D&D Economy and Professions

[Promethean]

Has anyone run through some of the numbers of D&D 3.5's economy and noticed that it's not viable?

Numbers of wizards and sorcerers being in a bit of flux from book to book as it is, the fact that magic academies Do exist in most of the settings seems impossible. With how expensive magical components and reagents are made out to be Vs how much money "Profession" jobs make, only the Kings high wizard or the mage partying with the Epic heroes of the land would be able to Afford to cast spells. There'd Be no market for magic items, as the only ones buying them are large noble families(who could afford 1 or 2) or the occasional epic hero(and for setting with more then one "Adventuring Party", there can't be enough "Loot" in the world to support more than a handful without inflating the gold coin so much it becomes worthless).

On another end we have the general guidelines for what levels people are in a population, and what classes are available to them. It really goes without saying that NPC classes are crap, and in a world with dragons and mind flayers, having more monsters in a country than are encountered by a single "Adventuring Party on an Epic Quest" begs the question why the human, elves, dwarves, and what have you aren't all dead.

So does anyone know if someone has gone through and actually priced out a viable economy/level range for the NPC side of D&D?

[Cosi]

Well, yes, D&D is based off the economic model of the middle ages. Everything is in a depression all the time, the economy is based on barter, and the vast majority of everyone has any wealth above survival taken from them by force. Also instead of the most deadly predators being wolves or bears, there are wyverns and **** flying around that could plausibly eat people at a rate of like one per week. Also there are necromancers and apocalypse cultists who would like to sacrifice you to horrifying monsters.

As far as I know, there isn't a complete writeup for making D&D's economies and ecologies work. Such a thing would be quite difficult to fit to an existing system in any case, and would require you to make fairly strong assumptions about setting.

[Silva Stormrage]

Yes it's commonly accepted that the general economics of D&D don't function. Frankly for good reason.

Economists can't even model OUR current economy with anything resembling perfect accuracy. Trying to model an economy with magic involved would require at least 500 pages of formulas and equations and it would still miss major variables and be unrealistic.

At the end of the day D&D's economy functions closely enough to how an economy functions that it works for the game and thats all it needs to do. As a DM you can adjust the rules as needed if PC's try to abuse it (Wall of salt comes to mind)


In general though I think you are underestimating the actual income of kings and such. Lets assume a standard D&D nation in fantasy medieval Europe. For ease of math lets assume half the population are skilled workers (Blacksmiths, chefs, standard expert jobs) and half don't work (Mothers, children, elderly). Realistically a higher percent would work but some of those workforce would be in lower paying jobs so it's roughly even.

Lets see how money that nation "earns" via profession skills and such. A level 2-3 expert (Average skilled worker) is going to have a profession check of.
10 (Taking 10)
+1 (Ability score)
+3 (Skill Focus)
+2 (Masterwork Tool)
+2 (Other feat bonus)
+6 (Ranks)
=24.
Meaning each individual working makes ~12 GP per week. 52 weeks in a year means 624 GP per year per individual working. These individual families can actually quite realistically purchase 25 gp healing potions in emergencies. Even perhaps save up for cheap items that might make their work easier like a Talisman of the disk. Or maybe they could pool money with coworkers for a 2k collar of perpetual attendance. Continual Light is also well within purchasing power of these middle class families.

England had at least 5 million people during the Medieval era according to a quick google search, and it was fairly on the low end for population compared to France and other powers during that time.

Now lets assume the government puts out a 10% flat tax rate which seems reasonable for that time period. Thats 156,000,000gp per year. Sure a lot of that goes into paying soldiers, accountants, bureaucracy and the like. But magic can make those things a lot cheaper. Why spend a lot of money on irrigation systems when you can purchase a decanter of endless water. If there is a famine you could purchase food from your neighbors or simply hire a local druid or divine spellcaster to cast "Grow plants" a couple times. Soldiers are a lot less valuable then spell casters who will thus get large payments but can cover ground and enforce legal matters much more effectively then common guards.

Is the average farmer going to town to buy a +1 scythe to better cut down their produce? Of course not, the system never said thats what happened anyway. But the economy is fairly decent as long as you don't look too closely or expect it to model everything with perfect accuracy. And you wouldn't want that system anyway.


Edit: Also the NPC classes aren't that bad when built right. See: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?232822-The-Commoner-Handbook for some examples.

Regular non spellcasting monsters below CR 10 should not be able to threaten a city that has anywhere near competent guards. Archers plus a single decent bard playing on war drums means even dragons die if they just casually approach and try to light a city on fire.

[Venger]

Yes, the numbers have been run. This thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?206240-quot-Opulance-I-has-it-quot-A-look-into-NPC-wealth) provides a good overview of the math involved.

[Fizban]

There are number of different ways to run the numbers (profession checks, businesses, affiliations, organizations, direct crafting and selling, etc), but the same result usually holds true: once you stop assuming the 1sp/day laborer is the majority of the population and use any of the money making methods, commoners makes plenty of money.


Has anyone run through some of the numbers of D&D 3.5's economy and noticed that it's not viable?

Numbers of wizards and sorcerers being in a bit of flux from book to book as it is, the fact that magic academies Do exist in most of the settings seems impossible. With how expensive magical components and reagents are made out to be Vs how much money "Profession" jobs make, only the Kings high wizard or the mage partying with the Epic heroes of the land would be able to Afford to cast spells.
The only class that actually requires expensive stuff to cast is the wizard, and wizards get free spells on level up. Even if they didn't, the highest level spells are only 9*2*100= 1,800gp, which is roughly the price of a tiny peasant's hovel. So a high level wizard is worth a lot of land and a low level wizard is worth more land than a low level something else, and? The problem here is the assumption that "magic academies" exist, and what "magic academy" means.

There'd Be no market for magic items, as the only ones buying them are large noble families(who could afford 1 or 2) or the occasional epic hero(and for setting with more then one "Adventuring Party", there can't be enough "Loot" in the world to support more than a handful without inflating the gold coin so much it becomes worthless).
Indeed, there should be no market for magic items, but nothing prevents the DM from actually enforcing that reality of the world. Just because the PCs can get things of up to Xgp in a city doesn't mean they can get them off the shelf right now. Furthermore, the assumption of most settings really is that there are tons of adventurers going out, looting stuff, and then eventually dying and having their stuff looted. Regarding inflation, uh, the ready cash of a big city is ludicrous even compared to high level party standard, and there's no reason you need to actually run any of those transactions in gold coins if you think that destabilizes something.


On another end we have the general guidelines for what levels people are in a population, and what classes are available to them. It really goes without saying that NPC classes are crap, and in a world with dragons and mind flayers, having more monsters in a country than are encountered by a single "Adventuring Party on an Epic Quest" begs the question why the human, elves, dwarves, and what have you aren't all dead.

So does anyone know if someone has gone through and actually priced out a viable economy/level range for the NPC side of D&D?
Well when you speak of actually doing the math, it turns out that between the hundreds or thousands of 1HD canon fodder and the generated higher level NPCs, any settlement of significant size is actually monster proof. Unless you're assuming the monsters also come in the hundreds or thousands, but the statblocks have organizational data in them which simply don't support that, nor do the maths on feeding such a population (there was a thread on that). So complaining about a city of mindflayers being able to wipe out all of humanity is on the complainer for instituting a city of mindflayers (and that includes any setting foolish enough to do so).

[Promethean]

... So a high level wizard is worth a lot of land and a low level wizard is worth more land than a low level something else, and? The problem here is the assumption that "magic academies" exist, and what "magic academy" means.

...So complaining about a city of mindflayers being able to wipe out all of humanity is on the complainer for instituting a city of mindflayers (and that includes any setting foolish enough to do so).

That's my problem though. Many of the default settings, like say forgotten realms, make those assumptions by default and exasperate the problem by assuming there are multiple epic level spell-casters(and associated threats to said casters) active in setting. Not even touching the problem of things still being alive on the same plane as 2 epics having a duel, the fact they exist at all is a bit strange.

I would like to contest the "Army of a thousand 1 HD soldiers" arguement with the fact that a single adult red dragon would kill all of them easily. Even extending the army to the range of 1-5 levels(still standard warriors, commoners, and experts) wouldn't seem to help, as the ones not running in terror would be unable to hit it's 29 AC and would die from it's 12d10 breath weapon. Dragons would eat towns like smaug from the hobbit(but without the lucky black arrow doing anything more than pissing them off). Even if pushing the dragon button is going overboard, D&D ecology of aberrations, magical beasts, undead, and Infernal outsiders makes the argument of humans living passed the stone age harder to believe.

[unseenmage]

...

I would like to contest the "Army of a thousand 1 HD soldiers" arguement with the fact that a single adult red dragon would kill all of them easily. Even extending the army to the range of 1-5 levels(still standard warriors, commoners, and experts) wouldn't seem to help, as the ones not running in terror would be unable to hit it's 29 AC and would die from it's 12d10 breath weapon. Dragons would eat towns like smaug from the hobbit(but without the lucky black arrow doing anything more than pissing them off). Even if pushing the dragon button is going overboard, D&D ecology of aberrations, magical beasts, undead, and Infernal outsiders makes the argument of humans living passed the stone age harder to believe.

Have you ever encountered the phrase, 'crit fishing'? After enough rolls even a lowly commoner is guaranteed to hit on a natural 20. And succeed on as saving throw on a 20 too.

I'm pretty sure this is why outnumbering practically any opponent in 3.x is so important.

[Promethean]

Have you ever encountered the phrase, 'crit fishing'? After enough rolls even a lowly commoner is guaranteed to hit on a natural 20. And succeed on as saving throw on a 20 too.

I'm pretty sure this is why outnumbering practically any opponent in 3.x is so important.

Don't crits only count if you "Confirm" the roll against the opponents AC? Though some things like masterwork item enhancements(non-magical) and item templates can add bonuses to said confirm roll. You'd still need a commoner with really good(and expensive) weapons to get really lucky(on both his save And his attack) in order to do Any damage. If said dragon has any items in it's horde that allow healing, death by a series of incredibly unlikely cuts seems even less likely. If you add spellcasting(Said adult dragon can cast mirror image after all) it seems even less likely. If the dragon is older than adult, I really don't see anything besides the "Unlikely Heroes"(read as the average monstrously-over-powered D&D party) putting up much of a fight.

