Comments on the 4th Ed fact thread

[alhoon]

Since they use disenchant most people won't sell their items. They will recycle them.
And I'm also against selling tons of magic items at high prices. But 1/5th? That's a new low. They manage to get 15 swords+1? Well, the first one is bought relatively high priced. The second at a lower price and... that's it. A cap. You can't expect to find 15 people able to afford magic swords in a small town.

The recycling system has been test by millions. Yes, in WoW. It's a good idea, I think they were right in incorporating it. That something has appeared and tested in a MMORPG doesn't mean it shouldn't be incorporated in the new system.

As a second note though, I'm pleased to note that there will be far fewer magic items, so unless the PCs reach high levels selling a dozen of magic swords after each adventure won't be a problem. The PCs simply won't find that many.
I haven't seen so far any creature with immunity to natural damage. Yes, some may be resistant but that's not terrible. The new NPCs don't need magic weapons as much as in 3rd edition. Could you think of an NPC oriented for battle at level 7 or 8 that doesn't have a magic weapon in 3rd edition? Now a lvl 7 human bandit for example would have carde of neat abilities so he won't need that +1 to hit and damage rolls as badly.

But the crazy profits from a single mid-level item sale (4/5 market price +10-40%) would break the economy of a small city.
I think it was designed to discourage the sale and magic-item economy and to balance with the lower cost of magic item creation though disenchanting current items.

It's not just economics. It's the feeling:
"OK you go to the temple. Blah blah blah, you meet the priest, blah blah blah. He tells you that he could spare a few potions of healing, but since these are troubled times and they are in high demand they would be costly. He is willing to sell 2 healing potions for 60 gold pieces each. (+20%)"
PCs: OK.
After the adventure, they find 3 more potions of healing and thinking of the troubled times, they decide to sell them. They go to the priest.
PCs: "We have 3 potions of healing for sale."
Priest: "Very good! I'll buy them for 10 gp each! (1/5th price)"
PCs: "But we bought them for 60gp... "
Priest: "Yes, I know. But the troubled times are over! We have the potions in abundance now!"
PCs: "OK, then instead of selling them since you have them in abundance we would like to buy a couple and sell to the next village"
Priest: "Well... the price is still 60 gp for buying"

It's not the priest cheating the PCs, it's the system.
That's why I proposed the Item Rarity system. The different in prices is 50% of the market price. The PCs may influence the sale.
So in the case of an item with a market price of 200 gold pieces they can expect to buy it 100 gold more than they can sell it. Not 5 times more!

[Lord Soth]

They still have to turn a profit. If they buy them at 60 and sell them at 60 then... where's the profit? What's the point of being in the business, at all, if you're not actually making any money?

Look, 9 out of 10 DMs I knew used to divide the equipment they wanted and the money, out in the planned or random encounters. This part is just 3rd edition bashing in order for people to think 4th improves on something it doesn't.

If 9 out of 10 DM's aren't actually using the 3E treasure system, then wouldn't that indicate that it's a bad system, and that they're right in bashing it? But then again, I'm not entirely sure what that system is, as I haven't looked at a DMG in a good long while.

[alhoon]

They still have to turn a profit. If they buy them at 60 and sell them at 60 then... where's the profit? What's the point of being in the business, at all, if you're not actually making any money?

If 9 out of 10 DM's aren't actually using the 3E treasure system, then wouldn't that indicate that it's a bad system, and that they're right in bashing it? But then again, I'm not entirely sure what that system is, as I haven't looked at a DMG in a good long while.

Good point. The DMG system is increadibly stupid. It needed revising. I really wonder how it was kept mostly the same for sooooooooooo long. It's practically the same since old D&D.

What it was? roll some percentage to see what kind of treasure the monster has. I.e you could roll a dragon that had ONLY copper pieces, and gems. And by "you could" I mean there was fairly high chances to get strange and crappy treasure hords.

And no, buying at 45 and selling at 70 is 25 gp profit. That's what I propose. Not buying at 10 and selling at 60.

[Jester of the FoS]

They still have to turn a profit. If they buy them at 60 and sell them at 60 then... where's the profit? What's the point of being in the business, at all, if you're not actually making any money?

If 9 out of 10 DM's aren't actually using the 3E treasure system, then wouldn't that indicate that it's a bad system, and that they're right in bashing it? But then again, I'm not entirely sure what that system is, as I haven't looked at a DMG in a good long while.

Good point. The DMG system is increadibly stupid. It needed revising. I really wonder how it was kept mostly the same for sooooooooooo long. It's practically the same since old D&D.

Because if they changed it people would get upset over needless changes and the old edition bashing.


I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist.

[alhoon]

[alhoon]

I have to tell though that at least 3rd edition proposes the average gp system per encounter, instead of just rolling all those useless tables!

There is a table: 1st level encounter 300 gold, 2nd level 600 gold etc.
That the same they do in the 4th edition. In fact, I believe the admittedly hidden table is better than the parceling.

4 adventurers of 3rd level need 12000 gold spread out in their level. That could be a +1 sword, a +2 shield, 2 potions of cure moderate wounds and 5400 gp in coins and gems.
Do you know where the problem is with this? It doesn't add up right! I have tried it back in 1998-2000. It doesn't produce the treasure the PCs should have in the right levels.

