I am going to break this down to better address either how to solve the issues, explain why they are not issues in my mind, or to ask for further information.
- It does constrain DMs significantly in what they can give out. On advantage of the current system (excluding time) is that one can mix different parcels together on the gold size for different effects. This is a somewhat minor issue (I think), but it is there.
I am not sure what you mean here. Can you explain it a bit further.
The "when character levels, they get any parcels they would have gotten outstanding" will sit poorly with DMs when that happens during their adventure (I prefer our system to be as reasonably hands-off as possible). A system where a PC essentially gets an IOU (i.e., choose the parcel they would get but the DM actually rewards the item at some point of their choosing in game) would work better and still keep the core of the system.
This can be solved by simply bumping up the item, at 1 parcel per player per level. A DM with 4 players gives out 4 parcels, a DM with 6 gives out 6 parcels
It reduces (significantly) the amount of gold a PC will get. If I read it correctly, a PC will only get any gold from an adventure once every 5 levels. There are a lot of incidentals a PC needs to pay for (enchantment of items, rituals, etc.). While one can sweep some of the lower cost items under the rug, the larger items are more difficult.
I don't think it does. Though it does change when that gold arrives. Consider this. Over the course of level 1, players will receive 360 gold, a lvl 2, 3, 4, and 5 item. So, assuming that the DM gives these out and the players split the gold, each player has 1/5 of 360 gold(72 gold) and 4 have 1 item.
Under my system, 4 players have 1 item, and one player has 360 gold. The same total gold and the same total items, but instead the gold is concentrated into one persons hands
The second level comes along and 4 more items and 1 more gold parcel are distributed. 4 players gain 1 item and one player, not the player with 360 gold, gains 520 gold. So far, the same amount of gold has been distributed, except that its more concentrated.
In a normal game, the game assumes that players pool their gold to purchase items. But we can't really expect that to happen in a living world where their fates are not as closely tied. In that case, giving the gold in lump sums allows those players to more easily purchase what they want if they want to purchase.
So, under the standard assumption you've at the start of level 3 you've got items of level 2,3,4,5,3,4,5,6 assigned to 5 players and each players has 176 gold. 176 Gold is not enough to buy many rituals or enchant any items. In order to purchase items, people need to give their gold to others.
But in this system players have items of level 2,3,4,5,3,4,5,6 spread between 5 players, one of the players that has only 1 item has 360 gold and one of the characters that has only 1 item has 520 gold. 520 gold or 360 gold is plenty to purchase items with, even enchant things.
In the end, those that get more gold have less strong items, but because all the gold is concentrated, those that don't get items and instead get gold earlier are better able to utilize it because they have far more than they would have if the gold were being split under the standard assumption.
This holds true even with time gold/xp unless very large amounts of XP are given via time. I actually think ritual, alchemy, and enchantment value of gold is much higher in a system where you're giving it out in chuncks to single players rather than letting it accumulate slowly to individuals.
This also lets DM's give gold wealth to classes that enchant items, or use rituals faster while those characters who do not need gold as early in the game are able to use the items they would be otherwise. After 2 levels, instead of the rogue, ranger and fighter having 170 GP apiece that they aren't going to use for rituals or alchemy, the artificer has 520 gold and the wizard 360, one twice as much as they would have otherwise, and one three times as much, though they
may have fewer items
Its underspreading wealth. In a level, parcels of items n+1, n+2, n+3, n+4, and gp (or equivalent) or 2*(item n in gold) are given. You give out the first 5, but not the last.
? In a level, for a party of 5, items of level +4, +3, +2, and +1 are given and GP equal to an item of lvl n. You give out all of them, one to each party member.
If the party size is larger or smaller you simply add or subtract another parcel of any quality to the mix. Since each PC has their own record, you can give out parcels in any manner that fits each individual PC's wealth. If you wanted, you could give out, for the first level of 6 PC's, 6 sets of gold, starting everyone out with 360 gold. Or you could give them all items. Because the next time anyone gives them items, they just say "my reward for this character can't use this parcel that has already used" and then select the reward they want to give.
The standard item set was making an unspoken assumption, and that is my fault. It was making the assumption that you had 5 players playing over 5 levels. This is unnecessary, it just makes explaining handing items out easier.
A better way to word it would be like this.
