• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 3E/3.5 (3.5e) Treasure per Experience Variant

HoboGod

First Post
Treasure rewards are one of the most aggravating game mechanics to follow. After you've banged your head against the wall figuring out attacks of opportunity, challenge ratings, and the encounter levels, all you have to do is give out experience and treasure. Experience isn't so bad, the table is pretty easy to follow and just requires a bit of math. Treasure isn't all that bad either if you've already figured out encounter levels. In fact, there's online calculators out there that eliminates the math and table work. If you do everything by the books, then things work great and you don't need anything I'm suggesting. However, if you tend to reward ad hoc experience, your game doesn't match the 13 encounter system, or you have players of different levels, you've likely been depriving your players of appropriate treasure or giving them too much, and additionally your lowest level players are being excelled too quickly to have the appropriate treasure for their level.

My variant is not a variant at all, it's how the DMG suggests you as a DM should award treasure. DMG says that reaching A amount of experience requires having B encounters which average C ECL each and then give D amount of treasure for a C ECL encounter B number of times. There is direct correlation between experience and treasure, my table is the math behind that correlation which reduces it to a 1-to-1 ratio.

So, all the numbers are in place, with a little number munching, it's easy enough to say "Hey, lets just give an amount of treasure based on experience!" If the treasure you gain at next level is based on 13 balanced encounters, then the treasure value you gain can be calculated based on the sum of 13 encounters equal to your character level divided by the experience required to reach next level. I pulled out my spreadsheet tool and quickly derived the numbers. These numbers are rounded for convenience sake.

Code:
Current Level	Treasure per exp
1,2,3,4		98 cp
5		104 cp
6		121 cp
7		138 cp
8		163 cp
9		189 cp
10		222 cp
11		265 cp
12		325 cp
13		395 cp
14		477 cp
15		569 cp
16		688 cp
17		849 cp
18		1043 cp
19		1300 cp

So, for example, a party of three 8th level and two 6th level players fight five ogres, the 8th level players get 400 exp each and the 6th level players get 600 exp each. The 8th level players each get 400*163=65,200 cp (652 gp) worth of treasure, the 6th level players get 600*121=72,600 cp (726 gp) worth of treasure. You can justify the newbies getting more loot because they need it most and are the poorest of the group.

Another way of handling this variant for those DMs that wish to let their players divide wealth on their own would be to calculate the treasure given to the highest level player and multiply that amount by the number of players. In the example above, the party would receive 3260 gp worth of treasure. Note that if the 6th level players were not given inflated starting gold, they shall never reach the same wealth once they catch up to the 8th level players in experience.

The added advantage is that this variant grants higher control over how much wealth your players accumulate. I've seen too many games broken when wealth gets out of control. Your party will never reach too much higher than the values listed in the DMG, page 135, for wealth per level.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Crothian

First Post
Wow, how boring. I see what you are trying to do but for character to know exactly how much money they will get before an encounter even starts just seems very uninteresting. I don't see any reason to have something like this in the game.
 

HoboGod

First Post
Wow, how boring. I see what you are trying to do but for character to know exactly how much money they will get before an encounter even starts just seems very uninteresting. I don't see any reason to have something like this in the game.

No, I'm not suggesting that AT ALL. Rewarding treasure is still based on the situation and the DM. You aren't going to magically find 500 gold from killing a pack of wild dogs. But when you find the dragon's loot, the DM can hand out your wonderful treasure and say to herself: "I've given them this much experience so far, I can safely give them this much treasure" rather than saying to herself: "I've given them this many of these encounters, I can safely give them this much treasure."

I'm suggesting no change to gameplay as it's presented in the DMG.
 

RUMBLETiGER

Adventurer
I'm tracking with what you are saying, this metric is simpler on the micromanaging, moment to moment scale.
 
Last edited:

Gansk

Explorer
This is an important concept to understand if you want to DM a balanced campaign.

In the AD&D days I assigned the maximum treasure to all the demon and devil lords based on their treasure types in the 1e MM. The total gp divided by the XP rewarded for defeating them came to a ratio of 3.19 (I rounded this up to a ratio of 3.25).

Before running any published module, I total the XP of all monsters and the gp of all treasure. If the ratio exceeds 3.25, I lower the treasure.

