Do DMs generally allow everything to be bought?

[magicalmagicman]

This thread got me thinking:http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?572137-Purchasable-Creatures

Do DMs generally allow every single magic item in existence to be available for purchase at any settlement as long as it follows the DMG Demographics? Even exotic mounts, evil alchemical items like liquid pain, scrolls of PrCs, etc?

All my DMs do and I was wondering if that was the norm.

[Manyasone]

What a can of worms you'll open, mate...
As a DM i don't allow my players to buy whatever they want just because. The game however expects you to do this, but printed modules for instance are almost always in 'LOL, Nope' zones.
But there will be plenty of opinions, i'm sure

[DeTess]

It varies. One DM that I played with usually ran very short games or one-shots that started at mid levels, and he allowed everyone to spent their WBL on anything in the books, and afterwards was oretty lenient on what could be available.

Another DM was a lot stricter. If you can't reasonably explain why the particular item you want is available where you currently are, he'd either flat-out say you can't get it (if it's something highly specific and rare), or get out the dice let them decide.

Edit: I don't really think there's a 'wrong' or 'right' way to do this, as long as the world as a whole follows the same rules for NPC's regarding scarcity or non-scarcity of magic items. If I'm playing with a DM limitng what we can get regarding magic gear, but all his NPC's are tooled up with custom stuff, I'd complain, but if magic items are scarce for everyone (and the GM takes the lack of stuff into account for encounter design), it'd be fine.

[BassoonHero]

Different DMs have different policies. Myself, if I'd let the players have something in the first place, and there's no specific reason why it should be hard to find, then I'll let them buy it.

Non-spellcasters typically rely on magic items to compensate for potentially-crippling vulnerabilities and capability gaps. Without these magic items, nonmagical characters will often find themselves unable to meaningfully contribute. Restricting access to magic items tends to hurt already-weaker non-spellcasters far more than it hurts spellcasters.

[heavyfuel]

I have never played with DMs that allowed for everything.

Most common restrictions I've seen come in the form of consumables that normally allow for you to access spells earlier than what your level normally permits. These usually come in the form of restriction on Scrolls and Spellcasting services being far more expensive than what the book says.

Personally, I somewhat embrace these ideas. Scrolls/Spellcasting an ECL 6 caster could create/provide are usually common. Beyond ECL 6 and up to ECL 12 means it's difficult to access. ECL 13+ means it's almost inaccessible (though my games tend to take place at lower levels, where a 10th lv PC is probably the strongest guy around)

[Crichton]

Depends on the setting we're in currently, but if the players are somewhere you'd expect to find pretty much anything (a city as big and bustling as Waterdeep, or Sharn, for example), then yeah, the players can pretty much have at it. Gotta run each purchase by the DM though, and explain items he's not familiar with, why you want them, and discuss any uncertainties in the rules wording for stuff, and if they can be potentially used for any level of cheese. Pretty much a good faith arrangement. DM has veto power for things that are clearly broken, but agrees to use this power with a light touch, as long as the players similarly agree not to engage in abuse of broken or misworded rules texts.

Aside from the agreement to avoid such cheese, though, if it exists in a 1st party source and you want it, you're likely to find it in such a large bustling city, and can buy it as you wish.

[Darth Ultron]

Generally, no.

Most 'adventurer' worthy items can only be gotten from and adventure.

The average alchemist shop sells only the common cheap items, like sunrods.

The average magic shop only sells non combat items, and mostly things like warm knife or a self lacing boot.

[Efrate]

if the city in question could reasonably have it and it's the right size, go nuts. depending on how esoteric it is might require some checks or bribes, but generally go for it. you won't find liquid pain in Silverymoon unless the story has some deep stuff going down, or specially made drow crafted gear, but otherwise yeah.

You might have to go to skullport to get drugs, slaves, or demon armor but you can find it in waterdeep. If you are in sigil, or city of brass, you can likely find anything including larvae at a stall in the market.

Dis might not have celestial armor readily available, but odds are someone lost it and it can be sold. and Mercanes go everywhere.

[bean illus]

Sorta. Almost everything can be found with a little role playing.

But if it's super cool or powerful, then they get the quest, or plot hook. Things can usually be found eventually, but not quite everything is in the first shop/town/city/dungeon you look in.

[Troacctid]

I usually say that "normal" items are reliably available in big cities, and more unusual ones can generally be had with a Gather Information check. Smaller towns might be more limited in what you can get quickly (I might roll a few times from the tables in MIC for what the local markets have in stock), but there's a decent chance you'll find someone to take a commission if you're willing to wait. Custom items usually require a commission. Things like grafts, symbionts, and exotic pets tend to be harder to find even in cities, and might require a Gather Information check or a short sidequest. None of these limitations apply to starting equipment, of course, since it's assumed all that happened in your backstory.

[Mike Miller]

Generally? No. However, I will allow most things.

[Nifft]

Hell no.

You can by what's reasonable.

A desert community won't sell you a ship. An island town won't sell you enough war horses to outfit a cavalry regiment. A community of horse-nomads on the steppes won't sell you farming implements. An agricultural hamlet on the plains won't sell you mining gear. A mountain village won't sell you camels.

Most places don't have most things. Some places have craftsmen which can be commissioned to make things for you. Getting favor with skilled craftsmen is a worthwhile reward to pursue.

Furthermore, most places will not sell you Evil stuff like Liquid Pain -- if you find that on the black market, it's a sign that something is VERY wrong with the community -- this is probably a plot-hook, and if you don't follow it up then you can expect something terrible to happen (which might mean the destruction of that community, or might mean something worse). If you want Evil gear, you'll need to go to the Planes to find it. Generally the Evil planes, for obvious reasons.

[RoboEmperor]

Since everyone is gathered here, let me ask a quick off-topic question. If I was a player in your game, would you let me buy a Lodestone Marauder if we're in a small city? Costs 6,000gp to buy, and you can train it yourself in 6 weeks or hire someone for 2,500gp.
MMIV p.90.

PC level 5.

Just curious. I have a grasp of what stuff DMs allow or disallow from shops, but exotic mounts is an unknown area since no one I know ever purchased one.

[Troacctid]

Since everyone is gathered here, let me ask a quick off-topic question. If I was a player in your game, would you let me buy a Lodestone Marauder if we're in a small city? Costs 6,000gp to buy, and you can train it yourself in 6 weeks or hire someone for 2,500gp.
MMIV p.90.

PC level 5.

Just curious. I have a grasp of what stuff DMs allow or disallow from shops, but exotic mounts is an unknown area since no one I know ever purchased one.
Well, the monster entry actually talks about where you might find them. In Eberron, you'd most likely have to go to the Mror Holds, which seems to be the only place they're commonly trained. In the Forgotten Realms, you could find them in any major city, but they'd be most common in Underdark cities.

In either case, the book says they're normally trained as guardians, so if you wanted to bring one with you on an adventure rather than having it guard a fixed location, I'd expect you to train it yourself with six weeks of work and a DC 20 Handle Animal check as per the text, and thereafter it would be subject to the usual Handle Animal rules: DC 15 check as a move action to command it to perform a trick it knows, DC 30 check as a full-round action to push it to do a trick it doesn't know. Even with training, I would probably not consider it to be an appropriate mount, since...well, just look at the picture. You don't want to sit on that.

[heavyfuel]

Since everyone is gathered here, let me ask a quick off-topic question. If I was a player in your game, would you let me buy a Lodestone Marauder if we're in a small city? Costs 6,000gp to buy, and you can train it yourself in 6 weeks or hire someone for 2,500gp.
MMIV p.90.

PC level 5.

Just curious. I have a grasp of what stuff DMs allow or disallow from shops, but exotic mounts is an unknown area since no one I know ever purchased one.

If you could afford one at this level, yeah. But if you've been saving so much money to afford it by level 5, you likely won't have made it to level 5.

However, I would first and foremost require you to pass a DC 34 Knowledge (Dungeoneering) check to even know they can be trained. That's the stipulated DC in MM4.

Do these 2 things, and you can buy your guardian. Aka, not your mount/slave/pet that goes adventuring with you.

[Temotei]

Almost anything mundane can be bought from pretty much anywhere.

Magic items are mostly available, with a few banned exceptions, but some rarer items/relics/artifacts are going to be tougher to find. You might have to go on a quest or something.

Animals vary. Horses, mules, that sort of stuff--easy to find. You could buy them from, again, pretty much anywhere. Exotic animals might be available in cities or, again, as part of a quest or something. Maybe the party sees a giant eagle nest on a distant mountain and they can work toward the giant eagle to tame it/steal an egg.

That's how I do it. So, basically what Troacctid said.

EDIT: If a player were to ask for a lodestone marauder at level 5, I'd probably just ask them to hold off for a few levels (assuming they had the gold in the first place) and tell them to buy something else in the meantime. If they were really insistent I guess I'd allow it but that's going to chunk a level 5 character's wealth a lot. I dunno if it'd be worth it considering the checks involved and the pain in training/rearing.

[DrBloodbathMC]

I generally limit it by town. Bigger cities will have most "normal" stuff, smaller towns will have a worth limit like nothing over 4k.

[Florian]

Nope. Outside of forum discussion, I've never been in a game where everything was go, no matter if that includes books, rules and material or being able to buy just anything.

[DeadMech]

I don't see the fun of having books full of cool toys that the players aren't allowed to ever play with. So yes almost everything is available through commerce. The only exceptions that come up off the top of my head are things I expect to be one of a kind.

