Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8261411" data-attributes="member: 18">That's interesting, it's like a separate cultural tradition (one that rather relies on magic items have pretty clear, fixed and known prices I note, otherwise it seems like the game would become an episode of one of those reality shows featuring an awful lot of price negotiation). I've played since 1989, and like Blue I've never actually seen it happen, I think because in Ye Olde Dayes of early 2E, we liked to act like magic items didn't have fixed, precise, known values, and after that it just would have been a big hassle (and in no edition of D&amp;D have I ever seen gold to actually be worth much, once you get beyond a few thousand - I suspect it might have been worth more in 1E).There's also this issue:Which I think would be the deciding factor that would prevent us adopting it even in an OSR-ish game.The alternative would be that you could force items on people and put them in &quot;debt&quot; if they didn't have the cash, but that is not likely to end well, in my experience. I've seen similar things with MMORPGs and Dragon Kill Point-type systems. Some guilds used to have people able to force-assign items to people, people who might otherwise save up their DKP to buy a different item, because those guilds wanted people to make the guild group stronger, but this always ended in acrimony to some significant degree.Whereas if you just hand it to the best person to use it, that's likely advantaging everyone and not causing acrimony.With any kind of &quot;pay for it system&quot;, unless you're swimming the pay resource, you risk situations where someone refuses a very good item which would be a big benefit to the party because they want to reserve the pay resource for something else. It also relies on the gold costs of the items being sensibly apportioned by the designers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8261411, member: 18"] That's interesting, it's like a separate cultural tradition (one that rather relies on magic items have pretty clear, fixed and known prices I note, otherwise it seems like the game would become an episode of one of those reality shows featuring an awful lot of price negotiation). I've played since 1989, and like Blue I've never actually seen it happen, I think because in Ye Olde Dayes of early 2E, we liked to act like magic items didn't have fixed, precise, known values, and after that it just would have been a big hassle (and in no edition of D&D have I ever seen gold to actually be worth much, once you get beyond a few thousand - I suspect it might have been worth more in 1E). There's also this issue: Which I think would be the deciding factor that would prevent us adopting it even in an OSR-ish game. The alternative would be that you could force items on people and put them in "debt" if they didn't have the cash, but that is not likely to end well, in my experience. I've seen similar things with MMORPGs and Dragon Kill Point-type systems. Some guilds used to have people able to force-assign items to people, people who might otherwise save up their DKP to buy a different item, because those guilds wanted people to make the guild group stronger, but this always ended in acrimony to some significant degree. Whereas if you just hand it to the best person to use it, that's likely advantaging everyone and not causing acrimony. With any kind of "pay for it system", unless you're swimming the pay resource, you risk situations where someone refuses a very good item which would be a big benefit to the party because they want to reserve the pay resource for something else. It also relies on the gold costs of the items being sensibly apportioned by the designers. [/QUOTE]

Verification