Though I guess that'd be how many stories about heroes start, the one guy who happened to grab a nice sword off one of the dead noble's corpse getting a lucky shot that finishes of an already wounded dragon.

[InvisibleBison]

Don't crits only count if you "Confirm" the roll against the opponents AC?

Nope (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits)! A natural twenty is an automatic hit, regardless of the target's AC.

[Promethean]

Nope (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits)! A natural twenty is an automatic hit, regardless of the target's AC.

Huh, I guess said army would just need to have a few people invest in a few bow with a good crit threat range. It'll still be a pain to deal with the dragon's spellcasting, though it'll still likely be driven off to heal.

That's probably how dragon fights actually go for anyone not fortunate enough to be the main characters of a D&D session. A nation in a drawn-out war of attrition with an adult red dragon, said dragon attacking random, weakly-defended towns to wear down their soldiers and loot the smoking remains. The nation having to send waves of soldiers and towns folk to fire aimlessly at it until it's enchantments run out and they can get a few lucky shots in. The Bittersweet victory of forcing it to retreat to it's lair, knowing you're safe for now, but it'll inevitably be back later and that you've lost hundreds-or-thousands in the conflict. Leaves dragons still terrifying in context, being flying, heavily armored, reality-warping one Wyrm armies.

I kinda want to play a campaign and/or read a story about how a normal D&D NPC fights monstrosities like that now.

[Goaty14]

Don't crits only count if you "Confirm" the roll against the opponents AC?

Nope (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits)! A natural twenty is an automatic hit, regardless of the target's AC.

Thanks captain obvious, but that wasn't the question. You do need to beat the target's AC again to confirm a critical hit (aka, deal the x2-4 damage). If you get a nat. 20, they you do automatically hit, regardless of the confirmation.

[Cosi]

The nat-20 rule doesn't get you that far. One in 20 attacks hits, but those attacks are dealing only normal damage, so against the Adult Red Dragon's 5 points of DR, they deal no damage on average. If it's a mature adult even max rolls from a longbow do nothing. And all this is ignoring the crowd control options the dragon has, and any other defenses it might get from treasure or casting.

A average attack from a guy with a Longbow does .05 * 6 / 8 = ~.04 damage. An Adult Red Dragon has 253 HP. That's over 6000 shots to put it down. You can help some with support casters, but the Dragon will just eat or rout those round one, because it's a genius level tactician.

The reason that Dragons don't eat peasants isn't because they can't, or because there's an effective defense you can mount without adventurers. It's that if they eat all the peasants, they would have to mine gold and raise cattle themselves. The power of monsters in D&D just underscores the horribly nature of life under feudalism. If you aren't personally a badass hardcore enough to take all comers, you are the de facto property of such a badass. Dragons don't destroy kingdoms, they rule them (a la Dragons of Tarkir in MTG). Mind Flayers don't sack your village and eat everyone's brain. They're smart enough to realize they get more brains in the long run by harvesting sustainably.

[Promethean]

The nat-20 rule doesn't get you that far. One in 20 attacks hits, but those attacks are dealing only normal damage, so against the Adult Red Dragon's 5 points of DR, they deal no damage on average. If it's a mature adult even max rolls from a longbow do nothing. And all this is ignoring the crowd control options the dragon has, and any other defenses it might get from treasure or casting.

A average attack from a guy with a Longbow does .05 * 6 / 8 = ~.04 damage. An Adult Red Dragon has 253 HP. That's over 6000 shots to put it down. You can help some with support casters, but the Dragon will just eat or rout those round one, because it's a genius level tactician.

The reason that Dragons don't eat peasants isn't because they can't, or because there's an effective defense you can mount without adventurers. It's that if they eat all the peasants, they would have to mine gold and raise cattle themselves. The power of monsters in D&D just underscores the horribly nature of life under feudalism. If you aren't personally a badass hardcore enough to take all comers, you are the de facto property of such a badass. Dragons don't destroy kingdoms, they rule them (a la Dragons of Tarkir in MTG). Mind Flayers don't sack your village and eat everyone's brain. They're smart enough to realize they get more brains in the long run by harvesting sustainably.

Okay, Forgot to add the DR. Derp.

I'd like to add however that many creatures with int 0-3 can still get into the DR/Nope club, and things like farspawn/some fiends will be actively Trying to wipe out the planet/plane. Not to mention the fact that said peasant/slaves that the dragon/mind flayers "own" would be much easier to handle in a concentration-camp style environment and also much less likely to build weapons that can kill their "masters" that way.

Before this tangent becomes all consuming though. I was more looking to see if any DM's have come up with a tweaked version of the price, class, and level ranges of people/items to make things more coherent.

[ShurikVch]

Lets see how money that nation "earns" via profession skills and such. A level 2-3 expert (Average skilled worker) is going to have a profession check of.
10 (Taking 10)Are you sure taking 10 is acceptable for most of medieval professions?
Let's see:
miner accidentally causing collapse of the gallery
shipbuilder flattened by a loose log
construction worker falling from a roof
carpenter chops off some fingers
cook getting scalded by some boiling stuffIn short - Profession isn't something which I, personally, would call "not being threatened"
There are a number of reasons why NPC aren't die from old age, and "monsters" is just a part of it


+1 (Ability score)Are you sure?
Isn't standard range for NPC the six "10"?
From the number of low-level Expert NPCs with complete statblock, most have Int 10.
Some have 12 (or even 15), but some other have 9 (or even 8 - like that Typical Airship Stevedore from Explorer's Handbook), so it's equalize each other



So complaining about a city of mindflayers being able to wipe out all of humanity is on the complainer for instituting a city of mindflayers (and that includes any setting foolish enough to do so).All Mind Flayers are have manifesting power of 9th-level Psion-telepath. Sustenance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/sustenance.htm). Done.
And even if you will insist on a generic MM non-psionical version of Illithid - Ring of Sustenance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rings.htm#sustenance) is still within the financial capabilities of every single brain-sucking squidface.
Thus - nothing, really, limiting increasing of their numbers - until they will run out of empty space (or, at least, - of breathable air)

[Deophaun]

Are you sure taking 10 is acceptable for most of medieval professions?
Let's see:
miner accidentally causing collapse of the gallery
shipbuilder flattened by a loose log
construction worker falling from a roof
carpenter chops off some fingers
cook getting scalded by some boiling stuffIn short - Profession isn't something which I, personally, would call "not being threatened"

Are you in a square where a goblin/beholder/dragon/etc can attack you? No? Then you aren't threatened. And no, before someone brings it up, the language for threatening does not refer only to squares, but also to things within those squares.

Taking 10 is perfectly acceptable for all of those.

[ShurikVch]

Are you in a square where a goblin/beholder/dragon/etc can attack you? No? Then you aren't threatened. And no, before someone brings it up, the language for threatening does not refer only to squares, but also to things within those squares.

Taking 10 is perfectly acceptable for all of those.OK, let's replace the goblin/beholder/dragon/etc with a Basic Arrow Trap (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/traps.htm#cr1BasicArrowTrap).
Does it threatening (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm#threatenedSquares)?
No, it's not a melee attack.
But can you "take 10" with it?.. :smallwink:

[Darth Ultron]

That's my problem though. Many of the default settings, like say forgotten realms, make those assumptions by default and exasperate the problem by assuming there are multiple epic level spell-casters(and associated threats to said casters) active in setting. Not even touching the problem of things still being alive on the same plane as 2 epics having a duel, the fact they exist at all is a bit strange.


You need to keep in mind the Setting over rules the Core rules. The Forgotten Realms does not follow the 'Core idea' that the whole world is full of weak characters, no monsters and very little magic. Eberron is the setting for all that.

The Realms is full of Epic level characters and monsters, and I guess your question is ''why does not an epic one take over the world or blow up the world?" Well, the answer is: they can't.

The first reason is that the Realms is a fictional place based on reality, not a silly game construct for jerks and little kids to destroy. And in such a fictional place, why would ''everyone'' even want to take over or destroy the world? A character, based more on reality, wants to live a real life....not act like an immature jerk.

Second, most powerful things in a world are older, so they have the wisdom that comes with age. It takes a long time, years, to become powerful. And as most people age, they act less and less like a immature jerk. When Bobby is 18, he makes a 40th level epic spellcaster and wants to rulez the worldz and be super duper coolz. By the time Bob hits 30, he has changed a bit and wants to have an interesting character based role playing storytelling experience.

Third, the Forgotten Realms is full of Watchers. There are tons that watch out for the ''stupid immature jerk types'' and stop them way before they can do any harm.


Then take money. Sure a powerful person can make lots of money...and they do. But it does not destroy the world.

[Silva Stormrage]

Are you sure taking 10 is acceptable for most of medieval professions?
Let's see:
miner accidentally causing collapse of the gallery
shipbuilder flattened by a loose log
construction worker falling from a roof
carpenter chops off some fingers
cook getting scalded by some boiling stuffIn short - Profession isn't something which I, personally, would call "not being threatened"
There are a number of reasons why NPC aren't die from old age, and "monsters" is just a part of it

Are you sure?
Isn't standard range for NPC the six "10"?
From the number of low-level Expert NPCs with complete statblock, most have Int 10.
Some have 12 (or even 15), but some other have 9 (or even 8 - like that Typical Airship Stevedore from Explorer's Handbook), so it's equalize each other



1)
When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure —you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn’t help. Is the section for taking 10 on the SRD. Mining is not as active as a threat as fighting for your life or anywhere close. Taking 10 for profession checks is pretty much always going to be allowed. Also even if it wasn't well... it's average? Even if the individual had to actually roll each time the end result is going to be basically the same (A bit higher actually since 1d20's average is 10.5).

2) I was using the non elite array and assuming that an average skilled individual had a bonus to their ability score regarding their own profession. Even without that middle age gives +1 so it can boost some to +2 or those with -1 to +0. Likewise there are races with wisdom bonuses etc etc. +1 was just my compromise for a simple rough estimate (Also that subtracts less than a 1gp per week so that doesn't really impact the end result at all).

