D&D 5E (2024) Uncommon items - actually common?

[Vaalingrade]

Its. Magic. The god of trade sets the price. There we go.

I'd rather the gods not have anything to do with non-divine magic.

Rather, I'd say the strong and weak economic forces are naturally-occurring forces in the D&D universe.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Not at all. A diamond (singular) is a thing that can be valued. Diamonds plural are a commodity that should be listed however that commodity is valued such as "3 dragonshards worth of diamonds" and an associated 100gp/dragonshard listed somewhere.

Yes, that would definitely reduce the number of arguments about how much it cost to cast revivify, because no one would argue what a dtagonshard is worth.

 

[Maxperson]

Its. Magic. The god of trade sets the price. There we go.

Giving it in terms of ounces doesn't solve anything. Because then you need to know all that ruby dust grinding crap. And players are then trying to weasel out of paying the intended cost by using cruddy rubies. So now you need to know the price of crappy rubies, how many ounces of dust they produce, how long it takes to grind them, etc.

Its literally the give a mouse a cookie situation.

Why wouldn't the god of magic set the price?

 

[jmartkdr2]

Why wouldn't the god of magic set the price?

Argument with the god of prices.

 

[Maxperson]

Argument with the god of prices.

Let's hope it's a better fight than the Tyson match the other night!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Argument with the god of prices.

Clearly they need the services of the god of arbitration.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Generally, I'm happy if the players can remember the name of the country their characters are in.

My pet peeve? Getting them to remember that the person they interrogated/interacted with is STILL PRESENT in the room they are talking, discussing their plans, and didn't depop magically when they finished interacting with them. Except when they start focussing on either minutiae or a random unnamed NPC that I just mentionned for color.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

It is more realistic in a sense that it is unrealistic that everyone in the world uses the same currency which is neatly decimal.

Yeah, it's strange they decided to go with decimal currency, and yet chose to use units like foot and ounces to sound medieval. They'd better go all-in with coins disconnected from the monetary unit of account. But I guess it would be quickly abandonned, much like sp and gp. Objectively, most players convert everything to gp, because... few GMs (including me) bother to strike them with exchange fees.

In my game, I reserve non-decimal currency to very out-of-the-way places the characters can visit. Like a red seashell being worth 8 white seashell being each worth 13 yellow seashells.

With more abstract system we can assume that there is more realistic variety of money in the fiction without having to deal with the currency conversion and mathematics hell it would produce if we tried to track all these individual valuables.

I'd be less miffed with wealth level being very abstracted (much like the cost of living) as in other games TBH. I think counting gold ceased to be important with editions (it started very important as it was xp, then it was a measurement of ability to get equipment and still important with WBL guidelines. Now it's just a few roadblocks in getting... a few things that quickly matter little as they go up in level and can afford amour and the needed non-consumable components for their spells. Especially when no guidelines are given for rewarding PCs for their services. We can get the value of the dragon hoard, but nobody is telling us what kind of reward getting a kingdom rid of dragon would be worth. Or maybe it's 1gp a day because the god of trade set the price of skilled manpower?

 

[Maxperson]

In my game, I reserve non-decimal currency to very out-of-the-way places the characters can visit. Like a red seashell being worth 8 white seashell being each worth 13 yellow seashells.

So 6 abalone shells are worth a kingdom?

 

[tetrasodium]

This is important for costly spell components because ultimately costly spell compoare magic items and should present as such instead of presenting as a perfunctory checkbox as they do now.

Yes, that would definitely reduce the number of arguments about how much it cost to cast revivify, because no one would argue what a dtagonshard is worth.

No I think it would do something very different in a good way using dragonshard as the fantasy horsepower/btu/volt equivalent encouraging players to ask thematically appropriate questions like "I'm a cleric of Pelor, his portfolio is sun & agriculture. Since it's past the limit on revivify & Alice isn't high enough level to cast raise dead on Bob. Can I consult the church records to see if there are any records of a lower level cleric in desperate need like us successfully casting raise dead at noon in a field like the local farms and five or more dragonshards as the spell's material component offering?". Instead of an argument you have an interesting exercise in collaborative problem solving... IoW the exact type of emergent fiction & creative problem solving that 5e's needlessly excessive simplicity is supposed to fuel.

Before the obvious question of "why the current setup listing commodities by price rather than unit while item choice creates other [already discussed] problems for treating them as magic items" comes up... That's simple. Price is an objective fact with clearly defined boundaries & volume is really the only fuzzy bit for the party to hang constructive magibabble based plans like the one with pelor & the crops above. By shifting the unknown area from volume/mass of a checkbox to a unit for measuring a fantasy form of power it allows the creativity to be hung on what can be done in order meet or as a result of exceeding the target.