Though there are some caveats. I tend towards most purchased magic items being commissioned. A corner shop containing more wealth than entire kingdoms in magic items out in the open isn't terribly realistic. Most crafters don't have the wealth to keep a full stock and most aren't dumb enough to keep it where anyone with points in sleight of hand are going to just walk away with it. Though some of the more commonly sought after magic items, especially towards the cheaper spectrum might just be hidden in a safe or some extra dimensional storage space or more likely a safe inside of an extra dimensional storage space.

Otherwise the process is find the crafter or representative of said crafter. Tell them what you want in character and me out of character. Then they see if they already have it or more likely if it's something they can produce. I don't see the value of questing to find places to spend money so either they do or they will just point you to whoever they learned the craft from who's over in next biggest city. Once the crafter agrees to make the item the party pays some percentage of the cost upfront depending on factors. In more lawful areas particularly large purchases might have them sign a contract, receive a copy, and deliver that copy to an official who's responsibility is making sure such bargains are honoured. Then they go about their downtime activities and receive the item when it's done some reasonable time later.

On the plus side the players get to customize the magic items appearance. Allot of them out of the book look absolutely ridiculous. Alternatively you could approach players who are part of large organizations like churches, universities, governments, ect and have them gain their magic items through them in exchange for dues, tithes, donations, ect... and the resulting items will end up fitting that organization's aesthetics.

For animals I suppose you could employ a similar approach. You aren't going to a shop that has every species of creature right there. You are going to someone with the ties to breeders or hunters. You pay a percentage of the cost up front and then they go to those contacts and after some amount of downtime they come back with the creature.

[RoboEmperor]

Well, the monster entry actually talks about where you might find them. In Eberron, you'd most likely have to go to the Mror Holds, which seems to be the only place they're commonly trained. In the Forgotten Realms, you could find them in any major city, but they'd be most common in Underdark cities.

In either case, the book says they're normally trained as guardians, so if you wanted to bring one with you on an adventure rather than having it guard a fixed location, I'd expect you to train it yourself with six weeks of work and a DC 20 Handle Animal check as per the text, and thereafter it would be subject to the usual Handle Animal rules: DC 15 check as a move action to command it to perform a trick it knows, DC 30 check as a full-round action to push it to do a trick it doesn't know. Even with training, I would probably not consider it to be an appropriate mount, since...well, just look at the picture. You don't want to sit on that.

Right, i forgot about the DC 5 increase. Thanks for reminding me. That makes things more complicated for sure, but if the thing is doing the guard trick, handle animal might not be necessary at all. It will be if no one is charging me though.

Not that I'll be riding the thing but, exotic saddles do exist for a reason. Now that I think about it I think you're right that they're not a mount. They were under "mounts" in the table of contents which is why I've been refering to them as mounts.


If you could afford one at this level, yeah. But if you've been saving so much money to afford it by level 5, you likely won't have made it to level 5.

However, I would first and foremost require you to pass a DC 34 Knowledge (Dungeoneering) check to even know they can be trained. That's the stipulated DC in MM4.

Do these 2 things, and you can buy your guardian. Aka, not your mount/slave/pet that goes adventuring with you.

The text says "to take orders" not "train as a guardian" so you're wrong about the mount/slave/pet.

However you do make a valid point about the knowledge 34 DC. But if they're sold on the open market (they are) I'm pretty sure I can learn they are trainable and available with a DC 15 Gather Information check.


EDIT: If a player were to ask for a lodestone marauder at level 5, I'd probably just ask them to hold off for a few levels (assuming they had the gold in the first place) and tell them to buy something else in the meantime. If they were really insistent I guess I'd allow it but that's going to chunk a level 5 character's wealth a lot. I dunno if it'd be worth it considering the checks involved and the pain in training/rearing.

It's a CR9 tank so honestly I think 6,000gp is too cheap for what it brings to the table. It will probably outshine the party fighter for a good while.

[ericgrau]

FWIW the PHB says anything under 3,000 gp is fair game in a large city (maybe metropolis? I forget). Over that and the players need to do some hunting.

I thought of this question a while back and my solution was to have a spreadsheet roll randomly many times for shop contents. Players can buy whatever is available. Anything else they need to hire an NPC to craft. The original version is in my sig but that was so long ago it might have flaws that I can't remember. IIRC it might have issues with distribution or total value in specific categories, and it might be better to select "all".

[mabriss lethe]

Depends on the location: I've found that some of the most fun comes from being somewhat spare on magic items that are readily available throughout most of the campaign, but allowing for regular intervals where the PCs can just go on a relatively unrestricted shopping spree. (everything gets vetted beforehand, but I tend to be pretty lenient in those moments.) I also employ an out of character wish list during character creation, every player gives me a list of 10 items of varying price that they want their character to have. Some of those things will show up as loot, and I will make sure the rest is available either for sale or as part of/the entire point of a quest.

[Troacctid]

Right, i forgot about the DC 5 increase. Thanks for reminding me. That makes things more complicated for sure, but if the thing is doing the guard trick, handle animal might not be necessary at all. It will be if no one is charging me though.

Not that I'll be riding the thing but, exotic saddles do exist for a reason. Now that I think about it I think you're right that they're not a mount. They were under "mounts" in the table of contents which is why I've been refering to them as mounts.

The text says "to take orders" not "train as a guardian" so you're wrong about the mount/slave/pet.
The text does imply that they are normally trained to guard places, not people.

As a DM, I expect anyone with animal pets to be able to control them if they want to use them in combat. It doesn't take a lot of investment to make the DC 15 check, and it is important to be able to use the Down command sometimes. Besides, it'll be more effective in combat if you have the ability to sic it on an enemy proactively instead of having it camp in front of you waiting for them to attack you first.

[Nifft]

I don't see the fun of having books full of cool toys that the players aren't allowed to ever play with. So yes almost everything is available through commerce. The only exceptions that come up off the top of my head are things I expect to be one of a kind.

Well, here's the problem: allowing all books doesn't result in all the cool things.

It results in only the best things at each level. Then next game the same best things (they're still best after all), and so you've removed a large chunk of replay value. Each game, lockstep progression through the same best things.

What seems to work to actually use all the cool toys -- not just the few best things at the top of every guide -- is to vary the setting with each new campaign.

So one game, there are magebred horses and ghost tigers available.

Next game, those things are gone, and instead you can buy lodestone marauders and dinosaurs as mounts.

Game after that, it's flying islands, so the mounts are stuff like dire eagles.

Then we're on islands which don't fly, so lots of aquatic mounts for the party of Surf Dragoons.

-- -- --

This is also why the Spell Compendium should be a DM-only book, and DMs should include a few non-core spells in each game -- but not the same new spells in every game.

A rich and interesting world is impossible when players are rewarded for treating it like a solved walkthrough.

[DeadMech]

Well, here's the problem: allowing all books doesn't result in all the cool things.

It results in only the best things at each level. Then next game the same best things (they're still best after all), and so you've removed a large chunk of replay value. Each game, lockstep progression through the same best things.


If you don't trust your players to just play the game then why are you playing with them?

[SLOTHRPG95]

It really depends on the campaign that I'm trying to run, and the location of the players in that campaign world. I've run a game where players were based in Sigil, and could buy anything that existed in my game there, so long as they had the coin and the contacts. Now, while they were stuck in the tarterian depths of carceri for a while, their access to a lot of goods and services was (understandably) severely limited, but some things they could still find just fine.

On the other hand, I've run a campaign where buying any sort of magic item other than a potion or low-level scroll required finding a specific seller, either in a big city, or perhaps in their secluded mage's tower. Furthermore, there were plenty of restrictions on mundane items, inasmuch as they seemed common-sense. No camels for sale in the underground dwarven mining town, but equally no dwarven waraxes for sale at the (human/orc-dominated) desert oasis village.

As to the Lodestone Marauder specifically, the answer'd be no. But not for any profound reason, I just don't ever play with MMIV or MMV material in my campaigns, and you can't buy what doesn't exist. Just like you can't buy an arquebus if they haven't been invented yet in your campaign setting, or a dinosaur if they're all extinct.

[unseenmage]

I had a character once, a gestalt Cleric Artificer even, who not only had access to everything, but had infinite wealth to boot.
That was a fun game.
We never did figure out how/why that character was getting inspirations for inventions from other campaign settings. We asked his deity and that guy threw his hands up in befuddlement.


Conversely, I had another artificer trapped in a magic-mart-less wasteland where most encounters were surprise attacks and mending/prestidigitation couldn't clean/repair ancient tattered clothes of slain undead 'because they were too gross'. (which my character didn't learn until AFTER paying the xp to use the spell from his infusion)


Both were Faerun games, couldn't have been more different if they'd tried.


My current GM favors rolling % dice to tell if stuff is available now. Though most of the time they're probably just fudging and buying time to think about whether a requested item will bork their well laid plans or not.:smallsmile:

[Mordaedil]

In my experience, never. You get what the DM's have to offer. However, if there is something you are burning for, you can put in a request for the item and receive it custom-crafted, and usually they let you get away with paying the XP cost up front.

[Nifft]

If you don't trust your players to just play the game then why are you playing with them?

Making good choices is playing the game.

[Yogibear41]

We have to roll a % dice to buy any item, even something simple. With the % changing based on the size of the location/town/city we are in. Been in a major city before and wasn't able to find something simple like a healing belt, because I rolled bad.