As for Mind Flayers, their reproduction cycle is odd frankly. They have to capture humans and then use weird parasite type abberations which are grown in limited pools with the Elder Brain eating weaker ones. More than likely they have a cap on the amount of those parasites they can produce. Or perhaps since they actively need psionic energy from devouring brains a ring of sustenance (Which only provides food/water nutritional value) can't substitute it. The main book on Mind Flayers states they can't increase their numbers quickly at all, the exact reasons aren't super important.


Edit: As for the whole dragon thing. One bard with dragonfire inspiration gives all those archers +4d6 energy damage at level 1 with basic optimization. 400 Archers only hitting on a 20 can kill a dragon non mature adult dragon assuming it just approaches from the sky which is what I was saying. Regular monsters like Ogres, Trolls, Manticores, etc etc. Stand even less of a chance.

[Deophaun]

OK, let's replace the goblin/beholder/dragon/etc with a Basic Arrow Trap (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/traps.htm#cr1BasicArrowTrap).
Does it threatening (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm#threatenedSquares)?
No, it's not a melee attack.
But can you "take 10" with it?.. :smallwink:
Is it shooting at you? It wouldn't be threatening, but that would be a distraction, so no.
Is it not shooting at you? Then it would not be threatening, and would not be a distraction. So yes, you could.

[Promethean]

Edit: As for the whole dragon thing. One bard with dragonfire inspiration gives all those archers +4d6 energy damage at level 1 with basic optimization. 400 Archers only hitting on a 20 can kill a dragon non mature adult dragon assuming it just approaches from the sky which is what I was saying. Regular monsters like Ogres, Trolls, Manticores, etc etc. Stand even less of a chance.

If you include character optimization you've just thrown the entire point of the arguement out the window.

Typically classed NPC populations aren't going to include the "Bard" class, that'd be a rarity, and a normal "bard" would likely be an Expert with skill points focused on perform checks. Not to mention "dragon fire inspiration" would be rare to find amoung the already rare bards. Just Being said bard would push you into chosen one status to begin with, they're not something any old village or stonghold would have.

[MrSandman]

I kinda want to play a campaign and/or read a story about how a normal D&D NPC fights monstrosities like that now.

Not exactly what you're asking for, but have you read this: https://www.amazon.com/NPCs-Spells-Swords-Stealth-Book-ebook/dp/B00KB2RLKO ? It's awesome.

[Darth Ultron]

Before this tangent becomes all consuming though. I was more looking to see if any DM's have come up with a tweaked version of the price, class, and level ranges of people/items to make things more coherent.

Well, the easy way is to just assume most of the world is around 10th level.

[Nifft]

That's my problem though. Many of the default settings, like say forgotten realms, make those assumptions by default and exasperate the problem by assuming there are multiple epic level spell-casters(and associated threats to said casters) active in setting. Not even touching the problem of things still being alive on the same plane as 2 epics having a duel, the fact they exist at all is a bit strange.

FR is a mess.

Most homebrew settings are less of a mess than FR.

If you want to discuss D&D in general, drop the idea of having it apply to FR. If you want to discuss FR, that's its own topic.

[Fizban]

Posting right before work so this is gonna be short:


That's my problem though. Many of the default settings, like say forgotten realms, make those assumptions by default and exasperate the problem by assuming there are multiple epic level spell-casters(and associated threats to said casters) active in setting. Not even touching the problem of things still being alive on the same plane as 2 epics having a duel, the fact they exist at all is a bit strange.
Been covered, things that powerful generally exist in a state of cold-war because they're all smart enough to know if they raise a ruckus one (or more) of the others will retaliate.


I would like to contest the "Army of a thousand 1 HD soldiers" arguement with the fact that a single adult red dragon would kill all of them easily. Even extending the army to the range of 1-5 levels(still standard warriors, commoners, and experts) wouldn't seem to help, as the ones not running in terror would be unable to hit it's 29 AC and would die from it's 12d10 breath weapon. Dragons would eat towns like smaug from the hobbit(but without the lucky black arrow doing anything more than pissing them off). Even if pushing the dragon button is going overboard, D&D ecology of aberrations, magical beasts, undead, and Infernal outsiders makes the argument of humans living passed the stone age harder to believe.
DR is required to negate thousands of bows, and even then DR 10 is required to fully negate them. A Small city is guaranteed a pile of 7th+ level characters (two of every class), Large a pile of 10th+, and Metropolis a pile of 13th+. There are very few single monsters that can stand up to half a dozen casters of even 10th level, hence monster-proof. At least by any reasonable logic that the high level PC-classed NPCs of the town value it and want it to continue existing. If a monster wants to take over, it needs to negate enough of the "adventurer" class threats first, which means infiltration, not open warfare.


Typically classed NPC populations aren't going to include the "Bard" class, that'd be a rarity, and a normal "bard" would likely be an Expert with skill points focused on perform checks. Not to mention "dragon fire inspiration" would be rare to find amoung the already rare bards. Just Being said bard would push you into chosen one status to begin with, they're not something any old village or stonghold would have.
DMG 137 begins random town generation, with the highest level locals table on 139. In short, yes, every "typically" classed NPC population includes one or more Bards with a rolled level, same with every other PC class. How much organization and optimization the town is allowed to do against the monsters nicely competes against how many assumptions the DM is making about those monsters.


Oh, and someone mentioned Mind Flayers can all just cast psionic Sustain- no, that's optional psionic Mind Flayers. And if you let a monster that's specifically all about the need to eat brains innately just refuse to eat brains, that's once again, not the game's problem.

[Silva Stormrage]

If you include character optimization you've just thrown the entire point of the arguement out the window.

Typically classed NPC populations aren't going to include the "Bard" class, that'd be a rarity, and a normal "bard" would likely be an Expert with skill points focused on perform checks. Not to mention "dragon fire inspiration" would be rare to find amoung the already rare bards. Just Being said bard would push you into chosen one status to begin with, they're not something any old village or stonghold would have.

No I am not throwing the entire point out the window. The idea that in a setting militaries would NOT leap upon trying to grab up any possible force multiplier upon that magnitude is ridiculous. As well as the idea that the entirety of the world is NPC classed. The basic settings are not set up that way.

Look at the demographics generator on the SRD: http://www.d20srd.org/d20/demographics/

A sample human town with 50k population has 76 bards one of which is 17th level. The idea that the military will pay a single bard to act as a super force multiplier is so basic that I can't fathom a realistic or practical government ignoring the option. It isn't like they wouldn't be able to figure it out either, basic divinations or clerics would easily be able to find out about it. Considering they have 76 bards in that sample town who can all boost their soldiers with inspire courage it takes a single general/officer to ask a bard "Hey is they any great way to boost that inspire courage song you have". Once they figure out how dragonfire inspiration works on the basic level they can start just flat out training soldiers into the role. Militaries optimize, they strategize and try to find the best possible most effective solutions to killing their enemies. And humans can be veeeeery good at figuring out how to kill things.

The standard D&D setting is not 99.999999999% npc classed. It never was and never has been. The example city I generated was about 97% NPC classed. But in a population of 50,000 that gives a LOT of PC classes. And with the government having the funds they do from taxation they can afford to pay/purchase those rare PC classed individuals. Or train them themselves.

The main issue I think you are running into is that you are thinking D&D models a "Low magic" style of game. Where there are only a few heroes and they fight against the monsters to protect the feeble and helpless commoners at their back. D&D is not that game and struggles to model those type of games without a lot of handwaving.

[Fizban]

Now, if one wants to argue the point that any population center smaller than City is in fact majorly threatened by certain monsters even in small numbers. . . yeah. That's why they need to hire adventurers. If a pop center small enough to be beaten like that is attacked, someone will escape, or someone else will notice, and warn anyone and everyone they find, and eventually the news will get back to some adventurers. And then the adventurers go on an adventure where they free a town from monsters instead of freeing it from brigands or corrupt lords or fighting the monsters in caves.

The game is about adventurers fighting monsters, and the demographics are set up to support it. Towns have enough high level PC-classed NPCs to support PCs, and cities have enough to support higher level PCs. This also means that anything a group of four PCs would fight is no threat to their home base, which has enough people to match them if faced with an existential crisis (unless they're basing out of somewhere underleveled for them). Roaming groups of higher level people are needed to guard/counter attacks on smaller pop centers, which explains why the adventurer exists. If a group of high level NPCs gets paid to go out and do a bunch of jobs they stop being city NPCs and are eventually replaced over time, while the world gains a new group of adventurers.

[Clistenes]

Has anyone run through some of the numbers of D&D 3.5's economy and noticed that it's not viable?

Numbers of wizards and sorcerers being in a bit of flux from book to book as it is, the fact that magic academies Do exist in most of the settings seems impossible. With how expensive magical components and reagents are made out to be Vs how much money "Profession" jobs make, only the Kings high wizard or the mage partying with the Epic heroes of the land would be able to Afford to cast spells. There'd Be no market for magic items, as the only ones buying them are large noble families(who could afford 1 or 2) or the occasional epic hero(and for setting with more then one "Adventuring Party", there can't be enough "Loot" in the world to support more than a handful without inflating the gold coin so much it becomes worthless).

On another end we have the general guidelines for what levels people are in a population, and what classes are available to them. It really goes without saying that NPC classes are crap, and in a world with dragons and mind flayers, having more monsters in a country than are encountered by a single "Adventuring Party on an Epic Quest" begs the question why the human, elves, dwarves, and what have you aren't all dead.

So does anyone know if someone has gone through and actually priced out a viable economy/level range for the NPC side of D&D?

Well, unless they are the ones running the show, high level arcane spellcaster just don't need society at all. They can build themselves their little paradises with everything they could wish for... the only real reason to interact with the outside world is charity, or to get a power trip bossing around the normies... so they only need to be taken into account when they are enemies, patrons or allies of the characters... all other mages don't give a crap what happens to the world until the adventurers come kicking their door...

Clerics and Driuds, on the other hand, they need to interact with and influence society in order to pursue their Deity/Philosophy's agenda. Most societies would be Theocracies (save the few Magocracies), but since there are many gods, they would keep kings and nobles around rather than ruling directly (rather than fighting over who rules the country, churches like those of Pelor, Heironoeus, Lydia, Elhonna, Delleb, Berei, StCuthbert...etc., allow a king who venerates them all to rule, provided he keeps himself neutral and gives all churches the same support...).

