D&D 5E What's the point of gold?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Charlaquin]

This is a valid viewpoint, after all, when viewed as a game, it is fun to kill things to get more powerful, to kill more things (etc.).

That said, I trust you can understand that your approach isn't satisfying to everyone else. Because to someone like me, it sounds like sketch comedy:

Q: So, why do you like to adventure?

A: Because I like to adventure!

Q: Well, awesome! Adventuring is fun. But why? What do you want to do?

A: I want to get stuff.

Q: Okay, great! And what will you do with you stuff that you get?

A: I will use it ... to be better at adventuring!

Q: ....okay. And what will you do when you are better at adventuring?

A: Oh, that's easy. I GET BETTER AND MORE STUFF!

Q: *sigh* I know I'm going to regret this ... but what will you do with your better and more stuff?

A: Why, I WILL ADVENTURE! TO GET MORE STUFF!

I mean, yeah. It's a game. But it's also a role-playing game. To the extent that you're (cue a reality show) "in it to win it" and you like the hobomurder/princess rescue/charop game, more power to you! That's fun! Work with your DM and come up with a system to spend your money (magic items, "training" for skills or abilities, that sort of thing) that lets you just do what you want to do.

Others of us use money differently. Which is where the divide occurs (and, based on this necro'd thread, and so many others, the divide ALWAYS occurs).

I trust that you did not mean it to come off this way, but this is an extremely reductive and, frankly, demeaning representation of the view I presented. And not because of the hyperbolic sketch comedy bit, but because it reduces all adventuring to fighting monsters and getting loot, which are actually pretty low on the list of reasons I like adventuring.

I understand that my playstyle preferences are not shared by everyone, and I have absolutely no problem with the folks who prefer games that focus more on the characters’ day-to-day lives than on the adventures they go on. But for some reason, that crowd seems either unable or unwilling to accept that those of us who prefer to focus on the adventures don’t necessarily feel that way out of a desire for combat and character optimization.

For me, the interesting part of the game is making choices as I imagine my character might. More specifically, making difficult choices with significant consequences. I find that more such choices occur during uptime than during downtime. Is part of that the tactical decision-making that occurs in combat and the character building choices that occur when you gain more levels or new loot? Of course. But those are far from the only difficult, consequential choices made on adventures. What do you do when presented with a situation where you can’t save everyone? Who do you prioritize? Do you protect this village now, or sacrifice it to strike a blow against the villain who might do more harm later? Do you take the safe route along the road, or the fast route through the fire swamp? D&D, to me, is a game of presenting scenarios where there is dramatic conflict, and asking the players, “what do you do?” And downtime, in my experience is not that. It could be an entertaining mini-game, much like character building is, if the choices you made during downtime had an impact during uptime. Then it becomes a dramatic, consequential decision point, instead of a (for lack of a better term, and please let me know if there’s a better one to use here) fluffy one.

And for all the pushback I keep getting about “that’s fine for YOU, but not everyone plays that way,” it seems to be totally acceptable to be dismissive of the way I play, with comments like “These threads always amuse me, as if there’s no point spending your paycheck on anything that doesn’t help you defend yourself from hobos,” or framing me as only liking adventuring because I like getting rewards that make me better at adventuring. I actually hate advancement treadmills (my biggest beef with what was otherwise my favorite edition of D&D), because they reduce depth by making advancement a content gate instead of a meaningful decision point.

 

[Derren]

instead of a meaningful decision point.

Don't you think that it would be a more meaningful decision if you had to choose between buying new equipment and story stuff instead of money being practically useless and can be thrown around without a second thought as you do not really need it?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Charlaquin]

Don't you think that it would be a more meaningful decision if you had to choose between buying new equipment and story stuff instead of money being practically useless and can be thrown around without a second thought as you do not really need it?

I mean, yes, that has been my argument all along. Although, I would add that new equipment is “story stuff,” and it would be preferable if non-equipment stuff that you could spend money on also had an effect on uptime.

Like, it’s buzzard to me that people on both sides of this argument seem to separate between adventure and story. Are adventures not what the stories y’all tell are about??

 

[Shasarak]

You can't comprehend how "choices you made during donwtime had an impact during uptime." To me ... that doesn't make any sense at all. It is the equivalent of nonsensical word salad.

I can see how that does not make any sense as it is exactly the opposite of what he said.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Derren]

Now, some editions (for example, 3e) explicitly embraced a more "gamist" approach, similar to what you wish for, with more explicit rules for a magic item economy; in essence, between the official rules and 3PP, there were a lot of ways to spend money to "be a better adventurer."

5e has largely moved away from that. Which some people appreciate, and some don't. Some people appreciate the stories they tell (the adventuring experience), and other appreciate the stories they tell (the character that made the last score, and built a large castle, and was crowned King of ... um... Aquilonia ... and became an NPC that was renowned in the land and that new PCs hear about).

Except that 3E also had a lot better support for non-adventuring spending. In 5E it doesn't matter. You have useless gold so you can throw it at building and stuff at your leisure. Its not that it can be used for anything else. In 3E you always had to make the decision if you spend money on your personal safety or on pet projects. But in 5E gold is more of a score you keep track but it doesn't really matter.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*