PDA

View Full Version : About phat lewtz...



SilverLeaf167
2012-03-11, 11:16 AM
Has anyone ever suspected the realism and common sense of looting all the equipment you find from enemies, only to sell it to the nearest blacksmith?

I think most merchants would be disturbed by or at least unwilling to buy huge loads of bloody, rusty, partially broken, low quality weapons and armor. Perhaps less so if only some of those qualities are present, but still... what do you expect from slaughtering a horde of kobolds or goblins?

What are your thoughts on this?

Oracle_Hunter
2012-03-11, 11:33 AM
Has anyone ever suspected the realism and common sense of looting all the equipment you find from enemies, only to sell it to the nearest blacksmith?

I think most merchants would be disturbed by or at least unwilling to buy huge loads of bloody, rusty, partially broken, low quality weapons and armor. Perhaps less so if only some of those qualities are present, but still... what do you expect from slaughtering a horde of kobolds or goblins?

What are your thoughts on this?
It depends :smalltongue:

If you are in an isolated town on the frontier then someone is going to want that passel of gear you've found. Maybe not the blacksmith, but I'm sure the local lord might be willing to pay a small bounty on usable gear so that he can continue to outfit the militia while having spares on hand in case of losses. He probably won't want the goblin-sized chainmail, but a shortsword or two never hurt. And who knows, maybe the local blacksmith can melt down the odds and ends and recycle it into something useful -- steel being rare on the frontier.

Now, your capitol city or major town probably doesn't have any need for that detritus. It gets enough raw material to turn out high-quality gear for whomever wants it, so why bother with rusty goblin-spears? Perhaps a less savory merchant might buy it on the cheap to outfit the various gutter dwellers he caters to but no legitimate arms dealer is going to touch the stuff.

Belril Duskwalk
2012-03-11, 12:05 PM
There's also a matter of effort exerted vs. value gained. Let's say making a new suit of Studded Leather armor takes a full week (as a wild guess). Now if an adventurer comes into town with a half-dozen suits of studded he grabbed from a raiding party of Orcs it might make good sense to buy them. You might need to replace a few straps and buckles here, maybe re-set some of the studs where they're starting to rip free, but on the whole you could probably get several serviceable suits of armor for a weeks effort rather than just the one. This isn't to say the armorer is going to pay the normal price; obviously you'll knock the price down by a fair margin to account for the effort needed to get them in shape for re-sale. The point though, is that if the armor is still in half-way decent condition it would probably turn a profit to buy it, fix it, then sell it off later.

Slipperychicken
2012-03-11, 12:24 PM
What are your thoughts on this?

Thing is, they're selling it at 50% market price. That's awful by anyone's standards, and totally appropriate if you realize they're selling it to the equivalent of a pawn shop, whose business model is buying things spontaneously, but cheaply.



Also, I'm pretty sure you can't sell items below masterwork quality at all.

bloodtide
2012-03-11, 12:33 PM
Has anyone ever suspected the realism and common sense of looting all the equipment you find from enemies, only to sell it to the nearest blacksmith?

I think most merchants would be disturbed by or at least unwilling to buy huge loads of bloody, rusty, partially broken, low quality weapons and armor. Perhaps less so if only some of those qualities are present, but still... what do you expect from slaughtering a horde of kobolds or goblins?

What are your thoughts on this?

In general, most folks don't care. And even more so they can't afford to care. In any type of pre-industral world items are extremely rare. Even a somewhat simple item, like say a wooden spoon, takes hours to create. More complex items can take days or weeks to make. And this does not account for craftsmanship.

Remember that there is nothing like Wal-Mart in pre-industral times. Everything must be slowly hand crafted. A woodcarver can work ten hours a day making items, but will still only have a handful on a shelf to sell at any one time. A shop would not have a whole rack of shovels(like you'd find at Wal-Mart), they would most likely only have two or three.

And in addition to all that remember that materials are of great value. As again, in pre-industral times it was hard to get raw materials. And even more so to get raw materials of good quality. So even broken items have value as material. Take for example a broken metal weapon(or even just a poor quality), it can easily be melted down and recast into anything. So your local blacksmith could turn a handful of metal kobold weapons into lots of useful metal items.

And the final thing to remember is, well, almost everything is bloody, rusty, partially broken, and low quality. That's just the way, everything is in the whole world. Almost no one has 'new' stuff or stuff of 'high' quality.

And there is the real world modern example: I want to do something simple, such as cut down a small tree. I don't have an axe or other such tool though. So I head to Wal-Mart and find an axe, that is however $12.99. As I'm short on money, I can't spend that much on just an axe that I will use only once. But on my way home I stop at a flea market, where I find an axe for just $1. So I buy that used axe and head home to cup the tree down.

Mastikator
2012-03-11, 12:33 PM
To be honest I don't like the concept that all vendors should buy anything, but only at a 50% rate. It should be handled on a case by case basis.
If you kill a bandit and take his stuff, and sell the weapons to the blacksmith, the blacksmith may be wary since he may become a target of the bandits friend, and he can't really resell the bandit stuff, so he'll only melt down the weapons, he'll pay at most 10% of the market price.
On the flip side, if you sell your sword, that can be resold he should buy it at 90% or some such price.

Traab
2012-03-11, 01:28 PM
To be honest I don't like the concept that all vendors should buy anything, but only at a 50% rate. It should be handled on a case by case basis.
If you kill a bandit and take his stuff, and sell the weapons to the blacksmith, the blacksmith may be wary since he may become a target of the bandits friend, and he can't really resell the bandit stuff, so he'll only melt down the weapons, he'll pay at most 10% of the market price.
On the flip side, if you sell your sword, that can be resold he should buy it at 90% or some such price.

I dont really buy that. (sorry for the pun) its not like the bandits sword is stamped with, "Property of bertie banditking" on it, so how would his cousin theodore thieflord recognize it lying in a stack of second hand items? And unless that leather jerkin has a half dozen broadsword holes in it, it shouldnt be that hard to patch it up reasonably well and once again sell it for a reduced price.

Mastikator
2012-03-11, 02:27 PM
The bandit's friends may want revenge against the killers and anyone who deals with them.
Also, lets not forget about superstitions, it may be a bad omen to take from the dead. Even in real life if a house is accused of being haunted it loses market value.

Traab
2012-03-11, 03:15 PM
Meh, by the time you are returning to town, you have killed the vast majority of the bandits, expecting the sad remnants of whoever ran away fast enough to escape, to come back, track the heroes down, and watch to see who buys the scavenged loot off of them for the chance to hit someone the heroes likely dont care about, is pretty far fetched to me. Not saying it isnt possible, just that it would take one hell of a perfect storm of events to setup a scenario where that happens. Chances are, if the bandits friends want revenge, they wont know or care that one merchant didnt buy the loot off the heroes, everyone dies anyway. I mean, chances are, the town hired the heroes in the first place to deal with the bandits, so revenge is on the menu as it is.

Mastikator
2012-03-11, 03:21 PM
Killed the vast majority of the bandits!? What kind of lack of grimdark easy campaign setting do you think I'm running here? If you actually manage to kill all the bandits then you'll acquire quite a reputation.

