How does your group split treasure?

[Aericura]

My group tends to distribute magical items to those who need it, then money and gold goes to the party pool.

Every member in the party is allowed to draw a maximum of 10% from the pool and the rest belongs to party funds. It covers useful expenditure like bribes and so on.

Generally it works out very well, we don't have members going "OMGFATLEWT" and taking stuff. Those that do, tend to live a very short life (thank god for the lawful nuetral fighter and cleric).

We only take round numbers for the pool, so the extra pocket change goes to most deserving party member. As party leader, I like to run my party like a bunch of preschoolers.

They can't think for themselves.

 

[Norfleet]

You know, I ran a poll on this awhile back, after encountering TOEE NPCs, and their talk of "shares" of the treasure, and the general looting....and realized that, to me, this was an entirely alien concept which I'd never encountered before in any actual play.

To me, the idea that "treasure" was divided into "shares" was simply an alien concept, as it makes basically no sense for a group of soldiers on a battlefield to, after a battle, round up all of the enemies guns, ammo, and hand grenades, and then divide them up as if they were some sort of commodity to be possessed, seemingly with no regard to who could CARRY it, and whether those bullets went with those rifles, or that the person who got a rifle should therefore not receive a hand grenade....none of that made any sense to me, considering my background. I've been a mercenary. At NO point did we EVER go and round up all of the enemies dropped equipment, personal effects, and cigarettes, and actually sit down and divide it up as if it was some sort of snack bowl.

I've always been used to the concept that treasure is distributed across the party in order of who can best use it, followed by the order of who can best carry it: The idea that a strength 8 wizard gets the same amount of gold as a strength 18 fighter is absurd, given the difference in relative carrying capacity. And to call this "shares"? Isn't the idea of sharing completely undermined by declaring ownership on items? It's not SHARING anymore if you declare the item your exclusive property, now is it?

And having been through maybe a half-dozen different groups, all of whom saw it this way, I came to wonder....what in the world are they talking about? So I ran a poll, and was surprised to see that while my method of treasure division was common, it was not, by any means, a dominant method.

However, I've still never played in a group where the idea was even proposed. Even after I took up video games.....nobody in our Diablo group ever sat around arguing over who would get the loot. An item was grabbed by whoever could pick it up, if deemed interesting and not immediately usable, it was shown to the rest of the group, and if nobody felt it was useful, it was sold by person who grabbed it, who then pocketted the change. If anyone felt they needed the cash, they simply asked for it. This pattern has repeated itself dozens of times across many different settings, games, and groups....I've never been in a group which actually tried to divide up the treasure in any sort of way. But yet some people have. I wonder what kind of backgrounds these people have which induces this form of behavior.

 

[Caliber]

My group does it almost exactly like Saeviomagy. In fact, I don't know why I said almost, cause that is exactly how we do it.

I think that method requires the sale of magical items to be pretty easy, however. In my current campaign, in which the party works for a very powerful merchant lord, thats the case.

In my next campaign ...

 

[Aericura]

You know, I ran a poll on this awhile back, after encountering TOEE NPCs, and their talk of "shares" of the treasure, and the general looting....and realized that, to me, this was an entirely alien concept which I'd never encountered before in any actual play.

*snipped*

However, I've still never played in a group where the idea was even proposed. Even after I took up video games.....nobody in our Diablo group ever sat around arguing over who would get the loot. An item was grabbed by whoever could pick it up, if deemed interesting and not immediately usable, it was shown to the rest of the group, and if nobody felt it was useful, it was sold by person who grabbed it, who then pocketted the change. If anyone felt they needed the cash, they simply asked for it. This pattern has repeated itself dozens of times across many different settings, games, and groups....I've never been in a group which actually tried to divide up the treasure in any sort of way. But yet some people have. I wonder what kind of backgrounds these people have which induces this form of behavior.

Well, I used to serve in the Singapore Armed Forces (1st Singapore Infantry Regiment) and I could safely say we don't give the SAW guy an M203 grenade. I would like to rebute your claims with my past experiences (Not real experiences, I've only been in training, no actual combat) that after confirming a kill we tend to loot what we can and distribute it amongst ourselves on a who needs what basis.

 

[Umbran]

I've been a mercenary. At NO point did we EVER go and round up all of the enemies dropped equipment, personal effects, and cigarettes, and actually sit down and divide it up as if it was some sort of snack bowl.

Yeah, well, note that adventurers aren't like real-world mercenaries, and monsters aren't much like a real-world merc's enemies. Most real-world mercs, as I understand it, don't go in much for looting. They get most of their money as payment for reaching objectives. Adventurers commonly don't. They are more akin to bandits than mercs in that regard - there's no rich people paying them to kill mind-flayers, so if they want to eat and continue fighting and climbing up the food chain, they've got to lug some profit out.

How many times did your enemies tend to carry many months worth of wages as cold, hard cash that you could divvy up and spend in the next town? You talk about weapons that can and will be used, sure. But you don't refer to other forms of booty - works of art or jewelry, or other equipment you don't actually need, but which is relatively light for it's monetary value.

The idea that a strength 8 wizard gets the same amount of gold as a strength 18 fighter is absurd, given the difference in relative carrying capacity.