Divine protection would explain why humans aren't wiped by Mindflayers, Dragons and Beholders. If those creatures become great enough a threat, the gods trigger their contingencies (often the contingencies involve powerful adventurers...). Also, most powerful monsters would be very rare, and have trouble raising their populations due to their shallow gene pool, psychotic personalities or other factors...

Since powerful arcane spellcasters don't interact with mundane economy save as saviours or evil conquerors, and (non-evil) divine spellcasters try to keep stable societies, powerful magic don't turn economy inside out.

There probably are way more gemstones and valuable metals around than in our own world, due to he existance of several subterranean races very focused on mining, gemcutting and metalworking, which explain the low value of gold and silver in most settings.

No, most people can't afford magic. And most casters aren't interested in making their magic cheap (their services are so valuable they can afford to sell them at a high price, so they can earn more for less work hours...) or in training many casters.

I think most arcane casters would follow the master-apprentice system rather than found schools. You don't want to produce many competent casters who will become your rivals... you should rather train just your own children or an apprentice who is like a son to you...

Low to middle level casters could train the children of kings and nobles in exchange for privileges and an exalted social position.

The exception would be Magocracies: Those are trying to reshape society to become arcane focused, so they would have actual schools.

Churches would try to train as many Clerics and Druids as possible, but those need true faith, which is a limiting factor.

As for magical items, they should be rare. Here is how I see it... (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16302423&postcount=18)

[Malphegor]

I've always felt that a fantasy setting economy is based on the adventurers bringing in weird and wonderful relics from ancient tombs.

A dungeon-based economy, reliant on the relics and ancient treasures from forgotten times that were sealed away. So, one day, your city-state is mulling along, when suddenly a bunch of adventurers come in. Not only have they infected all your prostitutes, they've complained about all your beer being too weak, and also started a fight with the town guard, they've brought in 13 thousand pieces of gemstones, gold, and assorted treasure.

Whilst yes, they've used these to buy items whilst in the town, that gold is now in the system, causing an economic depression that lasts about the length of time it takes for the adventurers to go away, raid another tomb, and come back, at which point the cycle starts again.

And adventurers wonder why the townsfolk aren't particularly happy to see them!


This could be fun to play with one day- a town that doesn't want adventurers paying for anything, if only because that much gold will WRECK the delicate balance of the economic structure of the place.

(sidenote, in my game, I keep noticing ways in which a wizard could make a comfortable existence with just Prestidigitation. It's worth realising that as a wizard, you could be the best chef ever by preparing Prestidigitation and making ordinary tasteless gruel taste like a 5 star restaraunt dish. Or how about a barber shop? SHAZAM! your hair is now the colour you chose for the next month or so, that'll be 5 gold pieces. It won't be high adventure rich, but it'll be a decent non-peasant income forevermore)

[King of Nowhere]

Even without assuming a bard with a specific feat, a simple spell like magic weapon can turn 50 arrows into +1 arrows, that bypass damage reduction of dragons. So with a few 1st level wizards or clerics or even adepts you can provide enough magical ammunition that a few hundred archers can take down an adult dragon (hint: don't place them all in a cone-shaped tight formation also).

Now, attrition is a problem. the dragon could come in, smoke a few dozen people and retreat. This is where you call in adventurers. On the other hand, why would the dragon behave that way? the dragon is smart enough to realize that if he burns and pillages around adventurers WILL be called, and they ARE strong enough to threaten him. What would the dragon gain to justify taking that risk?


Well, unless they are the ones running the show, high level arcane spellcaster just don't need society at all. They can build themselves their little paradises with everything they could wish for... the only real reason to interact with the outside world is charity, or to get a power trip bossing around the normies... so they only need to be taken into account when they are enemies, patrons or allies of the characters... all other mages don't give a crap what happens to the world until the adventurers come kicking their door...


that depends on a lot of assumptions about wizards. one of them is the level of optimization. another is how much those wizards are into power trips.
Because yes, potentially a high level wizard could live without society. but it's certainly much easier to live within society anyway.
Sure, you could scry and search and fight that dangerous monster whose body is harvested for magic reagents, and do the harvesting yourself. If you're willing to spend the time and take the risk. Or, you could simply send your attendant to buy it at the market. Zero time, zero effort.
Sure, you could perform that difficult research at the library. It's well within your capabilities. Or, you could just pay that npc expert to do it on your behalf, while you are free to do something else. Why spend weeks of your time just to save what for you is pocket money?

Sure, they can build themselves little paradise where they have all they wishes. Which is exactly what happens when they cast spells for money. You work one hour in the morning to prepare the spells, then maybe one more hour in the day to go at locations and cast them. all the rest of your time is free to do as you wish. And you make enough money that you can buy whatever you wish, at least in terms of comfort.
And you also get to be a respected member of the community - which is likely to include relatives and old friends, so most wizards would care about it. Why would a wizard not care just because he doesn't need said community? I bet you don't need your friends to provide you services, but you still care about them. Smart and powerful as they are, wizards are still human.
Do not forget one of the most basic human needs and pleasures, sex. If you live within the society, you can afford the best escorts available every day. If you don't, you could certainly conjure some succubi to perform for you, and they would probably be better than any regular human; but they carry a lot of risk. Plus, they are evil forces of destruction and malice. No matter how attractive they look, it would put a serious crimp in any charm they possess, at least for me.
How about romance and love? Wizards are portrayed as emotionless loners, but most brilliant people in the real world are happily married or would happily marry if they found the right person. And, unless you are a monster, brainwashing some poor girl with magic to marry her does not count. your secluded wizard could probably create a simulacrum of the perfect woman with some spell, but I doubt it would be as satisfying emotionally. Now, if you are a rich and respected member of the community, praised for intellligence and skill and generally looked like a great catch, you should be able to find a wife/husband to your liking.

Sure, there will be the people who lock themselves in a tower and never come out for decades. Those who make their own demiplanes. Those who must abuse their power to find satisfaction. But they will be a minority, and the subject of quests.
I always assume most wizards would be professionals selling their trade just like any other professional, because they are people first and wizards second.

[Fizban]

they've brought in 13 thousand pieces of gemstones, gold, and assorted treasure.
But the thing is, they didn't just dump 13,000gp into the peasants. They dumped at most a couple thousand on the peasants and maybe the high end tailors and whatnot, and the rest went into. . . more magic items. Most of that influx goes to a very specific few people, who also don't have much to spend it on quickly. The money spent to buy magic items is used to buy magic items from the next guy, unless the money was actually just a direct trade of item for item. It's a whole separate economy.

The most I think one can really push is that if items from town are mostly crafted (as makes sense), then every time a bunch of adventurers commissions some items, there's a massive outflow of cash to the people who collect "miscellaneous crafting components."

But let's look at the actual numbers. A small city of 8,000 pop, right in the middle of the 15,000gp purchase limit, has 6,000,000gp in ready cash. You just dropped 13,000? Congratulations, that's a 0.2% increase. I don't know the proper economic maths, but I don't think at 0.2% increase in cash is going to crash the economy.


It's worth realising that as a wizard, you could be the best chef ever by preparing Prestidigitation and making ordinary tasteless gruel taste like a 5 star restaraunt dish. Or how about a barber shop? SHAZAM! your hair is now the colour you chose for the next month or so, that'll be 5 gold pieces. It won't be high adventure rich, but it'll be a decent non-peasant income forevermore)
Except the magical flavoring only lasts an hour, so anyone who doesn't eat it immediately (slow eater, long feast, doggie bag) gets to taste the real thing, and there's so many more parts to good food besides "flavor," that anyone who actually knows it will laugh you away- a trick to amuse peasants. Color changing is not moving, cleaning, or soiling, so it lasts 1 hour.


Even without assuming a bard with a specific feat, a simple spell like magic weapon can turn 50 arrows into +1 arrows, that bypass damage reduction of dragons. So with a few 1st level wizards or clerics or even adepts you can provide enough magical ammunition that a few hundred archers can take down an adult dragon (hint: don't place them all in a cone-shaped tight formation also).
Actually basic Magic Weapon can't do that- it's only GMW that has the batch of ammunition clause. Legion's Magic Weapon will hit a bunch of people for a few rounds instead, if they start close enough. You can also try a bank of cannons bombards with a heavily magically enhanced gunner, but you want someone with a decent attack roll for that. The cost/benefit ratio on stocking the right oils and such compared to the actual frequency of dragon attacks (and heck, dragons can be carved and sold) is still great. The best weapon I found was shards of Chardalyn stone from a web enhancement filled with Slime Hurl and pair with oils of Launch Item- some cheesy cheese that will wreck any dragon in just a couple throws. Well it would if they didn't pre-cast Shimmering Scales, that stupid spell.

[Clistenes]

Because yes, potentially a high level wizard could live without society. but it's certainly much easier to live within society anyway.
Sure, you could scry and search and fight that dangerous monster whose body is harvested for magic reagents, and do the harvesting yourself. If you're willing to spend the time and take the risk. Or, you could simply send your attendant to buy it at the market. Zero time, zero effort.

For relatively common and cheap reagents, sure, it would be faster... but if we are speaking or rare stuff that needs to be taken from a powerful monster who lives in another continent it would be faster and simpler to scry and teleport there with your retinue of Simulacrums, Constructs, Extraplanar minions and monster thralls and do the job yourself...

And even if the Wizard hired adventurers, it would be a matter of a member of a small elitist minority giving some money to members of another select minority, it's not as if the Wizard is taking over economy or toppling the government...



Sure, you could perform that difficult research at the library. It's well within your capabilities. Or, you could just pay that npc expert to do it on your behalf, while you are free to do something else. Why spend weeks of your time just to save what for you is pocket money?

That's exactly the kind of task a Wizard with Int 24+ and 20+ skill ranks in Knowledge could do faster and better than anybody else...

But even if he hires an underling for the task, rather than doing it himself or entrusting it to a Simulacrum, it is just a wage...

What about the stuff he doesn't need to pay for? Building palaces, furnishing them, hiring servants, getting clothes and food for them, creating businesses or fiefdoms to generate revenues to pay for all that...etc...



