Anatomy of Failed Design: Treasure Parcels

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:40 pm

Psychic Robot wrote:
I surely hope people don't go on a quest for the fire-brand weapon just because they later fight ice-based monsters.
Uh...why? That would make for a cool adventure.

Well because if the only reason people "adventure" in an RPG is for items, like in an MMO, then a whole portion of the game has been lost, as well a large production of innovation has been lost to humanity.

If you go for this fire-brand item because you want it, then fine. If you go for it solely based on the fact you know you will be fighting ice-based creatures, and use this type of thinking for every quest; then something has gone horribly wrong.

When I first saw the preview of treasure parcels, and then encounter bugets, I thought of treasure parcels as each its own golden fleece.

Give them only at the end of the level when a new level is gained, and you can do it; then you have the treasure marking the end of the level, and each level becomes its own adventure with a golden fleece at the end of that adventure.

Then things started to break down. Where was this lump sum reward coming from at the end, and why was it always at the end?

The way combat is balanced, you gain equipment for the next level in advance. The treasure parcel system supports this with how it is given out 1 level+1 item, 1 level item, 1 level -1 item, etc.

So it makes the game have a defined end when each level is just a chapter in the story, rather than able to contain multiple chapters within a single level.

How and why these things are placed break the 4th wall in 4th edition.

Always the PCs can see the growth of the weapons power, and never is it set up to give anything that would resemble organic treasure. It is there because someone else brought it together. It was solely there for the PCs to find.

So the fire-brand can be where someone specifically has it, but it could easily fall into the trappings of the golden fleece model and breaking the 4th wall of the game where items are only sought after because the game mechanics from within the game world and PC mindset.

I am not against gamist, but don't think the game should be designed for gamist mentality only. It needs to have the ability, within the structure of balance, that allows for all styles of play.

The way 4th edition is built, it does not provide a framework for that with its intertwined systems that depend on each other not to diverge.

So if you know within the game and only rarely seek the fire-brand to fight ice-based creatures, then it wouldn't be a problem so much as when the only reason you search for ANY item is because the plot later will require it.

Seems like a reverse Chekov's gun. You have the reason for it to go off, but now you have to find it and place it into a scene so it can be found, so it can go off.

I prefer the axe over the tavern to just be there as decoration, and only later find out you need it for something.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:44 pm

Well because if the only reason people "adventure" in an RPG is for items,

Who said the only reason that they were adventuring was for items? I thought they were planning on defeating some ice monsters.

If you go for this fire-brand item because you want it, then fine. If you go for it solely based on the fact you know you will be fighting ice-based creatures, and use this type of thinking for every quest; then something has gone horribly wrong.

How has it "gone horribly wrong"? I think that questing for a firebrand when you're about face off against an ice critter is sensible and good roleplaying--if the ice monster is weak to fire, isn't a good idea to bring a fire weapon with you?

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:49 pm

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 5:20 pm

Psychic Robot wrote:
Well because if the only reason people "adventure" in an RPG is for items,
Who said the only reason that they were adventuring was for items? I thought they were planning on defeating some ice monsters.
If you go for this fire-brand item because you want it, then fine. If you go for it solely based on the fact you know you will be fighting ice-based creatures, and use this type of thinking for every quest; then something has gone horribly wrong.
How has it "gone horribly wrong"? I think that questing for a firebrand when you're about face off against an ice critter is sensible and good roleplaying--if the ice monster is weak to fire, isn't a good idea to bring a fire weapon with you?

Because if the game has gone down to finding new toys and only that reason, then something has been lost.

It is a part of the player empowerment of knowing what monsters you will see or not because some cannot remove player knowledge form character knowledge, they "build" the character based on best possible combination of items/stats in order to deal with what comes next.

You won't see a kobold at level 20 for example.

So when the system sets up for only going for items you know you will need later, and how else can the player drvien item wish lists work, you have gone into territory of using the wrong knowledge.

While the fighter might want a fire-based sword for his character for some reason (why exactly does the character want it, or is it just the player wanting it?), it doesn't mean it will be given fight away to him.

