|
Author
|
Comment
|
Boden Blagden
Here for a while
(3/24/03 3:16 pm)
Reply
|
Gouquog p. 172.
Gouquog is listed in posessions as having 4 pearls (1000 gp).
Is this 1000 gp each pearl or a 1000 gp for all the pearls put together. This question might seem mundane but the difference between 1000 gp and 4000 gp is pretty good.
|
The guy from Belgium
Here for a while
(3/24/03 3:30 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
4*1000 gp as i see it
sale value is 1/2 of course...
so that's 2000 gp or perhaps 2400 gp for the party (50% if sold, 60% if traded)
YMMV of course...
|
Abelard
Still here? Wow.
(3/24/03 5:02 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
Generally, gems and jewelry sell for listed price, not 50%, because they aren't subject to wear and tear like weapons and equipment are.
|
Cordo Crowfoot
Here to stay
(3/24/03 5:21 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
That is a gray area of the rules, but when I have asked that question in the past it seems the majority of people go with 90-100% value for gems and jewelry (I go with 90% IMC).
I don't think that it is due to "wear and tear" that stuff like magical equipment goes for 50% (some of it definitely doesn't wear out) but rather that they aren't commodities and the PCs don't have the time and connections to find the end-users willing to buy for full price.
"They were immediately and absolutely recognizable as adventurers. They were hardy and dangerous, lawless, stripped of allegiance or morality, living off their wits, stealing and killing, hiring themselves out to whoever and whatever came... They were scum who died violent deaths, hanging on to a certain cachet among the impressionable through their undeniable bravery and their occasionally impressive exploits" China Mieville, Perdido Street Station |
Abelard
Still here? Wow.
(3/24/03 6:07 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
Cordo,
It's true, "wear and tear" is a strange explanation for the 50% resale thing, since there are no rules reflecting actual wear and tear in game terms. But I'm pretty sure that's the flavor given in the DMG along with the guideline. (could be my bad memory too!)
I suppose that even if it doesn't make sense that mundane/magical equipment doesn't actually degrade, it does make a little sense that at least they could conceivably degrade, unlike gems & jewelry.
|
benhamtroll
Here quite a while
(3/24/03 6:29 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
I like to have the quantity of gems sold, and frequency, effect the price.
If the party heads to into town to sell a boatload of gems on a regular basis, the gem market gets glutted. Perhaps the next time they come down people are using them to patch leaky roofs, etc. Maybe not that extreme, but they may get a lower price, or the dealer may not be interested . . .
There's no business like gnoll business |
 Infiniti2000
Still here? Wow.
(3/24/03 6:37 pm)
Reply
ezSupporter
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
I also use half (usually). I don't explain it as wear and tear, but resale value. If you sell a 1000gp pearl to a jeweler, what is she going to sell it for? A typical markup is 100%, so if you reduce it by the same factor, it makes more sense. The 'value' of the item is the market cost of the item. This is theory carries out to magical items. Let's take a +1 cloak of resistance, which "lists" for 1000gp. It costs 500gp to make. So, a wizard manufacturing said cloak gets 500gp. Now, if the PC's sell it, they should also only get 500gp, unless they take the time to actually sell it to the end-user, or the final buyer.
However, that can be problematic, though potentially a source of fun if you and your group like to roleplay such things. To make things simple, sell everthing for 50% of value, +/- 15% (or whatever). For some really choice items, I'll let them sell it for full value (like the ring in the boat in Nulb, because I attributed some special significance to it, Thrommel's ring and all that).
|
Cordo Crowfoot
Here to stay
(3/24/03 8:55 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
I take my cue here from PH pg. 96 under "Selling Loot".
It really depends on if you decide to define gems and jewelry as commodities. It does say "Wheat, flour, cloth, and valuable metals are commodities..." but gems and jewelry is in a gray area.
Earlier on that page under "Wealth other than coins" is written "Gems and Jewelry serve also serve as portable wealth."
I wouldn't think it serves very well as portable wealth if you can only sell it for half of it's value.
Anyway, to address the original question, I would probably interpret that as being worth 1000gp each, for a total of 4000gp. That pushes Gouquog pretty far above the average treasure for a CR8 encounter, but that doesn't mean it is wrong, it could just be making up for other non-treasure encounters elsewhere. In practice though, I would probably make a decision on the value based on the wealth of the PCs. If they are average or trailing behind, probably 4000gp. If they are ahead of the curve, just 1000gp.
|
Boden Blagden
Here for a while
(3/24/03 8:58 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Gouquog p. 172.
When doing marking of prices I allow them to sell things at 60-75% of the cost. When buying things it costs them +10% or more of the cost in the DMG or whatever the said market value of the item is.
|
ZansForCans 
Here for a while
(3/25/03 8:24 pm)
Reply
|
Gems et al.
This shouldn't influence anyone with their own ideas about YC economies, because it's a very highly tailored thing, but if you are looking for some more RAW comments on gems, check out DMG pg. 171:
Quote:
Smart PCs love gems because they're small, light-weight, and easily concealed compared with the same value in coins.
Fairly flavor-centric, but bordering on calling them equal in value, similar to CC's PHB reference above. There's also this random example on pg. 137 where some adventurers are trying to sell 50 gp "worth" gems in a town that has a gp limit of 450. They are able to sell nine of them. These few examples lead me to believe that the RAW isn't really grey about this, just not very straightforward.
Although the gems seen in a lot of fantasy artwork are worked, I think the raw stone itself could still be considered 'gems' and may be the commodity that the RAW implies in the same sense as raw metals (PHB pg. 96 again). Although that being said, I know basically zilch about real gemworking 
I think the real grey area is artwork and jewelry. I2K's description makes a lot of sense, but a lot of what you're going to find in a fantasy setting could be viewed as unique and has some undetermined age to it, both of which can skew the "value" of an object. I guess it all depends on if you view these things as collector items (and thus the value given is what it's being traded at) or nice, but common items (so that you could walk down the street to pick a similar one up at market).
Group Editing & Authoring Support
flexible campaign management for the web
info :: demo |
Kylearanon
Here for a while
(3/26/03 2:25 am)
Reply
|
Re: Gems et al.
what exactly is meant by the difference between selling and trading. I read about that more than once now and I am wondering.
Actually I would have though "trading" means that the character gives .. well, whatever, say a pearl and doesn´t get gold in exchange but wares. Only I wonder how that should work. At a jewelery you woudn´t find anything but other jewelery, so no point in trading. And in an armory for example, you might not find a smith who likes to take jewelery as a payment !!
So ?
Cheers
Kyle
|
Infiniti2000
Still here? Wow.
(3/26/03 10:12 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
|
Re: Gems et al.
Well if you sell or trade an item to someone who only plans on reselling the item, clearly you can't get full value for it. If you sell or trade an item to someone who plans on keeping it (i.e. that someone is the end-user), then you should get full value for it. That was my whole point.
For gems, it depends entirely upon the individual campaign's ecnomic structure. If you want gems to be a form of money, then you should always get full value for them. To me, the only one who wants to hold onto gems are adventurers. Everyone else wants to put them in jewelry, weapons, or magical items. In that respect, you could still get full value (or something closer to full value) for a gem if you sell it to a jeweler, but not if you sell it to a "gem seller" who just wants to resell it.
If you want to give your group the benefit of the doubt that they are able to find end-users, then they should get full value for all their stuff (minus maybe a little for wear and tear, especially on weapons and armor). This is not a bad way to do things, though I will probably not do it that way (IMC the party is already over the top based on previously very generous treasure hoards).
|
|
Okay -- Your Turn
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies