lkj said:
Now, all that said, I agree the whole article is still a little thick on player empowerment. Just not as bad as your suggesting based on the particular quotes.
Point taken, but WOTC really did publish this:
<<If you feel that your characters are truly cash-starved, and it is affecting your enjoyment of the game, talk to the DM. Do a wealth audit and see where your characters stand vis-à-vis the assumed average wealth for the game. Your DM may not realize how stingy he's been, and if you point it out, he might reshuffle things a bit to help you catch up. If it turns out that dialing down the money was an intentional thing, you can ask the reason why and negotiate about how and whether you want the campaign to continue. >>
The idea of an "audit" to see if my players are getting enough loot, and negotiating to get more, that just shocked me. I can't see any circumstances under which that behavior is at all appropriate, so I'm still in shock that WOTC is saying that.
The general tenor of the article switches back and forth before the "normal" hey, different strokes for different folks, if you don't like your campaign, learn to live with it or move on stuff to this 'audit and negotiate' player entitlement stuff: the right to prestige classes, the right to sufficient treasure, the right to sufficient treasure from underling monsters so that if you wimp out and fail to complete an adventure, you are still rewarded? What gives?
The audit scenario is like Knights of the Dinner Table . . . players threaten to unionize because el Ravager NEEDS a +12 sword, because he needs the bonus to make the Swords of Domination prestige class minimum to hit bonus. And Gary Jackson's Hard Eight games clearly states that a player who has been on 20 or more adventures is entitled to a value for at least 150,000 gp, +10% if they bought the "player advantage treasure horders handbook".
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
