Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DmBebop 06-11-05, 04:27 AM	One of the things I have noticed on the boards is DMs talking about PCs being to powerful for thier level. I tend to give out more goodies than the average DM, I suppose, but my sessions are difficult and PCs perish more than they would like to admit. However, I have heard of DMs that don't even hand out a +1 longsword until the PCs are 10th level. That seems boring to me. I know not all DMs are that way, but when should the gear start to get more tasty? I know there are alot of variables here, but I'd like to hear some outside DM input on this. Can't you just step up the encounter in exchange for some toys that they maybe shouldn't have for a few more levels? :rant:
Winter's requiem 06-11-05, 04:41 AM	I DMing for a game where all my players are lvl 3-4. They started at lvl 1, and I've made my own magical items. None of them are especially good, but they are handy. One of my player is a rogue/fighter which uses poisons and blowpipe, and I've given him some poisons that I've made my self which aren't good but annoying, such as a diarya posion I gave him. If you start a game where the players are lvl 4 they have enough money to buy a +1 sword, then it would be reasonable to allow them to get one. Of course it would be wrong to hand out a +1 sword as soon as they reach lvl 4 hand. If they loot a creature they might find some cool stuff as well.
Skeane 06-11-05, 10:13 AM	Players ability to get magic stuff really depend how 'magic-heavy' your campaign is. Personally, I've had characters get their hands on some pretty cool stuff early on, and I've had other campaigns where these items were really hard to get. The important thing to remember is keep is to keep it balanced. If every member of your party has some sort of magic trinket, then it's fair to assume that magic trinkets are common. Players shouldn't be surprised when they come across foes who also have a couple of 'magic helpers' with them too. If you do decide to use a heavy magic campaign, you may want to consider giving your items 'charges', making them easily breakable, or assigning some minor curse; that way you level out the possibility of the game being all about who has the best magic item.
Liwmial 06-11-05, 11:33 AM	I Dm a game where I am trying to reduce the overall amount of magic in the Eberron campaign. (Magic is magic because it is rare and mysterious, IMO) That is why I try to limit the amount of magical items that my players get their hands on; and I have also found that without magic items, or when magic items are obtained later in the game, the characters more fully develop their full range of abilities. But that's just me.
Siduakal 06-11-05, 01:16 PM	Hm, it's preference. I know in my 2 player campaign, our DM lets us get fairly powerful things that we shouldn't have at our level. BUT.. we also fight really hard encounters (Still). And we don't do combat a WHOLE lot. I'd say every other session we have combat. I think it largely depends on the players. If your players aren't into RP at all, then I'm not sure.. It may just be some groups. Our group participates in epic battles, travels, and the like.. In very small party. I play a Wizard, so the extra gear I generally get doesn't affect my power too much. (AC doesn't matter, I rarely get attacked.. Though the hippogriff mount does help with that) It mostly depends on what you want as DM. Some people would say my DM is monty hauling it because we have special mounts. (One player rides a special breed of horse that her entire mercenary group rides, I ride a Hippogriff - an animal no mercenary group rides) But he did so because this area of his world is VERY mount oriented. Each mercenary group breeds a mount to ride. Griffons for one, special horses for another, Wyverns for another, etc.. It's how people are identified. -shrug- In the end it's really just how you, as DM, want to play it. Better gear means you die less if you fight the same CRs. If you fight higher CRs than you should, it stays about the same.. But more tactics come into play, imo. (If you have 2 level 4s fighting 12 Worgs.. it's going to require they think quickly on how to even the odds in the fight.. but 2 level 4s fighting say.. 3 or 4 worgs.. Not so much. They just go on a killing spree) -shrug- Just my opinion.
Airsucker 06-11-05, 01:54 PM	If you're not sure how much loot to give, there are the treasure tables in the DMG and in the MM, each creature listing states what is typically found with each creature, whether no treasure, standard treasure, or double standard. I've found it to be rather handy. If you are running a less than 4 group, you might want to be a touch more generous.
Dreaming_in_the_void 06-11-05, 03:23 PM	This should be campaign and setting dependent. In my current world the "modern" has fallen its behind ancestors in magical knowledge. The way to get magic items is to go tomb raiding or delve into the depths of the earth searching out ruins or former civilizations. I would describe this as a fairly "rare magic" campaign. Look to item creation first... I try not to give the PC's anything tougher than what a wizard their level could make. Second, check the DMG NPC tables... they give you an idea of what the average, hobie joe character would have. Adjust upward for difficult or magic rich campaigns, or downward for easy campaigns or settings where magic is rare. I generally make sure the players have all but two items of similair power to the NPC tables. I give out potions, scrolls, or other "one shot" items instead. They can do pretty cool things with the one shot items, but then its gone. To be sure, this is an art; you want to keep the players happy while keeping the game... well, not realistic, but believable.
DmBebop 06-11-05, 06:37 PM	My campaign is FR, but it has changed so much because of the epic campaigns I've done in the past. Governments, populations, and relations have changed in many places. I try to stay consistant with past campaigns even though they are separate. I often throw in a cameo of an old PC or the reprocutions of a past campaign are felt by the current one. As far as gear in the current campaign, they are magic heavy. Lots of goodies, spread evenly enough amongst the PCs. The only item I have come to regret is the wizard's Staff of Conjuration. I'm going to have to come up with a nasty way to get rid of that. The abundance of toys is offset by how much they die. You should see how the vultures circle, looking over a demised PC's sheet. What ever happened to the days of laying the dead to rest with there gear? Like Boromir.
