math analysis of DMG loot guidelines for starting PCs above level 1

[evilbob]

continuing the original post

Two more points:

First, I highly recommend starting loot for level 2 to be an n-1 item and n-1 gold, and starting loot for level 3 to be n, n-1, and n-1 gold. This "evens out" the math nicely regardless of which tact you take. This is included in the original post but I wanted to draw it out specifically. For those interested in the percentages, that gives 95.74% for level 2 and 94.30% for level 3. (Yes, those are high, but they're still less than 100% and you don't have much room to work with.) Note that not including the starting 100g is important as this actually makes it worse.

Second, for those interested in the n+2 option for level 9 and above, here is a chart for loot percentages against the DMG guidelines, just for reference.

[sblock]

str lvl	DMG tot		%
1	100	
2	2760		367.02%
3	3560		195.18%
4	5000		149.52%
5	7080		130.15%
6	9800		118.93%
7	13800		115.00%
8	17800		102.53%
9	25000		100.16%
10	35400		99.89%
11	49000		99.11%
12	69000		101.11%
13	89000		93.64%
14	125000		93.96%
15	177000		95.45%
16	245000		95.91%
17	345000		98.73%
18	445000		92.05%
19	625000		92.81%
20	885000		94.61%
21	1225000		95.30%
22	1725000		98.27%
23	2225000		91.74%
24	3125000		92.58%
25	4425000		94.44%
26	6125000		95.18%
27	8625000		98.17%
28	11125000	95.61%
29	13125000	88.17%
30	17750000	96.28%

[/sblock]Again, the levels 2-8 options are really unusable and the total spikes just over 100% at levels 9 and 12. Otherwise, the numbers fall around 92% - 98%, for an average of 95.6%.

The level 29 one is low because there is no n+2 for 29, so I used a level 30 - this took a big hit as you can see, relative to the other numbers. For level 30, I counted n+1 as a 30 but n+2 as two 30s, which brought it back in line. In other words, using this system and starting at level 30 gives you four level 30 items, one level 29, and gold equal to a level 29 item. Seeing as it is level 30 and the game pretty much breaks for everyone at that point, I didn't think anyone would mind.


Edit: And just for Evilhalfling, here's the chart for adding an n-1 item, so you'll know what you're choosing:

[sblock]

str lvl	DMG tot		%
1	100	
2	2280		303.19%
3	3080		168.86%
4	3880		116.03%
5	5320		97.79%
6	7400		89.81%
7	11400		95.00%
8	15400		88.71%
9	19400		77.72%
10	26600		75.06%
11	37000		74.84%
12	57000		83.53%
13	77000		81.02%
14	97000		72.91%
15	133000		71.72%
16	185000		72.42%
17	285000		81.56%
18	385000		79.64%
19	485000		72.02%
20	665000		71.09%
21	925000		71.96%
22	1425000		81.18%
23	1925000		79.37%
24	2425000		71.84%
25	3325000		70.96%
26	4625000		71.87%
27	7125000		81.10%
28	9625000		82.72%
29	12125000	81.46%
30	14125000	76.62%

[/sblock]Average for levels 9-30: 76.48%. (Also used a level 30 for n+1 for starting at 30.)

 

[NMcCoy]

Hmm... How does expected wealth plot against the starting guidelines if you sell/disenchant everything that's more than one level below you?

 

[Fundin Strongarm]

I gave my level 2 starting characters 750gp to spend as they wished. Most spent it on a level 2 item but they had options to get a lvl3 or even two lvl1s if they wanted. I think 1 or 2 just bought a level 1 item.

I appreciate the work involved. I think n+1, n, n-1 works well enough beyond level 4 or 5. At most, at level 8+ I'd probably allow an additional n-3 or lower item per tier, just for flavouring.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Hmm... How does expected wealth plot against the starting guidelines if you sell/disenchant everything that's more than one level below you?

Why would you do that?

There are many excellent items that are more than 3 levels lower if you are level 30.

And that by no means applies only to level 30.

 

[evilbob]

Hmm... How does expected wealth plot against the starting guidelines if you sell/disenchant everything that's more than one level below you?

I don't understand your question: sorry.


Fundin Strongarm: That's basically what I was trying to get at in one of my previous posts: giving PCs gold instead of item levels is slightly problematic in some ways - since they could technically buy a higher-level item - but it's not really that problematic - since item prices generally prohibit abuse. I honestly prefer that method myself.

 

[Nail]

It seems like you could use your baseline table "straight-up", evilbob, with the old 3e caveat that you couldn't purchase an item worth more than half the total.

 

[keterys]

Ah, now that is interesting - and it proves me right!

Sadly... no. You did prove that 2 and 3 are too high (obviously), but you haven't proven anything about the other levels until you can give some accurate bias for consumed, sold, or disenchanted items.

For example, let's say a 6th level character has a +1 Lightning Weapon and acquires a +2 Vicious Weapon... deciding to upgrade, he has the lightning weapon disenchanted or sold.

Instead of having 3600g worth of treasure, he instead has 2800g. Which is probably a lot closer to 73%.

It won't, of course, make up the difference, but I also think that the assumption that everyone ends up with the items they want at close to the levels they want them is actually a far cry from the norm or the expected. After all, the published adventures certainly don't work that way, nor does the official RPGA LFR campaign... so at least a certain amount of randomness is expected.

Sometimes a player will get a +2 Vicious Weapon and go 'Well, I really would rather have a +2 Bloodclaw weapon, so I'll just sell this to help pay for it' and that will take a huge chunk out of their expected treasure.

 

[Danceofmasks]

... nor does the official RPGA LFR campaign..

I played the special at a con earlier this year with a brand new character ... in a party of level 1s (I think 2 of the characters have been used before).
Leveled up to 2 and picked up a level 6 item.

Sure, specials are meant to be tougher and come with higher rewards, but ... I don't think that's representative of what D&D is meant to look like.