I mostly use 3e rules still for magic shop pricing as 5e for some reason has decided to steer dms away from the concept of a magic shop and encourage magic as treasure more than money as treasure for buying specific magic from a shop so dm's can have more control over what magic their players get to have.
I still prefer players getting to have at least some of what they really want rather than 'random' loot drops.
Removing specific prices a) more accurately simulates what purchasing this kind of specialized items would be like in the standard setting where they aren't going to have an MSRP rate and b) reinforces the fact that all the aspects of issuing magic items are subject to DM's discretion by not letting players point to the "right" price in the DMG if the DM wants to set a higher price for some reason. And it's rather inaccurate to say 5e is actively steering DMs away from using magic shops and into only randomized loot just because they don't give list prices for the items. There's just little reason to take time to spell out a formal system for "players give you a shopping list, you give them the prices", as opposed to alternatives that incorporate various degrees of randomization.
The downside is that new players when kitting out their characters will see no prices in the equipment lists so on occasion actually do think "Oh, free!"
They often do not even realize they are choosing magic items as starting equipment.
Additional downsides are not just that the rarities are often nonsensical even comparatively when comparing magic items, but also for most people, words like 'Common' or 'Uncommon' do not mean what the Devs presumably meant by them. They give the impression there really are stores where you can just walk in and buy these things off the shelf.
I mean, that is kinda the idea of Common stuff, and even Uncommon in a lot of cases.
Exactly. But they do not seem to understand the ramifications of things like a collapsing pole being common (which implies that magic powered pistons could well be a thing). Spyglass of Clairvoyance. Why spend 1,000 on a non-magical spyglass when you can have a magical one for a fraction of the cost? Locks of Trickery being common suggests that Rogues should be making most lock picking checks at disadvantage.
Gauntlets of Ogre Power, giving 19 str are merely 'uncommon.' Ditto Gloves of Thievery, which are +5 to Slight of Hand and Lockpicking. Immovable Rod, also underrated, IMO
Personally, I think, if they are going with this route, they should have said "These are the relative rarities among magic items. The rarity of magic items generally will be up to your DM." or words to that effect. And screened rarities more carefully as well.
All this affects the pricing advice they give.
I mean, there's a difference between "common" and "mass produced". Plus, keep in mind that even a Common magic item is several months' wages to your basic middle-class type (Modest lifestyle from the PHB). And Uncommon can be most of two years' wages. Also, some of your proposed uses don't work; a Pole of Collapsing expressly does not expand beyond the available space, so it cannot function as a piston. And the Spyglass of Clairvoyance is specific to Acquisitions Incorporated, and so is a bad example for their larger design trends/goals since it was primarily designed for use in a particular series of events, not as a general use item.
And, they did also indicate that it's DM discretion as well:
Common items, such as a potion of healing, can be procured from an alchemist, herbalist, or spellcaster. Doing so is rarely as simple as walking into a shop and selecting an item from a shelf. The seller might ask for a service, rather than coin.
If your world includes a large number of adventurers engaged in retrieving ancient magic items, trade in these items might be more common. Even so, it’s likely to remain similar to the market for fine art in the real world
Plenty of people might like to have a magic sword, but few of them can afford it. Those who can afford such an item usually have more practical things to spend on.
All of the common "magic item economy makes no sense" talking points are addressed in the DMG, at least to the degree that economics in general are addressed in D&D. It might require a little finessing of the prices as compared to the suggested ranges, but I've yet to see an RPG game system that did have a perfectly balanced and logical economy, so giving a general tone and leaving it to the DM to hash out the exact details for their setting is hardly something you can find fault with.
"The following activities are suitable for any character who can afford to pursue them. As DM, you have the final say on which activities are available to the characters. The activities you allow might depend on the nature of the area where the characters are located. For example, you might disallow the creation of magic items or decide that the characters are in a town that is too isolated from major markets for them to buy such items."
Its definitely frustrating that this, like many things, is all covered in the DMG+XGtE, but not in a way that is particularly accessible/discoverable. (its taken me four (!) years to really start to find my way round the DMG, I've often found things in pdfs from previous edition (which I never even played!) and then searched my way back to the 5E rules. Hoping the 2024 edition of the books fixes this.
Meanwhile in Eberron: "Thanks to dragonshards, common magic items — including the ones in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything — are readily available in Khorvaire.... ...In Eberron, common magic items can be found for sale in most communities. The DM determines the stock that is available, or the DM has the shoppers make a group Intelligence (Investigation) check to find a shop or peddler that has the desired item in stock. The DC for this check is...[Quite a bit easier than in XGtE]"
Of course if the players are power gaming against the spirit of the campaign world the DM will be wanting/needing to restrict options to keep the integrity of the story... but that really is not a rules problem but a table one.
