5e GMs - Why or Why Not Wandering Treasure?

[Xaelvaen]

I like your terminology for this - "wandering treasure" - and yes, I use it sparingly. I much prefer magic items to help tell a story that relates to a character as opposed to its own story, unless I'm going to be doling out an artifact or sentient magical item, in which it having its own unique story is sometimes a better option.

How this pertains to the wandering aspect:

As I make up these specific items for the players, or even find that perfect item, it'd be sort of redundant to put them all in the obvious chest after a big boss is slaughtered after a dungeon or at the end of an adventure. I like to put them in as many unexpected places as possible.

So, Perception, Investigation, Survival checks - sometimes a check isn't even involved necessarily - if a PC chooses to specifically check out an area that wasn't even really all that suspicious but I had chosen it for a reason, and their instincts lined up to my planning, well good for them.

I'll also add, that just because a PC passes up one opportunity, doesn't mean that item is lost to them forever, it just means it might not be available to them for one or two encounters. Then there'll be another chance to acquire that item in another way, and eventually they might find it in a treasure horde somewhere.

As with all D&D stories, there's always exceptions and flavor-filled preferences, of course!

 

[5ekyu]

The typical house in 2018 contains far more junk, and many more objects of value, than a typical dungeon in D&D.

Whether or not it is realistic for you to write down everything valuable during your prep phase is going to vary wildly depending on the amount of time you devote to it, your definition of value, and how much clutter you like to include in your dungeons. Just for me, personally, it's perfectly reasonable for me to place everything valuable in a dungeon ahead of time.

Cannot argue about your assessment of your dungeons... Wont try

Like i said, it would seen quite sterile and spartan if i limited the things existing in my scenery/site to either be no value or to be individually placed. Particularly so if its like a camp or lair of a dozen or so inhabitants or a manor house with servants and guests.

 

[5ekyu]

I like your terminology for this - "wandering treasure" - and yes, I use it sparingly. I much prefer magic items to help tell a story that relates to a character as opposed to its own story, unless I'm going to be doling out an artifact or sentient magical item, in which it having its own unique story is sometimes a better option.

How this pertains to the wandering aspect:

As I make up these specific items for the players, or even find that perfect item, it'd be sort of redundant to put them all in the obvious chest after a big boss is slaughtered after a dungeon or at the end of an adventure. I like to put them in as many unexpected places as possible.

So, Perception, Investigation, Survival checks - sometimes a check isn't even involved necessarily - if a PC chooses to specifically check out an area that wasn't even really all that suspicious but I had chosen it for a reason, and their instincts lined up to my planning, well good for them.

I'll also add, that just because a PC passes up one opportunity, doesn't mean that item is lost to them forever, it just means it might not be available to them for one or two encounters. Then there'll be another chance to acquire that item in another way, and eventually they might find it in a treasure horde somewhere.

As with all D&D stories, there's always exceptions and flavor-filled preferences, of course!

Yes, an aspect of Wandering Damage is it doesnt get passed by. It doesnt get missed. Its just delayed until next time.

 

[Lanefan]

4e did something that was eye opening - divorced treasure from looting. It had a good reason - treasure, specifically the magic item advancement treadmill, was built into character advancement math. But the idea of treasure packets was liberating. Mayor sends you out against bandits. Maybe you drive off the bandits and loot them - treasure worth X. Maybe you convinced them to give up their life of banditry ... and then the mayor gave you a reward worth X when you got back to town. Maybe you joined the bandit and his merry men, and got given items they couldn't use worth X.

So in the end you get X amount no matter what you do. How dull.

One oddity this led to, at least in the 4e modules I've run, is the opponents having very useful items that aren't listed under 'treasure' and thus aren't expected to be picked up and kept by the PCs. So are these items supposed to vanish when the foe goes down or what?

