Nifft said:My group goes Marxist, too -- "to each according to his need" and all that. However, there are two Wizards. So we get a little Stalinism in there too.
Cheers, -- N
All of the above. Different styles at different times. I prefer the 'who needs it most?' style, and don't see anything unrealistic about it. (These are people you are trusting your [character's] life to. The better job they can do of it, the better off you all are!)Anthelios said:How does your party/players handle dispensing found magical treasure. The group I DM for seems to be very socialist in their approach. They give the item to the PC that needs it the most, and ignore its value when it comes time to split up shares of treasure. Personally I think its unrealistic.
I've hear some other variants. Like rolling for first picks, or half-value buying the items out of your share of treasure. I'd like to hear how other EN worlders deal with their treasure shares.
eschwenke said:But Clueless, what if someone's playing a Fated?
heh heh heh, he said "penal servitude". heh heh heh.billd91 said:penal servitude?
Nifft said:heh heh heh, he said "penal servitude". heh heh heh.
Shut up, Beavis.
-- N
QFTDragonLancer said:...The value of an item is irrelevant. It should go to the person who needs it most. Any excess or unwanted items gets sold and the cash goes into a party fund.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.