Sildatorak 06-11-05, 06:52 PM	Look to item creation first... I try not to give the PC's anything tougher than what a wizard their level could make. That is sage advice. I also periodically do a wealth audit and see how my players are stacking up against the wealth by level table in the DMG. Generally a few are a little high and a few are a little low, so I'll slip some interesting toys in for the PC's who are falling behind and avoid slipping in things to the guys who are a little behind. Of course it doesn't help when the party splits loot and the rich get richer, but that is an area that you can't control as the DM. The important thing is that you've given them the raw materials to be where they should be.
VirgilCaine 06-12-05, 08:32 AM	I dislike DMs that think like this: (Magic is magic because it is rare and mysterious, IMO) That is why I try to limit the amount of magical items that my players get their hands on; and I have also found that without magic items, or when magic items are obtained later in the game, the characters more fully develop their full range of abilities. D&D isn't the right system for that feel and besides, what abilities will I as a PC more fully develop? Taking advantage of the terrain? So I push the monster off the cliff instead of using my necklace of fireballs. Using alchemical items? Being clever with mundane items?
Sildatorak 06-12-05, 03:00 PM	some stuff You forgot "casting spells of their own."
Talinna 06-12-05, 03:13 PM	Honestly that would all depend on what the DM wants to put his/her party up against... if you want them fighting mosters with +1 weapons then you better be willing to let your players have +1 weapons.... logic would say that when it comes to armor and weapons usually what the PCs find will be what the monster/npc was using durring the fight.... now if you have tomb raiders one would assume that difficulty=quality of stuff.... and so forth.. It would be unfair for a party to go up against elc 32 moster (or band of) and at best get a small sword out of it (unless it was a village of peaceful gnomes or halflings... then your party just needs a reality check!!)
VirgilCaine 06-12-05, 04:13 PM	You forgot "casting spells of their own." As abilities the PCs will develop? Yeah, they will cast spells of their own. But only spellcasters even get spells, and with a low-magic oriented DM, good luck using those points in Use Magic Device.
Sildatorak 06-12-05, 11:06 PM	As abilities the PCs will develop? I meant that it is silly for a low magic campaign to "keep magic mysterious" when PC's can cast spells of their own. I was just agree with you.
VirgilCaine 06-12-05, 11:31 PM	I meant that it is silly for a low magic campaign to "keep magic mysterious" when PC's can cast spells of their own. I was just agree with you. Right! Okay.
weasel fierce 06-13-05, 01:36 AM	Im extremely stingy with magic items, as they are rare in my campaign, both in the hands of player characters and NPC's. If an NPC does have an item, its a pretty good bet he'll be employing it too. In the last campaign, a party of mostly 5th level characters had 2 permanent magical weapons, a single suit of magical armour, and a handfull of potions and scrolls. The party had to flee several times, but managed to survive through luck, wits and some interesting tactics :cool: Low magic works fine if it assumes that the PC's are unique, and among the few spellcasters.
Cantankerous 06-13-05, 07:16 AM	I dislike DMs that think like this: (Magic is magic because it is rare and mysterious, IMO) That is why I try to limit the amount of magical items that my players get their hands on; and I have also found that without magic items, or when magic items are obtained later in the game, the characters more fully develop their full range of abilities. D&D isn't the right system for that feel and besides, what abilities will I as a PC more fully develop? Taking advantage of the terrain? So I push the monster off the cliff instead of using my necklace of fireballs. Using alchemical items? Being clever with mundane items? When magic becomes to common place it becomes; watch the word and think about what it means, MUNDANE. The Heroic Fantasy genre isn't the place for pseudo-hi tech mundanity that simply has the appelation "magic" applied to it... and D&D is the perfect Heroic Fanatsy game engine. Now, if you mean that games where magic has NOT become mundane isn't aren't well suited to munchkinism, I'd second that in a heart beat. Sure. Get creative. Use terrain. Use turly mundane items creatively. Don't just rely on magic items by the truck load to make the game feel magical. Isshia
FriendoftheDork 06-13-05, 08:10 AM	I'll have to agree with Isshia here. Players who can't think beyond the next magic item or spell are not very creative. It's amazing what can be done with some nice ideas and low level spells. I'm used to playing in low-magic campaigns myself and it has a different and to me, more believable feel. Especially the concept of buying magic items does not appeal to me. It would be like buying and selling masterpiece painings today - it's expensive and very rare. A Holy Avenger should be priceless, just like a Da Vinci painting is. of course once in awhile you find Tut-Ankh Amon's tomb... I have no problem with PCs finding powerful magic items from ages ago, as long as they don't just buy it from the local magic mart. Still, some items are not that important. I play in faerun usually, considered by many to be highly magical, so magic "trinkets" are commonplace. Also, potions of scrolls, and the odd +1 sword isn't that hard to get. it's the truly expensive and rare items I'm worried about. items that only a 16th level character can make is going to be rare indeed. Hmm, I'll stop ranting now. BTW in my moderatly high magic drow campaign a player recently told me he was 50k gp behind the average CP wealth table for his level.... not counting LA. Still as a group the party has alot of money and one was even raised last sunday.