[Fizban]

Items are available to purchase in places where it makes sense for them to be available for purchase. If there's someone that can craft it and is in the practice of selling magic items (or you can convince them to do it for you) then you can commission it. The gp limits for town sizes reflect some amount of magic item trade, but that doesn't mean literally every item in every book can be bought everywhere, because that would be silly.

Exotic mounts have a special mention, since I have reasonable prices set for a number of "exotic" mounts that aren't actually that exotic, but if you're outside an area that actually breeds them then you're obviously gonna be paying a premium if one can be found at all. I do not use MM2's Warbeast template prices, because those are ludicrously cheap- even the 2,000/4,000gp given in Oriental Adventures is chump change compared to the cost of getting an elephant any other way.

Regarding exotic "guard beasts," no I'd say those aren't generally available. Flying, extra heavy load, or special sense creatures are obvious, but something like a Loadstone Marauder is the kind of thing some rich guy or a military hires someone to pull off specifically. There is no market for monsters, just people who have them. If you want to be a person that has one, you'll have to figure out how to do it, or I'll have to figure out who and how much you're going to pay for it based on the situation.

[Malphegor]

I always feel that in any established marketplace with experienced traders, whilst they might not have everything, they can still get anything. In a world where adventuring is a profession some take, It only takes a couple of grand to hire a few Ind'ianna Jonnz drow adventurers to plunder some tomb for some highly specific artefact, or contact the Guild of Thieves for their aid in finding this strange oil...

Anything's possible, it just might not be available right this second, the adventurers just have to be back in town by X date assuming the expedition works out okay.

Of course, they can accompany the hirelings should they wish, and get the item themselves...

[Hurnn]

I generally follow the community value rules in the dmg at about 1/2 value for magic items.

[Quertus]

I don't think I've seen GMs limit what the players can purchase since the days of 2e. Good thing, too, since limiting gear hurts muggles, and therefore hurts game balance, generally speaking.

That having been said, that's just one more way that 3e is more "gamey" than earlier editions - something that, in retrospect, I probably should have complained about louder, so that they understood that making D&D gamey was a potential issue, before they made 4e.

[emeraldstreak]

I allow spellcasting services/scrolls per the PHB, meaning level 8/CL 15 (unless in Eberron). Evil items and such, not really.

[PunBlake]

Well, here's the problem: allowing all books doesn't result in all the cool things.

It results in only the best things at each level. Then next game the same best things (they're still best after all), and so you've removed a large chunk of replay value. Each game, lockstep progression through the same best things.

I kinda agree, but with a caveat: this is really dependent on the level of system mastery of your players. How well do they know all the available books? You can't buy an item if you don't know about it. I toss cool items from MIC as loot, and often, my players don't know them.

I generally play with all books available, using community size and other variables (community alignment, laws, location, ect.) to limit item availability as makes logical sense. This is mostly because my group likes hard combat more than subterfuge, such that good items are a requirement for survival. That said, some "best" items are banned in early game (Anklets of Translocation).

[Quertus]

Well, here's the problem: allowing all books doesn't result in all the cool things.

It results in only the best things at each level. Then next game the same best things (they're still best after all), and so you've removed a large chunk of replay value. Each game, lockstep progression through the same best things.

What seems to work to actually use all the cool toys -- not just the few best things at the top of every guide -- is to vary the setting with each new campaign.

This is also why the Spell Compendium should be a DM-only book, and DMs should include a few non-core spells in each game -- but not the same new spells in every game.

A rich and interesting world is impossible when players are rewarded for treating it like a solved walkthrough.


Making good choices is playing the game.


I kinda agree, but with a caveat: this is really dependent on the level of system mastery of your players. How well do they know all the available books? You can't buy an item if you don't know about it. I toss cool items from MIC as loot, and often, my players don't know them.

I generally play with all books available, using community size and other variables (community alignment, laws, location, ect.) to limit item availability as makes logical sense. This is mostly because my group likes hard combat more than subterfuge, such that good items are a requirement for survival. That said, some "best" items are banned in early game (Anklets of Translocation).

So... Hmmm... I feel like role-playing, not optimizing, is playing the game. IME, I don't see a lot of the same things taken over and over for being optimal. I do, I suppose, see the same things taken over and over, despite being suboptimal, because the player knows that is what they like (I'm looking at you, muggle classes).

So, I guess the question is, how can you get players to transition from "playing to win" to "playing for fun" (which, IMO/IME, is much more, well, fun)? Do that, and you won't have to put any effort into restricting their access to cool toys.

EDIT: nothing against cool world building with flying islands or anything. Just, if someone wants to take a normal horse or a dinosaur in such a game, why not let them?

[BassoonHero]

The trouble is that even if non-spellcasters aren't "playing to win", they still have to "play to compete". This usually means acquiring a reasonable set of numeric bonuses and a pile of utility items. It's not "fun" to find yourself unable to meaningfully contribute to an encounter because you didn't buy magical flight.

As a DM, you can address this by promising not to use flying opponents, battlefield control, and other tactics that many characters need pricey magic items to counter.

[Thrantar]

To me, the question is all about the proprietor of the store. I tend to assume solely owned businesses, or perhaps partnerships, but definitely not corporations. Further, I assume that the owner/operator(s) manually handle acquisition and/or manufacture of goods.
This means that there is a caster involved somewhere in the business, since casting in required for (most) item creation feats.
Casters have access (broadly speaking) to divination.
As a result, while no market offers everything, most high end vendors can offer what you are looking for.
This becomes more prominent as the profile of the adventuring party increases, due to the non-linear value scaling of magic items.

[Telonius]

Standard magic items listed in the DMG are generally available as long as the community is of an appropriate size. (No, the two-horse Thorp you've just encountered is not going to have a Holy Avenger available). Custom magic items are available on commission based on the highest-level caster in the community. If there's a good reason for the item to not be available at Ye Olde Magick Shoppe, they won't be. Darkskulls, Robes of Bones, and the like are probably going to be frowned upon in Good-aligned communities. They might be available at a markup.

For the MiC, most items are available as above. Relics and Item Collections are MacGuffins and are not readily available. Relics in particular need a character with Sanctify Relic (a very uncommon feat) to create them. They're mostly going to be special treasures or plot hooks.

[Quertus]

The trouble is that even if non-spellcasters aren't "playing to win", they still have to "play to compete". This usually means acquiring a reasonable set of numeric bonuses and a pile of utility items. It's not "fun" to find yourself unable to meaningfully contribute to an encounter because you didn't buy magical flight.

As a DM, you can address this by promising not to use flying opponents, battlefield control, and other tactics that many characters need pricey magic items to counter.

I mean, sure, play to the level of the table. And that's easier if all options are on the table, IMO.

So, sure, you've got flying opponents, and, a) to have fun, you need to contribute, and b) to play at the level of the table, you need to contribute well non-trivially. Seems a fair scenario. Off the top of my head, I've seen that handled by buying flying items (of various sorts), buying teleportation items (of various sorts), being a flying race, buying a flying mount, having the party caster cast Fly or other spells, paying for spellcasting services, having a primary or decent secondary ranged weapon, being a spellcaster with ranged spells, forcing the foe into melee (via cover, grounding it, being immune to its ranged attacks), ridiculous leaping skills, ridiculous hiding skills, weird vestige/essentia things, or even using your UMD to kill our profit margins eating up charges from our loot. Which doesn't sound terribly samey to me, and doesn't even include dealing with some other portion of the encounter (or the (probably horrible) Shadowrun technique of not contributing to this encounter, but owning another one).

So, if the only reason to limit purchases is a concern about samey-ness, well, I've not seen that at my tables.

[RoboEmperor]

So, if the only reason to limit purchases is a concern about samey-ness, well, I've not seen that at my tables.

Nifft's table is not the norm. Far from it.

In fact his argument is wrong. The reason the PCs at my table are so unique is because all of the options available to them which lets them create weird characters who are strong enough to beat the campaign. They intentionally choose suboptimal options for fun. If you limit those options then they just end up power gaming and optimizing with those options to the max instead of playing the weird thing they wanted to do.

Now if the players at his table all look alike and don't deviate from the online builds then that's a problem with his players.

[heavyfuel]

Thinking about it, most of my DMs apply plenty of limitations on special materials. Anything other than ordinary steel, silver, and cold iron is usually a pain to get your hands on.

Mithril is specially difficult to find in the games I play. Your standard Mithril Breastplate usually involves either a sidequest to obtain the ore, or it costs you and arm and a leg.

[Nifft]

I kinda agree, but with a caveat: this is really dependent on the level of system mastery of your players. How well do they know all the available books? You can't buy an item if you don't know about it. I toss cool items from MIC as loot, and often, my players don't know them. If your players discover places like this forum, where "standard" optimization advice echos loud and often, they don't need to earn any system mastery of their own.

Same goes if your players have access to handbooks / guides, and those are just a google search away.


I generally play with all books available, using community size and other variables (community alignment, laws, location, ect.) to limit item availability as makes logical sense. This is mostly because my group likes hard combat more than subterfuge, such that good items are a requirement for survival. That said, some "best" items are banned in early game (Anklets of Translocation). Sounds like you've got a fun table.

If you run long-term campaigns, this trick might be useful to you:

- "Best" items are unavailable until the PCs invent them.
- These items forever carry the "inventor" PC's name -- Anklet of Jodhi, for example, rather than "of translocation" -- or in my game Blessed Book of PC.