Again, it is the whole planning the mechanics to work for the characters, vs playing the characters to solve what they have to with what they have.

It is possible that this happens under this system, and was spelled out in the books to work thus. Why then assume it wouldn't happen?

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 5:27 pm

Because if the game has gone down to finding new toys and only that reason, then something has been lost.

What? The entire point of searching for a firebrand is to defeat the ice monsters. You're not just looking for "toys"; you're looking for tools to do the job. That's like saying that the wizard searching for a scroll of resist energy to help fight the ice monsters is just searching for "new toys."

The goal isn't the firebrand. The goal is the defeat of the ice monsters. You just need the firebrand to do that.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 5:39 pm

The thing is why do you know ice monsters are coming up? Because the encounter budget and monster design system places certain monsters only at certain levels in some sterile design environment, with no organic or fluid design that makes sense.

The above comic shows what I mean.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 5:46 pm

shadzar wrote:The thing is why do you know ice monsters are coming up? Because the encounter budget and monster design system places certain monsters only at certain levels in some sterile design environment, with no organic or fluid design that makes sense.

You mean you never had character do recon on where they maybe going? I mean that's the whole point of getting prepared for an adventure.

You seem to be making the assumption that you are either "searching for toys" or "roleplaying". You can do both.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:00 pm

4th edition emphasizes the balance by sterility in its design.

While it would be nice if people did think outside the rules, look all around at other forums where people are having problems getting players to think outside the box with 4th edition and its system of powers and just about everything else.

It isn't designed for recon, but for handouts such as the treasure parcel system.

In the past you could stick any monster anywhere to have anything on them and it made sense because the kobolds had a reason to be with the beholders and mind-flayers.

Now you get the BBEG highest level monster, that only has things close to his level for minions. You know what to expect where more often, and the gamist concepts built into 4th further the gamist playstyle, so why would people, and they seem not to, go searching for information.

4th is setup so that you can skip the RP ("Don't talk to the two guards at the city gates because it isn't fun.") and just get into combat quicker for more milestones and more dailies, to offer your 10 encounters per level to level with so you can get those treasure parcels to be ABLE to do anything the next level.

You could do that in the past, without having to tailor the system to it. Since the system IS tailored to that, then why would anyone HAVE to do research, when they are just "building" the optimized character for each level based on the mechanics?

At least the CR and EL system didn't toss out the chance of having kobolds to fight at level 12, so you didn't ever really know what to expect in 3rd. (I only praise 3rd it seems in attacking 4th....) In 4th however there isn't much wiggle room but the 5 level scale that seems to not work correctly for most, as the precise level things aren't properly balanced.

It is just so damn silly that treasure must be given in a specific way because you know what toe expect as a player, and it bleeds into the game world itself and becomes visible that the PCs are a part of a game.

4th edition has no 4h wall because of it.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:03 pm

The thing is why do you know ice monsters are coming up?

Because it's part of the plot. Because there's an ice drake BBEG menacing the townsfolk. Because the Ice Queen is turning the land into an arctic wasteland. Because frost giants are marauding everywhere. Because you're going to be going through an ice cave on the way to throw the One Ring into Mt. Doom.

It has nothing to do with 4e. I'm not even talking about 4e.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:14 pm

Psychic Robot wrote:It has nothing to do with 4e. I'm not even talking about 4e.

I am...

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:31 pm

Because it's part of the plot. Because there's an ice drake BBEG menacing the townsfolk. Because the Ice Queen is turning the land into an arctic wasteland. Because frost giants are marauding everywhere. Because you're going to be going through an ice cave on the way to throw the One Ring into Mt. Doom.

Please don't ignore the majority of my post.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:33 pm

PR: stop allowing threads that are actually about something to be completely derailed by shit no one cares about.

-Username17

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:36 pm

So skip all the gaming nonsense and use scorched earth tactics against the ice queen and her minions. Just melt them.