Traab
2012-03-11, 03:28 PM
Killed the vast majority of the bandits!? What kind of lack of grimdark easy campaign setting do you think I'm running here? If you actually manage to kill all the bandits then you'll acquire quite a reputation.

Well, all the bandits in that particular group at least. I wouldnt expect the bandits competition to care that I wiped them out. And if the bandits do have friends, id expect them to try and stop me from killing all of the said friends. And be killed themselves.

If the townsfolk are so horrified over the prospect of revenge killings, then why the hell did they hire my group to attack the bandits in the first place?

Mastikator
2012-03-11, 03:38 PM
Now see, you keep making up facts about the scenario that would explicitly contradict the parameters I've set up and act as though it takes priority. Some might say that you broke the unwritten rules about arguing on the internet.

Fhaolan
2012-03-11, 03:52 PM
Whoever came up with the 50% value sell-price never worked for a used goods business. A shop *might* be able to sell used goods for 50% of the market value, if it's in good condition. Any higher it it better be in pristine condition, as in never used and no wear at all, or it has to have intrinsic/historical value of its own. Buying this stuff from random strangers wandering into town? 5%-25% of market value, depending on condition.

Jay R
2012-03-11, 04:22 PM
I rule that most stuff is unsellable, except as so much raw materials. If you kill a bunch of goblins, there may be a single sellable weapon from the leader.

If the PCs are spending too much time trying to loot third-rate armor, you have either too few random encounters or no important deadline.

Thidrek
2012-03-11, 04:32 PM
Whoever came up with the 50% value sell-price never worked for a used goods business. A shop *might* be able to sell used goods for 50% of the market value, if it's in good condition. Any higher it it better be in pristine condition, as in never used and no wear at all, or it has to have intrinsic/historical value of its own. Buying this stuff from random strangers wandering into town? 5%-25% of market value, depending on condition.
You forget that we're not talking about a plasma-TV with 2 years of guarantee. Fewest fighters in a medieval world will be able to go to the local smith and have a shiny new sword or a custom-made suit of armor made to their liking. Most of them will be glad to get their hands on anything that will do the job and at the lowest price possible.
At least in a "normal" medieval world, there is no abundance of goods of any kind. Everything is made on purpose since you can't afford to keep 20 new swords lying around with no one to buy them.
So it's rather reasonable to always find someone who wants to buy your stuff, provided he can afford it.

bloodtide
2012-03-11, 08:20 PM
Whoever came up with the 50% value sell-price never worked for a used goods business. A shop *might* be able to sell used goods for 50% of the market value, if it's in good condition. Any higher it it better be in pristine condition, as in never used and no wear at all, or it has to have intrinsic/historical value of its own. Buying this stuff from random strangers wandering into town? 5%-25% of market value, depending on condition.

Dare I give the perfect example of a Used Goods Business:



http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4196/pawnstars1.jpg

Mike_G
2012-03-13, 07:38 PM
Swords and armor take a lot of effort to make. They weren't just left lying to rust after a battle. Do you thing that the Black Prince's men didn't help themselves to some of that expensive plate armor and fine swords of the French nobles after Agincout?

If the guy who runs the local General Store can buy a few slightly used ones and resell them, it makes a lot of sense. It's much more expensive to pay a smith for his hours of labor than to lowball the adventurer for his pile of looted weapons.

If you look at where the typical D&D campaign are -- the village wsurrounded by untamed wilds teeming with orcs and brigands-- as the wild frontier, people will always want weapons and armor. If you were out in the Wild West and shot it out with the James Gang and won, I think you'd carry a few revolvers and Winchesters back to town and sell them, and people who live in fear of bandits and Indian attacks would buy them. Or you could always sell a few repeating rifles to the Indians, who would rather shoot it out with the cavalry with a lever action rifle than a bow and arrow. Maybe the local barbarian chief wants to upgrade from stone axes to steel swords and will pay. No reason you can't sell to the outsiders.

Now, weapons from monsters of the wrong size would be hard to sell for more than scrap iron, and wooden weapons or weapons of less sophisticated groups would be low money items, but if I'm a minor lord way out in the boondocks, and my militia are all armed with pitchforks, maybe I want to buy a few slightly used shortwords or battleaxes.

Maybe the King will pay for Orc weapons as a bounty for getting them out of orc hands. Bloody Orc armor is even better, proving that there's one less Orc warrior out there.

Calzone
2012-03-13, 08:56 PM
Chainmail is very time consuming to make, drawing all the wire, cutting all the rings, knitting and welding them all together into a shirt.

Even ill-sized or damaged chainmail could be disassembled into large patches and relinked into a different size.

Plate armor was often sized pretty closely for the one who bought it, so really high end stuff would have to be reworked to fit someone else, if it could be resized at all.

Shields often took a lot of damage and may not have survived the fight in any usable shape at all. Spears and other shafted weapons may need rehandled, and arrows may need trued, reflected, or entire new shafts.

Also, on the legal side, the crown may have laws against sale or possession of certain weapons. A tax of half of salvaged goods, or a prohibition against blades longer than your forearm, for instance, could be fun to try to work around.

Mike_G
2012-03-13, 10:15 PM
It just seems that weaposna nd armor are expensive, and it's silly to leave that kind of thing to rust away on the battlefield. I don't think any army has ever made a point of not policing up the weapons of the defeated enemy.

Even more so when forging a new sword meant getting the iron delivered in a wagon and burning expensive charcoal and precious hours working it. Cleaning and sharpening a used blade and then selling it makes plenty of sense.

Recognizable stuff may be harder to sell. If you take out a group of Silver Flame officials and then try to fence their armor, you may have some explaining to do.

The "sell loot at 50%" thing is just for ease of calculation. Any merchant needs to make a profit, so he won't pay you full market price for something he plans to resell. It makes sense for the DM to adjust that based on if the stuff is damaged, like armor froma guy you Power Attacked for three times his total HP, or if you are trying to sell 1 hundred shoirtswords to a village of thirty farmers, or anything that can't easily be resold, like Kobold sized armor or Giant sized greatswords.

DigoDragon
2012-03-14, 09:07 AM
Location! Location! Location!

johnroth
2012-03-14, 11:04 AM
I think it just depends on the level of realism you want in your game. I, personally, would not want to deal with this sort of a headache. I think I would say "All crap sells for 40% market value unless it's magical, then it's 60%. No questions asked."

But another thing that sort of conerns me is that... are people literally taking every goddamn thing they come across? I mean, if you're taking 20 used pairs of studded leather armor from a group of Orcs that you killed... your party really took all the time to strip down every orc of their armor? Wouldn't that be time consuming and not really worth it? The people I play with would probably try and see if anything was magic, but anything mundane or common they'd just leave on the corpse.

