How Does Your Party Divide Treasure?
- Thread starter DarrenGMiller
- Start date
Pasus Nauran
First Post
Ever since I started playing D&D, I've been the party accountant (I'm not sure why, but I don't mind).
In the past we would deduce the resale value of all items (what we could get for them if we wanted to sell them), and then sum this up. We'd then divide that value evenly, and people could decide if they just wanted the gold, or particular items (or a combination of both). If an item was worth more than a person's share, they would be indebted to the group for the difference.
This took alot of math and time, and so for our latest campaign we've come up with a simpler solution:
All gold and valuables (ie: items of value that provide no benefit to the party: such as generic gems, artwor, etc.) are now converted to gold, and this is divided evenly among the party (with some going to party funds). For all equipment and special items people may want, we have a dibs list with the party in order (initial order was decided by die rolls of high to low). We go down the list asking each party member if the want the item. Whomever takes the item goes to the bottom of the list (for hauls of multiple items, people are moved to the bottom based on the value of the items they've taken: more value means closer to the bottom).
With this system, it's quite possible (and has happened) for one person to take 2 or three items in a single haul, if no one else is interested. Our party is quite diverse, so there isn't alot of fighting for items. IIRC, I'm currently at the bottom of the list after taking a defeated Wizard's spellbook. Until then, I had been second on the list since the campaign started.
In the past we would deduce the resale value of all items (what we could get for them if we wanted to sell them), and then sum this up. We'd then divide that value evenly, and people could decide if they just wanted the gold, or particular items (or a combination of both). If an item was worth more than a person's share, they would be indebted to the group for the difference.
This took alot of math and time, and so for our latest campaign we've come up with a simpler solution:
All gold and valuables (ie: items of value that provide no benefit to the party: such as generic gems, artwor, etc.) are now converted to gold, and this is divided evenly among the party (with some going to party funds). For all equipment and special items people may want, we have a dibs list with the party in order (initial order was decided by die rolls of high to low). We go down the list asking each party member if the want the item. Whomever takes the item goes to the bottom of the list (for hauls of multiple items, people are moved to the bottom based on the value of the items they've taken: more value means closer to the bottom).
With this system, it's quite possible (and has happened) for one person to take 2 or three items in a single haul, if no one else is interested. Our party is quite diverse, so there isn't alot of fighting for items. IIRC, I'm currently at the bottom of the list after taking a defeated Wizard's spellbook. Until then, I had been second on the list since the campaign started.
Storm Raven
First Post
diaglo said:
Yeah, that's a terrible new feature of the current edition, except that it was exactly the same in previous editions.
Ralif Redhammer
Legend
I don't get involved. In most of my gaming groups, the magic items are given to whomever can most benefit. Gems, objects of art, and coins are divided up evenly. One gaming group I played with established a group fund that was included in the division of loot.
I had one gaming group with a halfling rogue that filched extra shares of the loot. I was surprised that the group wasn't mad at all when they found out about that. Another time in another campaign, a thief-acrobat managed to steal all the loot for an adventure with now infamous line "Quick, hide it in my portable hole, it'll be safer there!"
I had one gaming group with a halfling rogue that filched extra shares of the loot. I was surprised that the group wasn't mad at all when they found out about that. Another time in another campaign, a thief-acrobat managed to steal all the loot for an adventure with now infamous line "Quick, hide it in my portable hole, it'll be safer there!"
iwatt
First Post
I deal with the issue in a really ad hoc manner.
First, see if there's even a reason to fight over the stuff. It helps to have mature players who don't care that someone else has 10% more wealth than them.
If there is more than a character that wants an object, they argue there case to the hole party. If there's a noticeable treasure difference between arguing parties, the "poorer2 character will usually take the item. If there is no easy way to rule, the two parties will reach a consensus (trade, promise a future pick etc..).
Everything is easier if you approach it in a mature and non-antagonistic manner.
Although I'd love to play in agame were all treasure is tossed into the middle and everybdoy jumps in and grabs what they want. Solve as you will.
First, see if there's even a reason to fight over the stuff. It helps to have mature players who don't care that someone else has 10% more wealth than them.
If there is more than a character that wants an object, they argue there case to the hole party. If there's a noticeable treasure difference between arguing parties, the "poorer2 character will usually take the item. If there is no easy way to rule, the two parties will reach a consensus (trade, promise a future pick etc..).
Everything is easier if you approach it in a mature and non-antagonistic manner.
Although I'd love to play in agame were all treasure is tossed into the middle and everybdoy jumps in and grabs what they want. Solve as you will.
Storm Raven
First Post
diaglo said:
No, pretty much exactly. If the DM wanted magic shops, then there were magic shops. If he didn't there weren't.
Just like now, where there is detailed material concerning wealth. You just don't have the silly gp = xp nonsense.
Similar Threads
