Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6022184" data-attributes="member: 996">True, but it would have to be too much by a very large margin, and there weren't the broken 'wealth generators' 3e suffered from.&nbsp; Also a non-issue in 4e, if you're following the guidelines, since the proportion of treasure you can use to make/buy items is pretty small - and because of the inherent bonus option, of course.That said, it would have been nice if the DM could have been free or stingy with monetary treasure without magic items overly impacting game balance.&nbsp; Cash just isn't a big enough chunk of treasure parcels to make that big a difference.&nbsp; If you sink your money into some non-adventuring expense, you might be a little light on minor items, but it won't meaningfully impact the game - found items should be quite adequate to keep your character viable.&nbsp; /One/ of, sure - one of five or six perhaps?&nbsp; I've said before that it looks to me like part of a larger trend towards putting more control over character definition and development in the hands of the player.&nbsp; In classic D&amp;D, there was very little character customization, and development was out of the players' hands - it was down to the advancement charts of the class(es) in question and the whims of the treasure-tables or the DM.&nbsp; In 2e you got a few customization options in Kits and non-weapon proficiencies, in 3e you got a lot more in feats, modular multi-classing, PrCs, and (see, I'm getting to it) making/buying magic items.&nbsp; In 4e you had feats, features, powers, themes, backgrounds, PPs, EDs, and wish-list/make/buy for magic items.Meh, if you go by how much people complain, everything since language has been a bad idea.Like I said, I don't /like/ the commoditization of magic items that started in 3e, but I can't pretend it didn't (eventually) do what it set out to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6022184, member: 996"] True, but it would have to be too much by a very large margin, and there weren't the broken 'wealth generators' 3e suffered from. Also a non-issue in 4e, if you're following the guidelines, since the proportion of treasure you can use to make/buy items is pretty small - and because of the inherent bonus option, of course. That said, it would have been nice if the DM could have been free or stingy with monetary treasure without magic items overly impacting game balance. Cash just isn't a big enough chunk of treasure parcels to make that big a difference. If you sink your money into some non-adventuring expense, you might be a little light on minor items, but it won't meaningfully impact the game - found items should be quite adequate to keep your character viable. /One/ of, sure - one of five or six perhaps? I've said before that it looks to me like part of a larger trend towards putting more control over character definition and development in the hands of the player. In classic D&D, there was very little character customization, and development was out of the players' hands - it was down to the advancement charts of the class(es) in question and the whims of the treasure-tables or the DM. In 2e you got a few customization options in Kits and non-weapon proficiencies, in 3e you got a lot more in feats, modular multi-classing, PrCs, and (see, I'm getting to it) making/buying magic items. In 4e you had feats, features, powers, themes, backgrounds, PPs, EDs, and wish-list/make/buy for magic items. Meh, if you go by how much people complain, everything since language has been a bad idea. Like I said, I don't /like/ the commoditization of magic items that started in 3e, but I can't pretend it didn't (eventually) do what it set out to. [/QUOTE]

Verification