This only works once per item per campaign, but it's really enjoyable for the players to get their names on high-quality items that they find desirable. It turns the speed-bump into something fun.

Plus you can make a fun and dangerous quest to find the exotic items necessary to create the first Anklet of Jodhi.



So... Hmmm... I feel like role-playing, not optimizing, is playing the game.

If your character is competent at her role, then optimization is role-playing.

[Doctor Awkward]

In general, I follow strict pricing guidelines in my games for all 1st-party printed items.

If an item is under the wealth limit of a particular village, you can buy it there.

If it's a custom item that doesn't appear in the books, I usually have the party roll a Gather Information check to locate it. At a minimum, it will give them a lead as to where they can find it and send them on a sidequest.

If I want to do something more immersive, I apply this Gather Information rule to 1st-party material based on books. For instance, if you want something out of Drow of the Underdark, a check will lead you to a town or city that deals with the drow (adversely or otherwise).

[PunBlake]

So... Hmmm... I feel like role-playing, not optimizing, is playing the game. IME, I don't see a lot of the same things taken over and over for being optimal.
That's mostly how my players feel. My current group is on its fifth campaign (in a custom world) going from 1-15ish. I joined them in campaign three. In campaign four, we all (all five characters, for different reasons) bought Anklets of Translocation as early as possible, and whole party swift action teleport access trivialized multiple encounters. Thus, we agreed to avoid them until after level 6. This is pretty much my only experience with an overly optimal item hurting a game, though. I could probably fix it by house-ruling a price increase, but I don't like that.


Mithril is specially difficult to find in the games I play.
:smallfrown: I personally hate this restriction on mithril (though I'm fine for it for rarer/non-SRD stuff like Starmetal or Riverine). Already high list price and in-game delay from non-local availability/shipping is usually enough for me. Item(s) stolen in shipping is an interesting one-off side quest.


"Best" items are unavailable until the PCs invent them
I like the idea of this, but I feel it needs to be implemented/player knowledge at the beginning of a campaign. It also gives PCs a reason to take an item crafting feat. Hmm. Saved for future use.

[Quertus]

If your character is competent at her role, then optimization is role-playing.

... I've met a lot of competent programmers who all had different styles, whose code wasn't all samey. I've seen a lot of competent characters who performed in highly diverse ways, and weren't all samey. I've seen a lot of cool art that was vastly different, all really competent, and not at all samey.

I'm not really seeing where you're coming from.

I mean, sure, all professional jockeys are, like, 25 pounds soaking wet. All professional linebackers are, like, 300 pounds naked. And you wouldn't want to switch the two. But I suspect that there's a lot of differences in the ways that even professional sports-ball players take to their roles to make them unique.


That's mostly how my players feel. My current group is on its fifth campaign (in a custom world) going from 1-15ish. I joined them in campaign three. In campaign four, we all (all five characters, for different reasons) bought Anklets of Translocation as early as possible, and whole party swift action teleport access trivialized multiple encounters. Thus, we agreed to avoid them until after level 6. This is pretty much my only experience with an overly optimal item hurting a game, though. I could probably fix it by house-ruling a price increase, but I don't like that.

I can't say as I've ever seen that. The original 3.0 Winged Cloak, clocking in, IIRC, at a mere 5.5k, was rather popular at my tables (rarely was there a party past level 6 or so without at least 1 character wearing one), but even it was not ubiquitous. And the camo Winged Travel Cloak of Elvenkind was different from the Gleeman-style Winged Cloak of Charisma +6, or the angelic-themed Winged Cloak of Protection +5. So even they didn't feel samey.

[Nifft]

... I've met a lot of competent programmers who all had different styles, whose code wasn't all samey. I've seen a lot of competent characters who performed in highly diverse ways, and weren't all samey. I've seen a lot of cool art that was vastly different, all really competent, and not at all samey.

I'm not really seeing where you're coming from.

You're looking at a domain (programming) which is both (a) real, and (b) probably the most complex human endeavor currently possible, thanks to the unbounded degrees of freedom and unbounded degrees of abstraction.

And you're comparing it to a simplistic elf game where bigger numbers win, which has a finite number of effects that can move only a very small number of variables.

The simplistic elf game is very simple compared to what competent programmers do.

You're making an absurdly poor comparison.

[Doctor Awkward]

So... Hmmm... I feel like role-playing, not optimizing, is playing the game. IME, I don't see a lot of the same things taken over and over for being optimal. I do, I suppose, see the same things taken over and over, despite being suboptimal, because the player knows that is what they like (I'm looking at you, muggle classes).

So, I guess the question is, how can you get players to transition from "playing to win" to "playing for fun" (which, IMO/IME, is much more, well, fun)? Do that, and you won't have to put any effort into restricting their access to cool toys.

EDIT: nothing against cool world building with flying islands or anything. Just, if someone wants to take a normal horse or a dinosaur in such a game, why not let them?

People who play the game to fill in the numbers and dive through books to find the most mechanically effective way of achieving a particular goal are still playing the game. They are just playing it in a different way.

For the type of person who comes to the table for the story, their numbers don't really matter. They could put in most of their effort crafting an extensive character history and then enjoy an evening spent sitting around in immersive roleplaying without once picking up the dice, and for them that is the fun.

For the type of person who likes the numbers, and puts in the most effort reading through the books and figuring out the rules, for them that extra work is the fun, and just another part of playing the game.

Neither of them is "correct". It's personal preference.

[Troacctid]

So... Hmmm... I feel like role-playing, not optimizing, is playing the game. IME, I don't see a lot of the same things taken over and over for being optimal. I do, I suppose, see the same things taken over and over, despite being suboptimal, because the player knows that is what they like (I'm looking at you, muggle classes).
Building a character in D&D 3.5 is designed to be kind of like building a deck in a TCG. It's very much part of the game. And just like in Magic: The Gathering, you have your Tammy, Jenny, and Spike players. Just because they enjoy the game for different reasons doesn't mean they're not all really playing it.

[Quertus]

People who play the game to fill in the numbers and dive through books to find the most mechanically effective way of achieving a particular goal are still playing the game. They are just playing it in a different way.

For the type of person who comes to the table for the story, their numbers don't really matter. They could put in most of their effort crafting an extensive character history and then enjoy an evening spent sitting around in immersive roleplaying without once picking up the dice, and for them that is the fun.

For the type of person who likes the numbers, and puts in the most effort reading through the books and figuring out the rules, for them that extra work is the fun, and just another part of playing the game.

Neither of them is "correct". It's personal preference.


Building a character in D&D 3.5 is designed to be kind of like building a deck in a TCG. It's very much part of the game. And just like in Magic: The Gathering, you have your Tammy, Jenny, and Spike players. Just because they enjoy the game for different reasons doesn't mean they're not all really playing it.

OK, point. There are a lot of different minigames, all of which are, I suppose, playing the game. I guess I was just feeling like optimization by itself couldn't qualify as an RPG, to say that it *is* the game, just like I don't feel that building a deck is, all by itself, the whole point of MtG.

Also... Did MtG rename Johnny, Timmy, and Spike?


You're looking at a domain (programming) which is both (a) real, and (b) probably the most complex human endeavor currently possible, thanks to the unbounded degrees of freedom and unbounded degrees of abstraction.

And you're comparing it to a simplistic elf game where bigger numbers win, which has a finite number of effects that can move only a very small number of variables.

The simplistic elf game is very simple compared to what competent programmers do.

You're making an absurdly poor comparison.

I mean, I don't know about you, but I find programming much simpler than elf games.

Still, my point was, simply, that I not only lack a frame of reference within the game, but, even looking at other competitive fields where optimization could matter, I'm not seeing a necessity for a disturbing amount of sameness.

I mean, sure, you're not going to see a jockey / linebacker Theurge, but I suspect that people who care about sports-ball could tell you how different players in the same sport / position differ.

There's a whole spectrum of competence between Quertus (my signature tactically inept academia mage, for whom this account us named) and the Determinator - and I don't think that "competent" requires living at the 99th percentile.

[Manyasone]

Yup. A regular can of worms 😁 I love it

[Nifft]

I mean, I don't know about you, but I find programming much simpler than elf games.

Elf games are a fun recreational activity, where errors have no particular consequence on anyone or anything.

It's difficult to imagine that being more difficult than any real-world activity upon which someone's research / someone's money / someone's life might depend.

You're seriously putting forth the idea that playing a game is more difficult than the stuff which is replacing both rocket science and brain surgery -- are you trying to make a joke here?

[Quertus]

Elf games are a fun recreational activity, where errors have no particular consequence on anyone or anything.

It's difficult to imagine that being more difficult than any real-world activity upon which someone's research / someone's money / someone's life might depend.

You're seriously putting forth the idea that playing a game is more difficult than the stuff which is replacing both rocket science and brain surgery -- are you trying to make a joke here?

No, I'm saying, as a programmer and as a gamer, that writing good code is, IMO/IME, easier than a) building optimized characters; b) knowing all of D&D in order to build such characters.

Now, admittedly, that's an unfair comparison, in that it involves higher standards on elf games than on writing code. But it's a fair comparison, in that it is, if I read you correctly, the level of standards you put on elf games, and higher standards than many professional software developers routinely meet.

So, I guess the point is, should this feel like a joke, or do you hold PCs to much higher standards of "competence" than professional software developers require?

I just feel like your issue with samey characters may have resulted from you setting the bar a little high.