Sure, they can build themselves little paradise where they have all they wishes. Which is exactly what happens when they cast spells for money. You work one hour in the morning to prepare the spells, then maybe one more hour in the day to go at locations and cast them. all the rest of your time is free to do as you wish. And you make enough money that you can buy whatever you wish, at least in terms of comfort.

Or you could cast Magecraft and Fabricate and create goods worth millions of gp in a few minutes...



And you also get to be a respected member of the community - which is likely to include relatives and old friends, so most wizards would care about it. Why would a wizard not care just because he doesn't need said community? I bet you don't need your friends to provide you services, but you still care about them. Smart and powerful as they are, wizards are still human.

As I said, some Wizards may help others out of charity/goodness...



Do not forget one of the most basic human needs and pleasures, sex. If you live within the society, you can afford the best escorts available every day. If you don't, you could certainly conjure some succubi to perform for you, and they would probably be better than any regular human; but they carry a lot of risk. Plus, they are evil forces of destruction and malice. No matter how attractive they look, it would put a serious crimp in any charm they possess, at least for me.

What about Succubi, Brachinas, Nymphs, Sirines's....etc., Simulacra?



How about romance and love? Wizards are portrayed as emotionless loners, but most brilliant people in the real world are happily married or would happily marry if they found the right person. And, unless you are a monster, brainwashing some poor girl with magic to marry her does not count. your secluded wizard could probably create a simulacrum of the perfect woman with some spell, but I doubt it would be as satisfying emotionally. Now, if you are a rich and respected member of the community, praised for intellligence and skill and generally looked like a great catch, you should be able to find a wife/husband to your liking.

Still doesn't require that you conquer the kingdom or control economy. Your palace, piles of gems, magical servants and maybe some charity work would do the trick...



Sure, there will be the people who lock themselves in a tower and never come out for decades. Those who make their own demiplanes. Those who must abuse their power to find satisfaction. But they will be a minority, and the subject of quests.
I always assume most wizards would be professionals selling their trade just like any other professional, because they are people first and wizards second.

An being human requires that you set a shop? People who earn a lot of money and retire early stop being human?

High level Wizards are beings who study the great mysteries of the universe... why should they sell their skills for pocket change when they don't need to?

Can't they be just dedicated scholars and leisurely gentlemen, rather than mere craftsmen?

I'm not saying Wizards would isolate themselves from the world completely; I'm saying that they don't need to take anything from society or give to it unless they desire to do so, so their economic imprint would be neligible, and they don't need to rule anything unless they desire to do so...

And taking into account other factions would fight back and maybe kill them if they try to seize control, why would they do so, unless they do it out of pure goodness or for the power rush?

[ShurikVch]

Dragons don't destroy kingdoms, they rule them (a la Dragons of Tarkir in MTG).In that case - shouldn't there be a whole lot more of fights "territorial monster vs destructive monster" (a la Godzilla vs MUTO)?

[King of Nowhere]

Can't they be just dedicated scholars and leisurely gentlemen, rather than mere craftsmen?

I'm not saying Wizards would isolate themselves from the world completely; I'm saying that they don't need to take anything from society or give to it unless they desire to do so, so their economic imprint would be neligible, and they don't need to rule anything unless they desire to do so...


yes, pretty much what i was advocating. most wizards will be happy to pursue their trade. I still think most of them would sell spells, because, if you are paid a thousand gp to cast a single spell, of which you have several dozens per day, and which costs maybe 5 minutes of your time... well, why not? sure, you can make with magic most things you could buy anyway, but i'm under the impression that real goods are generally better.
Some of them will be craftsmen, by choice mostly, just like some people who gain handsomely and may easily afford to retire early and live in luxury often chooses to keep working anyway. Some of them will be heroes devoted to charities, some will pursue causes, some will pursue dark secrets or dominion...

basically, high level wizards can be a lot of things. I was merely countering the idea that all high level wizards (or characters, for that matter) need to conform to particular stereotypes.

[Fizban]

For relatively common and cheap reagents, sure, it would be faster... but if we are speaking or rare stuff that needs to be taken from a powerful monster who lives in another continent it would be faster and simpler to scry and teleport there with your retinue of Simulacrums, Constructs, Extraplanar minions and monster thralls and do the job yourself...
There are essentially no "magic reagents" taken from "powerful monsters," at least nothing significant that you can't get from a spell component pouch. I suppose if your cheese level assumes infinite simulacrums and free planar bindings then everything looks like a nail.

Or you could cast Magecraft and Fabricate and create goods worth millions of gp in a few minutes...
Magecraft only boosts craft for normal craft checks to create items, not Fabricate- not that the bonus is that significant. As for whether Fabricate does what the guy who invented that "trick" thinks it does, the interpretation of Fabricate is once again up to the DM but the straight reading says one item, not hundreds of daggers connected by a wire. Even before the DM stops and decides to enforce some supply and demand.

High level Wizards are beings who study the great mysteries of the universe... why should they sell their skills for pocket change when they don't need to?
Because they've gotta pay the bills somehow, and lol free planar binding minions to bring you money isn't really endorsed by the default setting. It's a char-op trick that is, as usual, up to DM interpretation, and even if it works, assuming ever caster in the game does it is ridiculous.

You seem to be arguing that casters shouldn't break the economy, but you're doing so by. . . saying they've already broke the economy?


As for crafting: the highest general upkeep in the DMG is 200gp per month. A +1 weapon is 1,000gp of profit, takes one day to craft, NPCs only worry about xp costs if the DM says they do. If they do, killing one CR 1/3 Dire Rat is enough to pay the 80xp with 20 left over (and a DM requring such a value is probably not one who would reduce the reward for circumstances). You work 3-6 days a year depending on if you can find rats or goblins or cows to fight all at once or spread out between different days. That's assuming no one ever pays you for spellcasting, which takes even less time. A small enough village won't get that much business, but that just means casters who live there live less extravagantly and/or have day jobs and/or are paid for by someone else. Of course, a village only has one wizard and one sorcerer, with at most three members of the other casting classes, most of which are already portrayed as having day jobs.

[Nich_Critic]

As for whether Fabricate does what the guy who invented that "trick" thinks it does, the interpretation of Fabricate is once again up to the DM but the straight reading says one item, not hundreds of daggers connected by a wire. Even before the DM stops and decides to enforce some supply and demand.



By that reasoning, you couldn't make a carriage because you're unable to create more than one item, but you could disassemble a carriage into 4 wheels

[Cosi]

The idea that fabricate only makes one item is just flatly false. It makes "a product" and one of the listed examples is "clothes". Even if you do believe it has to be contiguous material, it also lets you make "rope", so clearly "cut it up and sell the bits" is something you can do.

[King of Nowhere]

you are a wizard, not a professional craftsman. I am sure a good craftsman can make stuff of better quality. I am also sure you can pump your craft check to the stratosphere with enough cheese, but most people stop way before that. And npcs are generally less optmized than pcs.

personally I try to keep professional craftsman with higher skill checks than wizards because I like the idea that being actually good at what you do trumps magic, at least in the specific area of expertise. it keeps mundane crafting relevant, and it also offers a parallel with our world where mass-produced goods are cheap but generally of lesser quality compared to crafted goods. the idea that a wizard can mass produce but the stuff won't be as good as that made by a skilled professional aiming for quality sort of resonates with people.

[Nifft]

personally I try to keep professional craftsman with higher skill checks than wizards because I like the idea that being actually good at what you do trumps magic, at least in the specific area of expertise. it keeps mundane crafting relevant, and it also offers a parallel with our world where mass-produced goods are cheap but generally of lesser quality compared to crafted goods.

Just so you know, that last bit is just a very recent modern luxury item sales pitch.

Initially, mass-produced tools were so much better than hand-crafted tools, that they displaced entrenched guilds and other interests which had a lot of power and money, and which tried to fight back.

Mass-produced tools can be (and often are) made cheap, but the majority of luxury items don't involve less industrial process. They just involve higher standards within that industrial process -- or sometimes just a brand-name slapped on at the end, without any particular increase in quality.

The industrial revolution increased quality of life globally not just because there were more things, but also because the things were better.


That said, this is a fantasy game, and I support your right to have that fantasy in your game 100%.

It's just the bit about "our world" which isn't right.

[Clistenes]

yes, pretty much what i was advocating. most wizards will be happy to pursue their trade. I still think most of them would sell spells, because, if you are paid a thousand gp to cast a single spell, of which you have several dozens per day, and which costs maybe 5 minutes of your time... well, why not? sure, you can make with magic most things you could buy anyway, but i'm under the impression that real goods are generally better.
Some of them will be craftsmen, by choice mostly, just like some people who gain handsomely and may easily afford to retire early and live in luxury often chooses to keep working anyway. Some of them will be heroes devoted to charities, some will pursue causes, some will pursue dark secrets or dominion...

Casting spells for money is the least effective way a Wizard can use his magic to get money...

A Wizard can snap his fingers and he has made all the artisan class obsolete with a couple of spells.
Another couple of spells, and you no longer need iron mines, salt pans, quarries, lumberjacks or charcoal burners.
With a some of effort, he can replace all the merchants who move wares across the globe using permanent Teleportaton Circles or Succubi Simulacra with Bags of Holding, Portable Holes and Dragonskin Bags of Grendel.
With some work, he can replace all the masons and builders too.
...etc.

Why don't Wizards do that? Because at that level they don't need money anymore. They can easily get anything money could buy with a spell... So, why bother?

And that explains why a mundane economy keeps existing in a world with reality warpers.



basically, high level wizards can be a lot of things. I was merely countering the idea that all high level wizards (or characters, for that matter) need to conform to particular stereotypes.

Again, This is not about the stereotype of the antisocial Wizard isolated in his tower. It is about Wizards not needing anything from mundane economy.


There are essentially no "magic reagents" taken from "powerful monsters," at least nothing significant that you can't get from a spell component pouch.

Monster parts can be used to replace XP or to spontaneously add Metamagic Feats to your spells. Check "Power Components" in Dragon Magazine 312 and 337.


I suppose if your cheese level assumes infinite simulacrums and free planar bindings then everything looks like a nail.