It works as an organization tool as well as giving you the price for every item (official and partnered, currently 4305 items).
The prices are solely based on the item's power. They take into account attunement requirement, if the item is consumable, number of uses as well as many other things. All the prices use formulas in their calculation, so they stay consistent with one another.
This list has now been used actively for some months in a West Marches campaign where all items are available and we've been updating the prices when needed for balancing reasons. If you have feedback about the prices feel free to give it here or on Discord (link in the website).
This is a very cool list! I'm curious to learn more about the formula. For example, just browsing uncommon utility items, I was surprised to see the Cloak of Elvenkind as ~ 1/4 the price of Sending Stones, and I'm wondering if that's just a side effect of using the rubric or if you would agree that this is the appropriate result.
Because D&D isn't a simulation of a magical reality there are a lot of things that call for a large suspension of disbelief. magic item rarity pricing is one of those - hence all the confusion. I applaud those that have tried to make some sort of sense of it - I tried and am still trying but only occasionally. WotC basically wants magic to be a reward for adventuring, not something you can either make or buy in shops. That is why there are no official prices and a horrid mish mash of crafting rules - that mostly make it take to long to be useful during a campaign. The rarity system is also a good joke. many of the "common" items I find nearly useless for adventuring and only slightly useful even socially. I can understand why the cloak of billowing and cloak of many fashions are common magic items, but the rod of bird calls? then magic gear for adventurers -why are weapons uncommon but armors rare? to my mind basic +1 items along with things like bags of holding that everyone pretty much can use should be uncommon, with only the more common potions also being common magic items. Things like the Headband of intellect and gauntlets of ogre power along with specialized armor and weapons of +1 or +2 would be rare. basic +3 items and +2 with major abilities would be very rare and pretty much anything else of major power is either legendary or an artifact. most of the wild and wacky specialty items - like the bags of tricks or horns of Valhalla would be rare to very rare simply because they were never made in any quantities as only selected classes and/or individuals would originally want them. Keep in mind that every magic item was - originally - made for some particular person who was willing to shell out the time and money to acquire the materials and find someone of sufficient capacity to create the item. With 2024 we are starting to see some sort of guidelines with what can be created in the bastion section of the DMG. but its still basically a cr^p shoot to try to find/make/buy magic - even for DMs.
This is a very cool list! I'm curious to learn more about the formula. For example, just browsing uncommon utility items, I was surprised to see the Cloak of Elvenkind as ~ 1/4 the price of Sending Stones, and I'm wondering if that's just a side effect of using the rubric or if you would agree that this is the appropriate result.
The "formula" is actually a complex mix of multiple formulas for different kinds of items. The initial "pillar" for prices are the prices of spell scrolls that were released in the PHB2024. Though I changed them a bit so they follow a more regular exponential curve. A lot of effects are similar to spell effects so I base the prices on spells of similar power level. Then some other smaller "pillars" are weapons with extra damage, the value of AC for armor, for those I calculated the average damage dealt or the average damage received and made exponential formulas for both. Items with charges/multiple uses are multiplied by numbers that increase less and less (due to diminishing returns of charges). The calculations have a lot into it, but I'd say these are the big bases used for most of the items.
Cloak of Elvenkind is a good item for its price because for the sake of simplicity I value every skill the same (like I do for damage types and resistances), so an item that gives advantage in performance is going to have the same value as an item that gives advantage in stealth, making the item that gives advantage in stealth better for it's price since stealth checks are much more common. Another important aspect for this price calculation is the attunement requirement, this is often disregarded but requiring attunement is extremely important when you start to own multiple of those items, just due to attunement I reduce item's prices to 60% of its original value.
Reviewing Sending Stones made me actually reduce its price (currently 879) since before I was using a 3rd-level scroll as base, but it's a weaker version of the spell since you can only cast it on the bearer of the other stone. The other thing that makes this item more expensive is that you are essentially buying two of the item, doubling its price.
I can go more into detail and give exact values for the calculations of these items if you're interested, but this is the gist of it.
I'd say the final prices align with my gut instinct when reading both items, I agree they are appropriate.
This is a very cool list! I'm curious to learn more about the formula. For example, just browsing uncommon utility items, I was surprised to see the Cloak of Elvenkind as ~ 1/4 the price of Sending Stones, and I'm wondering if that's just a side effect of using the rubric or if you would agree that this is the appropriate result.
