D&D (2024) Uncommon items - actually common?

[Ancalagon]

This is an off-shoot of the "bespoke items" thread.

I've been thinking a lot about the "meaning" of uncommon. The crafting rules in 5.5 are pretty generous, and uncommon items are pretty accessible. Given the very high utility of some of these items, it seems to me that they would be... common? I've been thinking a lot about this, because the rules actually fit the campaign I'm about to start (Yoon Suin); which has a great abundance of castes living in an area for thousands of years. There has been plenty of time to make lots of items.

But I thought more about it, common for whom?

Uncommon items are quite ... mundane for adventurers, heroes, but also nobles, military officers - any kind of people with significant wealth and a life where conflict is quite likely. I could see a wealthy merchant acquiring utility, protective or divination items too.

Common magical items are "common" from well, the more common people. Shop keeps, wealthy farmers, common sell swords. If you make a gp a day, but manage to save 1 silver a day... you could afford a common item in a reasonable amount of time.

I think that this perspective can be helpful. In a somewhat magic heavy world, which is the setting that the rules seem to imply, a +1 sword or a bag of holding shouldn't be a big deal.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is an off-shoot of the "bespoke items" thread.

I've been thinking a lot about the "meaning" of uncommon. The crafting rules in 5.5 are pretty generous, and uncommon items are pretty accessible. Given the very high utility of some of these items, it seems to me that they would be... common? I've been thinking a lot about this, because the rules actually fit the campaign I'm about to start (Yoon Suin); which has a great abundance of castes living in an area for thousands of years. There has been plenty of time to make lots of items.

But I thought more about it, common for whom?

Uncommon items are quite ... mundane for adventurers, heroes, but also nobles, military officers - any kind of people with significant wealth and a life where conflict is quite likely. I could see a wealthy merchant acquiring utility, protective or divination items too.

Common magical items are "common" from well, the more common people. Shop keeps, wealthy farmers, common sell swords. If you make a gp a day, but manage to save 1 silver a day... you could afford a common item in a reasonable amount of time.

I think that this perspective can be helpful. In a somewhat magic heavy world, which is the setting that the rules seem to imply, a +1 sword or a bag of holding shouldn't be a big deal.

The generally accepted definition of rarity terms doesn't seem to make sense with the mechanics, and the setting those mechanics imply, no.

To be honest, I doubt WotC thinks that hard about the contradiction inherent there themselves, let alone that they imagine their bread-and-butter profit-generating consumer base thinks about it.

 

[Oofta]

I view uncommon as still not necessarily being available everywhere and typically not available to apprentices, novices or commoners. PCs in my campaigns don't get uncommon items until 4th or 5th level.

But there's no such thing as a perfect rarity system, no matter what you do someone will have an issue with it.

 

[Kurotowa]

I think that this perspective can be helpful. In a somewhat magic heavy world, which is the setting that the rules seem to imply, a +1 sword or a bag of holding shouldn't be a big deal.

Yeah, the "wide magic" principle that Eberron pioneered really seems to have taken hold. Magic is pervasive, though not as cheap and omnipresent as technology is in the modern world. Instead of a world where kings have court archmages and peasants scrabble around like medieval farmers, the magic is spread a little more evenly.

An extended family pitching together to get a Prosthetic Limb or Ersatz Eye isn't impossible for the common folk. Rich kids running around showing off with their Masquerade Tattoos and Cloaks of Billowing makes sense. A well to do specialist having a single uncommon magic item related to their trade is fitting. And I'm okay with all that. It makes the fantasy world feel like a fantasy world, not Renfaire Earth with a few wizard towers dropped in randomly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I view uncommon as still not necessarily being available everywhere and typically not available to apprentices, novices or commoners. PCs in my campaigns don't get uncommon items until 4th or 5th level.

But there's no such thing as a perfect rarity system, no matter what you do someone will have an issue with it.

Agreed. Just come up with a system that works for you and your group, by whatever metric matters to you. It certainly doesn't have to be the one in the book.

 

[bedir than]

Player facing rules are meant for players and their characters, not a worldbuilding conceit meant for the 7th grandparent of an NPC

 

[Ancalagon]

The more I think about it, the more I think the problem is linking rarity and power.

Take the humble bag of holding. Can I imagine a world where they are "uncommon"? Of course!

What I have a hard time imagining is that it's worth 400 gp when it's trivial to demonstrate that a merchant using a bag of holding to transport valuable goods could make the bag pay for itself and more in less than a year.

It's easy for me to imagine a fantasy world where a shield +1 and a shield of shielding have the same rarity. It's baffling that they would be worth the same value.

 

[Distracted DM]

Player facing rules are meant for players and their characters, not a worldbuilding conceit meant for the 7th grandparent of an NPC

Are you suggesting that the rarity is rated to adventurers, not the world and its folk? That could make sense.

 

[bedir than]

Are you suggesting that the rarity is rated to adventurers, not the world and its folk? That could make sense.

Yep!

It's not like NPCs in the edition are built with player-facing rules. Why would we assume that the cities they occupy are?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Player facing rules are meant for players and their characters, not a worldbuilding conceit meant for the 7th grandparent of an NPC

That does appear to be what they're saying now. It is very much not the game it was.