Use lamp oil and everything else you can if oyu know that much, you don't need to go seek a single item when the answer is that obvious. PCs aren't stupid enough to not get fire v ice. It would save a lot of energy and effort as well.

Catapults and greek fire. No need for a single person to have some sword that makes fire. It isn't like fire doesn't exist without this one sword being found.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:38 pm

So skip all the gaming nonsense and use scorched earth tactics against the ice queen and her minions. Just melt them. Rolling Eyes

Use lamp oil and everything else you can if oyu know that much, you don't need to go seek a single item when the answer is that obvious. PCs aren't stupid enough to not get fire v ice. It would save a lot of energy and effort as well.

Catapults and greek fire. No need for a single person to have some sword that makes fire. It isn't like fire doesn't exist without this one sword being found. Rolling Eyes

No. The entire point is that it's a fun sidequest to get the flame sword that will defeat the Ice Queen. You don't have to do it--your players can use catapults or alchemist's fire (even though those are weak options)--but getting the firebrand isn't the players being "bad." It's the players being smart.

It has nothing to do with metagaming or "player entitlement."

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:53 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:Let's say you really wanted to have magic items be real things that you found and bought for money. OK, we could make some systems that genuinely did that. Let's go!

The Ziggurat

The items in the world are harshly tiered. Maybe they have three or six tiers. I don't even care. The point is that you make the value spike between turnips to copper and copper to gold and gold to um... astral diamonds be large. And you put a fucking weight limit on exchanges. Merchants seriously will not sell you anything for 50 kilos of "currency" so once you're outfitted in copper-purchasable merchandise, there's no point in even picking that shit up. In this model, when players start getting gold they are in a rush to swap out all their shit with gold-tier crap and then once they get a full set they start saving up gold to pay the brokerage fees to hone in on the exact equipment they are looking for. This allows people an easy fall-back position because they can liquidate like any astral diamond merchandise at all to grab a big enough pile of gold that no one has to run around in that environment with actually empty slots.

Let's say the games I play in usually span one or maybe two tiers (that's probably an accurate assessment, no matter what is meant by "tier"). In that case, isn't this essentially the same as 3.5's wealth system?

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:09 pm

hogarth wrote:
FrankTrollman wrote:Let's say you really wanted to have magic items be real things that you found and bought for money. OK, we could make some systems that genuinely did that. Let's go!

The Ziggurat

The items in the world are harshly tiered. Maybe they have three or six tiers. I don't even care. The point is that you make the value spike between turnips to copper and copper to gold and gold to um... astral diamonds be large. And you put a fucking weight limit on exchanges. Merchants seriously will not sell you anything for 50 kilos of "currency" so once you're outfitted in copper-purchasable merchandise, there's no point in even picking that shit up. In this model, when players start getting gold they are in a rush to swap out all their shit with gold-tier crap and then once they get a full set they start saving up gold to pay the brokerage fees to hone in on the exact equipment they are looking for. This allows people an easy fall-back position because they can liquidate like any astral diamond merchandise at all to grab a big enough pile of gold that no one has to run around in that environment with actually empty slots.
Let's say the games I play in usually span one or maybe two tiers (that's probably an accurate assessment, no matter what is meant by "tier"). In that case, isn't this essentially the same as 3.5's wealth system?

Pretty much. 3.5 enforces its tiers rather poorly, and it is a very short ziggurat. But you'll note that the essentially free nature of basic equipment once characters start having reasonable amounts of magic items keeps the game working pretty well in the run between 1st and 5th level. One can make a pretty compelling argument that the reason that the game's treasure falls apart at higher levels is mostly to do with the fact that it fails to introduce additional tiers and instead attempts to get +2 swords to somehow purchase Darkskulls by dint of intermediary trades of literal tonnes of precious metal.

-Username17

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:27 pm

Like I told Tequila Sunrise in the other thread, 3.5E's wealth-by-level system had some serious problems with it.