[martixy]

As a general statement?

Yes...

Finding where and what to pay for it? That's a different matter. Gold will only get you so far. Which is to say, not very far at all.

[martixy]

Elf games are a fun recreational activity, where errors have no particular consequence on anyone or anything.

It's difficult to imagine that being more difficult than any real-world activity upon which someone's research / someone's money / someone's life might depend.

You're seriously putting forth the idea that playing a game is more difficult than the stuff which is replacing both rocket science and brain surgery -- are you trying to make a joke here?

Rocket science and brain surgery? Please have a little respect for the sciences...

A monkey can hit keys on a keyboard and make something happen. That's why we call them "code monkeys".

Actual computer science, actual software engineering is out of reach of 99% of so called "programmers".

You underestimate the depth of the game and overestimate the abilities of the vast majority of practitioners of this "incredible human endeavour" you seem to be fascinated with.
/rant

Although I wouldn't quite stoop to the Quertus's latest statement. I'd love an account of what you consider good code that's actually easier to write than building a competent character.

[Nifft]

Rocket science and brain surgery? Please have a little respect for the sciences...

A monkey can hit keys on a keyboard and make something happen. That's why we call them "code monkeys".

Actual computer science, actual software engineering is out of reach of 99% of so called "programmers".

You underestimate the depth of the game and overestimate the abilities of the vast majority of practitioners of this "incredible human endeavour" you seem to be fascinated with.
/rant Software is rapidly overtaking human capability in traditionally-hard fields like rocket design and brain surgery. That's the factual state of the technologies in 2018, not any kind of estimation. Feel free to ask Google's software if you don't trust a human. :smallwink:

I enjoy this silly elf game too, but you're trying to sell pungent BS if you're seriously trying to compare any RPG to the only human endeavor which is more complex than law. (And the complexity is mostly for the same reason, which is trivial but interesting.)


Although I wouldn't quite stoop to the Quertus's latest statement. I'd love an account of what you consider good code that's actually easier to write than building a competent character. I suspect there's nothing behind his statement.

[Quertus]

Although I wouldn't quite stoop to the Quertus's latest statement. I'd love an account of what you consider good code that's actually easier to write than building a competent character.

I'll not (further) belittle my profession by addressing how many of my peers your earliest comments resemble, and only address this part.

Do note that the crux of my argument is that different people are defining "competent" differently. That spispopd, which was created in, what, one evening by one programmer has, to the best of my knowledge, zero known bugs, and is a perfectly acceptable program. Whereas, supposedly, if your character isn't decked out in something exactly identical to the optimal gear, they are incompetent.

So, using my metric for programming competence, and what i read nifft's for character competence, I hope it's easy to see why I state that, by those definitions of competence, programming is easier than elf games.

[Nifft]

Do note that the crux of my argument is that different people are defining "competent" differently. That spispopd, which was created in, what, one evening by one programmer has, to the best of my knowledge, zero known bugs, and is a perfectly acceptable program. Whereas, supposedly, if your character isn't decked out in something exactly identical to the optimal gear, they are incompetent.

So, using my metric for programming competence, and what i read nifft's for character competence, I hope it's easy to see why I state that, by those definitions of competence, programming is easier than elf games. Can you cite someone actually saying that "if your character isn't decked out in something exactly identical to the optimal gear, they are incompetent." ?

Because I think that overactive imagination of yours has bitten you right in your crux.

[ezekielraiden]

For my part, I have found most DMs entirely willing to work with me in whatever it is I'm looking for. Part of that is just us both making an effort to be congenial, I'm sure, but another part is that I almost always seek a story for my mechanics, and mechanics for my story. I find either one unsatisfying without the other.

I currently have a gestalt Druid/Planar Shepherd|Wizard/Geomancer I'm hoping will be accepted for a game. It's purely Int based: Academic Priest does everything but spell DCs, and Geomancer takes care of everything that applies to the moment of casting, so all my spells use Int for everything. But I've tried to make it a cohesive whole: since the DM doesn't care about alignment restrictions, but rather living up to your professed ethos, Caleb is a Lawful Good Druid who reveres Bahamut and is now attuned to Celstia. Finding fun, flavorful explanations for choices like Dragon Wild Shape (he's human but his adoptive mother is a silver dragon, so he picked up Bahamut-worship and love of dragon-ness from her) or being a Conjurer (he's an academic, a researcher specialized in planar travel and ecology, so *of course* his Wizard specialty is the teleportation school!) or a Geomancer (his birth mother was an archmage, his father is an archdruid, his adoptive mother is a silver dragon wizard, so *of course* he'd see the world of magic as a blend, a cohesive whole rather than disparate parts.)

Under conditions like this? Yeah, I can usually buy whatever I want. And if I can't, the DM is almost always willing to help me find a substitute, alternative, or even superior option. I've never had a DM say or act otherwise, and never felt the need to push for stuff that was set off limits.

[martixy]

I'll not (further) belittle my profession by addressing how many of my peers your earliest comments resemble, and only address this part.

Do note that the crux of my argument is that different people are defining "competent" differently. That spispopd, which was created in, what, one evening by one programmer has, to the best of my knowledge, zero known bugs, and is a perfectly acceptable program. Whereas, supposedly, if your character isn't decked out in something exactly identical to the optimal gear, they are incompetent.

So, using my metric for programming competence, and what i read nifft's for character competence, I hope it's easy to see why I state that, by those definitions of competence, programming is easier than elf games.

1. Not sure how to take this. (Not looking to get offended, just curious.)
2. To be honest, not sure where I fall on this. Plenty of people have difficulty grasping the basics of programming, so by the metric of statistical competence, being competent is quite hard. Possibly on the level of elf games. :)


Software is rapidly overtaking human capability in traditionally-hard fields like rocket design and brain surgery. That's the factual state of the technologies in 2018, not any kind of estimation. Feel free to ask Google's software if you don't trust a human. :smallwink:

I enjoy this silly elf game too, but you're trying to sell pungent BS if you're seriously trying to compare any RPG to the only human endeavor which is more complex than law. (And the complexity is mostly for the same reason, which is trivial but interesting.)

Oh, okay. I see where the disconnect here is.
When you say brain surgery or rocket science I think medical research and cutting edge physics. While you were merely referring to engineering challenges in highly specific domains, which are starting to get solved better by computer software than human effort. Yea.

The low end of programming is quite accessible and running a good game is definitely harder. By a lot.
The computer science that goes into facilitating other cutting edge science or fundamental advances in the field itself are hard indeed, but not any more special than other cutting edge academic-level hard sciences. But placing it on the pedestal like you do is just silly.

[Nifft]

Oh, okay. I see where the disconnect here is.
When you say brain surgery or rocket science I think medical research and cutting edge physics. While you were merely referring to engineering challenges in highly specific domains, which are starting to get solved better by computer software than human effort. Yea. Good.


The low end of programming is quite accessible and running a good game is definitely harder. By a lot.
The computer science that goes into facilitating other cutting edge science or fundamental advances in the field itself are hard indeed, but not any more special than other cutting edge academic-level hard sciences. But placing it on the pedestal like you do is just silly.

The original goalpost was that Quertus claimed building a character was more difficult than software engineering.

Building a character is not nearly the same goalpost as running a game -- the latter is going to demand social skills, and might be better compared to managing a team of software engineers to produce a market-ready product that succeeds at its intended role.

Finally, it was Quertus who made the comparison between building a character and software engineering. I'm refuting his (very silly and hopefully now agreeably refuted) assertion, and as part of that refutation I'm pointing out that software can be more complex than any real thing. That's just the nature of the domain -- software lacks the limitations on complexity that constrain any real process. That's not a pedestal, though. It's just a bit of trivial which happens to refute a dumb assertion.

The fact that software can be more complex than any real thing doesn't mean software engineering is more difficult than any other academic pursuit. Complexity isn't the same as difficulty.

But I'll stand by my argument that making a character is not nearly as difficult as any non-trivial software engineering, and in the interest of pedestal dismissal I'll happily expand that to any non-trivial academic endeavor being more difficult than making a character.

[Mordaedil]

Quertus' only assertion was that coding wasn't an exact science, you made it into something else entirely. Even at the highest levels of programming there are a lot of people who have no idea what they are doing and are just hoping it'll work. Just look at what was revealed of the source code for Windows 95, lots of curse-words in the comments, lots of functions that do nothing and weren't cleaned out. Even the most serious programmers are just people who need to unwind a bit.

Just because their programming works and looks amazing to someone uninformed doesn't necessarily mean it is flawless or without errors. One of the greatest relevations to a programmer is that sometimes their mistakes are considered the best part of their code too. It can be kind of infuriating when you work in the field and fixing things you know to be a mistake actually aggrevates people more than it helps them.

[Nifft]

... I've met a lot of competent programmers who all had different styles, whose code wasn't all samey. I've seen a lot of competent characters who performed in highly diverse ways, and weren't all samey. I've seen a lot of cool art that was vastly different, all really competent, and not at all samey.


Quertus' only assertion was that coding wasn't an exact science, you made it into something else entirely.

His assertion was that because good programmers can have different styles, therefore optimized characters won't take the same few "best" options. He's comparing programming and artistry with character creation.

I've quoted it above. Feel free to click back and read the discussion.

[ezekielraiden]

His assertion was that because good programmers can have different styles, therefore optimized characters won't take the same few "best" options. He's comparing programming and artistry with character creation.