I guess the idea of obsessively amassing everything that's not bolted down kind of bothers me. And I usually play characters who will collect every interesting or semi-useful trinkets they can find, or usually load up on super cheap stuff in the markets. But just stripping common bandits of everything on them that they may have of value... I mean, isn't that a job for grave robbers and the sort? Usually PC's are out on far more epic adventures... I think if I had PC's who were trying to grab everything in sight I'd probably inmpose some sort of penalty or consequence. Perhaps a group of powerful goblins catch sight of a party of people who go into dungeons and clear the whole place out, saving them the trouble. Why face the dangers of unknown beasts and traps when you can just swoop in right after a party of adventureres did the dirty work and steal it?

Gnoman
2012-03-15, 05:23 PM
At low levels, stripping down your enemies whenver possible is a huge amount of cash. Look at the sell price of your basic orc's gear:

Studded leather: 12 GP 5 SP
Falchion: 37 GP 5 SP
Javelin (if not expended): 5 SP

That's a total of 50 GP 5 SP per orc. As the orc is CR .5, to equal one 1st-level PC you "need" two orcs, so that's 101 gp per PC for a "balanced" endcounter.

Note that a 1st-level fighter only starts with 60-240 GP. It clearly makes sense that the PCs would strip their enemies whenever possible. As for not being worth much, the cheapest item on the list, the 1gp javelin, represents ten days labor (per DMG rules) for the "average" person. The falchion is worth more at full price than the average commoner makes in a year (assuming the world uses the standard 365.25 day year) and would take several weeks to make for the average blacksmith. Thus, the blacksmith will have several falchions to sell rather than one (if he even bothered to make them at all instead of tools), and can charge full price for them as they work perfectly well, and the demad will exceed the supply. (In other words, there are going to be more people who want to buy falchions than there are falchions to buy.) The used/new dictotomy only really exists due to mass production and increasingly complex items.

Saladman
2012-03-15, 05:50 PM
Has anyone ever suspected the realism and common sense of looting all the equipment you find from enemies, only to sell it to the nearest blacksmith?

Considering that actually happened consistently throughout history every time there was an opportunity, no, I don't suspect it at all. I'm pretty okay with it, especially if the group can knock it out quickly without making it the whole focus of the night.

Now, the point already made about 50% being too high bears emphasizing, especially for more common goods. That's a pretty arbitrary game abstraction made for the sake of playability, and you might well make it a d6 x 5% roll if you're worried about it.

That turns into small change only after the PCs start acquiring some power and wealth. And this is where the old school idea of 10 minute dungeon turns and wandering monster checks comes into play. It should take more than a few seconds to do a proper job, especially of taking armor off dead guys and checking boots for hidden coins. So call it a turn, let the players know there's a one in six (or whatever) chance they'll have company, and make that decision a part of play.

Another thing that actually happened but that we don't model is camp followers and local peasants coming out to loot the fallen. So here's an idea: non-hostile scavenger goblins who don't fight adventurers but follow them around stealthily at a distance and strip the bodies of the fallen, whichever side that is. I think for best effect play it straight at first and don't have the goblins ambush them; the players may be pissed off enough to take it to combat on their own initiative.

Autolykos
2012-03-17, 07:03 PM
Depends on the condition the stuff is in. If it's good enough that the players would still want to use it, I'd rule it's still *worth* half it's base price. But unless you're really good at bargaining, you'd get only half of what it's worth.
If it's really old, rusty and worn (bad enough that it will perform worse than listed in the equipment tables), it will only sell for scrap.
So the offers the blacksmith would make:

Perfect condition, almost never used: 50% base price
Ok condition, used in actual combat: 25% base price
Bad condition, nobody would use it with alternatives available: 50% material value

Mike_G
2012-03-17, 07:21 PM
The armor and arms of a defeated knight were often taken as winnings in tournies, and poorer knights could make a lkiving "selling" back the armor to a defeated foe.

Weapons and armor are expensive and time consuming items. Even todya, with mass proiduction and factories and easy transport of raw materials anto the maker and the goods to the market, weapons are still expensive, and woudln't just be left to rust after a fight. There's a big blasck market in wepaons, and if the adventurers are pretty muhc mercenaries, they'd be unlikely to pass up some valuable stuff for resale.

Encumbrance becomes an issue if we're talking about stripping the armor off a half dozen orcs, but somebody will want to have that kind of thing in a pre industrial society, and pay something for it.

Boci
2012-03-17, 07:24 PM
Now see, you keep making up facts about the scenario that would explicitly contradict the parameters I've set up and act as though it takes priority. Some might say that you broke the unwritten rules about arguing on the internet.

So in this scenario of yours, how many friends does this bandit have exactly who won’t be with him during the attack? As a general rule, if you have contacts and friends then you aren't a bandit. Few people are one by choice if we're going for realism. You also didn't answer the question of how the friends of the deceased will ID the equipment.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 07:50 PM
Bandits usually work in groups. Kill one, make an enemy of the rest of the bandit group. (and I did say kill a bandit, not an army of bandits)
Selling the bandit's weapons (a handaxe and a dagger maybe?) to a blacksmith, the weapons are in poor conditions and appear not to be made from the same weaponsmith who made your weapons, which the smith you're selling to can easily see, because he's a smith.
When you sell the weapons he might ask "say, where did you get this handaxe and dagger, they're not in as good shape as your sword". And you go "oh, there was this mean unclean man that jumped us on the road trying to rob us of stuff, we killed him in self defense and figured he wouldn't need those anymore".
Then the blacksmith looks nervous and cries out "no you killed one of them? They'll kill us all now for sure, I won't touch that, maybe they'll spare me".

How will they ID the equipment? Lets say the adventurers manage to persuade the blacksmith to purchase the weapons at a lowered rate.
And the blacksmith sell it to one of the other villagers.
Then one of the other bandits who happens to have reasonable relationships with the village happens to see one of the villagers carrying around the handaxe, he recognizes it, asks if he had killed his friend, the villager says "no, I bought it from the smith, please I didn't know".
The bandit goes to the smith and tells him "you deal with those who kill us?" and then proceeds to beat the crap out of the smith and break most of his stuff.

Oracle_Hunter
2012-03-17, 07:56 PM
How will they ID the equipment? Lets say the adventurers manage to persuade the blacksmith to purchase the weapons at a lowered rate.
And the blacksmith sell it to one of the other villagers.
Then one of the other bandits who happens to have reasonable relationships with the village happens to see one of the villagers carrying around the handaxe, he recognizes it, asks if he had killed his friend, the villager says "no, I bought it from the smith, please I didn't know".
The bandit goes to the smith and tells him "you deal with those who kill us?" and then proceeds to beat the crap out of the smith and break most of his stuff.
If this is the situation, then the town obviously needs some adventurers to murder all the bandits :smallamused:

If the bandits are murdering a town out of spite instead of for profit they are clearly more powerful than the local government as they have the spare resources to engage in unprofitable behavior for a minor slight. In general, banditry in a world of adventurers is a marginal occupation at best (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0158.html) so any "bandits" capable of beating their cows because someone killed one of their members are no longer bandits but the local lord.

