Fauchard1520
Adventurer
Do you guys think some classes are more dependent on gear than others? If so, should they get a proportionally larger share of the party's loot?
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Gear-Dependent Classes
- Thread starter Fauchard1520
- Start date
Assuming you play backgrounds pretty straight with classes (i.e., no sorcerers with the criminal background), then I think most classes have similar gear dependency, maybe with rogues and rangers sticking out as being a little more dependent due to them usually being explorers and rogues using thieves' tools, and monks being a little less dependent since they don't use shields or armor. I wouldn't say that it's enough to create a loot discrepancy, since everyone more or less starts with what they need.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
The designers claim that the game balance is set up assuming no magic items, and I'm inclined to take that a face value. So none of the classes should be gear-dependent.
That doesn't necessarily mean that every class can be expected to get the same benefit from equipment. For instance, a moon druid probably won't use magic items as much since most don't work in wild shape. A monk can't use armor and her unarmed strikes aren't improved by magic weapons. But overall, most characters can benefit from most items. I don't see a big disparity that would generally favor distributing items unequally.
Of course, in a given group it might turn out that one character is carrying a lot of the load, and giving that character some extra help might make sense.
--
I suppose that when it comes to simple gold distribution, classes with heavy armor could have some claim for extra, since no one else can use mundane gear as expensive as full plate. But once that is paid for, I don't think there is much difference.
Last edited:
ccs
41st lv DM
Answr 1:
Those who rely on Armor & Weapons generally require more gear.
But spellcasters often need to invest in rare components, more spells, etc.
Answer 2:
No, I don't believe anyone deserves a larger share of the loot.
In games where I'm a player we divide the loot roughly evenly.
In games I DM I just provide loot & let the players decide how to divvy it up. I do NOT go out of my way to make sure to provide loot specifically suited for individual pcs. Except for plot items loot is generated randomly & bbegs/npcs are equipped according to thier needs, not the parties. If the players can make use of this stuff, great. How they divide it up is thier bussiness.
Those who rely on Armor & Weapons generally require more gear.
But spellcasters often need to invest in rare components, more spells, etc.
Answer 2:
No, I don't believe anyone deserves a larger share of the loot.
In games where I'm a player we divide the loot roughly evenly.
In games I DM I just provide loot & let the players decide how to divvy it up. I do NOT go out of my way to make sure to provide loot specifically suited for individual pcs. Except for plot items loot is generated randomly & bbegs/npcs are equipped according to thier needs, not the parties. If the players can make use of this stuff, great. How they divide it up is thier bussiness.
In most cases i have sern the group tends to cover needs for the group. If armor is available and the fighter needs gold, they chip in and he either pays it back or they do the same for other stuff.
It is after all a group, not a collection of adversaries.
As for found stuff, they usually divvy it up by use, need and then equitably.
Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app
It is after all a group, not a collection of adversaries.
As for found stuff, they usually divvy it up by use, need and then equitably.
Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app
ArchfiendBobbie
First Post
Gold is divvied up evenly. Items by need, with any unneeded magical items stuck in storage until they can find a seller (usually potions or arrows). Unneeded nonmagical equipment is sold, and the gold from the sale evenly divvied up. Magical items that are needed are divided by need and ability to use.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing (He/They)
Nah, I don't think so. All of the classes use different gear to varying degrees, but they don't necessarily depend on it.
5E did a good job of getting rid of the "arms race" of earlier editions IMO, by removing the price tags from magic items and limiting the number of items that can be attuned. Those two things have really leveled the playing field as far as loot is concerned. There's much less incentive to turn fighters into Christmas Trees of Death.
5E did a good job of getting rid of the "arms race" of earlier editions IMO, by removing the price tags from magic items and limiting the number of items that can be attuned. Those two things have really leveled the playing field as far as loot is concerned. There's much less incentive to turn fighters into Christmas Trees of Death.
Warmaster Horus
Explorer
If you're that dependent on gear you need to be patient. That said, if a suit of +3 plate comes along I would expect that goes to the fighter instead of the monk.
Yes. Strong guys want plate armor and magic users want material components. Wizards be fillin' spell books. That makes them more gear dependent. However, gold as an upgrade path quickly becomes meaningless using the default "settings" of D&D 5e.
It is my preference as a DM and player that the group keeps a pool of cash available for group-related purchases. That includes class-related items, like plate armor for the strong guys and spell components for the casters. It's all toward improving the group's functionality. How one manages deposits and withdrawals is a matter of discretion for each table.
Two of my favorite tables treated all loot as group loot, so it was just a matter of tracking a single account. They could take as they pleased, but big purchases always involved discussion. In groups where wealth was distributed to individuals, the group pool was funded by voluntary contributions (and grew rapidly in size, no less). I've never seen a group loot tax in play, but that could be another way of funding group-related purchases.
If using group loot to cover class-related item costs doesn't fly at your table, I would favor equal loot portions for everyone regardless of gear-dependency. Wealth acquisition greatly outpaces gear costs in the long term, to the point where the latter is negligible. Wealth discrepancies will be apparent in the early game, but this wouldn't deter me from playing and enjoying a gear-dependent class.
It is my preference as a DM and player that the group keeps a pool of cash available for group-related purchases. That includes class-related items, like plate armor for the strong guys and spell components for the casters. It's all toward improving the group's functionality. How one manages deposits and withdrawals is a matter of discretion for each table.
Two of my favorite tables treated all loot as group loot, so it was just a matter of tracking a single account. They could take as they pleased, but big purchases always involved discussion. In groups where wealth was distributed to individuals, the group pool was funded by voluntary contributions (and grew rapidly in size, no less). I've never seen a group loot tax in play, but that could be another way of funding group-related purchases.
If using group loot to cover class-related item costs doesn't fly at your table, I would favor equal loot portions for everyone regardless of gear-dependency. Wealth acquisition greatly outpaces gear costs in the long term, to the point where the latter is negligible. Wealth discrepancies will be apparent in the early game, but this wouldn't deter me from playing and enjoying a gear-dependent class.
Similar Threads