I've quoted it above. Feel free to click back and read the discussion.

The assertion seems, to me, that just because one can demonstrate a clear, even unambiguous, metric by which to optimize something, doesn't mean that every single person doing that thing will always make perfectly symmetrical choices every single time. That is, with programming, you could even impose common rules (e.g. "shortest program which performs a desired algorithm or effect") and common goals (a specific algorithm or effect that everyone is seeking), and you'd still get a space of results.

It doesn't mean there will, definitely absolutely, be wild differences, either, but that's secondary to addressing your argument (e.g. expecting that would be an excluded-middle fallacy). That is, "samey" is rather a loose, squishy term, isn't it? To my eyes, all dolphins look pretty much indistinguishable, yet their social structures clearly depend on some level if differentiation between individuals. To an alien from Zeta Reticuli or Tau Ceti or wherever else we fancy to assume aliens might come from, all humans are indistinguishably samey, even though I'm pretty sure we get very upset if you swap one human for another in most any social context as if they were functionally identical.

It is true that, for example, every Druid is vastly more likely to take Natural Spell at level 6 than any other feat. But beyond that? There are at least three high-op paths you can take (focusing on summons, wild shape for beatsticking, or BFC/explosions/buffs), and you can even blend two or all three together. It's simply not true that every Druid, barring foolish or self-restricting choices, will always choose even a majority of their stuff identically.

Now, I do agree that DMs can encourage players to break out of personal ruts in thinking by introducing restrictions (or, and this is purely a matter of preference, by introducing incentives e.g. giving out stuff for free just before it would normally be a reasonable purchase). I think it's very, very good for DMs to think about that and try to work with their players to encourage creativity within the op level the group favors.

Simply, I think you've overstated your case. I completely agree with a less strident form of what your argument seems to be. There will always be patterns as long as there is a system. We don't have to be concerned that most every Fighter wants Power Attack or that most every Rogue wants Darkstalker. But if a given player or group does in fact recap the same characters, with no more than incidental variation...something has definitely gone awry and the DM would do well to encourage alternate paths. You can do that with a carrot or a stick. But I don't think every or even most groups emphatically NEED the DM hard-banning or hard-requiring specific stuff every single game in order to avoid absolute cookie-cutter builds fullstop.

[Selion]

It depends on your setting. In a common country there are 1-6 npc with character level in the range of 16-20, if wish scrolls are allowed in numbers, who made them?
I think small towns should have items requiring a CL 1-5 to craft, in a large city it should be easy to find items of CL 12, while items in the range of CL 12-16 should be harder to find or more likely they have to be crafted by order.
Any item higher than that... well, as a DM you should know exactly who made it and why, there are quite a few persons in your story that are able to do that.

[Mordaedil]

His assertion was that because good programmers can have different styles, therefore optimized characters won't take the same few "best" options. He's comparing programming and artistry with character creation.

I've quoted it above. Feel free to click back and read the discussion.

That isn't exactly wrong though, plenty of optimization builds can be done in vastly different ways and I've seen more than once that doing things slightly differently can get you a different sort of optimized outcome with a different goal in mind, not unlike how programming can be done in many different ways (like one person uses arrays and another person decides to just make a function to have better control on his own homestyle array)

Both might end up doing the same exact thing, but they pick pick different ways to go about it with different goals in mind.

And I can certainly see Quertus' point in elf games seeming more complex than programming, given how many ways you can read a given text and how there is an argument RAI or RAW in any given discussion. Of which there is a surprising amount of in programming too, even at the most complex levels.

[Tajerio]

I'm pointing out that software can be more complex than any real thing.

I'm very surprised to learn that software is not, in fact, real. Nifftian ontology must be a whale of a time.

On the point of the thread, the main thing I do as a DM is make it harder for wizards to acquire any scroll they want, by assigning percentages and rolling for them. Core spells I don't tend to make difficult (although the higher-level ones can be tough simply because there aren't many high-level NPC casters in my games). But spells from the SpC I usually make tricky to find. I also like to mix it up by making a few random spells from the SpC of any particular level available, so that wizards have a more eclectic spell mix.

I've never yet run a game with a PC cleric using the SpC, so I might have to tweak it there. I have used it with PC druids and sorcerers, but they weren't optimizing by any stretch of the imagination, so I didn't bother setting up any restrictions.

[unseenmage]

So if elf games are easy and programming is hard then why cant we properly program elf games?


More on topic, our PF games allow everything. Though as suggested we make Cthuhu monsters and tech "rare". Meaning our characters are supposed to be surprised by it everytime the GM uses them.
The GM uses them often. :smallsmile:

[SimonMoon6]

I think it is incredibly foolish to try to restrict certain items' availability to one city or another.

After all, if I can't buy a certain item in Megalopolis but I can buy it in Metroville, then I just teleport over to Metroville and buy it. All that has changed is that you, as the DM, have deliberately slowed down the game to put more of an emphasis on the most boring part of the game, the buying of necessary equipment. Why on Earth would you want to do that? Restricting things in this way causes very few good results but always causes multiple bad results (slowing down the game on multiple occasions, possibly each and every game session).

Yes, that's only true at level 7-ish, when teleport becomes available, but before that, you don't really have the money to buy anything interesting anyway.

Now, choosing not to allow an item in a world at all, that's a different matter... assuming the PCs can't simply plane shift to an alternate reality where that item IS for sale.

[PunBlake]

I think it is incredibly foolish to try to restrict certain items' availability to one city or another.

At end-game, when the party has moved from their starting location to a Megalopolis, things are easier to get, but you're forgetting about the goal. As a DM, you're trying to create a convincing world and tell a good story. You only limit item availability when it makes sense. Making literally everything available immediately at all times can actually reduce the verisimilitude of your world, unless it's a super-high-magic (or tech) setting. Also, you need to know where to teleport to get the things you want (gather info check); teleportation can be hazardous if you've never been there; and hiring a wizard who has been there to take you (a) may not be possible currently and (b) will cost you spellcasting services, unless you scry the location yourself, which requires the spell and a costly mirror.

You can try to buy a mithril chain shirt before level 7 pretty easily; that doesn't mean you're near a mine that produces it or that your local blacksmith has high-paying customers (or the skill to make the craft check) to warrant paying the money to already have the material / finished good himself. Item availability is strongly related to world building.

[heavyfuel]

I think it is incredibly foolish to try to restrict certain items' availability to one city or another.

After all, if I can't buy a certain item in Megalopolis but I can buy it in Metroville, then I just teleport over to Metroville and buy it. All that has changed is that you, as the DM, have deliberately slowed down the game to put more of an emphasis on the most boring part of the game, the buying of necessary equipment. Why on Earth would you want to do that? Restricting things in this way causes very few good results but always causes multiple bad results (slowing down the game on multiple occasions, possibly each and every game session).

Yes, that's only true at level 7-ish, when teleport becomes available, but before that, you don't really have the money to buy anything interesting anyway.

Now, choosing not to allow an item in a world at all, that's a different matter... assuming the PCs can't simply plane shift to an alternate reality where that item IS for sale.

So you're saying you always play characters with access to the Teleport spell? That sounds awfully boring. And how exactly do you access Teleport at lv 7? Do you buy scrolls or pay for spellcasting services?

If you do, the DM forced you to waste resources, not just real life time. Resources that you might need (be it gold or spell slots). Teleport also has a failure chance, so you're (literally) rolling the dice.

Plus, it adds verisimilitude to the game. As others have said, you shouldn't be able to buy a boat fleet on a land-locked city, or buy camels in a city that mostly uses horses.

[Quertus]

Can you cite someone actually saying that "if your character isn't decked out in something exactly identical to the optimal gear, they are incompetent." ?

Because I think that overactive imagination of yours has bitten you right in your crux.

Well...



Well, here's the problem: allowing all books doesn't result in all the cool things.

It results in only the best things at each level. Then next game the same best things (they're still best after all), and so you've removed a large chunk of replay value. Each game, lockstep progression through the same best things.

What seems to work to actually use all the cool toys -- not just the few best things at the top of every guide -- is to vary the setting with each new campaign.


Making good choices is playing the game.


If If your character is competent at her role, then optimization is role-playing.

So, the way I read that, as I try to follow your logic, to be competent, you must optimize. Optimizing results in only the best things, and the same things repeated every campaign.

So, I read that as saying that there is a "samey or incompetent" dichotomy.

(EDIT: and that, then, relevant to this thread, because of the "samey vs incompetent" dichotomy, your choices for a campaign, which necessarily features competent characters, are either to accept samey, or to force variety through scarcity)

If that is not what you were trying to say, by all means, explain the difference between your intent and my interpretation of your words.

As to the rest... I think others have said it better than I have or likely could (without blatant plagiarism) but I'll add my 2¢, in case anyone wants to compare.


The original goalpost was that Quertus claimed building a character was more difficult than software engineering.

Finally, it was Quertus who made the comparison between building a character and software engineering. I'm refuting his (very silly and hopefully now agreeably refuted) assertion, and as part of that refutation I'm pointing out that software can be more complex than any real thing. That's just the nature of the domain -- software lacks the limitations on complexity that constrain any real process. That's not a pedestal, though. It's just a bit of trivial which happens to refute a dumb assertion.

The fact that software can be more complex than any real thing doesn't mean software engineering is more difficult than any other academic pursuit. Complexity isn't the same as difficulty.