Probably the biggest issue with WBL, especially with beginners, is that there were no guidelines on how to spend your cash. At low levels it wasn't a big deal, since you couldn't afford much and nearly everyone was smart enough to get a cloak of resistance/magic weapon/magic armor. But beyond that, many people didn't have a clue what to spend their money on, which led to some people picking up things like rods of wonder and mattocks of the Titans and other people to blow all of their money on pearls of power.

I really don't know how to solve this problem, other than dividing the tiered wealth into different colored piles and not making them interchangeable. For example, at level 10 people got 10 black diamonds, 10 red diamonds, 10 blue diamonds, 15 green diamonds, and 20 yellow diamonds. Weapons get purchased with black diamonds, armor with red, save boosters with blue, combat utilities with green, and 'fun' magical items like the Lyre of Building with yellow ones.

But aside from being really heavy-handed that's probably a lot more bookkeeping than players would tend to keep track of.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:06 pm

Okay, let's take a time out for a second. I'm not going to criticize 4E's design goals just for being what they are, but how they went about obtaining them.

So as far as I can tell, here were the design goals for the magical item accumulation system:

- Characters gain the bulk of their magical power from what the DM decides that they get. A characters should never expect to be able to have enough money to purchase an item of their level. Not even if they hoard their money.
- Characters must be able to get a weapon/implement, some armor, and a neck slot item. Anything else is considered unnecessary.
- PCs should not be able to obtain magical items or treasure outside of the reward schedule.
- Characters should frequently outright replace key items. Not just by going from a +1 flaming bastard sword to a +2 flaming bastard, but from a +1 flaming bastard sword to a +2 lightning-burst rapier.
- Consumable items bring be a permanent hit to a character's resource pile. If it weren't for the quadratic nature of the magic item system, you would seriously expected to pay for that potion you drank last year for the rest of your life.
- Players should be expected to use plenty of consumables over the course of their career (seriously, the treasure parcels go out of their way to include potions)
- Characters should be discouraged from trading in magical items they don't want for magical items that they do want.
- No monster looting. Ever.
- Non-combat items should draw from the same resource pool as combat items.

So, how would you design a system that met all of these design criteria?

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:22 pm

Lago wrote:So as far as I can tell, here were the design goals for the magical item accumulation system

Wrong.

We know what the design goals were because they fucking told us what they were.

Design and Development: Magic Items wrote:One of our goals in 4th Edition was to reduce characters' reliance on magic items. The most important portion of this goal involved removing a lot of the magic items that were essential just so your character could feel effective, like stat-boosting items, amulets of natural armor, and the like. We also felt like these items weren't as exciting as magic items should be, yet characters depended on them heavily to feel adequate in proportion to their level. We felt that the cool stuff a character can do should come from that character's abilities, not his gear.

Items are divided by item slot, much like they were in D&D 3.5 (though it took until Magic Item Compendium for the system to be quantified clearly). As before, you can only wear one item in each slot. The number of slots has been reduced (by combining slots that were similar), to keep the number of items manageable and easy to remem-ber. You still have a ton of choices for items in the game, and when we were still using more slots, our playtesters reported that it caused information overload.
Primary Slots

We've preserved a number of items that have traditional "plusses." These are the items we expect everybody to care about, and the ones that are factored into the math behind the game. If you're 9th level, we expect you to have a set of +2 armor, and the challenges in the game at that level are balanced accordingly. Here are the primary item slots:

Weapon/Implement: Whether you're swinging a mace or blasting with a magic wand, you have an item that adds to your attack and damage. These weapons also set your critical hit dice (the extra dice you roll when you score a critical hit, see the Design & Development article, "Critical Hits"). Even though this is called an item slot, that doesn't mean you can't wield more than one weapon, because that would make the ranger cry. 3.5 Equivalents: Weapons, holy symbols, rods, staffs, wands.

Armor: This category now includes cloth armor, so the wizard in robes has magic armor just like the rest of the group. Magic armor adds an enhancement bonus to your Armor Class. 3.5 Equivalents: Body, torso.

