Gem value

[JonahFalcon]

Something that's always made me laugh in D&D is that they measure gems in gold pieces, and not karats or anything.

If I pay 1000gp for a tiny little 1/10 of a karat diamond, does that mean it's a 1000gp diamond for spellcasting? If I get 100 karats of diamonds for sale, does that mean it's now that devalued gp amount?

Sort of like Gremlins II when they discussed what "midnight" meant.

[Trobby]

And this, again, is where I bring up the idea of a base price for rubies. Now granted this also implies that there is a base size for a ruby, and that differently-sized rubies might be differently priced, but if you really wanted to put the effort in, you could estimate the weight of rubies you'd need in order to cast a spell.

Few DMs or PCs are willing to do that work, so 500 GP of rubies is pretty standard.

[Linkavitch]

'Twas a joke. They paid 400gp for the rubies, but they need 500gp worth of rubies, and she haggled the price down. If she hadn't, they would've bought less rubies, but they'd have all they needed for the spell.

[Blue Ghost]

But if the rubies that she bought for 400 gp are ordinarily worth 500 gp, wouldn't they be enough for the spell?
And would the amount of rubies needed change along with the value of rubies in the economy?

[CapedLuigiYoshi]

But if the rubies that she bought for 400 gp are ordinarily worth 500 gp, wouldn't they be enough for the spell?

I think that's the joke. They DO have enough, they're just thinking about it wrong.

[Optimystik]

The joke is that, for practical reasons, spell components are measured using price instead of mass/quality.

This can lead to errors of logic in any setting where pricing isn't standard (i.e. where haggling and competition are factors.) If mass and quality are the only determinants of price, the system works. If you factor in other variables, such as greedy shopkeepers and savvy apprentices, you get absurd and funny situations like the one above.

[Silverraptor]

The joke is that, for practical reasons, spell components are measured using price instead of mass/quality.

This can lead to errors of logic in any setting where pricing isn't standard (i.e. where haggling and competition are factors.) If mass and quality are the only determinants of price, the system works. If you factor in other variables, such as greedy shopkeepers and savvy apprentices, you get absurd and funny situations like the one above.

And now I go and mess with my party's spellcasters.:smallamused: Thanks, dude!:smallbiggrin:

[Krenn]

Something that's always made me laugh in D&D is that they measure gems in gold pieces, and not karats or anything.

If I pay 1000gp for a tiny little 1/10 of a karat diamond, does that mean it's a 1000gp diamond for spellcasting? If I get 100 karats of diamonds for sale, does that mean it's now that devalued gp amount?

Sort of like Gremlins II when they discussed what "midnight" meant.

I asked that question once. on the one hand, it seems fair that if the going rate for a certain diamond in your current nation is 10,000 GP's , that that gem should work for a spell that requires 10,000 GP's of diamonds, even though the same gem is worth much less in a different country known for it's diamond mines.

on the other hand, it opens up the possibility of abuse: pay your fellow party member 10,000 GP for a sliver of diamond, and then sell him a piece of straw for the same 10,000 GP in return.

[petersohn]

Oh well, Elan should have really multiclassed to wizard. Or sorcerer, that fits his stats better.