But I'll stand by my argument that making a character is not nearly as difficult as any non-trivial software engineering, and in the interest of pedestal dismissal I'll happily expand that to any non-trivial academic endeavor being more difficult than making a character.

I mean, I've written lots of software, both professionally and as a hobby, both individually and as part of a group.

And none of the work I've done or seen seems as daunting to me as coding the entirety of 3e character creation. Getting the interactions right between every class, ACF, item, spell? How many arguments are there about what is RAW vs RAI? About whether this particular trick will work or not? And how do you code the ability for "this works at this table", free level adjustment, homebrew, house rules, etc? Making an actually useful character creation tool (for my admittedly seemingly perfectionist definition of "useful"*) that handles table-specific rules with minimal complexity is so far beyond any tool, program, operating system, database - any anything - I've ever worked on or even considered.

The logic behind 3e character creation is way beyond any of the commercial or military products I've ever produced, plain and simple.

So, what it takes to know how to program competently seems, to me, less than what it takes to program meaningful character creation.

Now, admittedly, it's an unfair comparison, in that (most well-designed) software is easily broken down into manageable chunks, each individually of limited complexity, and only interacting according to a predefined interface, whereas any given facet of character creation could impact most any other facet, and do so differently depending on the particular table's rules. Character creation is inherently rife with opportunities for spaghetti logic.

* In order for a character creation tool to be deemed "useful" by me, it must actually allow me to create the character I'm going to play at an actual table. This means that it must contain every class, ACF, spell, item, etc, that my character will take. It must accommodate all of the house rules, rulings, etc. in play at that table. It must even allow for homebrew items, classes, spells, etc. And it must track both default and situational modifiers to derived stats (ie, here's my AC and spells remaining after I use DMM Persist for my morning buffs). And it must do so without undue hassle or complexity (ie, be as easy to write my post-buffs stats with these house rules as it would be to do so with pencil and paper).


His assertion was that because good programmers can have different styles, therefore optimized characters won't take the same few "best" options. He's comparing programming and artistry with character creation.

I've quoted it above. Feel free to click back and read the discussion.

Well, I don't think anyone actually completely understand what I'm saying, in part because I don't fully understand what I'm trying to say.

So, let me go really high level for a moment. Everything I've said about software, sports-ball, and that ilk was all simply supporting a single concept. What I was trying to say, initially, was "?". OK, slightly lower level, I was trying to say, "...huh?". Lower level still, I was explaining the extent to which I do not comprehend the notion that competence requires something be repetitive samey, as that does not match my definition of competence / my experience, either elf games, programming, sports-ball, art, or any other fields. I lack any way to meaningfully grasp what I think you are saying.

Of course, if you claim that that was not what you were saying, then this whole conversation is moot.

[King of Nowhere]

Depends on the setting.
My setting is a rich and advanced world and it features a large and powerful merchantile organization, and you can access their emissaries in any major city. Every decent-sized city will have at least one wizard selling teleports at reasonable prices, so unless you are in the backwaters of nowhere, popping into a major city and ordering an item will get the item delivered within a few days. If it exists in the campaign world, that is; just because something is printed in a manual, it doesn't mean it exhist in my world. And now that the pcs are getting past level 15 and getting to the top tier stuff, eve the merchants don't always have everything they are asking. In fact, right now I stopped their orders as they already managed to book all the high level item creators for the next year.

That lenient attitude, however, is justified by the setting, and by it having this merchantile organization (which i actually created because I figured my players would be the kind that got annoyed at having to look for shops, so I removed the need; once established, it became one of the shaping forces of the setting).

If i were to DM another world, with different setup, things would be different.

In the campaign I'm a player, which runs on a more traditional setting, we've stopped roleplaying all the trading part as it was getting repetitive. But to sell 100k gp of random loot we needed one week of teleporting through all the major cities of a continent, and every single item costing more than 20-30k gp requires an explanation on where we look for it. Before our wizard got to teleport us around, limitations were stricter.

[Vaern]

In my group, you're generally able to purchase anything you want, but not necessarily on the spot.
Our DM rules that some items, especially low-level items, are common and readily available in any sufficiently large city. Higher level items and items that have limited or highly situational applications must be commissioned, taking the standard 1 day per 1000 GP of value to craft, which tends not to be a major issue if there's a sufficient amount of downtime between story arcs.

[Selion]

In my group, you're generally able to purchase anything you want, but not necessarily on the spot.
Our DM rules that some items, especially low-level items, are common and readily available in any sufficiently large city. Higher level items and items that have limited or highly situational applications must be commissioned, taking the standard 1 day per 1000 GP of value to craft, which tends not to be a major issue if there's a sufficient amount of downtime between story arcs.

My group once had a prize for a mission, something around 50k to spend in the mage guild. They ordered the stuff they needed for, but the dwarf wanted an adamantine full plate to be enchanted, so in the meanwhile the mage guild gave him a +1 full plate with a rune on it, namely "courtesy armor".

[heavyfuel]

the dwarf wanted an adamantine full plate to be enchanted, so in the meanwhile the mage guild gave him a +1 full plate with a rune on it, namely "courtesy armor".

Out of curiosity, was the Dwarf handed the courtesy armor without it being mundanely adjusted for him?

Without an adjustment (2d4*100 gp) it cannot be donned. And 2d4*100gp worth of Craft (Armorsmithing) checks will probably take longer than any magical enchantments. A smith with +20 bonus taking 10 will do 54gp a week, which means it will take an average of 10 weeks to finish adjusting the full plate.

Or did the DM perhaps handwave this requirement?

[Selion]

Out of curiosity, was the Dwarf handed the courtesy armor without it being mundanely adjusted for him?

Without an adjustment (2d4*100 gp) it cannot be donned. And 2d4*100gp worth of Craft (Armorsmithing) checks will probably take longer than any magical enchantments. A smith with +20 bonus taking 10 will do 54gp a week, which means it will take an average of 10 weeks to finish adjusting the full plate.

Or did the DM perhaps handwave this requirement?

I was the DM and actually i did handwave the requirement for the sake of simplification, i just thought in a large city they had common dwarf-sized magical armors to spare

[Kaihaku]

For me it depends on the campaign and theme I'm going for.

Last campaign was extemely high fantasy with no holds barred... So they bought whatever they wanted whenever they wanted.

Current campaign I gave all players access to crafting and there are no magic item shops. Downtime is a precious resource for a few reasons so that's the major control factor.

[omnitricks]

This is why in pathfinder rogues have a pretty good talent if you are faced with GMs like this.

Black Market Connections (Ex)

RAW they are gonna have to if you can make the check, especially since you have sunk finite player resources into something which would otherwise be useless if its up to the GM's whims.

We knew we were going to face a dragon in one session (encountered her before and her CR was 5 over the party)

Went super prep. GM eventually went "No you can't buy a greater dragon slaying arrow in town."

"I use black market connections."

"They want nothing to do with you."

"No I mean I use this rogue talent I have called black market connections. Rolling diplo now..."

"WHY THE @#$%^ DO YOU EVEN TAKE A WORTHLESS TALENT LIKE THIS?!?"

Same GM got surprised a few sessions later by another "worthless" talent called obfuscate story. Lol.

[Necroticplague]

Generally, yes. Planar portals in my setting are relatively common, if one knows what to look for. This includes ones straight to the City of Doors, City of Brass, and other planar metropoli. Which tend to have rather sizable populations of Outsiders that have Wish as an SLA. Oppurtunistic trade ensues, magic items proliferate. The PCs aren't particularly unique as far as characters go. If your PCs want something, someone else has probably also wanted it before, and it's likely there's someone selling. Even if they do want something rather off-the wall, that just means they'll need to commission the item. So, usually, the worst you'll get is a 'this might take a few days while my associates work through my back-log'.

[Crake]

This is why in pathfinder rogues have a pretty good talent if you are faced with GMs like this.

Black Market Connections (Ex)

RAW they are gonna have to if you can make the check, especially since you have sunk finite player resources into something which would otherwise be useless if its up to the GM's whims.

We knew we were going to face a dragon in one session (encountered her before and her CR was 5 over the party)

Went super prep. GM eventually went "No you can't buy a greater dragon slaying arrow in town."

"I use black market connections."

"They want nothing to do with you."

"No I mean I use this rogue talent I have called black market connections. Rolling diplo now..."

"WHY THE @#$%^ DO YOU EVEN TAKE A WORTHLESS TALENT LIKE THIS?!?"

Same GM got surprised a few sessions later by another "worthless" talent called obfuscate story. Lol.

Black market connections in no way guaranteed that there would be a greater dragon slaying arrow in town though. All it does is increase the "size" of the community, or add in a few extra magic items if it's a metropolis already. Depending on the size of the town you were at, it may well have done nothing at all to help you get a greater dragon slaying arrow, or at best given you a couple of extra chances to randomly roll a greater slaying arrow (which would be highly unlikely). Keep in mind that the "base value" number in pathfinder was changed from 3.5, you can't just automatically buy anything under that number like you could in 3.5, it's now only a 75% chance for that item to be available, so even if you got the settlement to the equvilent of a large city, there's still a decent chance that a greater slaying arrow wouldn't be available.