An example: in KotS there's a foe - a Hobgoblin, I think - who wields a staff in combat that sometimes does a bunch of extra electrical damage on a successful hit. Sounds like a magic item, right? But it's not listed in that encounter's treasure, nor is it listed in the Hob's possessions, nor anywhere else. So the party kill the Hobgoblin, and quite naturally they want to take a look at this staff that's just been shocking them...but the module seems to rather ludicrously assume it just vanishes into thin air. Meanwhile I-as-DM am wondering where do I find out how this works, whether it's charged, whether it needs attunement, whether there's specific requirements as to who can use it, etc.

In the end I had to make it up - no problem as I wasn't running a 4e game, just using the module - but if I had been running 4e it would have seemed strange to have to do this in a rules-not-rulings system.

Moving treasure, and through milestones XP, away from the kill-them-and-loot point of view that the mechanics rewarded, does a lot to move away from murderhobo beign the most mechanically supported way to play because that's how you got the rewards.

Though realistically you're still going to loot the fallen, aren't you - both friend and foe? (side note: over the long run looting dead friends can be just as profitable as looting dead foes)

And realistically, except in very unusual circumstances if a permanent item (e.g. the staff, above) has just been used against the party and the party defeat its user then the item should be there for the looting.

Lanefan

 

[the Jester]

Let me just say that I dislike the name you're using here. "Wandering treasure" implies treasure that wanders. You're describing something else entirely, in my opinion- you're talking about treasure that isn't defined, but not treasure that wanders.

So, no, I don't use "wandering" treasure, but I do sometimes use treasure that isn't explicitly defined as a random encounter.

To get to the heart of the matter, though, the more well-defined and detailed an area is, the more well-defined the treasure's placement is. In a dungeon, I usually note where it all is. On the other hand, if the pcs are exploring a ruined city, then they may well find random treasure scattered around (depending on the exact circumstances- less so if the place was burnt to the ground or previously thorougly looted, more so if it was left largely intact and undisturbed).

 

[the Jester]

So in the end you get X amount no matter what you do. How dull.

Yeah, I never ran 4e treasure like that.

One oddity this led to, at least in the 4e modules I've run, is the opponents having very useful items that aren't listed under 'treasure' and thus aren't expected to be picked up and kept by the PCs. So are these items supposed to vanish when the foe goes down or what?

An example: in KotS there's a foe - a Hobgoblin, I think - who wields a staff in combat that sometimes does a bunch of extra electrical damage on a successful hit. Sounds like a magic item, right?

In general, such things were considered to be part of the monsters' powers, rather than magic items. A few encounters included magic items on monsters, but those were pretty rare, sadly- an artifact of the philosophy of "give the players what they want", where you would have a list of "x number of items of level y" to be found throughout the adventure, rather than actually having the items chosen in the creation of the adventure. That was definitely an element of 4e that I strongly disliked and had to ditch.

 

[5ekyu]

Let me just say that I dislike the name you're using here. "Wandering treasure" implies treasure that wanders. You're describing something else entirely, in my opinion- you're talking about treasure that isn't defined, but not treasure that wanders.

So, no, I don't use "wandering" treasure, but I do sometimes use treasure that isn't explicitly defined as a random encounter.

To get to the heart of the matter, though, the more well-defined and detailed an area is, the more well-defined the treasure's placement is. In a dungeon, I usually note where it all is. On the other hand, if the pcs are exploring a ruined city, then they may well find random treasure scattered around (depending on the exact circumstances- less so if the place was burnt to the ground or previously thorougly looted, more so if it was left largely intact and undisturbed).

"Does a gp called wandering not buy as much ale as a gp called undefined?" i think that was in a post by Shakespear.

The "implied" was why i defined what i meant by the term upfront very early in the first post. i would have thought the reason for using it in a DnD forum even though it is not strickly and rigidly as accurate as it could have been was obvious enough that if i defined it quickly only a certain type would get their dander up.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, I never ran 4e treasure like that.



In general, such things were considered to be part of the monsters' powers, rather than magic items.

So in the case of the shock-staff the electricity would have been an intrinsic power of the Hobgoblin? Interesting, then, that the shocking ability doesn't appear in any of its other attacks - just the staff...

