Giving yourself treasure... Is there anything wrong with this?
- Thread starter UltimaGabe
- Start date
UltimaGabe
First Post
Zappo said:
Actually, I think it should be the other way around, somewhat. After all, I'm not giving my character money, or even a Vorpal sword or anything. I'm not giving him anything that would come into play during a game, or anything that would directly do anything. The fact of the matter is, my character makes magic items for the rest of the group- any time they want something unique, or they want to save a little money, I make them magic items at a discount, in addition to making myself magic items whenever I have money/xp. The problem, however, is that this causes me to end up behind everyone else in terms of xp, and thus this item/device/whatever I'd be giving myself would only slightly offset the downsides to my already-draining abilities, and allow me to use them to greater extent (after all, if you take a feat, you wanna be able to use it at your leisure).
I refused to give my character money, and I refused to give him anything specifically from the books. I simply made something up (using other existing magic items or feats as guides- there's an item in the Arms & Equipment Guide, for example, that, in addition to being a magical warhammer that can cast Magic Weapon 1x/day, reduces the material cost of Magic Weapons by 5%- also, there's a feat that my character has taken from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting that reduces the cost of one Item Creation Feat to 75% the market price, in terms of XP and GP). I figured that something indirect would affect game balance less than simply giving my character a bunch of money. (After all, it isn't money that I really want, it's XP- or, rather, a way to reduce the XP costs.)
francisca
I got dice older than you.
If your group setup a policy that states that the DM's PC does not get a portion of the loot, you should stick to it.
My advice: If you want to change the rule, discuss the changes with everyone. If they agree to the changes, institute the change the next time everyone in the group starts with all-new characters. Otherwise, someone will feel like they got the short end of the stick.
My advice: If you want to change the rule, discuss the changes with everyone. If they agree to the changes, institute the change the next time everyone in the group starts with all-new characters. Otherwise, someone will feel like they got the short end of the stick.
UltimaGabe
First Post
francisca said:
Well, the only reason that the DM's PC doesn't get a share of XP and Treasure is because the DM's PC generally isn't there. There HAVE been several instances in the past, however, where there were rather large battles that the other DMs have had their characters take part as well, due to circumstances (as in, the battle they had planned was really really big, or there were less people than expected, or so on). In those cases, the DM's PC got an equal share of the loot and XP as well, since they were part of the challenge too.
And I'd like to re-iterate that I didn't put anything into the adventure that was specifically geared at my character- in fact, I didn't even gear it towards my character until AFTER the adventure was over, and AFTER the other PC mentioned that I would find some use from it. It also wouldn't have gone to any of the other PCs, considering they weren't even there to begin with. The devices were simply added in off the top of my head when I was making the adventure on the fly, and it made sense that this Wizard would have had devices that either helped him make magic items, or something that provided him with some sort of benefit. I never put it in specifically for my character, it just turned out that way inadvertantly.
Basically, I'm not just out to give myself treasure. If I were, I wouldn't have bothered to ask everyone how they feel about it. I simply put something in because it made sense, and I wondered if I would be considered a bad DM if I wanted to keep it afterwards. I doubt it would be game-breaking either way, but I'm asking nonetheless.
BlackMoria
First Post
A question or two: Who else from the party can use the devices? If noone but you, will the party sell the devices off or will they allow you to use them?
Our group has rotating DMs and we have a similar arrangement for characters run by the DMs.
For our group, this situation wouldn't be a problem. Then again, our group has 'communal' treasure in which there is no defacto ownership of an magic item which can benefit more than one person - and a device like you mentioned would fall in that category for our group.
Also, our group reaps the benefit of having a wizard or cleric making items for the party. I play a mage when I am not DMing and noone has a problem with a item or two coming my way when I am DMing (the party gifts the item(s) to my character) while my mage is not an 'active' participant. Why? Because it just makes sense to 'take care' of the mage who makes them items.
Frankly, I would broach the subject about using the device for making items. It is not like you are staking a claim of ownership - you want to use it. A reasonable party should not have a problem with that, IMO.
Our group has rotating DMs and we have a similar arrangement for characters run by the DMs.
For our group, this situation wouldn't be a problem. Then again, our group has 'communal' treasure in which there is no defacto ownership of an magic item which can benefit more than one person - and a device like you mentioned would fall in that category for our group.
Also, our group reaps the benefit of having a wizard or cleric making items for the party. I play a mage when I am not DMing and noone has a problem with a item or two coming my way when I am DMing (the party gifts the item(s) to my character) while my mage is not an 'active' participant. Why? Because it just makes sense to 'take care' of the mage who makes them items.
Frankly, I would broach the subject about using the device for making items. It is not like you are staking a claim of ownership - you want to use it. A reasonable party should not have a problem with that, IMO.
Last edited:
UltimaGabe
First Post
BlackMoria said:
There are two other spellcasters in the group, and one of them makes a few magic items from time to time. He would definitely be able to benefit from it as well, if I were to keep such an item.
Terwox
First Post
Here's an idea:
give the PCs some liquid power, ie XP for crafting items in a bottle. They can give it to you if they want you to make them an item, or give it to the other item crafter.
it'd go to the other members, and they could use it, albeit it would still help you cuz you wouldn't be burning your xp -- you'd be burning their virtual XP.
there's mechanics for this in... umm, i think BoEM I.
give the PCs some liquid power, ie XP for crafting items in a bottle. They can give it to you if they want you to make them an item, or give it to the other item crafter.
it'd go to the other members, and they could use it, albeit it would still help you cuz you wouldn't be burning your xp -- you'd be burning their virtual XP.
there's mechanics for this in... umm, i think BoEM I.
Or you could read a certain rules passage liberally
the item construction rules allow multiple characters to assist in the
construction of an item, yes?
That is, you all agree that a cleric with craft wondrous item can have
a wizard supply the Shield spell to make a Brooch of Shielding, just like
in the rules, right?
Extend that concept. Any character willing to work with the crafter
8 hours a day for however many days may DONATE his own XP for the item.
It's what our group and another does. It keeps the party mostly close, though
some prefer to buy/claim items as the monsters drop them, to stay higher
in level.
My dwarf rogue/ranger/dungeon delver hangs out with the elf wizard who has
craft wand in order to make a wand of Delay Poison, which is only a 1st level
ranger spell, with a minimum caster level of 2. That's 1/3 the cost of a
cleric (caster 3 * spell level 2 = 6) wand.
We mark off the game time for the two characters, and I deduct the XP.
When someone wants a wand of cure light wounds (we have no cleric, btw),
the elf wizard sits with the half-elf druid who sits with the person who wants
the wand and:
wizard supplies craft wand feat
druid supplies cure light wounds, caster level 1
third guy supplies XP.
It works for us, which is all you can say for any "house rule," however:
It can be argued that the existing 3.5 rules allow for this, and simply don't
spell out that non-caster characters can collaborate with crafters to put
up the XP for an item.
the item construction rules allow multiple characters to assist in the
construction of an item, yes?
That is, you all agree that a cleric with craft wondrous item can have
a wizard supply the Shield spell to make a Brooch of Shielding, just like
in the rules, right?
Extend that concept. Any character willing to work with the crafter
8 hours a day for however many days may DONATE his own XP for the item.
It's what our group and another does. It keeps the party mostly close, though
some prefer to buy/claim items as the monsters drop them, to stay higher
in level.
My dwarf rogue/ranger/dungeon delver hangs out with the elf wizard who has
craft wand in order to make a wand of Delay Poison, which is only a 1st level
ranger spell, with a minimum caster level of 2. That's 1/3 the cost of a
cleric (caster 3 * spell level 2 = 6) wand.
We mark off the game time for the two characters, and I deduct the XP.
When someone wants a wand of cure light wounds (we have no cleric, btw),
the elf wizard sits with the half-elf druid who sits with the person who wants
the wand and:
wizard supplies craft wand feat
druid supplies cure light wounds, caster level 1
third guy supplies XP.
It works for us, which is all you can say for any "house rule," however:
It can be argued that the existing 3.5 rules allow for this, and simply don't
spell out that non-caster characters can collaborate with crafters to put
up the XP for an item.
Kilmore
First Post
Why on earth would your character refuse to accept treasure on approximately one third of all adventures? You don't have to justify this if it is the way you folks enjoy your games, but realistically I find it hard to fathom three adventurers sitting around the campfire having this conversation.
Freddy Fighter: "Well, I didn't get any treasure in the last adventure, and Maggie Mage refused her share the time before, so it's your turn to not get paid this time."
Paula Priest: "Nuts."
Manipulating things that exist in a character's world for reasons that only exist around the game table is called meta-gaming, and most people feel that it detracts from the immersion into the character. If that's the way your group feels is fair and you all enjoy the game regardless, more power to you. However, I would humbly suggest that instead of dividing up treasure according to who played and who ran, I would divide up the XP instead, allowing the DM's character a half-share or whatever you decide is fair to each player's full share. If everyone who is supposed to runs their share, at least the semi-NPC's will maintain an even level. Maybe the full-time players will advance a little quicker, but then they don't get to DM either.
Whether you follow this advice or not, be aware that when co-DMing a campaign, you share responsibility for that campaign with the other DM's. Make sure that whatever rewards and consequences you give in the course of your adventure are consistent with what the others are prepared to deal with.
Freddy Fighter: "Well, I didn't get any treasure in the last adventure, and Maggie Mage refused her share the time before, so it's your turn to not get paid this time."
Paula Priest: "Nuts."
Manipulating things that exist in a character's world for reasons that only exist around the game table is called meta-gaming, and most people feel that it detracts from the immersion into the character. If that's the way your group feels is fair and you all enjoy the game regardless, more power to you. However, I would humbly suggest that instead of dividing up treasure according to who played and who ran, I would divide up the XP instead, allowing the DM's character a half-share or whatever you decide is fair to each player's full share. If everyone who is supposed to runs their share, at least the semi-NPC's will maintain an even level. Maybe the full-time players will advance a little quicker, but then they don't get to DM either.
Whether you follow this advice or not, be aware that when co-DMing a campaign, you share responsibility for that campaign with the other DM's. Make sure that whatever rewards and consequences you give in the course of your adventure are consistent with what the others are prepared to deal with.
Similar Threads
