Stipend for PCs with Inherent Bonuses - Paragon Tier

[Shimrath]

OK, so now we know how much gold the Constables should be getting paid when the DM is using Inherent Bonuses, which is awesome.

In the game i'm running, i'd love to simply eliminate all of the mundane expenses the Constables might incur altogether. Everything they eat & drink, cost of housing, upkeep of equipment, ammunition, taxes, etc. All of the things that, to me, are not really worth spending time at the table.

My initial thought was to simply deduct 1/3 of their total earnings, leaving the remainder free and clear. Does that seem unreasonable? Anyone have a better estimate?

 

[rangda]

In my game I ignore that stuff totally and the pay I give them is net pay over basic living expenses.

 

[gideonpepys]

Yeah, me too. Mainly because the D&D economy is so effed up that the entire cost of their bed and board - even if you add in stuff like mundane ammo - is negligible compared to the earnings of an adventurer. My advice would be to forget about it.

The tax issue is also one I would rather not deal with. I had a laugh imposing taxation on the group in Ptolus, but I only kept it up for a while to see if they'd cheat. Real-life stuff like that isn't fun. I might at this juncture make a topical political point by comparing D&D adventurers to the modern day super-rich and/or multinational corporations, so again their tax burden will be negligible, taking advantage of numerous loopholes and filtering everything through a tax haven in one of the Border States.

 

[al_fredo]

Shimrath

- I'd ignore all that stuff. Just say that is net of normal living expense. I don't track drinks/food bought, arrows, etc. Only if it's critical to the story (like a bribe). Fact is my players basically spend all the gold on equipment. No one really has cash on hand.

 

[Shimrath]

Glad to hear that i'm not the only DM who handwaves the small stuff. I did think about simply giving them the full amount and ignoring the mundane expenses, but in the end i guess i was also trying to avoid the party having giant piles of gold with nothing to really spend it on, as has been the case in most games i've run and played in.

I talked it over with my players last night, and asked them outright what they thought was a realistic percentage to shave off their salaries. They were of the opinion that a good 1/2 would get exhausted on mundane expenses. Having never played long-term in this edition before, i'm not certain they have any idea just how much money is coming their way, but regardless, i don't feel at all bad about shaving off my original 1/3, which is what we settled upon.

If they end up too rich or too poor at any point, i'll just adjust things. My hope is that they'll still have enough cash to invest in some magical gear with interesting properties and powers, but not so much that they fill out every possible item slot with bling and constantly shop for upgrades.

 

[Ajar]

If you're taking a percentage, their living expenses will effectively go up with level, even though they're presumably renting the same apartments (or whatever) in Flint.

 

[gideonpepys]

If you're taking a percentage, their living expenses will effectively go up with level, even though they're presumably renting the same apartments (or whatever) in Flint.

Precisely. If you want a relatively low magic game (and it sounds like you do) just award less cash in the first place. The mechanism by which you are removing money from the game to avoid them having piles left over - which none of my players have - or bedecking themselves with too many items (which is entirely a matter of personal preference) is creating one problem to solve another. The point I made earlier about the bizarre D&D economy means that mundane items - including accommodation, food, etc - cost next to nothing. You cannot account for those missing thousands in that way. Just cut the RHC stipend.

 

[RangerWickett]

I'm glad I remembered to check this thread. I need to integrate this into the hardcover version of the campaign guide.