D&D 5E Do We Really Need a Lot of Gold? (D&D 5th Edition)

[Umbran]

I understand the desire for this approach, but the problem is that if you do this then it pretty much excludes the option for using money for interesting endeavors (investing it).

If you have no other use for the money, and you are "investing' it, that means you are basically using money as a player coupon for "give me Plot X that I want to engage with". Why not just give the players those anyway, without connecting it to currency?

We could look to designs like Gloomhaven uses - it has cash the party can use for buying stuff it needs, but it also has Prosperity for the area that player actions impact.

 

[Marc_C]

Being a role playing game is not an excuse for bad design. The game does indeed give you a lot of currency you ultimately have no use for unless you make a conscious effort to come up with made up excuses for it.
I really believe gold should be a parallel avenue for character progression. Yes, I'm aware people are averse to the idea of magic shops being a common thing, but hear me out: Gear doesn't necessarily have to be magic. A lot of "magic" weapons and armor in the DMG could easily be presented as high quality mundane gear.

It's fascinating how people shout "bad design" when the game doesn't correspond to what they want. It's not a bad design.

Gold can and should be used to acquire property and land that can be used to open up new avenues for story telling thus giving new responsibilities to the characters. Having land, a castle and citizens to protect propels the game into a new arena of play. It's no longer just about the characters belly button and his fantastic array of magical items.

 

[MerricB]

In regards to finding a use for gold beyond the usual plate armor and potions of healing, one idea for a sandbox campaign that I've been brainstorming is having the player's be explorers responsible for the establishment of a settlement in a frontier region. So during sessions they're going out on adventurers, "pacifying" the region as they see fit, and any treasure or gold they acquire during these adventures will be invested back into the settlement. In return, the players slowly get access to better resources and services. And if they do well enough after a set amount of time (I imagine long stretches of downtime be a key feature of this campaign) they would be knighted/declared as lords of the area.

Keeping the management-side of things light and restricted mostly to out-of-session downtime is the goal here.

Phandalin Advanced, if you will.

See Pathfinder's "Kingmaker" adventure path. (Flawed though I deem it, it is interesting).

 

[Reynard]

In regards to finding a use for gold beyond the usual plate armor and potions of healing, one idea for a sandbox campaign that I've been brainstorming is having the player's be explorers responsible for the establishment of a settlement in a frontier region. So during sessions they're going out on adventurers, "pacifying" the region as they see fit, and any treasure or gold they acquire during these adventures will be invested back into the settlement. In return, the players slowly get access to better resources and services. And if they do well enough after a set amount of time (I imagine long stretches of downtime be a key feature of this campaign) they would be knighted/declared as lords of the area.

Keeping the management-side of things light and restricted mostly to out-of-session downtime is the goal here.

Phandalin Advanced, if you will.

This is essentially the structure of Pathfinder's Kingmaker AP and it worked pretty well.

Edit: ninja'd by @MerricB

 

[Thunder Brother]

See Pathfinder's "Kingmaker" adventure path. (Flawed though I deem it, it is interesting).

Thanks! I watched a review of the video game and was thinking, "yeah, this sounds about right".

 

[Nefermandias]

It's fascinating how people shout "bad design" when the game doesn't correspond to what they want. It's not a bad design.

Gold can and should be used to acquire property and land that can be used to open up new avenues for story telling thus giving new responsibilities to the characters. Having land, a castle and citizens to protect propels the game into a new arena of play. It's no longer just about the characters belly button and his fantastic array of magical items.

Well, I'm glad you like it. Of course, I was giving my personal opinion on the matter.

 

[MerricB]

One of the troubles with Kingmaker is that once you have your gold and you want to build your kingdom... you start playing a board game. (It's not, but it feels very similar to the games I've spent so much time with over the past 20 years). It's a little sim-city, which is engaging for a couple of sessions and then turns into a bore.