Who said anything about infinite Simulacrums and free Planar Bindings? But even a few Simulacrums and bound Outsiders are damn powerful...


Magecraft only boosts craft for normal craft checks to create items, not Fabricate- not that the bonus is that significant.

The Wizard already has a crazy INT bonus.

And Magecraft grants "a +5 Competence bonus on a Craft check for the day's work...". It could easily be understood as getting a +5 Competence bonus to Craft for the day.

But fine. Even if Magecraft doesn't grant that, you can still research a custom spell that grants you a +5 Competence bonus for a few minutes.


As for whether Fabricate does what the guy who invented that "trick" thinks it does, the interpretation of Fabricate is once again up to the DM but the straight reading says one item, not hundreds of daggers connected by a wire.

The text mentions cubic foots of raw materials that are converted into finished goods. It never says it has to be a single item.


Even before the DM stops and decides to enforce some supply and demand.

But that's the point! The Wizard can mess the supply and demand any time he wants. He can bury the city in finished goods, destroying the jobs of all the artisan class.

But in most worlds artisans keep existing, because most Wizards aren't interested in that...



Because they've gotta pay the bills somehow, and lol free planar binding minions to bring you money isn't really endorsed by the default setting. It's a char-op trick that is, as usual, up to DM interpretation, and even if it works, assuming ever caster in the game does it is ridiculous.

But the Wizard DOESN'T have bills. He can get anything with his magic.

And I never said anything of Wizards telling summoned minions to bring him money (he could use Earth Elementals to mine diamonds, though).



You seem to be arguing that casters shouldn't break the economy, but you're doing so by. . . saying they've already broke the economy?

No. I argue that, if high level Wizards were interested in money, they could control the economy with ease. If we accept high level Wizards are interested in money then they put all blacksmiths, goldsmiths, coppersmiths, weaponsmiths, armourers, jewellers, glassblowers , carpenters, potters, tinkers, lumberjacks, brewers, weavers, tailors, masons... etc., out of the market...

But in most settings there still are artisans and merchants... why? There must be a reason magic hasn't made them obsolete... And I think that reason is, high level Wizards aren't interested in money because they don't really need it, so they don't bother taking over the economy, hence you can still have you faux medieval world with guilds and peddlers and crafters and workshops...



As for crafting: the highest general upkeep in the DMG is 200gp per month. A +1 weapon is 1,000gp of profit, takes one day to craft, NPCs only worry about xp costs if the DM says they do. If they do, killing one CR 1/3 Dire Rat is enough to pay the 80xp with 20 left over (and a DM requring such a value is probably not one who would reduce the reward for circumstances). You work 3-6 days a year depending on if you can find rats or goblins or cows to fight all at once or spread out between different days. That's assuming no one ever pays you for spellcasting, which takes even less time. A small enough village won't get that much business, but that just means casters who live there live less extravagantly and/or have day jobs and/or are paid for by someone else. Of course, a village only has one wizard and one sorcerer, with at most three members of the other casting classes, most of which are already portrayed as having day jobs.

I mentioned that some casters craft very low level magic items, but they don't really have any reason to bother crafting anything really powerful, since the most they can earn is 1,000 gp per day no matter what they craft. And anyways, mid to high level items have no demand, anyways...

[Cosi]

Wizards absolutely have spells that make them dramatically more efficient than traditional craftsmen. But that's not sufficient to replace traditional craftsmen, because there are a lot more of them, Wizards have things to do, and if you actually can produce all goods cheaper than the rest of the economy, you are no longer part of the economy.


As for the whole dragon thing. One bard with dragonfire inspiration gives all those archers +4d6 energy damage at level 1 with basic optimization. 400 Archers only hitting on a 20 can kill a dragon non mature adult dragon assuming it just approaches from the sky which is what I was saying. Regular monsters like Ogres, Trolls, Manticores, etc etc. Stand even less of a chance.

That's not "basic" optimization. In any case, I don't really understand the point of comparing optimized characters to stock challenges. An Adult Red Dragon is a 7th level caster. There's nothing stopping it from getting invisibility, which is quite sufficient to allow it to gank the Bard, or just using incredibly basic skirmish tactics to waste bardic music charges.


Oh, and someone mentioned Mind Flayers can all just cast psionic Sustain- no, that's optional psionic Mind Flayers. And if you let a monster that's specifically all about the need to eat brains innately just refuse to eat brains, that's once again, not the game's problem.

Yes, clearly if you use the rules of the game and it produces a bad result, it is your fault and not the fault of the designers.


No I am not throwing the entire point out the window. The idea that in a setting militaries would NOT leap upon trying to grab up any possible force multiplier upon that magnitude is ridiculous. As well as the idea that the entirety of the world is NPC classed. The basic settings are not set up that way.

I mean, sure, there are PC classed characters. But there are also older dragons, and dragons get their power for free (and can still take PC classes). A Great Wyrm Red Dragon casts as a 19th level Sorcerer (who can take Cleric spells, notably including miracle), has superhuman mental abilities, has 20 points of DR, two different AoEs, and an attack routine that will shred most characters.


Clerics and Driuds, on the other hand, they need to interact with and influence society in order to pursue their Deity/Philosophy's agenda.

They don't need to. Certainly the might, but there are deities whose goals don't require any particular interaction with society. Vecna is the god of secrets -- interacting with people would seem fairly directly opposed to their wishes.


Divine protection would explain why humans aren't wiped by Mindflayers, Dragons and Beholders. If those creatures become great enough a threat, the gods trigger their contingencies (often the contingencies involve powerful adventurers...).

Except those species also have gods. Tiamat is the goddess of evil dragons, and if Pelor decides to send his champions against the local dragon tyrant, she'll just deploy her own servants.


I've always felt that a fantasy setting economy is based on the adventurers bringing in weird and wonderful relics from ancient tombs.

It is, but not quite in the way you're thinking. Magic items, like technology, are important for your society's standards of living. But unlike technology they take a long time to produce. So population growth in D&Dland drops standards of living like a stone. To keep up, you need new sources of magic, which is very often going to mean plundering the ruins of past civilizations.


In that case - shouldn't there be a whole lot more of fights "territorial monster vs destructive monster" (a la Godzilla vs MUTO)?

Yeah. But pretty much any attempt to extrapolate from the rules results in that kind of "hey, this doesn't make sense" thing somewhere. Your options are basically to accept that and move on with your life, or stick your head in the sand and declare that anyone who attempts to follow rules that don't result in the exact medieval pastiche you want to be wrong.


personally I try to keep professional craftsman with higher skill checks than wizards because I like the idea that being actually good at what you do trumps magic, at least in the specific area of expertise. it keeps mundane crafting relevant, and it also offers a parallel with our world where mass-produced goods are cheap but generally of lesser quality compared to crafted goods. the idea that a wizard can mass produce but the stuff won't be as good as that made by a skilled professional aiming for quality sort of resonates with people.

The Wizard is a professional craftsman, and is very likely both smarter and higher level than his mundane counterpart.

[King of Nowhere]

Just so you know, that last bit is just a very recent modern luxury item sales pitch.

Initially, mass-produced tools were so much better than hand-crafted tools, that they displaced entrenched guilds and other interests which had a lot of power and money, and which tried to fight back.

A few points for this:
1) it depends on the good. If you want something standardized, like, say, a bolt or nail, then yes, industrial goods are the best. But the best clothes are tailor-made, and the best food is hand-coocked.
2) it depends on the artisan. Sure, your random average tailor who got his profession only because he inherited the shop from his father does not make better clothes than the wizard with fabricate and 1 rank in the craft skill. I'm talking about high quality luxury items here.

Anyway, fabricate may not put out of work the best craftsmen, but it may put out of work all the mediocre ones, who are the majority. Since it's just a single spell, and it seems to have no real use besides breaking the game, one may as well ban or nerf it. Just postulating that it requires some additional material components would be enough.
It's no different than limiting permanent teleportation circles to avoid getting a tippyverse.


Casting spells for money is the least effective way a Wizard can use his magic to get money...

A Wizard can snap his fingers and he has made all the artisan class obsolete with a couple of spells.
Another couple of spells, and you no longer need iron mines, salt pans, quarries, lumberjacks or charcoal burners.
With a some of effort, he can replace all the merchants who move wares across the globe using permanent Teleportaton Circles or Succubi Simulacra with Bags of Holding, Portable Holes and Dragonskin Bags of Grendel.
With some work, he can replace all the masons and builders too.
...etc.

Depends on the level of cheese your DM allows. For example, it is commonly established that iron wall and stone wall and similar are not really permanent, unless you want to deal with the economic implications of that.
Sure, if we play by RAW a wizard can make the whole economy redundant. If we play by RAW the first cleric to reach 17th level will chain-gate solars until the whole world is full of nothing but other solars. The first guy who find an efreeti will get infinite wishes and become a god. Just like any DM will have to adjust some spells to have a working game, and the question is generally not even asked because any player knows to not try that because it's no fun for anyone, so a few slight modifications should be made to keep a working economy.
Btw, murlind's spoon is high on the list of items that cannot be allowed as they are, otherwise each town pools resources to buy one and nobody has reasons for farming anymore.



The Wizard is a professional craftsman, and is very likely both smarter and higher level than his mundane counterpart.
But the wizard devoted himself to learning spells, not mundane crafts. Realistically, they can pick up other crafts as hobbies, but they will never be nowhere near as good as someone highly skilled that devoted his whole attention to it. I mean, the world best blacksmith is not also the world best tailor or the world best chef. Even though by RAW one would simply need to be the highest level expert and max ranks in all three of them (plus a few feats).
In fact, that the skill system supports such a surreal situation is the very reason that brought me to make the specialized expert npc class linked in my signature.

I am realizing just as I write this post how I am biased because I speculated on how a workable fantasy world economy should work and I made sure to adjust things to make the world work like that. And then I took them for granted and assumed that of course everyone else has to reach similar conclusions. It is strange how this thread is forcing me to realize the whole amount of houserules and homebrew that I put just to keep economy working in a certain way.
Still, I defend my work proudly, because it works greatly in game. nobody is feeling there is any difference over a regular setting, because the changes are small and only kick in when one is trying to deliberately break an economy. But if one wonders "why X or Y or Z", I have a good answer that does not require lots of handwaving for it.