As you see on the chart, 3e starts the ratio at 1 at 1st level and ramps it up from there. A ratio of 3.25 ends up at 12th level, which is coincidentally the level when I think 3e breaks down. I would never run a 3e campaign past level 12 again.
 

the Jester

Legend
So, for example, a party of three 8th level and two 6th level players fight five ogres, the 8th level players get 400 exp each and the 6th level players get 600 exp each. The 8th level players each get 400*163=65,200 cp (652 gp) worth of treasure, the 6th level players get 600*121=72,600 cp (726 gp) worth of treasure. You can justify the newbies getting more loot because they need it most and are the poorest of the group.

This falls apart as soon as the party decides to split the treasure evenly amongst them, or even (gasp!) favor the higher level pcs because they contribute more.
 

HoboGod

First Post
[MENTION=21556]Jester[/MENTION]: Yep, but that's not my problem. I'm suggesting a game mechanic variant, not a role playing one. It's up to the DMs to work this, like every other rule, into their games.

Besides, I'm not the kind of DM that is hindered by "the party decides. . ." situations. If the party decides they want to start killing each other in a winner takes all cage match, the remaining person takes everyone else's weapons and wealth to make one uber character, I don't say "Okay, everyone roll initiative." I glare bitterly at them and tell them they can't do that. And it's not like players don't try that crap all the time. A PC dies and someone in the group wants to sell all his stuff and pocket the extra gold. A PC rolls a perform check and expects to earn a fortune from begging. The spellcaster has used up all his spells throwing fireballs at rats and wants to sleep the night in a dragon's lair. The 1st-level paladin makes up some unoriginal backstory upon character creation about being crazy rich and would have inherited a Pegasus from his father. To hell with players and their greedy "I want, gimmie, gimmie" attitude! If I were running this variant (which I currently am) and my players told me they were going to take some of Joey's lunch money because they were bigger than Joey, I would smack them on the wrists and send them to their rooms.
 
Last edited:

kitcik

Adventurer
That's ridiculous.

The most valuable treasure will be the most powerful magic items.

The most powerful magic items will go to the highest level characters.

That is not "stealing Joey's lunch money," that's how D&D works.

You seem to be suggesting that the lower level characters receive the more powerful magic items (or the gold to buy them). Seems a tad unrealistic.
 

the Jester

Legend
[MENTION=21556]Jester[/MENTION]: Yep, but that's not my problem. I'm suggesting a game mechanic variant, not a role playing one. It's up to the DMs to work this, like every other rule, into their games.

Besides, I'm not the kind of DM that is hindered by "the party decides. . ." situations. If the party decides they want to start killing each other in a winner takes all cage match, the remaining person takes everyone else's weapons and wealth to make one uber character, I don't say "Okay, everyone roll initiative." I glare bitterly at them and tell them they can't do that. And it's not like players don't try that crap all the time. A PC dies and someone in the group wants to sell all his stuff and pocket the extra gold. A PC rolls a perform check and expects to earn a fortune from begging. The spellcaster has used up all his spells throwing fireballs at rats and wants to sleep the night in a dragon's lair. The 1st-level paladin makes up some unoriginal backstory upon character creation about being crazy rich and would have inherited a Pegasus from his father. To hell with players and their greedy "I want, gimmie, gimmie" attitude! If I were running this variant (which I currently am) and my players told me they were going to take some of Joey's lunch money because they were bigger than Joey, I would smack them on the wrists and send them to their rooms.

The fundamental divide between the dm and the players is that the players decide what their characters do. IMHO it is absolutely not the dm's place to intervene when the pcs want to divide or sell treasure or the dead guy's gear.

None of the stuff I bolded in your quote above even has anything to do with dividing treasure, so I'm not sure what its relevance is. You have a greedy player trying to adjudicate his own begging (the dm's place is to adjudicate the rules), a spellcaster who wants to get eaten by a dragon (unless you're suggesting that it is somehow unfair for the pc to suffer the consequences of his or her actions) and a player who wants to get extra starting gear (again, if anything this would be up to the dm, not the player). In none of those cases are you telling the players what their character can or cannot do, you are either adjudicating the results of their actions or telling them, "No, you don't get to start with free flying mounts just because you want to". In any case, those are all the dm's proper place, whereas telling the players that they must divide up treasure as you indicate is not.
 
Last edited:


Remove ads

Top