VirgilCaine 06-13-05, 08:47 AM	When magic becomes to common place it becomes; watch the word and think about what it means, MUNDANE. The Heroic Fantasy genre isn't the place for pseudo-hi tech mundanity that simply has the appelation "magic" applied to it... and D&D is the perfect Heroic Fanatsy game engine. Now, if you mean that games where magic has NOT become mundane isn't aren't well suited to munchkinism, I'd second that in a heart beat. Sure. Get creative. Use terrain. Use turly mundane items creatively. Don't just rely on magic items by the truck load to make the game feel magical. Isshia Uh, what? We're not debating making games feel "magical", whatever that is supposed to mean. I disagree with the idea that a lack of magic items makes the game feel more wondrous for the players. It doesn't--it should frustrate them. [Magic will not become just like technology because spells are not easily transferable between casters, because amking items requires an investment of the creator (XP) and because there are never enough spellcasters of high enough level to make enough stuff. ] "Magic items by the truck load?" Don't put words in my mouth. I'm talking about the by-the-book amount of wealth, with usual magic items available. I'm talking about having ten or so potions in my backpack and three of each Quaal's Feather Token in my Heward's Handy Haversack. [Why? Because I like to be prepared.]
TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe 06-13-05, 09:36 AM	I tend to give you slightly more treasure/magical weapons than normal (normal being "as described in the DMG) but, I also tend to play very magic-heavy campaigns, so it's not unusual to find +2 fairly early on. But, I also use many methods to keep this down. Example: ========== PC goes into town and starts going crazy with a necklace of fireballs...Oh, lookie there....the towns mage just casted Disjunction...pretty necklace, by the way. :D So, I tend to look at it like casino gambling, I give them an allocated amount and sometimes they cash them all in for something really uber or unexpected...so I find ways to remove the item...or make it a quest to get it back. ;)
High Octane 06-13-05, 09:51 AM	I use the DMG for the treasure in my campaign. I figure magic in the campaign is an accepted part of life, much as science is in our world. Most people wont hoot and holler like chimps screaming "EVIL FLASHING BOX!" at a computer, but seeing a fully computer animation with the latest graphics will certainly drop some jaws. On the flip side, we have paranoid people who think that satellites are always watching their every move and that there are secret computers running the government, not to mention the Y2K scare. Magic, at least in my campaign, is understood as existing, but not understood necessarily in the scope of how it works or what it is used for. Sleight of hand or alchemy can be mistook for magic. As far as magic items go, I allow them to be fairly common in my campaign. The only thing I have trouble with is players metagaming knowledge of magic items and going shopping for them. I suppose I should roll up availability and all...
jdaiut1 06-13-05, 12:57 PM	In my experience, magic items, and their rarity, can be one of the biggest bones of contention between a DM and his or her players. It's also, as has been pointed out, one of the places where players like to metagame far more than is good for them. What I like to do is quantify how much magic a PC should have for a given campaign. For example, in my current campaign, I use the "magic item value" list in the DMG as a good standard for how much gear a PC should have at a given level. However, in the campaign, magic items available for purchase (rare) cost twice as much as the DMG lists them at. So, if a PC "should" have 50K worth of gear, according to the DMG, it translates to 25K worth. I've found that this is okay with the players, so long as it's consistent. I also usually make the paty fight against the item (put it in the hands of an NPC) before I let them have it.
VirgilCaine 06-13-05, 05:11 PM	On the flip side, we have paranoid people who think that satellites are always watching their every move and that there are secret computers running the government, not to mention the Y2K scare. Magic, at least in my campaign, is understood as existing, but not understood necessarily in the scope of how it works or what it is used for. Sleight of hand or alchemy can be mistook for magic. Computers would be more competent than humans, so that's obviously an impossibility. ;) Just like in real life--people are fooled by science-like things that sound good.
Wayne 06-13-05, 05:22 PM	This is a pretty big problem that I and both players in my group that have also DMed bicker about a lot. They both think that magic items are too common, and should be rarer and more mysterious. Of course, they don't complain when their PCs are roughly 10000gp ahead of the wealth-by-level guidelines in my game, just because I tend to run a lot of humanoid NPCs to challenge them. In 3E, magic items are integral to the system. Warrior-types are horribly underpowered without layers of magic armor (just compare a high-CR monster's attack modifier and then a PC's AC before magic items-- and realize that they're not meant to always hit!), have trouble dealing damage without good magic weapons, and can't really compete with the utility of casters without various wondrous items. Meanwhile, casters don't really need the help, and tend to just buy stat/caster-level boosters and so on. 3rd Edition D&D is too much like Diablo for my tastes... how it revolves around going into dungeons, having potions in your inventory belt ready to keep you alive as you look to kill monsters and loot their corpses. I don't like that, and a lot of other people don't like that; but that's D&D right now. Taking away or giving less magic gear weakens warriors for no good reason, and indirectly makes spellcasters (especially artificers) much stronger. That's a bad thing, and I have to advise against it. One of the guys earlier made the point about how it's silly to nerf magic items because a campaign setting is "low magic" and then allow PCs to play spellcasters normally. And he (they?) were right. That's a very, very bad idea, if you want to have any semblance of balance at all in the game world.
