Gold or Silver Standard?

[Irda Ranger]

There will be wealth/level requirements in 4e. There HAS to be. Or at least their equivalent.

I stand by what I said, but let me clarify a bit.

First, I agree with your contention that in 4E 15th level monsters were balanced against 15th level PC's with a "Charlie Brown's Christmas Tree" worth of 15th level items. I think that's right.

But my point was that 4E has magical item assumptions, while 3E had magical item requirements. In 3E you were required to hand out items because of the nature of the class design; if you wanted to maintain intra-party balance the melee characters needed their items. It just didn't matter how much you futzed with the CR's; a high-level caster is merely inconvenienced by a lack of items, while a high-level Fighter is just frakked.

I think the whole point behind "Fighters Have Powers" and "+6 Wands" is that each class is balanced against the other at any given level of magical item possession, from Zero to Monte CookHaul. The Powers balance out the Spells, and the Elder Wand balances out Excalibur. No one has anything? No problem. Everyone's got Artifacts? No problem.

Now, you'll still have to fiddle with the Monster Levels to keep challenges at the right level (a 15th level party with items is more potent than one without), but at least no one person within the group will consistently outshine all the others in an itemless situation.

At least, that's my theory about what they're shooting for. It would be nice too if there was a little rule of thumb somewhere about how many "levels" items add to effectiveness, so that you know "No items? OK, treat these guys as -2 Lvl", but even if they don't I trust I'll figure it out eventually.

 

[Afrodyte]

I'd rather a barter economy. Small, everyday transactions-- currency is fine. When you're talking about the value of magic items, currency gets ridiculous, fast. I mean, who minted all these coins? Is there not a finite number of coins in the world? Especially a PoL world?

I concur. Besides the internal logic of it, there's also the RP value to consider. You could design a complete adventure around the prospect of gaining a particular magic item. Not to mention making a long-term enemy of an NPC who reneges on such an agreement.

PC Fighter: OK, here's that Whatchamacallit you asked for.
NPC Wizard: Oh, my! Wonderful! Thank you.
PC Fighter: So . . . what about that keen vorpal sword you promised me?
NPC Wizard: The what?
PC Rogue: The keen vorpal sword you promised him. Not to mention the enchanted cloak and armor you promised me.
NPC Wizard: I did?
PC Cleric: Yes. And a boatload of healing potions too.
NPC Wizard: You don't say?
PC Sorcerer: Perhaps a fireball would jog your memory.
NPC Wizard: Oh, gee! Look at the time! Well, gotta go! Good luck with the adventuring thing.
PC Cleric: Stop him!
NPC Wizard: *casts teleport and escapes - for now*
PC Fighter: Why do they always do that?
PC Sorcerer: (to Rogue) What are you doing?
PC Rogue: Adding him to the list.
PC Cleric: You keep a list?
PC Rogue: Yeah. Just in case there's some sort of shadowy organization that requires me to kill people for no reason other than to join said shadowy organization, I'll have plenty of candidates to choose from.
PC Fighter: Really? Who's on there so far?​

 

[Nyeshet]

One thing I've noticed is that using gold coins to purchase everyday items (backpack, sword, etc) lowers the worth players associate with it. Finding 100 gp after an encounter with a bandit group is nothing of note. But if you have most items bought with silver (after having adjusted the prices to more realistic levels), finding 100 gp is suddenly a major event - even if they perhaps gained nearly as much value in silver (say 700 sp) only a week or so before. If gold is used less often it is perceived to have more value.

Silver standard. It should have been used in the first place.

As for a PoL setting - barter and cp / sp (the latter being uncommon except in larger settlements).

 

[frankthedm]

Silver should be the default currency. Even if it is just a shifting of decimals it feels better.

 

[Campbell]

I never found the Wealth by Level guidelines problematic. What was problematic was balancing classes in such a manner that not all classes were effected by wealth in the same way. A wizard should be just as boned without level appropriate gear as a fighter is.

As far as the issue of a gold or silver standard goes I'm not really an advocate of one over the other. My only hope is seeing more in the way of gold or silver pressed into bars and less in the way of piles of coin in published adventures.

 

[Hussar]

No, I don't think so. I think you're really overstating the potential problem massively, in a way that's faintly hilarious to anyone who played 1E/2E. Do you think monsters back then we built "expecting" X magical items of Y level per player? Because I sure as hell don't. Did the DMG have a table like the one you described? I don't remember it.

Didn't seem to hurt anything, in my experience.

In 3E this semi-psychotic "balance" obsession came in, and so we had our detailed tables of GP of magic items and monsters designed tightly around expectations, expectations, furthermore, which were NOT written into the DMG (like no advice on how you had to ensure your PCs all got +saving throw items if they didn't want to die a lot at higher levels), and guess what, whilst "monty haul" or "treasure-free" campaigns were more obvious, I seriously did not notice the game being significantly more balanced than when we were eyeballing it in 2E.

Maybe others did, I'd be interested to hear from them if so, but it seems that that system caused as many, if not more, problems than it solved.

I really honestly believe any similar chart in the DMG would have a similar effect.

1e and 2e most certainly did have expected wealth by level. It didn't state it explicitly, but it was certainly there. Look at every module. How often do you see Vorpal swords in 1st level modules? How often do you see 9th level NPC's with no magic items? There's a reason for that.

It may not have been explicitly stated, but, it was there.

Never mind that higher level monsters needed +X weapons to fight. Why did you never see low level monsters needing that? After all, if there is no assumed wealth by level, then it's perfectly valid that 1st level parties should have magic weapons.

/edit

And, back on topic - a silver standard won't matter after about 5th level. PC's just have too much cash and stuff for it to matter. Moving the decimal isn't exactly going to change the experience for most players IMO.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

One kind of economy/bartering idea that I extremely liked was bartering for Tokens or information in the Goblin Market from Changeling: The Lost. Gave a real sense of the fantastical, etc. when you had players trading their own tears shed from sorrow for a powerful token, or having to find out what a "Heart's Bow" was to barter with for information.

 

[The Little Raven]

One kind of economy/bartering idea that I extremely liked was bartering for Tokens or information in the Goblin Market from Changeling: The Lost. Gave a real sense of the fantastical, etc. when you had players trading their own tears shed from sorrow for a powerful token, or having to find out what a "Heart's Bow" was to barter with for information.

Sounds like a perfect seed for a Feywild "Great Bazaar" location.

 

[FireLance]

One thing I've noticed is that using gold coins to purchase everyday items (backpack, sword, etc) lowers the worth players associate with it. Finding 100 gp after an encounter with a bandit group is nothing of note. But if you have most items bought with silver (after having adjusted the prices to more realistic levels), finding 100 gp is suddenly a major event - even if they perhaps gained nearly as much value in silver (say 700 sp) only a week or so before. If gold is used less often it is perceived to have more value.

Silver standard. It should have been used in the first place.

Maybe it's a side effect of being able to do math in my head, or of playing D&D and various other RPGs for over 20 years, but I don't think I'd be excited at finding gold just because it's gold. Yes, even gold has lost its sense of wonder for this jaded gamer.

It might work for newer players for a few levels, but after that, it just becomes an extra level of detail which isn't worth worrying about. The time the players start routinely rounding off silver to the nearest ten is the time to switch to a gold standard, when the players start rounding off gold to the nearest ten, it should be time to switch to platinum.

 

[DM_Matt]

...should someone be making a "Cross of Gold" speech right about now?

I like the idea of gold being more rare and valuable.

Count me as surprised that a William Jennings Byran reference showed up before a Ron Paul reference. Hooray for historically literate membership!