Boci
2012-03-17, 08:06 PM
Bandits usually work in groups. Kill one, make an enemy of the rest of the bandit group. (and I did say kill a bandit, not an army of bandits)
Selling the bandit's weapons (a handaxe and a dagger maybe?) to a blacksmith, the weapons are in poor conditions and appear not to be made from the same weaponsmith who made your weapons, which the smith you're selling to can easily see, because he's a smith.
When you sell the weapons he might ask "say, where did you get this handaxe and dagger, they're not in as good shape as your sword". And you go "oh, there was this mean unclean man that jumped us on the road trying to rob us of stuff, we killed him in self defense and figured he wouldn't need those anymore".
Then the blacksmith looks nervous and cries out "no you killed one of them? They'll kill us all now for sure, I won't touch that, maybe they'll spare me".

How will they ID the equipment? Lets say the adventurers manage to persuade the blacksmith to purchase the weapons at a lowered rate.
And the blacksmith sell it to one of the other villagers.
Then one of the other bandits who happens to have reasonable relationships with the village happens to see one of the villagers carrying around the handaxe, he recognizes it, asks if he had killed his friend, the villager says "no, I bought it from the smith, please I didn't know".
The bandit goes to the smith and tells him "you deal with those who kill us?" and then proceeds to beat the crap out of the smith and break most of his stuff.

Now I see the source of confusion, you are treating bandits as a hybrid army/thieves guild, who apparently have memorized how each other’s equipment looks. Most people don't use them that way. No honour amongst thieves may not always be true, but amongst bandits it is. They are a grudging alliance of poorly trained men who only work together because of the primitive notion of safety in numbers. They may not kill each other, but the thought is usually something they consider from time to time. If of bandits group attacks you, you may have some run away, but no others will care for those that you just killed, and even the surviving bandits may not. If they do, well they are in no hurry to avenge the fallen, because they are cowards who prey on the weak, and you have just proven yourself to be strong.

The scenario you described fits more if the adventurers defeat some individuals of the local lord’s private army, or some other force with political backing.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 08:09 PM
There's a very blurred line between "local government", "rogue government", "local mafia" and "bandits".

Maybe the bandits don't always rob people, they only take tolls on outsiders who wish to travel the roads.
Maybe they don't take much from the local village, but expect to be treated nicely and get free mead and wenches at the tavern.
Maybe they're overall benevolent because they kill hostile outsiders who would do the village much greater harm?
Maybe they're from the village and killing the bandits would not be viewed positively by the villagers, and it's really the king 50 miles north who want to kill the bandits and finally begin taxing the villagers for "protecting them from the bandits" ;)

Things are not always so black and white. I always try to keep morality blurred and gray, and the setting gritty and dark. It makes it harder to justify killing "bad people".

Edit- if we take off the labels and just describe clearly what they are.

They are a group of men and women, some poorly trained with weapons, others are moderately trained, a few are good. The good ones are considered their leaders, but only indirectly. Most of them come from the local villages, they have family ties there, they have friends in the bandit camp, and friends outside of it. They do care about their friends and family, most of their prey are outsiders who they have no ties to.
They each etch their name into their stuff to make sure everyone knows who's stuff is who's.
Some live in a camp in the woods, some live in the villages around, some vary.

Boci
2012-03-17, 08:16 PM
There's a very blurred line between "local government", "rogue government", "local mafia" and "bandits".

The first three, yes, but bandit is very clearly the odd one out there.


Things are not always so black and white. I always try to keep morality blurred and gray, and the setting gritty and dark. It makes it harder to justify killing "bad people".

That was never being discussed. What was being discussed was the power of bandits to extract revenge for their own losses.



They are a group of men and women, some poorly trained with weapons, others are moderately trained, a few are good. The good ones are considered their leaders, but only indirectly. Most of them come from the local villages, they have family ties there,

Yeah but family ties tend to get strained when one turns to crime.


they have friends in the bandit camp, and friends outside of it.

Again not really. A bandit with connections can probably have a go at a classier life.



They do care about their friends and family, most of their prey are outsiders who they have no ties to.

Pretty good morals for a bandit.



They each etch their name into their stuff to make sure everyone knows who's stuff is who's.

No. Theres no reason to do this, its actually pretty hard, and it identifies them as a bandit. So no, this is not at all reasonable.


Some live in a camp in the woods, some live in the villages around, some vary.

And when the ones who live the the village wake up to find their brothers slaughtered is their first thought going to be:
A. vengance
B. Better lie low, I don't want to die

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 08:21 PM
For clarity, I did say the bandit's friends. Not all the bandits working in unison.
The friends of the bandit may think it be appropriate to beat the smith who dealt with the no-good outsiders who killed their friend and burn down his house. Unless the adventurers are gonna sit on a 24h watch to keep the smith safe (who for all they know is overreacting).

edit-

Yeah but family ties tend to get strained when one turns to crime.
Strained? Yes. Cut off? No.
You'd be surprised how far people are willing to put up with each other, especially family.


A bandit with connections can probably have a go at a classier life.
What would you call a person who occasionally lives with his parents (who are farmers), occasionally lives in the woods with his friends, and uses threat of violence to steal from people who use the roads? Not a bandit!?


Pretty good morals for a bandit.
As I said, things are not always so black and white.

Boci
2012-03-17, 08:25 PM
For clarity, I did say the bandit's friends. Not all the bandits working in unison.
The friends of the bandit may think it be appropriate to beat the smith who dealt with the no-good outsiders who killed their friend and burn down his house. Unless the adventurers are gonna sit on a 24h watch to keep the smith safe (who for all they know is overreacting).

How many friends are bandits going to have? And how many of those friends are going to feel a duty to avenge his death?


edit-

What would you call a person who occasionally lives with his parents (who are farmers), occasionally lives in the woods with his friends, and uses threat of violence to steal from people who use the roads? Not a bandit!?

He doesn't friends in any sense that is relevant to the PC who just barried his sword thrust and beheaded him with a reverse cut.


As I said, things are not always so black and white.

They are in this case. This a bandit. If he doesn't kill he takes at knife point the wealth of others, and in this scanrio has attacked the PCs. If you want to make that grey, you may be trying too hard.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 08:27 PM
It only takes a single one to ambush the smith and give him a good smacking.

Boci
2012-03-17, 08:30 PM
It only takes a single one to ambush the smith and give him a good smacking.

But why would they do that? They are breaking the law to avenge a dead friend. This is a level of friendship a life of banditry does not promote.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 08:31 PM
Says who? Not all bandits are the same. Not in my scenario. Keep in mind that I stipulated that they would in my first post. If you don't like the scenario, fine, but you can't change the facts ex post facto.

Dumbledore lives
2012-03-17, 08:32 PM
Just want to say that a chain shirt economy is not entirely unreasonable for 3.5. It's the best light armor, thus most PCs who can use it because it doesn't impair movement, and it's worth a nice even 100 gp, so could be the next step up from platinum pieces. Everyone uses chain shirts, it's the simplest armor to give to mooks so ends up as the most common.

Boci
2012-03-17, 08:39 PM
Says who? Not all bandits are the same. Not in my scenario. Keep in mind that I stipulated that they would in my first post. If you don't like the scenario, fine, but you can't change the facts ex post facto.