The "formula" is actually a complex mix of multiple formulas for different kinds of items. The initial "pillar" for prices are the prices of spell scrolls that were released in the PHB2024. Though I changed them a bit so they follow a more regular exponential curve. A lot of effects are similar to spell effects so I base the prices on spells of similar power level. Then some other smaller "pillars" are weapons with extra damage, the value of AC for armor, for those I calculated the average damage dealt or the average damage received and made exponential formulas for both. Items with charges/multiple uses are multiplied by numbers that increase less and less (due to diminishing returns of charges). The calculations have a lot into it, but I'd say these are the big bases used for most of the items.
Cloak of Elvenkind is a good item for its price because for the sake of simplicity I value every skill the same (like I do for damage types and resistances), so an item that gives advantage in performance is going to have the same value as an item that gives advantage in stealth, making the item that gives advantage in stealth better for it's price since stealth checks are much more common. Another important aspect for this price calculation is the attunement requirement, this is often disregarded but requiring attunement is extremely important when you start to own multiple of those items, just due to attunement I reduce item's prices to 60% of its original value.
Reviewing Sending Stones made me actually reduce its price (currently 879) since before I was using a 3rd-level scroll as base, but it's a weaker version of the spell since you can only cast it on the bearer of the other stone. The other thing that makes this item more expensive is that you are essentially buying two of the item, doubling its price.
I can go more into detail and give exact values for the calculations of these items if you're interested, but this is the gist of it.
I'd say the final prices align with my gut instinct when reading both items, I agree they are appropriate.
Thank you! That was very helpful and I'm impressed with all the thought you put into it.
One thing I checked right away, however, was Cloak of Displacement. Curious why that's only about 6,000 while, for example, studded+3 is 40,000. The cloak is among the best defensive items in the game. I think +3 armor should be worth the 40,000, certainly, but so should the cloak, in my opinion. Curious what went into that calculation.
One thing I checked right away, however, was Cloak of Displacement. Curious why that's only about 6,000 while, for example, studded+3 is 40,000. The cloak is among the best defensive items in the game. I think +3 armor should be worth the 40,000, certainly, but so should the cloak, in my opinion. Curious what went into that calculation.
(edited the cloak's price)
The Cloak of Displacement is based in a value for granting disadvantage on all attacks that's around 18.2k. It is then multiplied for 60% which is the value I assigned for the probability of it working based in not working after taking damage or speed 0, and then 60% again due to requiring attunement.
But you do make a good point comparing it to an armor +3, I'll raise the value of items that grant disadvantage on all attacks. It is definitely better than half of +3 to AC.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I mean, there's a difference between "common" and "mass produced". Plus, keep in mind that even a Common magic item is several months' wages to your basic middle-class type (Modest lifestyle from the PHB). And Uncommon can be most of two years' wages. Also, some of your proposed uses don't work; a Pole of Collapsing expressly does not expand beyond the available space, so it cannot function as a piston. And the Spyglass of Clairvoyance is specific to Acquisitions Incorporated, and so is a bad example for their larger design trends/goals since it was primarily designed for use in a particular series of events, not as a general use item.
And, they did also indicate that it's DM discretion as well:
All of the common "magic item economy makes no sense" talking points are addressed in the DMG, at least to the degree that economics in general are addressed in D&D. It might require a little finessing of the prices as compared to the suggested ranges, but I've yet to see an RPG game system that did have a perfectly balanced and logical economy, so giving a general tone and leaving it to the DM to hash out the exact details for their setting is hardly something you can find fault with.
And where the rules are expanded in XGtE:
"The following activities are suitable for any character who can afford to pursue them. As DM, you have the final say on which activities are available to the characters. The activities you allow might depend on the nature of the area where the characters are located. For example, you might disallow the creation of magic items or decide that the characters are in a town that is too isolated from major markets for them to buy such items."
Its definitely frustrating that this, like many things, is all covered in the DMG+XGtE, but not in a way that is particularly accessible/discoverable. (its taken me four (!) years to really start to find my way round the DMG, I've often found things in pdfs from previous edition (which I never even played!) and then searched my way back to the 5E rules. Hoping the 2024 edition of the books fixes this.
Meanwhile in Eberron: "Thanks to dragonshards, common magic items — including the ones in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything — are readily available in Khorvaire.... ...In Eberron, common magic items can be found for sale in most communities. The DM determines the stock that is available, or the DM has the shoppers make a group Intelligence (Investigation) check to find a shop or peddler that has the desired item in stock. The DC for this check is...[Quite a bit easier than in XGtE]"
Of course if the players are power gaming against the spirit of the campaign world the DM will be wanting/needing to restrict options to keep the integrity of the story... but that really is not a rules problem but a table one.
