How much Gold are monsters supposed to ave ?

[Infiniti2000]

Well, are the treasure parcels the upper bound? If you hide any part of the treasure parcels, then on average your party will never reach the total of the treasure parcels (unless you design more into your encounters). The idea is that you would design your adventures with more in an effort to make sure the heroes get treasure about equivalent to the parcels.

So, the rule that we're looking for to counter keterys's post is whether the treasures parcels are billed as "upper bound", "guidelines", or something else. I don't have the book with me, so I can't comment on it yet and can't remember off-hand what it said.

One thing I have noticed in practice and by reading many adventure logs and posts is that if the adventure is designed with more than standard treasure (allowing for some missed treasure while trying to provide a balance), then the players will search high-and-low for that treasure. Unfortunately, that's not always that fun so I'm not sure it's a good thing.

 

[keterys]

They're described in the same manner as giving out xp... ie, no suggestions or guidance for increasing or decreasing the level of treasure, just a This is how much treasure you should put in your adventure or over X encounters type vibe, with various suggestions on how to do so. Little odd, really.

That said, losing a parcel or getting an extra every now and then won't make an appreciable difference in the power level of a party so they might just not care.

 

[frankthedm]

Really? Why bother with perception checks then? Just say the PC's find all the cleverly hidden loot. Better yet, why would anyone conceal a hoard in the first place if invaders find it automatically?

I agree with the sarcasm intended in the message. If the Players miss some loot, they miss some loot. Treasure is still a tangible in world object no matter how much the newer editions try and treat it as thinly disguised point buy system for power ups

 

[ForbidenMaster]

A common misconception:

DMG p125
'Sometimes it’s a good idea to include treasures with no associated encounter, such as a hidden cache of gold or stashed item that the characters can find with careful searching after they’ve overcome a few encounters.'

Similarly, if you fireball the 300gp painting that was part of one parcel, or let the minor quest-toting NPC that was going to give you a parcel of money die...

Or just receive and/or drink a lot of potions.

Further, still DMG p125:
'At the start of an adventure, look at the adventure in chunks of eight to ten encounters. (Include major quest rewards as if they were encounters, and if the party completes five minor quests, include those five rewards as a single encounter as well.) For each of those chunks, look at the treasure parcels on the following pages. Find the level of the characters as they work through those encounters, and note the parcels of treasure you will give out over the course of the encounters.'

It is often entirely possible to level while skipping an encounter. If that encounter happened to be the one with the dragon, and you negotiated with it, rather than killing it and taking its hoard, that can easily be a parcel lost. After all, the adventure was designed and that parcel placed there.

Or, to use an example from a game I ran, my party traded the dragon an item of their own in exchange for something from its hoard they wanted, then continued their quest. Should they get reimbursed for the item they traded away because they lost its value in play? I'd hope not...

There are no rules on those pages for replacing parcels that the party misses. Unless you're seeing one I've missed.

How is negotiating with a dragon not an encounter? If the party successfully negotiates with a dragon such that they gain XP and are one step further to leveling, that is an encounter. If for some reason the party doesnt get rewarded for that encounter then either you are hoarding the treasure for later, or you arent following the rules you quoted.

As for what your party does with their magic items, it is up to them. If they want to throw all of them into a river then fine, but the PCs are expected to find more.

During the course of gaining that level, expect a group of five characters to acquire four magic items ranging in level from one to four levels above the party level. In addition, they should find gold and other monetary treasure equal to the market price of two magic items of their level. So a 6th-level party would find four magic items, one each of levels 7 through 10, and gold worth two 6th-level items, or 3,600 gp.

 

[ForbidenMaster]

I agree with the sarcasm intended in the message. If the Players miss some loot, they miss some loot. Treasure is still a tangible in world object no matter how much the newer editions try and treat it as thinly disguised point buy system for power ups

Why? IMO tangible world objects arent fun because for better or for worse the party does have meta knowledge and they will search every nook and cranny if they are under the impression that they wont be rewarded if they dont. I prefer playing D&D to hide and go seek.