"Each DM gives out x number of parcels per level, where x is the number of players in his party, he choses either a lvl n+1, n+2, n+3, n+4 item, or item worth lvl n+0 in gold per character and distributes those out to each character as rewards where n is the level of the character in question at the time he receives it and not the level of the party. He may not give any player any one of the rewards listed that that player has received within the current half of a tier of play[I.E between lvls 1 and 5, 6 and 10, 11 and 15, 16 and 20, 21 and 25 and 26 and 30]. A DM may give this parcel out to the player at any point during that level. If a player has not received a reward by the time he levels up due to time XP, he may chose a reward that he has not received within the current half tier of play."
Since a DM may still have treasure to give to a player, he can simply assign that parcel to the next level since a player can receive his reward at any point during a level.
So lets take a party of 6 mixed characters to level 5-6. Lets say we have a:
Lvl 1 fighter [no treasure]
lvl 2 Bard [Gold, N+2]
Lvl 2 Rogue [N+4, No treasure]
Lvl 3 Wizard [N+1, Gold, no treasure]
Before the fighter hits 2, the DM can give him any treasure parcel, before the bard his lvl 4 the DM can give him any parcel that is not gold or an item at N+3. Before the rogue hits 3 the Dm can give him any parcel not or N+3, and before the wizard hits 4 he needs to receive any parcel not N+1, or gold.
So, everyone gains a level after some play, the fighter has received a lvl 5 armor, an N+4 armor, the bard gets nothing, the Rogue gets gold, and the wizard gets an N+4 wand
Lvl 2 fighter [N+4, no treasure]
lvl 3 Bard [Gold, N+2, no treasure]
Lvl 3 Rogue [N+4, Gold, No treasure]
Lvl 4 Wizard [N+1, Gold, N+4, no treasure]
Now the fighter, bard and rogue are going to level before the wizard hits 5, but everyone is going to get items. Say the fighter levels 2 times, the bard and rogue once and everyone ends up close to level 5. The fighter gains 3 items, gold, N+3, N+2. The bard gains 2 items, N+1, N+4, the rogue gains 1 item, N+3, and the wizard gains 1 item, N+2
Now we look like this
Lvl 4 fighter [N+4, Gold, N+3, N+2]
lvl 4 Bard [Gold, N+2, N+1, N+4]
Lvl 4 Rogue [N+4, Gold, N+3, no treasure]
Lvl 4 Wizard [N+1, Gold, N+4, N+2]
Time XP kicks in and knocks the wizard and rogue up to lvl 5, the rogue chooses a treasure parcel and both he and the wizard are eligable to receive another one.
Because no character can gain a level and not be eligable to receive an item directly after that, DM's should not worry about not being able to hand out the rewards at the point they want except to the extent that they have given out too much wealth to a character already, or another DM has fulfilled the requirements. But these issues exist whether or not this system is used or not, any system where multiple DM's are handing out treasure DM's will have to be cognizant of what each player already has before they decide to toss wealth on them[unless its plot specific wealth that is going to be leaving the party]
_____________________________
Now, there are problems in the early game with some players not having anything but their starting gold until they get a gold parcel. But we have or can ameliorate that because our players may not be starting at level 1. If players are starting at level 4, they could simply make a lvl 1 character and then get items as if they had leveled up to 4 on time XP.
They would then get to choose 3 of a lvl n+1. n+2. N+3. n+4, and gold equal to 1 lvl n item and apply that to each level. For instance a character would start like this
Lvl 4 wizard[n+2, Gold, n+3, no treasure]
He would start with a lvl 3 item, gold equal to a lvl 2 item[520] and a lvl 6 item. He would be eligable to receive treasure for lvl 4 immediately and could receive an n+1 item or n+4 item during the next two levels. This is exactly as much wealth as he might have received from leveling from 1 to 4 in any standard DnD game, though we would also have give him the extra 100 starting gold. When he hit lvl 6, if he was running low on gold, the DM could give him a gold parcel worth 1800g, the standard value of a lvl 6 item.
Standard starting wealth would give him a bit more in raw wealth and gold, but would make it harder to assign treasure for levels 4 and 5[lvl 5 item, lvl 4 item, lvl 3 item + lvl 4 item of gold[880]
If this doesn't clear things up, let me know
edit: I hope i am not coming off as pushy, i have a tendency to do that, especially when i drop a word bomb like that one. I just want to explain how i perceive my system to work and why i think its valuable. I actually posted something similar[but with players choosing the entire time rather than DM's choosing and players only choosing if they level up without receiving anything"] in the other thread as well(and in the middle of this one somewhere), so that explanation at the bottom of page 1 might be a bit of a help in understanding just what I am proposing here.