Don't confuse the question of who owns the money or valuable item with the question of who carries it for the moment. Also, with the existance of magic (and things like bags of holding, handy haversacks, and portable holes), the question of weight may not be an issue.

I've never been in a group which actually tried to divide up the treasure in any sort of way. But yet some people have. I wonder what kind of backgrounds these people have which induces this form of behavior.

I think it is a little naive to think that a particular background in the player has much to do with party and character behavior. It is a role-playing game. A good role player may have the character act in ways that the player personaly feels are sub-optimal.

Even if the issue is of player behavior, speciifcs of background are not really the question. More general lack of maturity is likely the culprit. And there are immature people of all backgrounds.

 

[Xavim]

Considering that the wizard not only earned an equal share but also requires more to be fully functional, allowing the fighter to walk around being the richest in the party is extremely counterproductive.

I'm with the peeps that divide based on usefullness and then even, fair shares of the treasure. If my wizard can't carry it, I'll get bob the fighter to carry my e for me. I don't think he'll mind, especially since it would encourage me to be nice to him with my spells that generally mean the difference in battle.

But my wizards tend to take out loans from the rest of the party so I can make magical items and scrolls and such. My current wizard is in a fiar spot of debt. Ah well, I nuked 120 Kobalds that adventrure. I think the party will agree that it was money well spent.

 

[Wycen]

Methods I've seen for DnD treasure distribution.

The best methed in my opinion is also the rarest these days as it harks back to the old days of hack and slash and random experience encounters. This method was everybody roll a dice and start picking from the list in order from highest to lowest. In this case it works fine because the treasure list was 2 pages long and had anything ranging from a dagger +1 to a Defender +6 to a Book of Infinite Spells. If you didn't get enough you kept on taking until you got your fill and nobody really cared.

This method can still be used in 3E, but the way treasure is assigned by challenge rating and Minor/Medium/Major means the person who takes the best item, if they don't need it or can't use it, is causing a problem.

The game I previously ran used the above method, roll and pick in order and it worked since everybody knew their roles, didn't have any overlap and if an item stayed in the pot after a few treasure picking sessions they usually sold it and split the money evenly.

The current game I'm in started with another method. The value of everything was totalled, then divided by the number of players and the players got to have a share equal to whatever the divided total was. This worked up until about 7th or 8th level.

After we got higher in level, we had to abandon that, thank god, and now do essentially what most of the others do, whoever can use the item best or needs it most takes it. We don't bother to figure out who picks first, we throw the sheet out on the table and whoever grabs it first chooses, then passes it one way or the other.

I suppose my complaint isn't with the method but rather the short sighted choices the others make. Items which would have been sold just because one or two people didn't think it was useful include a necklace of fireballs, rod of splendor and a crossbow of seeking. We had 2 sets of rare nobles clothing we were planning to keep for some future use, but after one session they changed their mind and sold them. That's what makes me upset.

 

[Altalazar]

I think this is one of those things that really depends on the group and style of play. There is also a subtle role for the DM to play.

When I DM, I know the characters well and I try and make there be items of particular interest to each of them - such that there really is no question, when an item is found, who it will end up with.

Of course, not all items fit so neatly into such a category, but then those could go well for anyone. This is generally also figured out on an amicable basis, discussed among the players.

When you have a close-knit group that has fun playing and role-playing the characters together, treasure division seems to be less of an issue.

If it is just a group thrown together for some hack'n'slash, that doesn't tend to work, but I don't tend to like such games anyway. For those, dice is probably the way to go.

Oh, and one other interesting way to divide treasure is when the treasure is a reward from an NPC - I had a campaign where the whole party was rewarded by a King for service rendered - and each character was given a custom magic item that fit well with them. I even wrote up a short narrative describing the scene to give to them after the session, and with the stats for each item to the appropriate player. That went over rather well.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Our party usually does the following:

All cash is divided equally among all party members. Magical or otherwise interesting items are placed in the "party pool," belonging to the party as a whole. These items are identified and their values quantified. In order for somebody to claim an item as their own, they must "purchase" it out of the party pool, the coins being distributed evenly among the other members. Party members purchase items out of the pool at the items "sale" price, 50% of the price to purchase the item new in town, so it's always a better deal using found items then buying new items.

It is possible to go into debt, claiming an item which you do not currently have enough cash to pay for. In this case, all of your cash goes to purchase the item until it has been payed off, i.e., you don't get any money (and therefore new items) until you've payed your debt. This is a self-regulating feature of the system that ensures that nobody will claim items in such a way as to be more powerful than the other players. The value of everybody's equipment is always roughly equal.

Items can be used from the party pool without purchase if the party as a whole agrees to it. Also, if the party as a whole agrees to it, somebody may be given an item from the pool without needing to pay for it.

If nobody expresses an interest in an item, it is sold and the cash distributed evenly.

 

[Davelozzi]

My group is pretty mature about things - magic items generally go to the most appropriate chracater - there's never been any serious arguements caused by it. Other valuables are carried by one or two of the strongest characters but are considered party funds. If someone leaves the group permanently they take a share. The thief keeps a little bit of extra for himself 'cause he's like that, but not enough to really start trouble.