VirgilCaine 06-13-05, 05:29 PM	3rd Edition D&D is too much like Diablo for my tastes... how it revolves around going into dungeons, having potions in your inventory belt ready to keep you alive as you look to kill monsters and loot their corpses. I don't like that, and a lot of other people don't like that; but that's D&D right now. First of all, you don't have to go into dungeons if you don't want to--you're the DM. D&D is adaptable to different terrains for adventuring and is evena daptable to a less-combat heavy style of gameplay, such as a stealth-heavy, urban intrigue game or something. Second, what's wrong with using potions?
Wayne 06-13-05, 05:44 PM	Eh... I guess I could've explained myself better. The points weren't really related. I was shooting for something like this: 1) D&D is like Diablo, inasmuch as a large facet of gameplay is killing monsters in order to get Phat Lewt, as they say. 2) Diablo involves a lot of dungeon-crawling and potion-clicking, and when D&D does that too [as it often does; like it or not, a lot of modules and the DMG itself is concerned with dungeon play] it seems even more similar. 3) I don't like Diablo, so in areas where D&D is similar to it I don't like that part of D&D, either. Yes, a D&D game doesn't have to ever go underground or into a "dungeon," but that doesn't really change the point about magic items. And no, there's nothing wrong with potions, that was just another Diablo-esque thing I thought of without thinking too much about it (I'm not a fan of that series, after all).
VirgilCaine 06-13-05, 05:51 PM	Eh... I guess I could've explained myself better. The points weren't really related. I was shooting for something like this: ... Yes, a D&D game doesn't have to ever go underground or into a "dungeon," but that doesn't really change the point about magic items. And no, there's nothing wrong with potions, that was just another Diablo-esque thing I thought of without thinking too much about it (I'm not a fan of that series, after all). I get you now. Using loads of potions I don't really care for either.
weasel fierce 06-13-05, 06:14 PM	One of the guys earlier made the point about how it's silly to nerf magic items because a campaign setting is "low magic" and then allow PCs to play spellcasters normally. And he (they?) were right. That's a very, very bad idea, if you want to have any semblance of balance at all in the game world. So because there are 2 spellcasters in the party, travelling on a continent with, say, 5 million people, game balance is ruined ?
Wayne 06-13-05, 10:06 PM	If: -They're the only spellcasters (there's no NPCs handy, like the rules assume there are); -They either don't have Item Creation feats (or don't use them to share with the warriors); And -The DM runs monsters appropriate to the group's CR (which includes enemies with DR, high ACs/attack bonuses, etc.), Then: Yes, it's imbalanced. What the rest of the world does has absolutely no relevance on the game until it impacts the PCs in some way. If the world is otherwise the same as normal D&D, except that Fighters don't have the magic items they need to have to fight Core-rules opponents, then the game is stacked against them. Of course, DMs can just run swarms of weak monsters all day long that are just as weak as the party Fighters, and that means the party casters (even if it's just two of them) will utterly dominate. That is an option... but it's not exactly a good one.
Didge 06-13-05, 10:30 PM	Ok, didn't read anything above (because I'm in a hurry to get out the door), but felt like I needed to throw in something. My world is low magic. Not as in, "Oh my goodness...a glowing sword! I've heard rumors of those!" But more of a low as in most magic items, swords, armor, shields, etc. have a +1 enhancement. These are the common magical items, a +2 item is uncommon and higher is more rare. Sure you can get higher, but that takes hard work, adventuring, or if your lucky enough...to convince a high level mage to craft you one. My general breakdown/guideline is that PC's will be averaging at a +1 item per every 4 levels. This works nicely, adds the element that I want. Milage may vary, depending upon campaign, DM, and/or Players.
weasel fierce 06-13-05, 10:47 PM	If the DM reduces the magic available, then of course the opposition will need some adjustment. This works fine in older versions of D&D, but I understand that 3.5 is written to be less flexible in such regards. DR's and such could easily be adjusted though, as could the numbers of spells allowed to casters.
The Human Target 06-13-05, 11:04 PM	DnD is designed to have lots of items and gear. Characters aren't viable within the confines of the base systems without magic stuff. I'd love to play in a low magic game, but it wouldn't be DnD. Or it would have to be modified out the wazoo. Personally, I give more magic treasure than book average. But much of it isn't purely for combat (or for combat at all). And I always figure it into my adventures.