I'm just saying your example is contrived. You have taken a group of people who are hard up, ill trained and lacks resources both financially and politically, and are now claiming that killing one of them will serious consequences. This is especially confusing because you are advocated more realism in the selling of gear, whilst throwing aside the realism of a bandit's resources.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 08:45 PM
How much resources does it really take to beat up a blacksmith? If you ambush the guy you can do it unarmed. A single friend of the bandit could simply be wearing a padded leather armor and carry a greatclub, smack the blacksmith in the head with it, use the furnace to burn down the house, get out of dodge.
You don't need a cavalry to take revenge on the blacksmith.

Actually, it doesn't really matter that his friends may not care, it's enough for the blacksmith to think they'll take revenge.

Boci
2012-03-17, 08:50 PM
How much resources does it really take to beat up a blacksmith? If you ambush the guy you can do it unarmed. A single friend of the bandit could simply be wearing a padded leather armor and carry a greatclub, smack the blacksmith in the head with it, use the furnace to burn down the house, get out of dodge.
You don't need a cavalry to take revenge on the blacksmith.

Sure. Doing is easy. I could also beat up someone pretty easily. In both cases its what happens afterwards which highlights our lacks of resources.


Actually, it doesn't really matter that his friends may not care, it's enough for the blacksmith to think they'll take revenge.

But a blacksmith isn't going to fear the revenge of a dead bandit without reason.

Arbane
2012-03-17, 08:55 PM
Just want to say that a chain shirt economy is not entirely unreasonable for 3.5. It's the best light armor, thus most PCs who can use it because it doesn't impair movement, and it's worth a nice even 100 gp, so could be the next step up from platinum pieces.

It's a bit heavy compared to coinage, though.

I'd argue that someone identifying looted weapons/armor/other stuff would be a LOT easier in most fantasy settings than it is now - most items are hand-made after all, and could be distinctive enough that a friend might recognize Gork the Headsplitter's old cloak when they see it on sale...

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 08:57 PM
It's entirely possible, reasonable even, that the blacksmith doesn't know how much resources the bandits have or how loyal they are to each other.

Maybe they've beaten up people before who dared to defy them. They probably don't actually want to kill anyone, so beating them up and taking/breaking their stuff can do just fine with a little "consider this mercy, if you resist us again we'll kill you". If a gang beats you up and threatens to kill you, you BELIEVE them, even if they ARE bluffing.

It is NOT unreasonable for people to be afraid of bandits.

Boci
2012-03-17, 09:00 PM
It's entirely possible, reasonable even, that the blacksmith doesn't know how much resources the bandits have or how loyal they are to each other.

But why would they assume the worst without a reason to? Surely most common folk will assume that after a common bandit is killed thats the last of them.


Maybe they've beaten up people before who dared to defy them. They probably don't actually want to kill anyone, so beating them up and taking/breaking their stuff can do just fine with a little "consider this mercy, if you resist us again we'll kill you".

If they can do that why afre they bandits?


It is NOT unreasonable for people to be afraid of bandits.

No, but its stretching it to have people being scared of a dead bandit.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 09:06 PM
But why would they assume the worst without a reason to? Surely most common folk will assume that after a common bandit is killed thats the last of them.
The way I see it, if you kill a gang member, the other gang members won't ignore that, they won't consider "well, our guy started it", they'll take it personally and they'll want to show who's in charge. The same rules apply to a bandit gang.
Even if they don't care for the guy they still need to show that it's not acceptable to kill any of them, and they'll have no problems showing this by attacking those who can't defend themselves.


If they can do that why afre they bandits?
If they can beat up people and steal their things, why are they bandits? Um is this a serious question?


No, but its stretching it to have people being scared of a dead bandit.
Strawman, it's not the dead bandit they are afraid of.

Kuma Kode
2012-03-17, 09:17 PM
It is NOT unreasonable for people to be afraid of bandits. It IS unreasonable for fear of bandits to dictate the economy. It's certainly plausible for a blacksmith or whoever to not want to sell a bandit's weapon as-is (ignoring the fact that simply the raw materials themselves would save him headache). However, not everyone wants to determine the rational and irrational fears, beliefs, socioeconomic position, reaction to gore, and trust level of every merchant. Sometimes, you just want to sell stuff offscreen between adventures. 50% is a good approximation. Some stuff is in good condition, some stuff is in bad, some places have more need for certain weapons or armor than others, and some places need raw materials. It'll balance out somewhere, to some overall percentage of the item's value in your world. It might as well be the same number for ease of bookkeeping, modified of course by any appraise or barter skill you desire.

Or reduce the baseline to 40% or even 25% depending on your world and how easily resources are discovered.

Boci
2012-03-17, 09:18 PM
The same rules apply to a bandit gang.

No it isn't. Gangs are often formed because the indeviduals crave discipline. This does not apply to bandits.


If they can beat up people and steal their things, why are they bandits? Um is this a serious question?

If they can do that in the bounds of a settlement, why aren't they controlling the settlement?


Strawman, it's not the dead bandit they are afraid of.

Figure of speech actually. If must be exact "Having them being scared of selling a dead man's gear is pushing it".

Mike_G
2012-03-17, 09:46 PM
In a medieval-type society, bandits are outcast and any man can kill them on sight. The whole term "outlaw" means that they are outside the law, and have no legal standing.

A bunch of bandits who terrorize the village will probably be hated by the villagers. If they are a just nuisance, like a bunch of goblins or orcs who raid settlements, they are already the enemy and nobody will care if you resell the gear. If they are a real threat, like a gang that holds the village hostage through fear, that's one hell of a plot hook.

The PC's gank old Stabbity Joe the bandit. They go to sell his stuff in town. The Smith recoils in horror. "That be Stabbity Joe's X on the hilt (since he never learned to write). His gang will kill me if they catch me tryin' to sell it!"

Any PC worth his iron rations will immediatley see this as a chance to go bandit hunting for a big reward from the villagers. Loot, gratitude from innkeepers with food, wenches no longer afraid to walk the streets with their charms, the no longer fearful smith who can give a discount on a gear upgrade, and maybe an offical reward from the local lord for wiping out such an entrenched criminal organization.

This is what low level PCs do. Go all Seven Samurai on the local brigands. Most of the average bandit's wealth will be in his armor and weapons.

Hell, most of the average PCs wealth will be in gear, not gps.

Mastikator
2012-03-17, 10:49 PM
It IS unreasonable for fear of bandits to dictate the economy.
I did not EVER say it should dictate the economy. Only that it should affect the economy. Especially when dealing with things taken from the bandits.


It's certainly plausible for a blacksmith or whoever to not want to sell a bandit's weapon as-is (ignoring the fact that simply the raw materials themselves would save him headache). Sure, the blacksmith can buy the weapons for the price of the raw materials. But then we're looking at 10% at most of the equipment price, not 50%. Which I kind of suggested.


Sometimes, you just want to sell stuff offscreen between adventures. 50% is a good approximation. Right, if how you acquired the items is not an issue then selling them isn't either, then frankly I think 50% is low. 80% is a better number. But selling loot stolen from a dead person is an issue.