The hexcrawl adventuring is fun. The initial building of the city is fun. But after that, you begin to notice how poor a simulation it is, and also how poor a game it is (because there's a lot of maths and not many interesting decisions).

The less said about Pathfinder's attempt at a mass combat system, the better. (Most of Paizo's subsystems introduced in APs were really bad - also see the Jade Regent caravan rules!)

Running good rulership RPGs is hard. It's not impossible, but my feeling is that it needs a ton of preparation - and it helps if the DM is versed in history.

 

[jgsugden]

Being a role playing game is not an excuse for bad design. The game does indeed give you a lot of currency you ultimately have no use for unless you make a conscious effort to come up with made up excuses for it.

This is absolutely false. I do not make a 'conscious effort' to make uses of coin in the game. When someone has a lot of money, there are a lot of pressures that are applied in the real world, and a lot of opportunities that open up. The same is true n the game if you just let a story flow.

I really believe gold should be a parallel avenue for character progression. Yes, I'm aware people are averse to the idea of magic shops being a common thing, but hear me out: Gear doesn't necessarily have to be magic. A lot of "magic" weapons and armor in the DMG could easily be presented as high quality mundane gear.

There is nothing wrong with that approach. In my setting, the PCs, by level 5, will know of the four great market locations in my setting: The City of Gold (in my Heavens), the City of Brass (in my Elemental Plane), the City of Iron (in Hell), and my equivalent of Sigil (in the Astral). Getting to them is possible around level 5, although at a cost. You can buy almost anything at one of these markets, and each is a very different experience. There are also brokers for magic items in most large cities, as well as merchants that deal in some level of magic items (with their inventory determined by many factors, one of which being the size of the city). I've had these approaches for decades and they work exceptionally well. You can also hire people to craft magical items - although it is not cheap and usually requires the PCs to gather the essential elements for the item (something I have used for decades, long before 5E wrote rules for it - special ingredients for potions was in the AD&D DMG, and I extended that to the concoction of all magic items).

Many (but not most) PCs spend all their coin on magic items and tools. Other PCs build strongholds. Others hire people for a variety of tasks. Others donate to charity. Others start businesses. Others buy ships. Others research magic. In reality, it is almost always a combination of these options (and others). It all can add to the story.

 

[NotAYakk]

As I understand that, it's real the "magic tag" that makes people reject the idea. I'm sure most people wouldn't mind a system where you are able to buy increasingly stronger itens as long as it doesn't make magic too common in your world.

No, I don't care if it is a +3 dwarven axe of masterwork or a +3 enchanted dwarven axe.

Having some part of the PC's advancement be non-planned and under the control of the DM/dice has value.

Also, as others have mentioned, if there are magic items that make you better at adventuring, you give each player a choice between "being better at adventuring" or "creating new narratives with gold". And I don't like that incentive.

If a PC wants to create a narrative of "I hire someone to find a magic item I want", go for it. Or, "collect gold for the dragon, who has offered me a boon". But it is a narrative, not a price list. And finding some specific item is going to be exponentially expensive and uncertain. If someone wants to not care about gold? It should work without the vow of poverty nonsense from 3e type mechanics.

 

[jgsugden]

...Running good rulership RPGs is hard. It's not impossible, but my feeling is that it needs a ton of preparation - and it helps if the DM is versed in history.

I value your opinion. Can you elaborate?

I do not find this terribly hard, especially as the PCs usually can't devote the time to be the full time ruler, when the rulership is at a high level. They get called in to make the big decisions, and they have a Regent or other person making choices while they are unavailable. You steer clear of the accounting and fine details and, like a CEO, have the decisions brought to you at a higher level.

Now, if the PCs have just managed to clear some land and are building a keep and negotiating borders, etc... It can be more of a 'full time' activity, but I consider that to be something that gets resolved as an adventure over a few sessions. You generally get to a stable point after that, and then anything else substantial related to governing that area that requires the PCs to give significant focus is going to be a new adventure (often a war or a political intrigue storyline).