I have never understood the concept of realism from the DMs point of view. I was always under the impression that realism was meant for the players and the DM is supposed to provide the illusion that it is there.

Finding hidden treasure is cool. Not getting what you "should" have is not cool. So why not give opportunities for the former to occur while having a back up plan should it not? Is the game about a real world in the DMs mind or is it about what the party experiences?

A hidden door with treasure behind it effectively doesn't exist if no one besides the DM knows about it. It is only cool if they find it. If they dont, and that treasure is never added in later then that treasure effectively doesnt exist. In short, you are shortchanging your party. Now given the actual value of monetary treasure in 4th ed that probably wont amount to much, but if you do it frequently and with necessary treasure like magic items then you are hampering your party.

So, what is the point of perception checks? It makes it a question of when and how the party will find the treasure and not a question of if. If the party misses a hidden treasure they do not have access to those resources until you add it later on. However if they find it then they can use those resources sooner.

 

[keterys]

How is negotiating with a dragon not an encounter? If the party successfully negotiates with a dragon such that they gain XP and are one step further to leveling, that is an encounter. If for some reason the party doesnt get rewarded for that encounter then either you are hoarding the treasure for later, or you arent following the rules you quoted.

It _was_ an encounter, and they got full xp, just as if they'd fought it. Precisely the point.

However, by trading away their magic item in exchange for the item from its hoard they ended up down one magic item, the one they traded.

That was their choice, and quite capably made. It resulted in them leveling faster than if they'd fought the dragon in terms of real time, but having slightly less treasure.

As for what your party does with their magic items, it is up to them. If they want to throw all of them into a river then fine, but the PCs are expected to find more.

Yep, four per level for a group of five. Whether they threw those items away or not. There are no rules nor suggestions for replacing items used, lost, wasted, or consumed.

So, yes, they should have found X total and _did_ find X total, but only ended up getting X-Y treasure, however it is that they lost some of that treasure.

 

[ForbidenMaster]

It _was_ an encounter, and they got full xp, just as if they'd fought it. Precisely the point.

However, by trading away their magic item in exchange for the item from its hoard they ended up down one magic item, the one they traded.

That was their choice, and quite capably made. It resulted in them leveling faster than if they'd fought the dragon in terms of real time, but having slightly less treasure.



Yep, four per level for a group of five. Whether they threw those items away or not. There are no rules nor suggestions for replacing items used, lost, wasted, or consumed.

So, yes, they should have found X total and _did_ find X total, but only ended up getting X-Y treasure, however it is that they lost some of that treasure.

I guess I misunderstood you. When you said, "It is often entirely possible to level while skipping an encounter," it threw me off.

 

[keterys]

Ah, fair. True of the example for my game, but I was also thinking in terms of things like modules. Like a published module might have the bundles assigned to various rooms, but then your players just don't go to a room and skip one parcel. That parcel might be, y'know '400sp and a healing potion', but it's _very_ easy to level and move onto the next module anyways and still be down 90g (and 50xp or whatever) effectively.

Edit: As a reminder, the OP is going through modules. Hence the missing parcels cause they didn't do certain encounters thing is very much an actual thing that could happen.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Regarding modules, I think you're making a false assumption that they are designed with the exact amount of treasure (and by exact let's really say +/- some small error factor, like 5% gp value). Instead, I think they are design above the correct amount of treasure with the expectation that not all will be found. For sure, 1e modules did this and it lead to the hide and go seek method of adventuring, which was ridiculous. We STILL have jokes at our table to cut open all monsters and look for gems. That's how stupid that method is.

 

[keterys]

Agreed on not liking that method of needing to dissect creatures and pickax walls, most certainly.

I can say that some of the newer modules in dragon explicitly use the treasure parcel system, so I suspect they don't give out extra.