Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 717545" data-attributes="member: 4937">"Do you think the wealth table is a basis for balance in the game?"Yes, and I have said so in this thread.  It is perfectly clear that the design intent of the wealth table is to provide guidance on achieving balance.  It is not in and of itself sufficient to claim balance just because you have followed the wealth guidelines, but that is what they are there for.  The wealth table gives the approximate wealth a PC of a given level is expected to have, which in turn provided guidance during playtesting for setting CR and so forth.  It however says nothing about how a character should acquire that wealth and nothing about whether the DM must assume that characters of a given level can and should face creatures of a given CR.  It is just guidelines for someone learning the game based on how the designers played thiers, and how they think the game will be most attractive to the largest percentage of players - especially ones new to the game."Do you think items a character won't use are really valuable to them?"Well, yes.  But what you said is probably not what you meant, so I'll try to answer what you meant as well.  An item that a player won't use represents a unutilized resource.  What I think you mean is do I think an item that a character can't use is really valuable to them.  And, no of course, by definition if they can't use it is not valuable to them.  But then we have to ask the question, 'What can't a player use'?  Even Uller and I seem to agree that a PC ought to be able to sell (in most circumstances) a generic magic item for which he believes he has no compelling use, and _that is a use for the item_.  I don't however think that means there is a big supply of generic magic items lying about - see my comments earlier about different assumptions in my economy."Do you adjust challanges that players would defeat with various magic items, such as flying or invisible opponents?"Well, doesn't everyone?  Isn't game balance a DM's job?  Don't you as a PC find the game frustrating if either the challenges are consistantly too easy or too hard?  Whether you give out magic items that make it easier or give out magic items that make it harder you still have to adjust balance.  The wealth table exists with the hope that a novice DM will need to provide minimal intervention is he progresses through challenges recommended by the designers for characters with these expected attributes.  Isn't that obvious?I'm not going to get dragged into another arguement over what is 'valid' and whether anyone has the 'right' to play how they want.  Those are again questions that answer themselves.  They have nothing to do with answering the question that they are generally intended to answer which is what is the best way to play.  You say that my view is 'narrow', and accuse me of believing my 'way' is best.  It is not like I think only stone age technology campaigns are best, any more than I think campaigns which feature science fiction themes are best.  It is not like I think Polynesian inspired campaigns are best, or Arabian inspired campaigns are best, or European inspired campaigns are best, or campaigns with utterly novel cultural settings are best.  It is not like I think grim and gritty is better than herioc cinematic campaigns.  It is not like I think campaigns featuring no core races except humans are better than campaigns that only have humans or only have elves or only have goblins or have the whole standard 'sacred cow' list are better.BTW, I have played in campaigns with all of those various flavors.  How narrow _is_ my view compared to yours?  How many of those have you even considered if you are the sort that is worried about whether or not you are going to get  the items you planned for your PC to acquire from the list you compiled by skimming through the DMG?To be frank, while I don't think my way is 'best', I do think that there are ways of playing that are better than others no matter how politically incorrect that may be for me to say.  I honestly don't think those elements that I call good gaming are all that contriversial, but I don't want to start that whole arguement about what it means to game well again.</blockquote>

Verification