Neck: An item in the neck slot increases your Fortitude, Reflex, and Will defenses, as well as usually doing something else snappy. The most common items are amulets and cloaks. 3.5 Equivalents: Shoulders, throat.
Secondary Slots

These items don't have enhancement bonuses. That makes them essentially optional. You could adventure with no items in your secondary item slots and not see a huge decrease in your overall power. Take what looks cool, but don't worry about having empty slots.

Arms: These are bulky items that fit over your arms, such as bracers, vambraces, and shields. You'll notice that shields no longer have an enhancement bonus. Instead, shields have special defensive effects and items you wear instead of shields, like bracers, are more offensive. 3.5 Equivalents: Arms, shields.

Feet: Focused on mobility and special movement modes, you can be pretty sure what you're getting when you look at magic boots, greaves, or sandals. 3.5 Equivalent: Feet.

Hands: Thinner items that fit on your hands fall into this category. This includes gauntlets and gloves. They usu-ally help out your attacks or help your manual dexterity. 3.5 Equivalent: Hands.

Head: These items increase your mental skills or enhance your senses. Helmets, circlets, and goggles all fall in this category. Another major subcategory here includes orbitals, such as ioun stones. If you see someone with an orbital, it's a good bet you're dealing with an epic character. 3.5 Equivalents: Face, head.

Rings: This slot has changed quite a bit. A starting character isn't powerful enough to unleash the power of a ring. You can use one ring when you reach paragon tier (11th level) and two when you're epic (21st level). And before you get started about how Frodo sure as hell wasn't epic, let's be clear: the One Ring was an artifact, not a magic item any old spellcaster could make. Artifacts follow their own rules. 3.5 Equivalent: Rings.

Waist: Items you wear around your waist are usually about protection, healing, or increasing your Strength tem-porarily. 3.5 Equivalent: Waist.
Other Items

Some items don't use item slots. Some of them aren't useful in combat. Others can be useful in a fight, but only once in a while.

Potions: Potions are consumable items, and they're mostly focused on healing effects.

Wondrous Items: This category no longer includes wearable items. These are utility items that don't take up space on your body or act as weapons.

Herp. Also Derp.

Treasure Parcel system is TOTAL FUCKING COMPLETE INEXCUSABLE FAIL.

-Username17

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:26 pm

Lago PARANOIA wrote: - Characters must be able to get a weapon/implement, some armor, and a neck slot item. Anything else is considered unnecessary.
- PCs should not be able to obtain magical items or treasure outside of the reward schedule.
- Characters should frequently outright replace key items. Not just by going from a +1 flaming bastard sword to a +2 flaming bastard, but from a +1 flaming bastard sword to a +2 lightning-burst rapier.
- Characters should be discouraged from trading in magical items they don't want for magical items that they do want.
- No monster looting. Ever.
- Non-combat items should draw from the same resource pool as combat items.

So, how would you design a system that met all of these design criteria?

With those things I wouldn't try to.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:40 pm

Frank, even though that link you posted made me cry baby tears (like so:

) that really didn't say a whole lot about how you're supposed to get said items.

The magic items in 4E could be awesome and gar but the actual resource accumulation system would still suck a bucket of balls.

And anyway, what was up with the hate for being dependent on magical items? I like magical items. I like my characters' awesomeness coming from magical items.

What I don't like is my characters' awesomeness being dependent on boring magical items like +4 subtle longswords to the point of not letting me have decks of illusion--all it does is make my character look like a bunnypants. What I don't like is my characters' awesomeness being dependent on magical items while some things aren't at all, like 4E humanoid monsters--all that does it make my character look like a bunnypants. What I don't like having to suck the cocks of other characters to get my magical items--all that does is make my character look like a bunnypants.

But as far as having a backpack filled with a magic carpet, a retractable grappling hook, a ring of invisibility, and a cloak of the bat? While having an enchanted booze-filled water fountain supplying my Valhalla-horn summoned pirates with booze so they can fire the delayed blast fireball and magic missile magical cannons on my golden airship? I love that shit. Bring on the bling, baby.