Scifione 06-14-05, 12:58 AM	Generally speaking if you follow the charts and guidelines in the DMG, the characters will able to take on challenges of the appropriate level. When your champaign varies from the norm, you have to adjust things to match. This means using good judgment, plain and simple. The goal here is to make the encounter exciting, challenging, survivable, dangerous, and fun. If you follow the wealth by level chart on page 135 in the DMG and guidelines for creating new characters on page 199, PCs would only receive item appropriate to their level. I generally don’t allow items worth more than half the characters’ wealth by level. Values are in GP. Level Wealth one-half one-quarter 1 <900 450 225 2 900 450 225 3 2,700 1,350 675 4 5,400 2,700 1,350 5 9,000 4,500 2,250 6 13,000 6,500 3,250 7 19,000 9,500 4,750 8 27,000 13,500 6,750 9 36,000 18,000 9,000 10 49,000 24,500 12,250 11 66,000 33,000 16,500 12 88,000 44,000 22,000 13 110,000 55,000 27,500 14 150,000 75,000 37,500 15 200,000 100,000 50,000 16 260,000 130,000 65,000 17 340,000 170,000 85,000 18 440,000 220,000 110,000 19 580,000 290,000 145,000 20 760,000 380,000 190,000 If a character has 1 item worth 1/2 their wealth and 2 item each worth 1/4 their wealth, they will not be over or under powered. I have seen cases where one character had an item more powerful than they would normally have. They were lucky, and everyone else had to wait to get items of the same power. This could be the majority of the treasure for the next several encounters. Once it was my character with a major circlet of blasting :dancin: One time it was a 2nd level fighter in a game I was running. He did not even know his mw shield was a +1 shield. :rofl:
danielinthewolvesden 06-14-05, 01:20 AM	As Scifione mentions- the chart on pg 135 is the DM's freind. Keep your players within one level of that, and you can't go far wrong. Want a "low magic" campaign? Then instead of just being cheap- hand out some cool non-magic loot, like Grandmaterwork weapons, or armour of mithril alloyed with adamanium, with the best of both. Or a Knighthood. Or a super-warhorse; a 'destrier", or a barony and a keep. Use your imagination. I once ran a "low magic" game, and the "sowrd of special elvish hardened silver, with superb balance' was treasured well into the upper middle levels (a MW sword with a +1 to dmg also, and no minus to dmg with the silver, and an extra +1 to damage again vs creatures vulnerable to silver... but no magic at all) Too many DMs use the excuse of "I want magic to be special and thus I run a low magic campaign", without increasing the non-magical rewards correspondingly. Or the expereince- if your players are a couple charts below in wealth- then their ECL is lower, and they should be getting more eps for the same encounter. It seems to me that what these DM's really are is either a "control phreak" ("If I hand out magic items, they PC's might do something besides look at the nice scenary on the train ride!" :rolleyes: ) or they are just plain CHEAP. Not all, but far too many. They brag about how cheap they've been. :rolleyes: Wayne "3rd Edition D&D is too much like Diablo for my tastes... how it revolves around going into dungeons, having potions in your inventory belt ready to keep you alive as you look to kill monsters and loot their corpses. I don't like that, and a lot of other people don't like that; but that's D&D right now.". You're wrong, my freind. That's how D&D has always been. I played with the original 3 volume set, some 30+ years ago, and that's what it was all about then, too. That's why the "Dungeon" in D&D".
Cantankerous 06-14-05, 02:20 AM	Don't put words in my mouth. I don't need to. You put them there yourself just fine. Although how you can get them to fit along with your feet... ;) Look Virg, you said: I dislike DMs that think like this: followed by the quote: (Magic is magic because it is rare and mysterious, IMO) That is why I try to limit the amount of magical items that my players get their hands on Now what is the converse of that? NOT limiting the number of magic items the players get their hands on, thus, "magic items by the truckload." Magic does become mundane and looses it's greatest edge and advantage when it becomes too common. This doesn't mean never give out magic items. It means that they should be rare and precious. This is especially true in a game where making them takes soooooo bloody much time, energy and most of all experience points (life energy). Hey, the cost of that Handy Haversack, to make, is: 1000gp, 80 XP and the ability to cast Secret Chest (which means knowing it, which means being at least 9th level and having the spell... which if the spell is gotten specificly to be able to make the Handy Haversack adds another 1,125 gp) and a couple of days of work. 1000 gold pieces (This about what a peasant in the fields makes for three YEARS of work. Three years in which he's working 10 days out of 11, sleeping in the woods, not buying clothes and not eating.) Sure said peasant doesn't need the Handy Haversack... and would look quite bizzare carrying it, wasted from three years without food except for what he could scrounge in the woods, filthy from sleeping in the woods for that long, naked as a jaybird except for that skunk skin loin cloth because his clothes rotted off and he couldn't spare the cash for new ones, stinking to high heaven because he had to catch said skunk bare handed... ;) BUT the point is, that this extremely cheap, and only utilitarian magic item by itself represents a massive investment in terms of money and no small amount of real effort, yet this item is no more than an oddity. Without a limiting factor on the availability of such nonsense stuff the suspension of disbeleif becomes so much of a burden that the game stops being about anything vaguely role playing realted and becomes SOLELY roll playing related. Isshia
Sildatorak 06-14-05, 04:30 AM	1000 gold pieces (This about what a peasant in the fields makes for three YEARS of work. It would be closer to 30 years, actually. Untrained labor is only 1 sp/day, which comes out to about 35 gp/year. Someone with 2 ranks in profession can rake in loads of money with about 600 gp/year assuming a 10 or 11 in wisdom. Generally magical items beyond trinket level are far beyond the means of the common folk, but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for them. Assuming that the PC's aren't the only adventuring party in the world, you could make a nifty profit selling items. An NPC wizard 5 who just picked up craft arms and armor and has 8 ranks in profession (bartending), a +4 wisdom mod, and skill focus could make about 25 gp/week via profession checks. Selling a single +1 weapon is a 300 gp profit (assuming a 1 xp/5 gp value is accurate). Selling 4 weapons per year will result in roughly the same profit as bartending, and I'd say that 1 xp/5 gp is being generous with the amount of "life energy" invested. A 5th level wizard against a single orc (warrior 1) will net enough xp to make 3 swords. If you were a wizard, which would you rather do: spend 1 week/year crafting, 1 week/year orc hunting, and 50 weeks/year doing whatever you want as you wait for people to inquire about my magical arms for sale posted at the local inn (which is frequented by adventurers) or 50 weeks/year bartending with a 2 week vacation? Without altering the creation rules for magic items, the rarity of spellcasters, or the frequency of adventurers (or their desire to purchase items), I find it difficult to believe that shops offering minor magical items or wizards willing to do commisioned work would not exist.