A few encounters included magic items on monsters, but those were pretty rare, sadly- an artifact of the philosophy of "give the players what they want", where you would have a list of "x number of items of level y" to be found throughout the adventure, rather than actually having the items chosen in the creation of the adventure. That was definitely an element of 4e that I strongly disliked and had to ditch.

Can you explain? You didn't like magic items on monsters? Or you want or don't want all the items pre-placed? I'm not parsing something here.

Lanefan

 

[Blue]

So in the end you get X amount no matter what you do. How dull.

You mean, exactly like normal play? Succeed at a challenge and get a reward? I don't find that boring. It's just that now the game mechanically would recognize other types of solutions besides "kill it".

An example: in KotS there's a foe - a Hobgoblin, I think - who wields a staff in combat that sometimes does a bunch of extra electrical damage on a successful hit. Sounds like a magic item, right? But it's not listed in that encounter's treasure, nor is it listed in the Hob's possessions, nor anywhere else. So the party kill the Hobgoblin, and quite naturally they want to take a look at this staff that's just been shocking them...but the module seems to rather ludicrously assume it just vanishes into thin air. Meanwhile I-as-DM am wondering where do I find out how this works, whether it's charged, whether it needs attunement, whether there's specific requirements as to who can use it, etc.

I'm sorry you had a unfun experience with a badly written module. The same thing could happen with or without that rule, but I see how that could have made it more common for poorly edited dungeons.

Though realistically you're still going to loot the fallen, aren't you - both friend and foe?

I trust you can understand the difference between "can be rewarded for killing and looting" and "only rewarded for killing and looting"? And how that can affect gameplay?

This doesn't stop loot and kill. It just recognizes other avenues of success that before were mechanically treated by the system as "nulls" - no XP or loot reward.

 

[5ekyu]

So in the end you get X amount no matter what you do. How dull.

One oddity this led to, at least in the 4e modules I've run, is the opponents having very useful items that aren't listed under 'treasure' and thus aren't expected to be picked up and kept by the PCs. So are these items supposed to vanish when the foe goes down or what?

An example: in KotS there's a foe - a Hobgoblin, I think - who wields a staff in combat that sometimes does a bunch of extra electrical damage on a successful hit. Sounds like a magic item, right? But it's not listed in that encounter's treasure, nor is it listed in the Hob's possessions, nor anywhere else. So the party kill the Hobgoblin, and quite naturally they want to take a look at this staff that's just been shocking them...but the module seems to rather ludicrously assume it just vanishes into thin air. Meanwhile I-as-DM am wondering where do I find out how this works, whether it's charged, whether it needs attunement, whether there's specific requirements as to who can use it, etc.

In the end I had to make it up - no problem as I wasn't running a 4e game, just using the module - but if I had been running 4e it would have seemed strange to have to do this in a rules-not-rulings system.

Though realistically you're still going to loot the fallen, aren't you - both friend and foe? (side note: over the long run looting dead friends can be just as profitable as looting dead foes)

And realistically, except in very unusual circumstances if a permanent item (e.g. the staff, above) has just been used against the party and the party defeat its user then the item should be there for the looting.

Lanefan

Honestly, while i can understand the rather odd methodology being discussed there - "treasure packets" - i would also not really like that approach.

However, i do think there should be a measure of balance between the different approaches. I dislike it when "systems" drive the choice of solutions.

Then again, the issue of "if we negotiate we do not get to take their stuff" is really more of an in-game-world basis than a system-one.

What i prefer to do is have the different approaches not worry so much about balancing out immediately in raw "loot terms" but instead that body of goblins you spared and negotiated with *ought to* show up later on in the story as a boon or at least you get given a nod that it paid off.

maybe you here later on that during a crisis that village and the goblins worked together to overcome a potentially lethal outcome. or maybe at a later date you find yourself in need of some friendly goblins and someone remembers... "hey, what about old yellow tongue" or maybe later on, news having spread, some goblin group is friendlier to you than you expect... any of which could be "manifested" by some some of goblin token given to show them as goblin friend if you wanted more tangible assets..