4E took all of the things I hated about 3E's magical items and amped them up while killing all of the things I loved about 3E's magical items.

Jesus fucking Christ when is that stupid bastard Andy Collins getting fired?!

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:00 pm

The problem comes form lack of useful utility magic (items/spells) at lower levels.

You would need things like the ability to Fly prior to level, what? 14?

So you have to wait late in the game for this plot item magic carpet to be given out with the current economic system under treasure parcels.

I know it says you can give more, but what effect does the ability to fly around at level 3 have, and what is the duration? Until end of the encounter? 5 turns? 30 minutes maybe so it is useful?

There is the big problem with the utility items, rituals, and powers in general.

So, Lago, how do you throw in an ability for your carpet that doesn't foul up combats by effectively giving a character a free combat worth of attacks that cannot be attacked back unless pinned indoors?

That is the biggest hurdle probably to altering the magic item system/economy.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:04 pm

Psychic Robot wrote:No. The entire point is that it's a fun sidequest to get the flame sword that will defeat the Ice Queen. You don't have to do it--your players can use catapults or alchemist's fire (even though those are weak options)--but getting the firebrand isn't the players being "bad." It's the players being smart.

It has nothing to do with metagaming or "player entitlement."

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:14 pm

Lago,

So as far as I can tell, here were the design goals for the magical item accumulation system:

Thanks for that concise summation - I was having trouble understanding the crux of your beef in this thread.

Frank / 4e Design blog
Jebus, I could vomit out a half-dozen different sets of 4e houserules to hit those design goals better than the core 4e system did.

In fact, if I get drunk enough tomorrow I'll try it.

PR: Please read my new siggy.

souran · Post by **souran** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:14 pm

Whoa,

Lago, I agree that 4e items have some serious problems. However, I think that a number of your points and analysis here are a bit baiting and looking to create a problem that isn't there.

Before we go further: Here are some of the aspects of the treasure system you didn't discuss

1) Item slots are focused: From the first presentation in the PHB the item slots are supposed to remain focus on a certain kind of effect. Boots do MOVEMENT stuff. If you want bonus strength that is on "Belts" etc.

The whole point of this is to prevent things like astral seal of the rangers twin strike from getting out of hand. If the desingers had actually remembered their design goals you wouldn't be able to get +healing in every slot, but instead in maybe 2 slots MAX.

2) It shouldn't matter how MANY items players have, but instead only that they don't have items to far in excess of their level. Or, put another way, the value of an item is related more to its level and less to its cost.

This sort of goes hand in hand with the above. The reason organic characters can have so much more is becuase it was not supposed to matter. As long as nobody in the party had items from a different tier of play, or more than the parties level+2 or so then the number of items shouldn't matter.

This was supposed to fix the wealth by level issue you were just discussing. Some people would blow their whole treasure pile on a sword. Others would turn it into a much better combination. Basically the item levels were supposed to be a shorthand to let the gamemaster know if something was appropriate. "Ideally" it wouldn't matter if players had lots of items or the minimum 3 (weapon, armor, necklace/cape). The other slots were supposed to be limited in how much additional vertical advancement they could provide and the level of the item also limited its modifier to something that would stay on the games rng.

Again, the item design failed at this from basically every book beyond the phb. Which is terrible and shows a lack of displine in the writting staff a lack of an editing staff and a lack of leadership from the design staff.

Now lets look at some of these other points.

Lago PARANOIA wrote: - Characters gain the bulk of their magical power from what the DM decides that they get. A characters should never expect to be able to have enough money to purchase an item of their level. Not even if they hoard their money.

The alternate way of saying this is that the game was looking for a method of giving players mostly the items they wanted without resorting to "give players whatever rolls up, let them sell it and buy the thing they want"

The idea is that its more satifying to take the sword from the torlls horde and discover its the one you want than it is to get a sword nobody would ever use but is supposedly worth a ton, take it to town and sell it for a sword that the somebody will use.