Some stuff is in good condition, some stuff is in bad, some places have more need for certain weapons or armor than others, and some places need raw materials. It'll balance out somewhere, to some overall percentage of the item's value in your world. It might as well be the same number for ease of bookkeeping, modified of course by any appraise or barter skill you desire.
There's a huge opportunity cost for story for a gain in time. Unless you're selling various stuff in large bulk then I'd rather not do it this way. I think trade should be personal.




No it isn't. Gangs are often formed because the indeviduals crave discipline. This does not apply to bandits.The reason why they are formed is not the issue. Total strawman.


If they can do that in the bounds of a settlement, why aren't they controlling the settlement? What do you mean "control the settlement"?
Building some kind of townhall in the center of the village to dictate orders? That would leave the bandits exposed. There's a difference between ambushing people, taking their stuff and beating them up and actually controlling a settlement. Further, to control a settlement they also need to be somewhat organized themselves first, but you've said previously that this is something they explicitly aren't. So I don't even know what you're saying here.


Figure of speech actually. If must be exact "Having them being scared of selling a dead man's gear is pushing it". It's more complicated than that, which I have been arguing the entire time. Are you not understanding this?
If the smith is caught selling the bandit's weapons then he is caught associating with the bandit's killers. These killers have defied the bandits and angered the bandits friends.

Kuma Kode
2012-03-17, 11:21 PM
I did not EVER say it should dictate the economy. Only that it should affect the economy. Especially when dealing with things taken from the bandits. You do seem to be arguing the bandit example a lot, is all.


Sure, the blacksmith can buy the weapons for the price of the raw materials. But then we're looking at 10% at most of the equipment price, not 50%. Which I kind of suggested.

Right, if how you acquired the items is not an issue then selling them isn't either, then frankly I think 50% is low. 80% is a better number. But selling loot stolen from a dead person is an issue.

10% works for some but not others, you'd need to come up with a better mechanism than 10% so that rapiers don't generate as much raw materials as greataxes. But if selling some items should make an issue, and you'd only get 10% for them, but other stuff in good condition should be 80%.... where does this even out? In the 40% to 50% range. Why not just apply a flat number to everything unless otherwise noted?


There's a huge opportunity cost for story for a gain in time. Unless you're selling various stuff in large bulk then I'd rather not do it this way. I think trade should be personal. I wouldn't exactly call it "huge." If I want selling an item to spark a story, I'll make it one, I don't want to try to turn every item into roleplay scene. In a low combat game or a merchant game, that could be good, but in a "standard" D&D game that focuses on exploration and dungeon crawling, trying to make a story out of every item or even a quarter of them is going to make it all feel very contrived rather quickly, unless your group is really into stories behind their gear.

I'm not saying your style is wrong, I'm simply saying that unless you want a story to come from selling an item, there's nothing wrong with just applying a flat number to the junk so you can move on. You can get the "bandit revenge" stories while still avoiding pricing every item individually for each possible merchant. Sure, it's not the most realistic solution, but neither is the GP system we're discussing.

Boci
2012-03-17, 11:23 PM
The reason why they are formed is not the issue. Total strawman.

It is highly relevant. A group formed for a want of discipline is going to have a far higher level of loyalty.


What do you mean "control the settlement"?
Building some kind of townhall in the center of the village to dictate orders? That would leave the bandits exposed. There's a difference between ambushing people, taking their stuff and beating them up and actually controlling a settlement. Further, to control a settlement they also need to be somewhat organized themselves first, but you've said previously that this is something they explicitly aren't. So I don't even know what you're saying here.

If bandits are brave enough to beat up villagers within the bound of the settlement then they must control it on some level.


It's more complicated than that, which I have been arguing the entire time. Are you not understanding this?
If the smith is caught selling the bandit's weapons then he is caught associating with the bandit's killers. These killers have defied the bandits and angered the bandits friends.

Its not complicated. The only way bandits will avenge their dead is if they can do so without any difficulty. A blacksmith in a village should be safe from them.

Mastikator
2012-03-18, 03:37 PM
I think you underestimate how easy it really is to walk into a village in the middle of the night, break into someones home, beat them up and leave. It's not like there are laser turrets with face recognition in a fantasy setting. Farmers can't afford to keep guards posted all over the place all the time, and even then the guards can't see in the darkness, because it is VERY dark at night outside of a modern civilized city.

These are the bare minimum resources a bandit would need to accomplish the task of revenge:
1) nothing.. he can sneak into the village at night, beat up the smith with his bare hands.
Being able to ambush someone doesn't grant you control. EVERYONE can do this.
You can do this. You can hide a knife behind your back, knock on your neighbors door, stab them when they open. There's nothing special about being able to attack other people.


edit-


You do seem to be arguing the bandit example a lot, is all.No, I brought it up once to illustrate that the sales cost should be contextual, and the source of your loot very much DOES matter. So far, 3 other people have been trying to inject contradictory facts into the scenario to contradict my conclusion that it can very easily be contextual.


where does this even out? You should only try to even it out when you're dealing with loot in large bulk taken from multiple sources and sold to multiple sources. Not when selling one or two things to a single buyer.


I wouldn't exactly call it "huge." If I want selling an item to spark a story, I'll make it one, I don't want to try to turn every item into roleplay scene Why can't every moment be a roleplaying scene? Does roleplaying need to serve any other purpose than roleplaying? "turning" a selling scene into a roleplaying scene makes it feel more personal and helps you immerse yourself better into the game.


Sure, it's not the most realistic solution, but neither is the GP system we're discussing. I'm adding realism and making each event matter. The "GP system" is only unrealistic because it IS streamlined, which is what I am saying it shouldn't be.

Jeff the Green
2012-03-18, 04:12 PM
I think you underestimate how easy it really is to walk into a village in the middle of the night, break into someones home, beat them up and leave. It's not like there are laser turrets with face recognition in a fantasy setting. Farmers can't afford to keep guards posted all over the place all the time, and even then the guards can't see in the darkness, because it is VERY dark at night outside of a modern civilized city.

These are the bare minimum resources a bandit would need to accomplish the task of revenge:
1) nothing.. he can sneak into the village at night, beat up the smith with his bare hands.


:smallconfused: Have you ever seen a blacksmith? The guys are frickin' massive and generally have, at the very least, a very heavy hammer on hand. Unless they have enough power to be a plot hook, bandits are not going to mess with the blacksmith for the same reason you don't stick up a gun shop.

Zale
2012-03-18, 05:09 PM
I think you underestimate how easy it really is to walk into a village in the middle of the night, break into someones home, beat them up and leave. It's not like there are laser turrets with face recognition in a fantasy setting. Farmers can't afford to keep guards posted all over the place all the time, and even then the guards can't see in the darkness, because it is VERY dark at night outside of a modern civilized city.


"Oh, Mighty Adventurers! Please save our village from the bandit terror!"

Instant Plot-Hook.

Bandit Status: Endangered.