[Nifft]

A few points for this:
1) it depends on the good. If you want something standardized, like, say, a bolt or nail, then yes, industrial goods are the best. But the best clothes are tailor-made, and the best food is hand-coocked.

The best clothes are tailor made from industrially produced fabrics, using only industrially produced tools.

Show me something superior made with only hand-crafted textiles and non-industrially-produced tools if you're actually making an honest comparison.

Otherwise, what you call "hand-made" is just some finishing touches on a loooooong industrial supply chain. You might be interested to learn that textiles and clothing were among the first industries to industrialize.


2) it depends on the artisan. Sure, your random average tailor who got his profession only because he inherited the shop from his father does not make better clothes than the wizard with fabricate and 1 rank in the craft skill. I'm talking about high quality luxury items here. You have a dumb Commoner with no tools for gaining an arbitrarily high Craft bonus.

On the other side is a Wizard who can -- temporarily, by expending daily resources -- gain several types of Craft bonus, plus has a high Int which counts as even more of a bonus.

The Wizard will win at level 20, vs. a level 20 Commoner. The only question is what level the Wizard starts to win, since after that the Wizard wins forever going forward.

[King of Nowhere]

The best clothes are tailor made from industrially produced fabrics, using only industrially produced tools.

Show me something superior made with only hand-crafted textiles and non-industrially-produced tools if you're actually making an honest comparison.

Otherwise, what you call "hand-made" is just some finishing touches on a loooooong industrial supply chain. You might be interested to learn that textiles and clothing were among the first industries to industrialize.


Ok, so we have different definitions of hand-made, and I admit textiles isn't the best example maybe. Still, what you get very wrong is that I am against any use of industrial tools or such. No, of course you use them whenever appropriate. To make the best stuff, however, you need very specialized, skilled workers to do some things - and I'll be frank, I have no idea what those things are in the specific field. I just know that to get the best product you need people with extensive know-how, and that's pretty much my point.



You have a dumb Commoner with no tools for gaining an arbitrarily high Craft bonus.

On the other side is a Wizard who can -- temporarily, by expending daily resources -- gain several types of Craft bonus, plus has a high Int which counts as even more of a bonus.

The Wizard will win at level 20, vs. a level 20 Commoner. The only question is what level the Wizard starts to win, since after that the Wizard wins forever going forward.
Again, wrong assumption that there is a dumb commoner against a wizard. So the whole world is populated by either wizards or dumb commoners, and nothing else. It's not like there can be smart commoners or anything.
And especially they cannot use magic. It's not like the best craftsman of a country is rich enough to afford plenty of magical help, either. You specified this guy is without tools; apparently there must be a law forbidding the purchase of tools to anyone who is not a wizard.

No, what I envision for a high level craftsman is some version of the expert class who has about the same intelligence of the wizard (it's not like wizards have the monopoly on 18 INT, nor anyone born with an 18 INT has the means or interest to study wizardry) and has plenty of magical tools and the capacity to use them. A guy who put in his craft the same effort the wizard put in wizardry. And I am fairly sure than, unless some major cheese is brough in, this guy is going to make higher quality stuff than what you can conjure with wizardry, barring maybe some high level spells with high cost like wish.

[Nifft]

Ok, so we have different definitions of hand-made, and I admit textiles isn't the best example maybe. Still, what you get very wrong is that I am against any use of industrial tools or such. No, of course you use them whenever appropriate. To make the best stuff, however, you need very specialized, skilled workers to do some things - and I'll be frank, I have no idea what those things are in the specific field. I just know that to get the best product you need people with extensive know-how, and that's pretty much my point. Well, if you're going to assert that we have different ideas, then you really ought to explain your idea.

For the context of this thread, my conception of hand-made is what a preindustrial medieval guildsman could make.


Again, wrong assumption that there is a dumb commoner against a wizard. So the whole world is populated by either wizards or dumb commoners, and nothing else. It's not like there can be smart commoners or anything.
And especially they cannot use magic. It's not like the best craftsman of a country is rich enough to afford plenty of magical help, either. You specified this guy is without tools; apparently there must be a law forbidding the purchase of tools to anyone who is not a wizard. Wrong again, I specified that he's without industrially-produced tools. He can have all the hand-crafted tools he can afford. They'd be relatively poor tools, as all were in those days, since hand-made tools are lower quality than industrially produced tools.

I do notice that you're trying to move the goalposts from a dedicated mundane craftsman -> "the best craftsman of a country". Let's not do that, mmmkay?


No, what I envision for a high level craftsman is some version of the expert class who has about the same intelligence of the wizard (it's not like wizards have the monopoly on 18 INT, nor anyone born with an 18 INT has the means or interest to study wizardry) and has plenty of magical tools and the capacity to use them. A guy who put in his craft the same effort the wizard put in wizardry. And I am fairly sure than, unless some major cheese is brough in, this guy is going to make higher quality stuff than what you can conjure with wizardry, barring maybe some high level spells with high cost like wish. I think the numbers will directly contradict your theory.

Go ahead, do some builds at levels... uh... 3 / 7 / 11 / 15, and I'll do a Wizard at those levels -- an adventuring Wizard, for whom crafting is a secondary concern -- and we'll see which one can do better. (Better after peanut-gallery corrections, of course.)

You'll stick to the Expert class, and the build guidelines in the DMG, including NPC wealth (p.127). Your Expert gets the Elite array; I'll take point buy (the equivalent to the Elite array would be 25 points, I think, but in many games a PC would get 32 point buy or better, while NPCs would use the Elite array).

How about it?

[Fizban]

Monster parts can be used to replace XP or to spontaneously add Metamagic Feats to your spells. Check "Power Components" in Dragon Magazine 312 and 337.
So optional rules from the magazine that a significant number of people reject on general principle. Not something they needed either way.


And Magecraft grants "a +5 Competence bonus on a Craft check for the day's work...". It could easily be understood as getting a +5 Competence bonus to Craft for the day.
But fine. Even if Magecraft doesn't grant that, you can still research a custom spell that grants you a +5 Competence bonus for a few minutes.
So if the DM takes a specific interpretation or invenst a custom spell, this thing that the DM may dislike happens. Maybe the DM should just not do that? As you are already aware, it's not needed to abuse Fabricate in the first place, so why cheapen the argument against Fabricate by assuming Magecraft has extra functions?


The text mentions cubic foots of raw materials that are converted into finished goods. It never says it has to be a single item.
The line is, "You convert material of one sort into a product that is of the same material." That's a product, made of one sort of material, by the strict reading that should be used when one is complaining about how the rules allow something broken. People that complain about things being broken because of loose readings have created their own problem (and of course, people who complain about strict readings have also created their own problem, because you're supposed to take the reading that works, not adhere to a dogma of how things must be read).


But in most worlds artisans keep existing, because most Wizards aren't interested in that...
Correct. Even by a strict reading most spells can be abused once you assume someone starts trying to abuse them, thus the default logic of the game must be that ridiculous exploits don't actually destroy the setting. This can be expressed in whatever way the DM desires, either because wizards don't care, non-wizards refuse to deal in "wizard" goods, other organizations potentially up to godly tier act against them, adding new restrictions to the spells, etc.


But the Wizard DOESN'T have bills. He can get anything with his magic.
And I never said anything of Wizards telling summoned minions to bring him money (he could use Earth Elementals to mine diamonds, though).
No, he can't? Create Food and Water is not a wizard spell, so that's out*. The components that are required for many spells, found in a 15gp spell component pouch, can only be replaced by special training or a specific spell that must be cast (limiting your use to how many copies you waste on replacing components). Crafting components have no 1st party source and can only be bought in town or substituted with the DM's blessing (use of that magazine article [or any splatbook for that matter] is also the DM's blessing of course). The assumption that a wizard can "get anything with magic" is predicated upon what, exactly? Seems to be that they'll just planar bind or simulacrum something to do it for them, which is so roundabout all it does is highlight how those things can't actually be done with just wizard magic.

*You might be about to say SM7: djinni, SLA, but the [summoning] descriptor has a little clause that says all spell durations end, and CFaW has a duration, giving more than enough room to say the intent is for SLAs to end and the created food disappears, once an actual DM shows up.

And the thing is, there are so few NPC wizards capable of casting these supposed economy destroyers, that it's not even a massive sweeping rule enforced over some crazy number of NPCs. You could actually list out all the 9th+ level NPC wizards of the cities in a setting, and it wouldn't be that long a list: four per metropolis, three per large city, and 1/2 per small city. Unless you're building something the size of Forgotten Realms, you can name every single one of them, and give them all very good reasons for why they don't go around trying to break the game, assuming they even *know* the spells that could supposedly do it.

No. I argue that, if high level Wizards were interested in money, they could control the economy with ease.
With the degree of latitude the internet likes to assume from hypothetical DMs, sure. But there are still plenty of ways an actual DM can take the wind out of some hypothetical wizards in their setting even before the existing assumption that they just don't care, let alone actually making them characters instead of straw men. Part of the problem here is that, as was probably mentioned on page one, the initial argument that the setting's economy even *can* be broken is flawed: the whole world runs on DM fiat, and the only person who can authorize sweeping changes to the default setting based on "realistic" rules abuse is. . . the DM. Which is why I point out that DMs who make their own mess get to lie in it.


I mentioned that some casters craft very low level magic items, but they don't really have any reason to bother crafting anything really powerful, since the most they can earn is 1,000 gp per day no matter what they craft. And anyways, mid to high level items have no demand, anyways...
Not sure where you get the idea that mid to high level items have no demand, but indeed, like all crafting conundrums things make a lot more sense when you get rid of the "a la carte magic marte" and take the reading where city/town gp limits include crafting on commission and even merchants/go-betweens who have contacts outside town.


Yes, clearly if you use the rules of the game and it produces a bad result, it is your fault and not the fault of the designers.
As above, DMs who use optional rules that produce results they don't like only have themselves to blame (DMs who use basic core rules and get results they don't like at least have some excuse, until they start whining instead of learning why they're getting those results and how to fix them). This has never really been an arguable point.

[Cosi]

The line is, "You convert material of one sort into a product that is of the same material."