There is a second part of this that is really examining the "you only get 20% back when an item is sold" rule. Which I really put in the "don't be a dick rule" group. 4E has a ton of "don't be a dick" rules. The intent is to prevent players from selling all their magic items to instead purchase a single more powerful item. While it also makes it very difficult to buy items at your level (requiring you give up 5 magic items of equivalent level) what it really is trying to prevent is players buying items above their level which it does because to buy something above your level requires pratically selling every position a whole party might own.

- Characters must be able to get a weapon/implement, some armor, and a neck slot item. Anything else is considered unnecessary.

True, and this actually shows how the equipment for chracters starting above level 1 was determined. Players are given the number of things needed to build a combat ready character.

- PCs should not be able to obtain magical items or treasure outside of the reward schedule.

What exactly do you mean by this. Its quite true that the game doesn't expect players to get treasure/resources from a source not related to the adventure or their past adventuring careers. But again, I think that the design goal was "a players power and equipment should come from in the game proper and not from rules interprutation, skill useage, or other out of game time activity." Weather that should have been a design goal in the first place is debateable.

- Characters should frequently outright replace key items. Not just by going from a +1 flaming bastard sword to a +2 flaming bastard, but from a +1 flaming bastard sword to a +2 lightning-burst rapier.

I am not sure if this was a design goal, but it certaintly appears that the item designers believe that adding an additional +1 is always better regardless of the property attached to your current equipment.

- Consumable items bring be a permanent hit to a character's resource pile. If it weren't for the quadratic nature of the magic item system, you would seriously expected to pay for that potion you drank last year for the rest of your life.

This is actually the issue really seperating 3e from 4e. Basically you have define how wealth by level is different from the parcels. The parcels I guess you could call "wealth by career." The problems are obvious especially with the fact that the ritual casting system being based on spending money only makes fucking sense if you assume a wealth by level based game. Otherwise every ritual is as bad if not worse than a potion.

The fact the rules specifically say that its a bad idea to remeburse for spent consumables seems strangely like it exists to be broken. Like the whole game is saying, "you know you have to do this different"

Whatever, your right, this part is both a design goal and completely retarded.

- Characters should be discouraged from trading in magical items they don't want for magical items that they do want.

Considering that the DMG recommends that players make lists of items they want and give them to the DM and that the DM should basically use these and his best judgement to put magic items in the treasure pile, I think that calling this a design goal is sketchy.

Again, the games economics are not designed to prevent players from getting what they want, but instead the design is to put every concievable barrier in the way of players getting magic items that are game breaking while those items are game breaking.

I would say the design goal is that players earn their favorite and most treasured rewards by playing and not by shopping. "This sword came from when we defeated hexag, lord of the firelands" and not "I trade the bundle of +2 swords from the firelands adventures for that holy avenger now."

- No monster looting. Ever.

Again, this is the don't be a dick rules. Also, this was done for ease of play.

Did you ever have a 3e party that took everything off the dead? I mean weapons, armor, clothing, shoes. I had a player who used to take teeth, livers and other body parts from humanoid and nonhumanoid foes in the hope that they were worth something as a magical component.

Now, I assume you realize that you are supposed to SUBTRACT this wealth from the wealth found in treasure chests and other caches in the wealth by level system?

I mean, I once had players who ripped out the marble floors of an evil wizards palace - using wealth by level then somewhere else in the advenuter I give them less money for doing so. However, if you have got that money in some magic items, and some of it in gems or art etc it gets to be a pain in the butt.

It is much easier just to say "the only things of value the orcs carry is XX" and then mark off one treasure parcel. Or maybe you really liked that high level parties kept extrademsional spaces filled with enough boots to equip whole armies.

- Non-combat items should draw from the same resource pool as combat items.

Agreeded, another problem especially since the designers had a whole blog where they basically argued that combat powers and non combat powers cannot really be balanced against each other because they never have comparable value.

Anyway, the system is not great. However, I would put more onus on those who didn't follow their own design rules about what was going to do what and therefore broke the system to nothingness rather than on some of the design goals themselves.