Vacerious 06-14-05, 04:35 AM	yeah, i'm glad someone is posting on this issue, cuz up until now, i didn't realize that i was givin away too powerful stuff for the relative CR's (medium magical weapons for CR 7 & 8 encounters) in the homebrew i'm workin on. once again, i thank all for your eternal knowledge. vacerious out.
Scifione 06-14-05, 04:57 AM	:whatsthis It seems to me that what these DM's really are is either a "control phreak" ("If I hand out magic items, they PC's might do something besides look at the nice scenary on the train ride!" :rolleyes: ) or they are just plain CHEAP. Not all, but far too many. They brag about how cheap they've been. :rolleyes: Wayne "3rd Edition D&D is too much like Diablo for my tastes... how it revolves around going into dungeons, having potions in your inventory belt ready to keep you alive as you look to kill monsters and loot their corpses. I don't like that, and a lot of other people don't like that; but that's D&D right now.". You're wrong, my freind. That's how D&D has always been. I played with the original 3 volume set, some 30+ years ago, and that's what it was all about then, too. That's why the "Dungeon" in D&D". I agree with you. This is be baseline for D&D. The standard game means average magic. Most people are commoners. Most NPCs are below 4th level, so they can’t afford magic items. The only ones that can afford magic items are adventures PCs, adventuring NPCs, and wealthy elite NPCs. This in turn means the following: Adventures adventure because magic items are rare. They hope to find magic items in treasure. There are spell-casters that can craft magic items, but they want a fortune for their work. Magic shops also don’t have that much in stock unless it is scrolls, potions, or +1 items. You have to place a custom order and wait for it to be crafted. PC spell-casters dream of the day they can create magic items. PC spell-casters adventure to unlock secrets and gain life experience that allows them to craft magic items. Any PC spell-casters with a reputation for crafting item are well respected. Magic item are rare in the standard D&D game because only a few people have them. This is the vast majority of the population A common laborer (commoner 1st) would earn 1 sp per day laboring. He would probably spend at least half this on necessities. It would take him 55 years to afford a 1,000 GP item. Most skilled tradesman (expert 1st) earn between 3 sp and 1 gp per day. It would take him between 5.5 years and 19 years to afford a 1,000 GP item. Seasoned guards, solders and mercenaries (warrior 2nd) earn 4 sp per day. It would take him 14 years to afford a 1,000 GP item. (based on hireling cost in A&EG) Yes! This makes magic items rare. Adventures are lucky because they have them! :lightbulb :w00t: :dancin: :clap: :cloud9: :pile: :fight!: :pint: :drool:
Scifione 06-14-05, 05:06 AM	Ditto that Sildatorak! You made your post while I was working on mine, and we made the same point. ;)
Wayne 06-14-05, 01:25 PM	Daniel-- You're wrong, my freind. That's how D&D has always been. I played with the original 3 volume set, some 30+ years ago, and that's what it was all about then, too. That's why the "Dungeon" in D&D". Now, admittedly, I'm substantially younger than you are (not turning 30 for another seven years, heh), and I only came in on the waning days of 2nd Edition AD&D; but the dynamics, at least with the groups I gamed with, were substantially different. Primarily, the rules for making magic items were much more abstract and were based on XP rather than gold, and with the strict class/equipment system (a party of a Cleric, Wizard, and Thief could never ever use a +2 battleaxe, for example), I never saw magic items taking on anywhere near the importance that they did in 3E. In video games, the typical paradigm is slug through dungeons > go to next area > [sit through pretentious, anti-religion cutscene*] > convert your newly acquired loot/items gained into the next tier of weapons/armor. *Only if you're playing a Japanese RPG, heh. And in our AD&D games, it wasn't like that. We didn't play FR, so there really wasn't any way to "buy" high-end items (and unlike a lot of D&D groups, we played past 9th level... and since none of we players knew the system that well, we had no idea how broken it really could've gotten); the DM just gave them out when he (or she, in some cases) thought it was appropriate. And a lot of the modules I've read for older games that I've never played didn't really take PC items into account, at least beyond "They have to have +2 weapons to get past the elementals in this room" or something. Anyway, in my experience, heh, the concept of magic items making up a vast part of PCs' power levels is new to 3E. Whether you chalk that up to how weak some of the classes were then compared to now (Fighters weren't as bad since ACs didn't have nearly the variance they do in 3E-- thanks to magic items, for non-monsters-- and guys like Druids were substantially weaker than they are now), or because the system revolves around magic items for non-casters to keep up (which fails, because not only is the magic item creation system unfair and poorly implemented (how many Bracers of True Strike arguments have we heard? :/), casters have the same access to it); it has a different game than what I played before. And that game is a lot like my short brush with Diablo years ago, before I started hating on Blizzard for WarCraft 3. *chuckles*
weasel fierce 06-14-05, 02:11 PM	I blame everquest ;)