The spell also allows you to make "clothes" and talks about "the quality of items made by this spell". fabricate makes plural outputs. That's simply the way the spell works. It only allows you to make one kind of output per casting, but it allows you to make as much of that as will fit into 10 cubic feat per level.


This has never really been an arguable point.

Which is why it baffles me that you believe the responsibility for delivering a functional product is on the consumer rather than the person selling it for money. It is always and everywhere the job of the designer to provide a product that does what consumers expect it to do.

[Andor13]

Otherwise, what you call "hand-made" is just some finishing touches on a loooooong industrial supply chain. You might be interested to learn that textiles and clothing were among the first industries to industrialize.

Of interest to the Wizard is the fact that the first sewing machine factory was burnt down by rioting tailors and seamstresses. Clothing manufacture used to employ a large percentage of the population.


Ok, so we have different definitions of hand-made, and I admit textiles isn't the best example maybe. Still, what you get very wrong is that I am against any use of industrial tools or such. No, of course you use them whenever appropriate. To make the best stuff, however, you need very specialized, skilled workers to do some things - and I'll be frank, I have no idea what those things are in the specific field. I just know that to get the best product you need people with extensive know-how, and that's pretty much my point.

Space suits. That's your example. Highest tech garment on Earth. Fantastically advanced and complicated technological system. Hand sewn because they are too complex to automate the process.

It's possibly worth noting that mass produced clothing that fits worth a damn is a direct outgrowth of WW1. When the American army was ramping up it took measurements of all the incoming soldiers, and that first large volume of anthropometric data in turn is what allowed the development of a set of useful sizes that would fit the majority of people passably well. Without that data mass produced clothing would have to be things like T-tunics, robes, or sun dresses, which don't much care what you're shaped like.

... Yes I know large volumes of useless trivia, what's your point?

[Andor13]

Which is why it baffles me that you believe the responsibility for delivering a functional product is on the consumer rather than the person selling it for money. It is always and everywhere the job of the designer to provide a product that does what consumers expect it to do.

Perusing the warning labels on most any product will tell you that consumers often have unreasonable expectations. (My favorite was on a pamphlet for a Husquvarna chainsaw "Do not stop moving blade with hand or genitals.") Like expecting a game about murder-hobo superheros to provide an accurate economic simulator for fantasy worlds. Actually, I'm not aware of any game that really even tries to do that. Real world economies are too complex to model well. Throw in all the fantasy elements and it's absurd to even try.

The thing is, an economy is an emergent system. It's inputs include materials, skills, desires, spells, enviroment, and the beliefs of the people in it about how it works. You can crash or save an economy by altering how people think about how it works. You can't model all that in a game. And if you tried the economy section would be inches thick. It's frankly better, and serves individual needs as well, to say "Here are some guidelines, the GM may need to make some adjustments." I mean, does anyone really think the economies of Athas and Eberron have much in common? Yet the PHB is supposed to serve both.

Very few players, in my experience, actually care very much about accurate economics. They don't want the price of +1 weapons to change just because they flooded the market. They don't want the price of food to go up because they failed to stop the Ankheg spawning. Even if they did, accurately computing how those prices would change would involves a lot of complicated math which would also involve inputs which are GM fiat anyway, so why not just leave it up to the GM?

[King of Nowhere]

Go ahead, do some builds at levels... uh... 3 / 7 / 11 / 15, and I'll do a Wizard at those levels -- an adventuring Wizard, for whom crafting is a secondary concern -- and we'll see which one can do better. (Better after peanut-gallery corrections, of course.)

You'll stick to the Expert class, and the build guidelines in the DMG, including NPC wealth (p.127). Your Expert gets the Elite array; I'll take point buy (the equivalent to the Elite array would be 25 points, I think, but in many games a PC would get 32 point buy or better, while NPCs would use the Elite array).

How about it?

As I said, that's because the system is poorly designed to handle a master craftsman. That's because an expert doesn't get a single bonus for being supposedly, you know, expert.
And, as I said, I don't care in the slightest about RAW when it's mostly even irrelevant to the game AND will produce results that disrupt the worldbuilding if applied to the end. Things are as I say because they make sense, and if the rules do not support that, I change the rules. That's my stance. I pick an economic system I like and I fit the rules to make it consistent.

[Nifft]

No, what I envision for a high level craftsman is some version of the expert class


As I said, that's because the system is poorly designed to handle a master craftsman. That's because an expert doesn't get a single bonus for being supposedly, you know, expert. Then maybe it's a bad idea to fixate on Expert as the pinnacle of master craftsmanship.


And, as I said, I don't care in the slightest about RAW when it's mostly even irrelevant to the game AND will produce results that disrupt the worldbuilding if applied to the end. Things are as I say because they make sense, and if the rules do not support that, I change the rules. That's my stance. I pick an economic system I like and I fit the rules to make it consistent. Well, if you drop the argument that Expert as-is makes for a viable master craftsman, and you create a new argument ("I ban fabricate and magical crafting stuff as not consistent with my setting.") -- if you do those two things, you'll end up with a better position.

You'll have lost this argument, since your original assertion will have been abandoned, but you'll be in a better place.



Of interest to the Wizard is the fact that the first sewing machine factory was burnt down by rioting tailors and seamstresses. Clothing manufacture used to employ a large percentage of the population. Were those historically Luddites, or did they start later? Either way, it's the same economic motivation.

And you'd right, of course -- the aspiring Wizufacturer needs to watch out for violence from those whose work she obviates.

[Cosi]

Sure, if we play by RAW a wizard can make the whole economy redundant. If we play by RAW the first cleric to reach 17th level will chain-gate solars until the whole world is full of nothing but other solars. The first guy who find an efreeti will get infinite wishes and become a god. Just like any DM will have to adjust some spells to have a working game, and the question is generally not even asked because any player knows to not try that because it's no fun for anyone, so a few slight modifications should be made to keep a working economy.

Yes, those things are clearly equivalent.


Realistically, they can pick up other crafts as hobbies, but they will never be nowhere near as good as someone highly skilled that devoted his whole attention to it.

Except they totally will. Because they get the exact same bonuses from levels, have a bigger INT score, and can take Skill Focus if they want it. The difference between "whole attention" and "minor afterthought" is +3 for Skill Focus. That's the same bonus the Wizard would get for having the Headband of Intellect he 100% has.


Perusing the warning labels on most any product will tell you that consumers often have unreasonable expectations. (My favorite was on a pamphlet for a Husquvarna chainsaw "Do not stop moving blade with hand or genitals.") Like expecting a game about murder-hobo superheros to provide an accurate economic simulator for fantasy worlds. Actually, I'm not aware of any game that really even tries to do that. Real world economies are too complex to model well. Throw in all the fantasy elements and it's absurd to even try.

The thing is, an economy is an emergent system. It's inputs include materials, skills, desires, spells, enviroment, and the beliefs of the people in it about how it works. You can crash or save an economy by altering how people think about how it works. You can't model all that in a game. And if you tried the economy section would be inches thick. It's frankly better, and serves individual needs as well, to say "Here are some guidelines, the GM may need to make some adjustments." I mean, does anyone really think the economies of Athas and Eberron have much in common? Yet the PHB is supposed to serve both.

Very few players, in my experience, actually care very much about accurate economics. They don't want the price of +1 weapons to change just because they flooded the market. They don't want the price of food to go up because they failed to stop the Ankheg spawning. Even if they did, accurately computing how those prices would change would involves a lot of complicated math which would also involve inputs which are GM fiat anyway, so why not just leave it up to the GM?

I mean, sure, you could declare that you were not going to provide economics rules. I'm not sure how that's relevant to Fizban's claim that if you use the rules you have paid for and they don't do what they are supposed to that is your fault.


As I said, that's because the system is poorly designed to handle a master craftsman. That's because an expert doesn't get a single bonus for being supposedly, you know, expert.

It seems like the more parsimonious explanation isn't that the game somehow forgot the bonuses the Expert was very definitely supposed to have, but that the intention was that Wizards (who get abilities like fabricate that make them better at crafting) are supposed to be better crafters than Experts. You can want something different, but the game has made very clear choices.

[Fizban]

The spell also allows you to make "clothes" and talks about "the quality of items made by this spell". fabricate makes plural outputs. That's simply the way the spell works. It only allows you to make one kind of output per casting, but it allows you to make as much of that as will fit into 10 cubic feat per level.
"The quality of items made by this spell" does not explicitly refer to a single casting, and can be read in the sense of all items created by the spell ever. You can run it however you want, but you're responsible for your ruling.


I mean, sure, you could declare that you were not going to provide economics rules. I'm not sure how that's relevant to Fizban's claim that if you use the rules you have paid for and they don't do what they are supposed to that is your fault.
The problem is it's hard to address this without accusing people of not reading the DMG, or at least it feels like it. Because it in no way ever endorses the idea that all printed material from every book will, could, or should all work together without unforeseen consequences. Instead it has cautionary language about introducing things carefully and making adjustments as needed. The topic of how many people read the DMG cover to cover, and how many only consult it for specific rules, has been its own thread.

Just because a majority of vocals in the internet community ignore the warning labels and instructions, doesn't mean the rules aren't doing what they're "supposed to." You can run the game how you want, and that means you're responsible for anything you include, even in the core rules. It's pretty much all there in the DMG.



Spellcasters "breaking" the economy always comes down to a couple specific spells vs the suggested stable/DM fiat economy. Funny enough, if those spells hurt your immersion you can just take them out of the game- they're actually very small and unimportant game elements whos removal does have little or no impact on the parts of the game that are "supposed to" work, the parts about dungeoneering combat. Not that the OP was actually arguing about this at all- they were skeptical about normal person income and overall wealth totals.

Same thing applies to Mind Flayers that don't need to eat brains- if you want to use the optional psionic mind flayers, and give them what you consider optimized power choices, and that means Sustain breaks the whole concept, then aside from just *not doing that* you can also remove or alter the Sustain power (or the Mind Flayer nutritional information) so that it doesn't do that. Stock Mind Flayers have serious feeding issues and thus are relatively ineligible for world domination.

And just throw in a +1 for both of Andor13's posts rather than quoting and lengthily agreeing.