Spell Casting...Economics?

[carrdrivesyou]

So many spells require costly components. Example: Revivify requires 300gp in diamonds which ae consumed with the spell usage. That being said, who determines the cost of diamonds? They may vary in price depending on local market values. These are not static prices, especially in the dynamic and often chaotic places adventurers tend to visit. I would house rule that the item value is frozen from when it is appraised or purchased, but this does open the problem of economics into a setting. Am I looking too far into things or is this a legitimate issue?

[Lord Vukodlak]

So many spells require costly components. Example: Revivify requires 300gp in diamonds which ae consumed with the spell usage. That being said, who determines the cost of diamonds? They may vary in price depending on local market values. These are not static prices, especially in the dynamic and often chaotic places adventurers tend to visit. I would house rule that the item value is frozen from when it is appraised or purchased, but this does open the problem of economics into a setting. Am I looking too far into things or is this a legitimate issue?

Its a game prices are static, there is NO need or reason to make things more complicated.

[Waazraath]

So many spells require costly components. Example: Revivify requires 300gp in diamonds which ae consumed with the spell usage. That being said, who determines the cost of diamonds? They may vary in price depending on local market values. These are not static prices, especially in the dynamic and often chaotic places adventurers tend to visit. I would house rule that the item value is frozen from when it is appraised or purchased, but this does open the problem of economics into a setting. Am I looking too far into things or is this a legitimate issue?

Yeah, I think you're looking too far, though of course, you can do with your setting whatever you want, and it makes sense from a perspective where you want to create as 'real' a world as possible. But two things. 1 practical: what if prices of diamands go down, does the spell suddenly fail if you using your formerly worth 300 gc worth of diamonds for a spell but the exchange price dropped, or you moved to an area where diamonds are more common and therefore of lesser worth? More important imo, is the mechanical issue: gc for spell components are put there as a limiting and balancing factor. Though a lot can be discussed on how good they do their job, desiginers thougt about how much extra cost some powerful spells shoud have, and if availability should be a possible issue. Bringing economics in it alters that balance.

edit: 3rd thing, simplicity is nice as well, this detracts from the things more relevant when playing D&D, like dungeon delving and defeating dragons.

Then again, if you and your party enjoy it, why not?

[nickl_2000]

Its a game prices are static, there is NO need or reason to make things more complicated.

I mean, if it makes you and all of your players happy to complicate it like that, go for it. Personally there is no way that I would, the economic ramifications of any of this does not spark joy for me.

[Sorinth]

It's a generic valuation. So if the adventurers go somewhere diamonds are plentiful they might be able to buy a 300gp diamond for 200 gold. Other places the sale of diamonds are restricted by the government and a 300gp diamond would have to be bought on the black market for triple the price. It's basically up to the DM.

It can even be a source of adventure, if the major diamond mine in the region is overrun my monsters or creatures from the underdark that could effect the price of diamonds everywhere and give the PCs an incentive to help clear the mines.

[JNAProductions]

My view is that "X GP of Y Substance" is just the NORMAL cost.

So, in most areas, you'd have to spend approximately 300 GP to acquire enough diamonds for Revivify. If you're in a mining town that just struck a massive diamond vein, you could get it cheaper-the amount doesn't change, but the price does.

I wouldn't tie the cost of a spell to local economics (barring a spell ABOUT said economics, perhaps) but if you enjoy it, hey, you do you.

[Reynaert]

How did nobody mention this yet: https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0677.html

[Tanarii]

You might find this an interesting read:
https://critical-hits.com/blog/2014/09/27/fiat-magic-reagents-the-god-of-the-market-and-modrons/

The entire Dungeonomics series is full of fun questions like that

Edit: here's another fun one on the price of starting equipment:
https://critical-hits.com/blog/2015/05/04/the-modronocracy-an-adventure-in-price-ceilings/

[No brains]

One simple way to run it is that it's that some amount of diamonds is required and the 300gp a measure of sacrifice required for the spell to work.

Perhaps you could even have a setup where the material is needed as a magic catalyst and that gold gives the 'power' to the spell.

Or you could look at the DMG treasure tables and find out that most required values of gems are only in late game treasure hoards if they exist at all, but that way lies madness.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Like in a place where things are specifically scarce, I would increase the price by a bit, and if they're in say.. a bustling metropolis, maybe a bit cheaper..

[Bohandas]

Its a game prices are static, there is NO need or reason to make things more complicated.

There is if you're playing spelljammer and moving between Krynn (with its iron shortage and (IIRC) relative abundance of gold) and anywhere else

[Cikomyr2]

The same way the United States dollars represents a set quantity of oil, which represent a set quantity of potential energy, the DnD worlds are actually not on a gold standard, but on a Managold standard.

The currency is not based on an absolute value based on the scarcity of the precious metal, but instead on its means of exchange for "1 gold" worth of magical energy, exchangeable at any Thaumaturgic Exchange Centers.

So say a spell is worth 300 gold to cast is like saying your jeep consumes 6 gallons of gasoline for 200 miles. It's directly related.

[Gignere]

It’s for ease of play sure they could have said a 1 carat Diamond but most people would have no beeping clue how much that would cost in a game world.