Cantankerous 06-14-05, 02:19 PM	It would be closer to 30 years, actually. Untrained labor is only 1 sp/day, which comes out to about 35 gp/year. Someone with 2 ranks in profession can rake in loads of money with about 600 gp/year assuming a 10 or 11 in wisdom. Generally magical items beyond trinket level are far beyond the means of the common folk, but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for them. Assuming that the PC's aren't the only adventuring party in the world, you could make a nifty profit selling items. An NPC wizard 5 who just picked up craft arms and armor and has 8 ranks in profession (bartending), a +4 wisdom mod, and skill focus could make about 25 gp/week via profession checks. Selling a single +1 weapon is a 300 gp profit (assuming a 1 xp/5 gp value is accurate). Selling 4 weapons per year will result in roughly the same profit as bartending, and I'd say that 1 xp/5 gp is being generous with the amount of "life energy" invested. A 5th level wizard against a single orc (warrior 1) will net enough xp to make 3 swords. If you were a wizard, which would you rather do: spend 1 week/year crafting, 1 week/year orc hunting, and 50 weeks/year doing whatever you want as you wait for people to inquire about my magical arms for sale posted at the local inn (which is frequented by adventurers) or 50 weeks/year bartending with a 2 week vacation? Without altering the creation rules for magic items, the rarity of spellcasters, or the frequency of adventurers (or their desire to purchase items), I find it difficult to believe that shops offering minor magical items or wizards willing to do commisioned work would not exist. Oooops, for got to multiply. Thanks for the heads up. The thing is though, even if there are fifteen adventuring companies in a kingdom of 1,000,000 people, (which would mean that adventurers in said country are thicker than fleas on a mangy dog), the fifty to seventy potential customers that will produce ain't a market pal. You aren't going to make any kind of profit with such an elite clientel because they aren't all wealthy enough at the same time to become a market; they will often make their own items, some would rather take than buy, etc, etc, etc. There is no reasonable way to turn a profit making magic items for sale EXCEPT in a world that has very poor suspension of disbelief. It's one of the traps of the D&D system paying quasi-realistic wages to the masses while making the PC's richer than Croscious. Isshia
kaldrin 06-14-05, 02:21 PM	Balance is the key to keeping the magic items under control. Loot is great fun to hand out, but that can be just as boring after a while as if you hadn't given them any items until level 10. I have done a campaign in the past where rolled up the items for the entire campaign at once and assigned them a 'level', meaning I put them in a stash after certain encounters at that level. On the whole it was one of the better planned campaigns I'd ever done and the players agreed it was actually exciting to check the items again. For a lot of those items I also switched around the classes of the items too. One sword was actually a sword of 3 wishes. And I had a belt of teleportation. Switching things up usually keeps players interested, especially if you create a few unique items for your world.
Sildatorak 06-14-05, 02:44 PM	The thing is though, even if there are fifteen adventuring companies in a kingdom of 1,000,000 people, (which would mean that adventurers in said country are thicker than fleas on a mangy dog), the fifty to seventy potential customers that will produce ain't a market pal. No, 50 to 70 customers isn't a market. 15 adventuring companies is far from thick, though, if we are going by the RAW demographics. A single 30,000 person "metropolis" (reasonable for the capital of a 1 million person kingom) will have at least 90 level 6 or better PC-classed NPC's. Considering that the most reliably selling items (and the ones you'd most likely keep in stock) are healing potions, buff potions, and +1 or +2 weapons and armor, I think there is definitely a market for them considering their large profit margin. When you figure in the other large cities, small cities, and large towns of the realm, I think that 15 adventuring parties is hardly a reasonable number. (I am assuming that most adventuring parties are probably in the 1st-5th level range as higher level NPC's in cities have probably settled down). You aren't going to make any kind of profit with such an elite clientel because they aren't all wealthy enough at the same time to become a market; they will often make their own items, some would rather take than buy, etc, etc, etc. If that is the case, then why does an "omg, my players want magic stores!!!" thread pop up so frequently?
wordserpent 06-14-05, 03:40 PM	I have found that by using the random treasure tables supplied in the DMG I usually get loot that is just what the characters deserve or a little bit less. The random treasure tables give out magic items but they are often so random that the players end up with wierd or useless junk (unless you have a balanced party, which I rarely do). The older editions were more free with powerful items. If you look at the old modules you might find the treasure hordes stocked with jucy items and the monsters ignorant of their use. As DM's we have the final say in what ultimately ends up in the treasure horde so if you don't want the Kobold King to have the Sword Of Kas or the Demon Armor, then by no means are you obliged to make it available. Treasure should be determined well in advance of the gaming session so you can add or nerf items as you see fit. If you know that the players will be fighting a Balor then you could introduce a powerful item a few sessions before old Balor pops up or find some other clever way to introduce a powerful item so the players don't say: "Hey! A Plus Three sword....I'll bet there's a balor in the next room." Some earlier posters have remarked on the (d)evolution of D&D from the "grand old days" of yore to the munchkinism of today. I have been playing this game since 1981 and I can assure you that there have always been powermongers among players. The new rules simply allow more options so there are more pathways to munchkindom. I would like to reassure you my fellow DM's, the fact that we see more munchkins, powergamers and Monty Haul DM's today, only means that more and more people are getting into D&D than in previous years. These new players are just learning what the game is all about and I have faith that as they mature, their roleplaying ability will mature with them. If we Old-Timers look back to our own early days of gaming we might find a bit of Munchkin/Monty Haul-ism in our past as we struggled with the undbridled power of being the DM or the endless quest for the next level or the next magical doodad. When a DM decides to be cheap with the magical loot (and I have seen my share of those), they are forced to balance their games accordingly. But some DM's are just good at doing that. Others end up with TPK's and either adapt their methods or are thrust aside as another intrepid player tries to do a better job.
