ah, but DnD is not real. It doesn't even pretend to have a sane economic system. Adventurers dumping tons of gold, doesn't cause inflation. There is no supply and demand, not much anyway.

 

[Nellisir]

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".

<sigh>
No, I don't.

 

[Hussar]

Some of these phrases have been so integrated with edition wars over the years that it's difficult not to see an implied "edition X sucks" in these statements. Pokemount is one, because when 3.5 came out that was one of the terms that seemed to be invented by 3.5 haters to emphasize how much 3.5 sucked. So then people start to fall onto the defensive as soon as they see some of these, simply because they are so often associated with edition wars.

I think its a geek thing. We love our camps.

QFT. When a particular term gets used frequently in a negative context, it is pretty disingenuous to claim innocence after the fact. "Oh, I know that many, many people have used the term pokemount to mean that 3.5 sucks, but, hey, that's not what I mean." falls pretty flat. (insert whichever term fits for pokemount)

On a complete tangent, this is why arguing authorial intent is pretty much discredited in any serious discussion on literature. What the author intends is irrelavent to meaning. The only meaning that matters is the meaning derived by the audience since we can never really know someone else's intent. Even if the author stands up and says, "Hey, I mean THIS", it doesn't matter since the audience may interpret it differently.

In other words, as I stated before, if you have the choice of using a vague shorthand that carries negative connotations, don't be surprised when people react. If you want to say something, be specific. Add those extra six letters and avoid misinterpretation.

 

[Slife]

On a complete tangent, this is why arguing authorial intent is pretty much discredited in any serious discussion on literature. What the author intends is irrelavent to meaning. The only meaning that matters is the meaning derived by the audience since we can never really know someone else's intent. Even if the author stands up and says, "Hey, I mean THIS", it doesn't matter since the audience may interpret it differently.

Mods, I'd like to report this man for insulting me, my family, my ethnicity, and my religion.

 

[Gentlegamer]

"Oh, I know that many, many people have used the term pokemount to mean that 3.5 sucks, but, hey, that's not what I mean."

For clarity, if I use the term "pokemount" it is to imply the 3.5 paladin's mount sucks, not the whole game itself.

 

[Nellisir]

Even if the author stands up and says, "Hey, I mean THIS", it doesn't matter since the audience may interpret it differently.

One of the most surreal experiences in my life was taking a creative writing workshop in college, and hearing my story explained and analyzed by the other students. It's funny, in a freaky kind of way.

 

[Jonny Nexus]

One of the most surreal experiences in my life was taking a creative writing workshop in college, and hearing my story explained and analyzed by the other students. It's funny, in a freaky kind of way.

Did you also have the rule that you weren't allowed to say anything for the several minutes they took to discuss it?

I had that with a comedy SF story (in the UFO conspiriciana sub-genre) that I'd taken to my non-SF writing group.

They spent several minutes discussing whether or not the people of Earth in my story were aware that aliens from UFOs were colonising the Earth (which they weren't, obviously... I mean that's the whole point of the conspiracy genre, isn't it?) and eventually concluded that my use of the phrase "They say the truth is out there" in my blurb indicated that the aliens were completely in the open with everyone knowing that aliens were among them.

(i.e. They concluded that the phrase "the truth is out there" means "the truth is known" as opposed to what it actually means, "there's is a truth, but it is being hidden from us").

And everytime I tried to say something, I was politely told that I couldn't speak.