Otherwise, I really doubt that the big, strong, healthy, well-fed blacksmith will be more scared of the ill-equipped, hungry, unhealthy, outcast bandits than the strong, healthy, possibly magical professional murderers adventurers.


Selling the bandit's weapons (a handaxe and a dagger maybe?) to a blacksmith, the weapons are in poor conditions and appear not to be made from the same weaponsmith who made your weapons, which the smith you're selling to can easily see, because he's a smith.
When you sell the weapons he might ask "say, where did you get this handaxe and dagger, they're not in as good shape as your sword".

"This stuff? I looted it off the cooling bodies of bandits that I personally killed. Is that a problem?"

Traab
2012-03-18, 05:19 PM
I really dont see the correlation here. An adventurer kills off lets say 75% of a band of bandits, loots their bodies and heads back to town. He sells off all his vendor trash loot, everything he doesnt need, which could include far more than just armor and weapons. What purpose does beating up the merchants in the nearest town serve other than to get another group of adventurers called in to finish wiping you out? You already lost the majority of your group to adventurers, do you really want to give them a reason to come BACK?!

Mastikator
2012-03-18, 05:23 PM
I said "killed a bandit", not "75% of the entire bandit camp". You're doing it again.

Traab
2012-03-18, 05:29 PM
I said "killed a bandit", not "75% of the entire bandit camp". You're doing it again.

Why would an adventurer kill just one bandit? Even if he did, why would he waste time going to the nearest town just to sell a broad sword hole filled leather jerkin? Chances are he is on his way to somewhere else so he will jam it in his packs and keep on moving. If the bandit is out there on his own, who is going to tell all his apparent friends who killed him and what he did with all the bandits stuff? If there was more than one bandit there why didnt they also attack? If he was such a good friend I dont think id let him run off screaming to his doom and swear vengeance on anyone who dares to buy his stuff. The entire scenario makes little to no sense.

Mike_G
2012-03-18, 06:00 PM
Can we let this one go?

Yes, if you try to sell a bloodstained fedora and a Tommy gun with "property of little Bobby Capone" on it, the guy at the pawn shop might think twice.

The basic low level adventuring party's default mission is "save the town from the bandit/goblin/orc menace." Most of the loot they take will be in the form of used gear and freed captives. "That bandit had buddies" is a plot hook, not a problem. The single bandit was an appetizer.

The connected bandit whose ninja buddies have sworn a blood oath of vengeance aside, who has a problem with looting and selling the gear of defeated foes as a source of adventurer income?

Kuma Kode
2012-03-18, 06:01 PM
No, I brought it up once to illustrate that the sales cost should be contextual, and the source of your loot very much DOES matter. So far, 3 other people have been trying to inject contradictory facts into the scenario to contradict my conclusion that it can very easily be contextual.

You should only try to even it out when you're dealing with loot in large bulk taken from multiple sources and sold to multiple sources. Not when selling one or two things to a single buyer.

Why can't every moment be a roleplaying scene? Does roleplaying need to serve any other purpose than roleplaying? "turning" a selling scene into a roleplaying scene makes it feel more personal and helps you immerse yourself better into the game.

I'm adding realism and making each event matter. The "GP system" is only unrealistic because it IS streamlined, which is what I am saying it shouldn't be. I don't really think there's a "should" here to be had. Why SHOULD I roleplay selling every item? Why SHOULD I not streamline it? Everything is inevitably streamlined, even physics simulations run on supercomputers are streamlined. The difference is where the simplification ends, and that depends on the gaming group and the setting.

If my group hates dealing with equipment and wants to streamline the process, I'm sure you're not saying I should roleplay it anyway. Roleplaying minor scenes is good and can help with immersion, but doing it too often will cause the plot to suffer for the same reason books and movies don't show every meal and chit chat during a three hour drive to the next plot location.

If it fits your setting to have blacksmiths be unwilling to buy armor because it's covered in human blood and your group enjoys roleplaying that for all their items they plan on selling, that's great. But I'm sure you're not trying to say groups who don't should.

Back to the original question (not that this bandit side thing isn't interesting), It probably depends on the merchant as to how they react to blood and gore. A blacksmith seeing a bloody sword? THAT'S WHAT THE SWORD IS FOR. He makes weapons to kill people. He shouldn't be surprised if this weapon was used to kill someone. We have a social stigma against killing others, even in self-defense, where that doesn't really apply in most fantasy settings I see.

The areas outside of town are essentially lawless. If someone tries to kill you, you try to kill them right back. You can usually challenge a man to a duel and kill him because he insulted your wife in these settings. People killing other people was still fairly tragic, but not so unheard of that weapon makers would refuse to buy weapons that were used for their intended purpose, especially with materials being so much more cost-intensive.

Now, depending on the setting, it may be much more regulated, but if you're off killing bandits in a setting where killing bandits will make you either scrutinized or otherwise unable to actually sell the gear you got from them, you might need to sit back and analyze that a bit to make sure the plot and the setting are going together the way you want.

And it's not to say that you can't find a buyer for that kind of thing. The local lord or militia wouldn't mind a usable piece of armor that also proves there's one less bandit to worry about. Hell, if there's a reward for the bandits you could turn that into a much more profitable means of turning in your bounty.

hamishspence
2012-03-18, 06:04 PM
DMG2 does say that if the bandits do surrender, in most societies "local law" will demand that the surrendered bandit be turned over to it, rather than the players being permitted to mete out their own punishments.

So you might have a society that puts bandits to work as indentured labor, rather than simply executing them.

However, it also states that the PCs are entitled to keep all property on the persons of the bandits.

So it would be reasonable to strip the bandits of everything valuable, then sell it.

Mastikator
2012-03-18, 06:21 PM
Yes, if you try to sell a bloodstained fedora and a Tommy gun with "property of little Bobby Capone" on it, the guy at the pawn shop might think twice.

Thank you, for talking about the actual topic rather than make up red herrings about trivial irrelevant details. You've made the case better than I so I'll let it go.

Boci
2012-03-18, 07:51 PM
Thank you, for talking about the actual topic rather than make up red herrings about trivial irrelevant details. You've made the case better than I so I'll let it go.

No it doesn't, because that examples relies on the bandit name tagging his gear and the PCs no washing the blood off the weapon before trying to sell it.

Zale
2012-03-18, 08:39 PM
No it doesn't, because that examples relies on the bandit name tagging his gear and the PCs no washing the blood off the weapon before trying to sell it.

Which doesn't make much sense, considering if they're greedy enough to sell everything that's not nailed down then you'd think they'd at least make the stuff a little presentable.

I mean, it makes a little sense to try and make whatever you're selling look slightly better than it is, in hopes of a better price.

Slipperychicken
2012-03-18, 08:41 PM
No it doesn't, because that examples relies on the bandit name tagging his gear and the PCs no washing the blood off the weapon before trying to sell it.

Washing the blood off sounds like one of the things I would rather have integrated into the "we sell all the loot" action, rather than having to repeat it every time. Of course, I'm the type who rolls his eyes every time he has to RP with a merchant (Seriously, I'm here to kill dragons, not agonize over transactions with every damn merchant in town).