MrkGrismer 06-14-05, 03:58 PM	Each and every computer/videogame RPG out there is based on 1st ed AD&D, at least insofar as the combat system (to-hits, AC, hit points). And D&D, since just after Chainmail (and some could say Chainmail itself) has been based on Dungeon Delves to slay monsters and get treasure. Every DM since those first days thru the present has had the option to focus their game either on hack 'n slash, politics, role-play or whatever it is that he/she and the group are interested in. It isn't really any different 3.5 vs AD&D, other then 3.5 has more rules and forumlas for things various DMs had to make up in earlier editions. You can run a campaign of political intrigue and still keep the characters pointed smack-dab in the middle of the wealth by level chart, it isn't any more difficult in 3.5 then it was in AD&D. In fact, it is (IMO) easier, because there are so many more feats and skills (and spells and PrCs and such) that allow for more rules-based intrigue. Personally, I go by the DMG as far as what magic items are available in a city of size X. My players greatly enjoy being able to sell the stuff they don't want (at half value) and buy the stuff they do want, so long as they go to a big city like Waterdeep. The PCs in my game currently have more loot then they should by the table, but it is certainly not dragging the game down. They are not having an easy time of it, and are just as likely to accomplish the campaign goals as they would be without the stuff. But a lot of that is because the campaign goals aren't a matter of slashing X monster. They need to discover information, and do something with that information. I don't see any reason to restrict the PCs. I have no intention of restricting the bad guys.
VirgilCaine 06-14-05, 04:15 PM	Oooops, for got to multiply. Thanks for the heads up. The thing is though, even if there are fifteen adventuring companies in a kingdom of 1,000,000 people, (which would mean that adventurers in said country are thicker than fleas on a mangy dog), the fifty to seventy potential customers that will produce ain't a market pal. Isshia Fifteen adventuring companies made up of how many people each? Fifteen groups of four or five adventurers is a drop in the bucket of the demands.
solbergb 06-14-05, 10:33 PM	Actually...when talking about things like magic items translated into real world market economics, the low level stuff is on the order of luxury automobiles, the next tier like private airplanes/ocean-going boats. The market for these isn't that large. Probably measured in 1000s for the 100k plus automobiles and 100s for the more expensive private transport. They're still markets worth serving, because the R&D is already paid for and the cost to make one is significantly less than the cost to manufacture and market it. NEW magic items will be reasonably rare, with a small market. But existing ones? Limited only by the demand and cash, and yes indeed, commissions will be taken by those capable of making such items. All you do by limiting magic is make PC spellcasters more important. They aren't limited at all by such restrictions, the warriors and rogues take a big power hit, especially past level 10 where the cash guidelines double, then double again relative to xp earned. Low magic worlds are fine, but you should cut all the primary spellcasters out of such a campaign, unless you want the PC casters to be the most important people in the continent by about level 9. As for history... First edition Greyhawk, a relatively low-magic world compared to say, Faerun, and the benchmark for old-school D&D had the head of state of each major country leveled in the 10-15 range, with a few around 20. Those guys had money, and the DMG city encounter guidelines for magic items indicate they'd be pretty well equipped. They and their bodyguard/family/retainers are the market. Each army platoon (about 40-50 depending on the makeup) had a L6ish spellcaster and a couple L5-7 fighter leaders, and the Greyhawk armies were measured in tens of thousands, generally. The world had magic, and more than a sufficient market for the kind of items that a level 1-8 guy would value. Beyond that...you had to get a cleric or wizard to spend time and constitution points to make a permanent item. Not easy. Consumables weren't hard to get though, since they didn't need Permanency and thus were only "time" cost, not "random chance of permanent stat loss" cost. Every humanoid in the 1st edition monster manual had even bandits lead by level 6-8 guys with level 2-5 lieutenants all of whom had some magic items, exact tables and percentages varied by race. This includes bandits and even cavemen.
Aeristoch 06-14-05, 10:52 PM	I Dm a game where I am trying to reduce the overall amount of magic in the Eberron campaign. (Magic is magic because it is rare and mysterious, IMO) That is why I try to limit the amount of magical items that my players get their hands on; and I have also found that without magic items, or when magic items are obtained later in the game, the characters more fully develop their full range of abilities. But that's just me. Buuuut I thought the flavor and feel of Eberron was directly related to the amount of magic in that particular world... Seems to me if you wanted low magic you should stick with Greyhawk.