This table assumes that a large portion of that money will be spent on wands etc that would be discarded after a couple of levels. My PCs rarely do that. They sell their wands, buy wands that would be useful for lot of levels use creativity instead of money many times and they end up having more money than their level suggests.
However... that depends on the PCs. We had campaigns that I swear I was giving money like it grew on trees and the PCs were underequiped. Sometimes it was the story. Bribing the guard instead of casting charm. Why? The stupid wizard hasn't memorized suggestion or charm. Paying for ressurection at high levels because... well, the Save against the disintigrate ended up 2. (see sometimes the DM was stupid. ) etc

[Sorti]

Good point. The DMG system is increadibly stupid. It needed revising. I really wonder how it was kept mostly the same for sooooooooooo long. It's practically the same since old D&D.

Because if they changed it people would get upset over needless changes and the old edition bashing.

No, because WoW didn't exist yet, so they had nothing to copy to change their system to

I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist.

Me too

[Charney]

Am I the only one who simply chooses what treasure to award his player with??? For that matter, I stopped using Challenge Ratings and Encounter levels for determining XP awards (even in 2ED I didn't use the fixed XP rewards anymore).

[alhoon]

No Charney. You're one of the 90% of DMs. Don't believe Andrew Wyatt. He would have us believe that 90% of the DMs would tell their players: "Sorry guys, but you get 140.000 copper pieces from the CR 9 dragon. What? No, not even a single silver or gold piece."

It's rediculous really. Look at the tables! There will be only ONE kind of coins in a single hoard! I.e if there are gold pieces, then there are NOT silver, copper or platinum. Oh and of course there can only be either gems or art objects in the hoard. I admit I haven't checked the tables in the 9 years that I have played 3rd edition. I'm glad I didn't. I'll stop hijacking the thread and open a new one now.

[Jester of the FoS]

I'm really treasure and magic stingy. My players get paid some nice coin and rewarded money but they've yet to find a treasure horde.

I give experience straight out of the book based on ELs and CRs though.

[alhoon]

About the orcs:

Assume the following orc raiding party:
orc berseker, 2 raiders, 2 warriors, 3 drugdes = 807 XP. That's an encounter for four 5th level characters. Well, 4 against 8 isn't very heroic. And it seems the intended level for fighting orcs is 3rd -5th. I'm disappointed.
I believed them this time that indeed 1st level chars would be heroes. They won't. Yes, they have some good tricks, but that's all. They're not the saviors of the village.

A single orc party with 2 bersekers a drudge and 2 raiders is 700 XP. That's a 4th level encounter!

Edit After some thinking and calculating I managed to patch up the following. It's not much but it's what 4 PCs of 1st lvl could do against orcs. It's not impressive. However I tidied it up like an adventure. The encounters are escalating in difficulty until the big battle with... a shaman his bodyguard and his harem...
- 2 raiders and 2 drudges (388 XP)
- 2 raiders, 1 warrior (400 XP)
- 1 berseker, 1 raider and 1 warrior (400 XP)
- 1 berserker, 1 warrior and 3 drudges (407 XP)
- 1 berserker, 1 raider and 2 drudges (413 XP) OR 1 Eye of Gruumsh, 1 raider and 2 drudges (438 XP) + ... the girl! *

*each adventure needs a reason. Saving the girl is always a worthy cause!

That's just 19 orcs, 9 of which are minions. Now don't ask me why the orcs wouldn't just gather up and attack the PCs before they have time for a short rest. The encounters in 4th edition are considered to take 5 mins each, along with the short rest. Also they are composed by all the nearby rooms.
I.e in the encounter 1, perhaps a drudge is the guard and the two raiders and the other druge hung out nearby, running to his aid (they gain a bonus charging so it's not a problem). Then it would take a few mins for the warrior and the 2 raiders nearby to wake up and put up arms and go to help. These 2-3 mins are enough for a short rest... etc

hmmm... it seems I made up my first 4th edition adventure.

[DocBeard]

Well maybe 1st level characters are supposed to fight goblins or something.

I mean, dude, 'An orc warparty might be a bit much for a 1st level party' doesn't mean '1st level characters cannot be heroic'.

[Mangrum]

No Charney. You're one of the 90% of DMs. Don't believe Andrew Wyatt. He would have us believe that 90% of the DMs would tell their players: "Sorry guys, but you get 140.000 copper pieces from the CR 9 dragon. What? No, not even a single silver or gold piece."

I take it you meant to put words in James Wyatt's mouth, yes?

[Jester of the FoS]

To say nothing of kobolds.

I'm okay with basic orcs being designed for 4th-6th level PCs.

Keep in mind you can take those same orcs and reduce the damage by 2, their AC/defence/attack by 3 and their hitpoints by 3x(whatever they get each level) and they're ready to fight first level PCs.
It's even easier for the minions.

[alhoon]

Nah... I like the orcs being able to pawn kobolds to bloody paste. However I also prefered them being cowards instead of bersekers that die before even thinking of retreat. Come on, we're talking about orcs here... I remember once that orcs had to make a morality check if their numbers became even with the oposition.

NOTE: The orc bloodrager seems a bit... out of sync. 5 1st lvl PCs can kill a chuul even with the outmost difficulty. But 6 PCs have a better chance to slay a single orc chieftain (700 XP) than a bloodrager (600 XP)!

That ability to strike back immediately after each blow is ... insane! Suppose the PCs have never encountered such an orc. They will gang up on him, only to be beaten up, while more experienced players (not chars) would pelt him with ranged attacks.
Well the bloodrager seems on par with 2 7th level critters. But NOT with 6 1st level ones. I believe a fight with 6 PCs against 4 skeleton warriors (600 XP) is far easier than with a single bloodrager.
It still can be done but it will take a lot out of the PCs.