Mastikator
2012-03-18, 08:49 PM
No it doesn't, because that examples relies on the bandit name tagging his gear and the PCs no washing the blood off the weapon before trying to sell it.

So the price of things should not be contextual because bandits don't recognize their gear?
This is why we can't discuss things. You're focusing on the example, and not the issue that the example was for.

Lets change the example. It's not a bandit. It's a dragon, an evil big fire breathing greedy virgin devouring dragon.
You go into its lair when its not there, take a truckload of treasure, use the treasure to buy a mighty castle (or something else).
You don't think that nobody would ever touch that treasure until after you kill the dragon? A feat you may not actually be capable of?

Traab
2012-03-18, 08:58 PM
So the price of things should not be contextual because bandits don't recognize their gear?
This is why we can't discuss things. You're focusing on the example, and not the issue that the example was for.

Because the issue is silly! What bandit aside from perhaps the leader, is likely to have gear that is anything but generic and uniformly average or less? Like going to gym class and they set out a rack of basketballs, one is much the same as another, and if I took a few of them and tossed them into another pile of standard basketballs, you wouldnt be able to pick yours out of the pile, or even know its there. Same thing here. Unless these bandits are in the habit of embroidering their name on the back of their jerkins, I dont see how they will be able to tell that their best friend frankies jerkin is now on the pile of other second hand armor that merchant is selling.

Now, that being said, i could understand if the scenario was, we took all the bandit chiefs gear and sold it, and since he was the chief his gear was at least recognizably special, even if still not all that amazing, that a bandit might recognize it for sale in a store. But even then I dont forsee them doing anything but robbing the shop when he goes to bed that night. The entire premise of, "You adventurers killed one of us, now for revenge we will beat up any merchant who buys our gear from you!" is just far fetched and not worth merchants refusing to buy looted gear over.

Ok, THIS is an example that makes some sense. An angry dragon would likely do its best to track you and its treasure down. I could argue semantics about how its unlikely the adventurers would get far enough away to find a town because noone in their right mind would want to live very close to a dragon, so said dragon would likely track them down before they could even try, but I wont. Lets deal with your example. I think personally, that the adventurers wouldnt be stupid enough to say, "We stole all this from a dragon while it was gone. Its still alive and presumably hunting us down while getting more and more pissed off as time passes, what am I bid for this kiss of death treasure?" So chances are, they would sell the treasure, and its entirely possible the dragon would later reach the town and burn it to the ground looking for the thieves.

Mike_G
2012-03-18, 09:04 PM
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay upthread I made a point of saying that easily recognizable stuff -- like paladin armor with Order of the Silver Flame devices all over it -- might be hard to fence.

The original question was "is it realistic to loot weapons and armor and lug them back to town to sell?" The answer is "Duh. Of course it is. That's what armies and mercenary bands have always done. "

The issue of friends of the late owner became horribly derailed by the bandit example. Do I think it's likely that selling a low level brigand's rusty sword will come back to haunt you? No. But the concept of the former owner's friends or legitimate authority tracking down the buyers could affect the price of items.

To use a real world example, you can always sell a used gun. Legitimate guns, with all the paperwork, you can sell at a legitmate shop, for a reasonable price. Hot guns you can sell on the street in the black market, at a bit more risk, or maybe the shop owner will buy it for black market resale, but he's taking a risk, so he wants more profit, so he lowballs you on the price. But if it's an NYPD issue gun, you'll have to sell to a shadier customer, probably for less money.

So, yeah, context can affect price, given how much detail you want to put in. If you just want to get back to the dungeon, "50% and call it a day" works fine, and doesn't strain credulity all that much.

Boci
2012-03-18, 09:45 PM
So the price of things should not be contextual because bandits don't recognize their gear?
This is why we can't discuss things. You're focusing on the example, and not the issue that the example was for.

I already said the example made sense if you replace bandits with soldiers of the local land lord. You were the one insisting on the bandits.

bloodtide
2012-03-18, 10:14 PM
Lets change the example. It's not a bandit. It's a dragon, an evil big fire breathing greedy virgin devouring dragon.
You go into its lair when its not there, take a truckload of treasure, use the treasure to buy a mighty castle (or something else).
You don't think that nobody would ever touch that treasure until after you kill the dragon? A feat you may not actually be capable of?

No one cares much where treasure or items come from, and very few people can even afford too even if they wanted too. The simple fact of pre-industrial life is that items are rare. It takes a long time to make even simple items and not everyone has the skill to do so. (If you'd like a nice, real world example go find yourself a stick and make a wooden spoon out of it) And high quality items are even more rare, almost all items are less 'barley useable'.

And in pre-industrial times, people had a different view of items. It was very, very common to do such things like loot the dead. If you came upon a dead body out in the woods....you looted it. You simply could not afford to leave useable items just laying around.

And the whole bandit or dragon examples do come from the tiny world examples (like Dragonlance) where 'everyone knows everything' and the game world is about a mile across.

Arbane
2012-03-18, 11:10 PM
Washing the blood off sounds like one of the things I would rather have integrated into the "we sell all the loot" action, rather than having to repeat it every time. Of course, I'm the type who rolls his eyes every time he has to RP with a merchant (Seriously, I'm here to kill dragons, not agonize over transactions with every damn merchant in town).

Pretty much this.

That said, I can think of one epic fantasy adventure based on a group of adventurers trying to sell a piece of loot that turned out to be a little too hot for them: Glen Cook's The Silver Spike. But that was a fairly unusual case.

Knaight
2012-03-18, 11:44 PM
Because the issue is silly! What bandit aside from perhaps the leader, is likely to have gear that is anything but generic and uniformly average or less? Like going to gym class and they set out a rack of basketballs, one is much the same as another, and if I took a few of them and tossed them into another pile of standard basketballs, you wouldnt be able to pick yours out of the pile, or even know its there. Same thing here. Unless these bandits are in the habit of embroidering their name on the back of their jerkins, I dont see how they will be able to tell that their best friend frankies jerkin is now on the pile of other second hand armor that merchant is selling.

With a few notable exceptions (e.g. massive industrial complexes in bronze age China, armor production in later Rome) mass produced objects are very much a modern thing. All the bandits are likely to have gear with its unique traits - at the very least the wear and tear is going to be different. This doesn't particularly matter, as weapons and armor are going to see some repair anyways. Moreover, the damaged stuff is liable to end up reforged, and I can guarantee that nobody will recognize the metal in their old ax or whatever after it has been made into a farm implement.

Wardog
2012-04-05, 06:19 AM
And in pre-industrial times, people had a different view of items. It was very, very common to do such things like loot the dead.

I once read a biography of a British soldier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Randell_Harris) who had served in the Napoleonic Wars, based on his own memoires.

At one point he described how he (and the other soldiers) were picking over the bodies of enemies that had been killed in a battle, when one of their officers spotted them.

Can you guess what the officer said?

"Stop that! That's disgracful behaviour"? No.
"That stuffs too good for common troops like you - hand it over"? No.

The officer's respons was "Try cutting open the fabric of their coats - they often keep gold coins hidden inside".