Regarding what players have the option to buy in my games though, it really depends on the setting. I've had low magic e6, magic-is-punished-by-death eras, I've had typical medieval europe, magic is rare and feared settings, and I'm currently running uber-magic-verging-on-tippyverse megacities that are actually just giant XP farms for the 0.01% sitting at the top of a giant pyramid scheme. In the first, I barely even allowed magic item creation, as players had no means to research or learn about it, in the second, magical item creation was practically required, as it was the only way to get any REAL gear, and in the last one, the currency is quite literally xp, either your own, or the suctioned up remains of dead creatures (you need a special black market collector for humands though :P), and cheap mundane items are quite literally just fabricated into existence. Need a masterwork weapon? Walk up to a fabricator and take 20 on your craft check to generate yourself a masterwork sword. Special and expensive materials need to have xp plugged into the fabricators to generate them, but otherwise are just as easy to make. I have had players quite literally eat up an entire level's worth of xp in generating themselves some protective items.

[omnitricks]

Greater Slaying Arrow is a medium magic item therefore beating the check in at least a large city guarantees it. Easy to make if you are a face build which I was.

[Crake]

Greater Slaying Arrow is a medium magic item therefore beating the check in at least a large city guarantees it. Easy to make if you are a face build which I was.

Correct, but large city is one step below metropolis, most cities will be a fair size smaller than that.

[Luckmann]

This thread got me thinking:http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?572137-Purchasable-Creatures

Do DMs generally allow every single magic item in existence to be available for purchase at any settlement as long as it follows the DMG Demographics? Even exotic mounts, evil alchemical items like liquid pain, scrolls of PrCs, etc?

All my DMs do and I was wondering if that was the norm.It really depends on game and GM. When I read books and supplements for 3.5 as well as PF, I don't get the impression that there was ever an idea for there to be an all-encompassimg superstore amd magic-mart, and since I detest that very concept, I'd never allow it in my own games.

If the player characters want something very specific that they have reasonably heard about being possible, they can seek someone out to commission it, though, which might take time and/or cost extra (or less, depending on what we're talking about).

But I'd never allow everything by default, other than perhaps on creation (at which point they can't afford much anyway).

[Selion]

I found this rule in pathfinder

Base Value: The base value of a settlement is used to determine what magic items may easily be purchased there. There is a 75% chance that any item of that value or lower can be found for sale in the settlement with little effort. The base value of a new settlement is 0 gp. Certain buildings (such as a Market or Tavern) increase a settlement’s base value. a settlement’s base value can never increase above the values listed in Table: Settlement Size and Base Value (except under special circumstances decided by the GM).
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/kingdom-building/settlements/

There is another table in which there is the number of magic items available per settlement. For a metropolis these are the entries:

Community Size Base Value Minor Medium Major

Metropolis 16,000 gp * 4d4 items 3d4 items

*In a metropolis, nearly all minor magic items are available.

[ngilop]

I allow anything to be bought within reason. And by that I mean, No.. you are not going to be able to purchase a gryphon's egg just because you have the gold. its more for magical tiems


I found that following the guidelines or being more reserved tends to have the players end up with tens of thousands of gold with nothing to spend it on. I had a very strick DM once and my wizard I think at level 13 or so had 90 thousand gold with nothing to spend it on because 'you buying that 33 thousand gold piece magical item would destroy the town's economy'


magic mart, I feel, is a necessity. the game expect the characters to have access to certain counters, boosts, and negaters at certain levels if you are not able to purchase them then they do not exist and the game gets a little bit more difficult.

[zlefin]

I'd generally follow the DMG guidelines with a few adjustments probably, simply because they're there and I don't want to think too much about it.

I definitely might adjust though for very rare/unusual item requests; as well as the amount of time involved. (i.e. if it's during a multi-week downtime in a major metropolis, a lot of stuff could be arranged through trading networks that reach beyond the already large city itself, and I'd just handwave that occurring)

[noob]

Generally, no.

Most 'adventurer' worthy items can only be gotten from and adventure.

The average alchemist shop sells only the common cheap items, like sunrods.

The average magic shop only sells non combat items, and mostly things like warm knife or a self lacing boot.
Honestly if you do not know how to use a self lacing boot to destroy the monsters it means you were only pretending to be an adventurer in the first place.
Oh and so who provide the army with siege weapons?
while siege weapons are not magical they counters many spells that protects from projectiles so adventurers might want to buy siege weapons.

[RoboEmperor]

I allow anything to be bought within reason. And by that I mean, No.. you are not going to be able to purchase a gryphon's egg just because you have the gold. its more for magical tiems


I found that following the guidelines or being more reserved tends to have the players end up with tens of thousands of gold with nothing to spend it on. I had a very strick DM once and my wizard I think at level 13 or so had 90 thousand gold with nothing to spend it on because 'you buying that 33 thousand gold piece magical item would destroy the town's economy'


magic mart, I feel, is a necessity. the game expect the characters to have access to certain counters, boosts, and negaters at certain levels if you are not able to purchase them then they do not exist and the game gets a little bit more difficult.

What's wrong with the Griffon Egg? WotC gave it a price which means they want players to buy it and use it as a mount.

[Vyanie]

As both a player and a DM I might prefer people could not get every little thing, I also recognize that not being able to buy specific items completely gimps martial characters. A wizard or druid really does not need anything to be a god, by level 5+ they are gods. Not allowing a person to buy items specific to their builds when you have retarded mechanics (weapon focus) twf or any of the feat tax of hell bs, just honestly makes players not play anything that is not a full caster.
If a player is a fighter, specializes in a specific weapon and you don't let them buy it so thereby specifically gimping them you are honestly a ****, its about the same as telling a person they have to compete in a race, they practice and specialize in a specific mode of transportation and on race day you take what they practiced in away you break their legs and make them run, all while putting people in race cars (4th level casters), fighter jets (6th level casters) and space ships (9th level casters) or hell teleportation devices to instantly finish the race that they are allowed to use BEFORE the race starts(T1 classes).

[SLOTHRPG95]

Honestly if you do not know how to use a self lacing boot to destroy the monsters it means you were only pretending to be an adventurer in the first place.
Oh and so who provide the army with siege weapons?
while siege weapons are not magical they counters many spells that protects from projectiles so adventurers might want to buy siege weapons.

Also, siege weapons are just plain fun to use! You know you're doing things right when you backstab sneak attack someone with a ballista. So why not let your players buy them, assuming the siege weapons manufacturers aren't particular about who their customers are?

[Techwarrior]

Most of my DMs are from the older edition school of you can't buy anything at all ever.

I usually go by way of fair trade or commission. If you want something special, you have to find someone to barter for it, and it's not going to be a purely monetary exchange. You'll trade off an item or provide a service to the person you're buying from.

[Luckmann]

In my upcoming game (Pathfinder, Kingmaker), "commissions" is going to be the name of the game. I don't like the idea of ubiquitious magic marts under the best of circumstances, but for the vast majority of this campaign, they will be far from major any major metropolis, their major connection to the rest of the world being a trading post which it can take weeks to get back to.

I've judged that commissions will probably take ~6 months, accounting for travel times and manufacturing, finding the right craftsman, etc., unless they pay considerably more (to get bumped up in terms of orders). I'm on the fence on whether I'm going to add an element of uncertainty to it or not (lost orders, misunderstood instructions, etc.)

At some point, due to how the campaign works, they'll be able to hire craftsman and/or invite them to live much closer to the players, though, working for them, at which point things could become pretty straight forward. I don't think any one of them will be clever enough to take the Leadership feat just to get a crafter.

[CIDE]

I think that every DM I've ever played with (except in 2e) basically allowed every item that had a listed price to be purchasable. That said, he didn't always keep the price fixed. It'd differ on location, whether he thought it was more powerful or more rare than the book suggested, etc. The only time I remember hearing "You can't buy that" is generally a "you can't buy that here" or "you can't buy that yet". The latter being far more common in 5e games. Only ever played with two DM's in 2e and they were a bit more strict.

[Jay R]

I started with original D&D, with the assumption that finding magic items for sale would be extremely rare. This meant that what the treasure was really mattered, since that was the magic your character would be able to use. Part of the game was figuring out ways to use the weird items that you found.

That part of the game is fun -- especially when nobody had the assumption that they would be able to get specific items by choice.

That's still a fun game, and that's still pretty much what I do, and what most of my DMs do. For one thing, I will sometimes give them an item that they will soon need, but would never purchase, because they don't know that they will need it. When I do that, I don't want them to trade it away.

Most recently, Mike has allowed us to buy low-level items, but only in large cities. Even so, I found a way to make it happen anyway. When my PC offered to pay with a mithril bar he'd found, he was able to persuade a dwarven king to make him a high-level weapon. But even then, I didn't specify what it would be. I asked for a guisarme worth the value of the mithril, and he made a +4 thundering guisarme.

The game works both ways, and with many gradations along the way. It's better to have fun playing the game your DM is running than to get annoyed thinking about a different style of game.


"There are nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays,
"And every single one of them is right!"

-- "In the Neolithic Age", Rudyard Kipling

[Jthw]

The way my group usually plays is that anything in the phb can be bought without mentioning it if you spend a night in town. Any magic items need to be roleplayed for unless otherwise stated. So you need to find a proper place to buy the item and see if they have it in stock. Many places might be willing to take requests to make a specific item at a higher cost.
Generally if players have the gold for an item and are trying to get it they should be able to get it within one session if not the next so long as they are willing to possibly travel.
Items like poisons and other taboos would be a bit harder to find (knowledge local/ gather info etc) and would be more difficult but not impossible to find what you need.

All of that being said if what they are going after seems cheesy then they probably won't be able to get it.