I've seen many people complain about magic item prices solely based on rarity. I agree with the complaint so I made:
Ryex's Magic Item Prices
It works as an organization tool as well as giving you the price for every item (official and partnered, currently 4305 items).
The prices are solely based on the item's power. They take into account attunement requirement, if the item is consumable, number of uses as well as many other things. All the prices use formulas in their calculation, so they stay consistent with one another.
This list has now been used actively for some months in a West Marches campaign where all items are available and we've been updating the prices when needed for balancing reasons. If you have feedback about the prices feel free to give it here or on Discord (link in the website).
This is a very cool list! I'm curious to learn more about the formula. For example, just browsing uncommon utility items, I was surprised to see the Cloak of Elvenkind as ~ 1/4 the price of Sending Stones, and I'm wondering if that's just a side effect of using the rubric or if you would agree that this is the appropriate result.
Because D&D isn't a simulation of a magical reality there are a lot of things that call for a large suspension of disbelief. magic item rarity pricing is one of those - hence all the confusion. I applaud those that have tried to make some sort of sense of it - I tried and am still trying but only occasionally. WotC basically wants magic to be a reward for adventuring, not something you can either make or buy in shops. That is why there are no official prices and a horrid mish mash of crafting rules - that mostly make it take to long to be useful during a campaign. The rarity system is also a good joke. many of the "common" items I find nearly useless for adventuring and only slightly useful even socially. I can understand why the cloak of billowing and cloak of many fashions are common magic items, but the rod of bird calls? then magic gear for adventurers -why are weapons uncommon but armors rare? to my mind basic +1 items along with things like bags of holding that everyone pretty much can use should be uncommon, with only the more common potions also being common magic items. Things like the Headband of intellect and gauntlets of ogre power along with specialized armor and weapons of +1 or +2 would be rare. basic +3 items and +2 with major abilities would be very rare and pretty much anything else of major power is either legendary or an artifact. most of the wild and wacky specialty items - like the bags of tricks or horns of Valhalla would be rare to very rare simply because they were never made in any quantities as only selected classes and/or individuals would originally want them. Keep in mind that every magic item was - originally - made for some particular person who was willing to shell out the time and money to acquire the materials and find someone of sufficient capacity to create the item. With 2024 we are starting to see some sort of guidelines with what can be created in the bastion section of the DMG. but its still basically a cr^p shoot to try to find/make/buy magic - even for DMs.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
The "formula" is actually a complex mix of multiple formulas for different kinds of items. The initial "pillar" for prices are the prices of spell scrolls that were released in the PHB2024. Though I changed them a bit so they follow a more regular exponential curve. A lot of effects are similar to spell effects so I base the prices on spells of similar power level. Then some other smaller "pillars" are weapons with extra damage, the value of AC for armor, for those I calculated the average damage dealt or the average damage received and made exponential formulas for both. Items with charges/multiple uses are multiplied by numbers that increase less and less (due to diminishing returns of charges). The calculations have a lot into it, but I'd say these are the big bases used for most of the items.
Cloak of Elvenkind is a good item for its price because for the sake of simplicity I value every skill the same (like I do for damage types and resistances), so an item that gives advantage in performance is going to have the same value as an item that gives advantage in stealth, making the item that gives advantage in stealth better for it's price since stealth checks are much more common. Another important aspect for this price calculation is the attunement requirement, this is often disregarded but requiring attunement is extremely important when you start to own multiple of those items, just due to attunement I reduce item's prices to 60% of its original value.
Reviewing Sending Stones made me actually reduce its price (currently 879) since before I was using a 3rd-level scroll as base, but it's a weaker version of the spell since you can only cast it on the bearer of the other stone. The other thing that makes this item more expensive is that you are essentially buying two of the item, doubling its price.
I can go more into detail and give exact values for the calculations of these items if you're interested, but this is the gist of it.
I'd say the final prices align with my gut instinct when reading both items, I agree they are appropriate.
Thank you! That was very helpful and I'm impressed with all the thought you put into it.
Very cool!!
One thing I checked right away, however, was Cloak of Displacement. Curious why that's only about 6,000 while, for example, studded+3 is 40,000. The cloak is among the best defensive items in the game. I think +3 armor should be worth the 40,000, certainly, but so should the cloak, in my opinion. Curious what went into that calculation.
(edited the cloak's price)
The Cloak of Displacement is based in a value for granting disadvantage on all attacks that's around 18.2k. It is then multiplied for 60% which is the value I assigned for the probability of it working based in not working after taking damage or speed 0, and then 60% again due to requiring attunement.
But you do make a good point comparing it to an armor +3, I'll raise the value of items that grant disadvantage on all attacks. It is definitely better than half of +3 to AC.