Is it wrong to want a fair share?

[Tatsukun]

The way our party did it, we all ended up with a fair share. We just calculated everything out at sale value. Then, people would get an even share and could either take the gold, or take items (essentially buying them from the party, at the sale (half retail) price).

So if a group of 4 PCs found 10 wands worth 1,000 each, every PC would get 2,500 Gp. If one of the PCs was a wizard, he might buy two wands and take 500 Gp, or he might put 3,500 Gp in the pile and take 6 wands. It's up to him.

Everyone seemed pretty happy with this system, and I don't think it weakened us. It should be noted that scrolls of healing and other party-utility things were not sold, just kept on the cleric in case we needed them.

-Tatsu

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

In the only really long campaign I played, we just gave the items out to the people who could use them, sold what we didn't use, and divided all the gold up mostly evenly.

 

[Blue]

I think it 100% should be: How the Characters in-game have decieded what to do.

Really. The players have no loot. Unless you are in a world with adventuring charters, each adventuring group (PC & NPC) can do things different ways.

I've been in parties where:
* Everything was fair share of any encounter.
* Everythign was cumulative fair share, and people wanting a big item from an encounter often had to put a smaller item back into the pot.
* It was "give to the person who needs it the most". (This was usually the best for party survivability, but did end up with uneven distribution.)
* Give to the person who needed it most, and occasionally all magic items went back into the pot and got redivided.
* Keep a running track of cost of items, and PCs with the least treasure picked first for new treasure.
* As many of the above, but oen use items always went to whomever needed them most with no "charge".

There are a lot of things out there. Discuss it IN CHARACTER. If you character feels he's getting a bum deal, tellt he other characters. It is a role playing game after all.

Cheers,
=Blue

 

[Bigwilly]

Fight for it

Characters list what they want from the loot list. If no-one else wants it, they usually just get it. If more than one character wants it, then they get in the ring and fight for it (simple d20 roll, highest wins). Remaining stuff is sold off and money raised is split evenly between all party members.

However, there was a pair of spectral gauntlets that the gnome rog/ill made for another PC that subsequently got himself killed. For some reason that I can't remember, the party forced him to buy them back.

Bigwilly

 

[Belen]

I'll never let a PC buy a magic item again, nor will I let a PC customize their gear again. Magic items are not just another "option" to help a player get "kewl" powers. They should be unique and help to define who you are.

When 3e first came out, I was in love with the whole item creation concept. Finally, I had a good way to build new and more customized items. Unfortunately, 3e items tend to be very bland. They are great for adding bonus' to a players abilities, but lack all and any flavor.

Now, I hate the 3e item creation mechanics and its faceless crunch.

My PCs get random treasure. They will not be able to sell a magic item...ever. They can barter with item creators with items or they can quest for items etc, but never will they purchase them.

Purchase a magic item, get a munchie.

 

[Shallown]

How my group splits treasure changes as new characters are brought in the group. When we lost 3 of 5 characters within a session or two the method we used changed based on the characters personalities. Treasure distribution is in the hands of the characters. Before one character more or less decided who got what and how money was used. He kept track of party funds etc. Now we split everything between the party with an extra share going to the party fund. Now if you want an item you buy at the same price the party could sell it (basically 1/2). If you don't have enough you borrow the extra from the party fund. So If you can't afford the sword +3 from the treasure you pay your split and borrow the rest from the party fund. Also party fund buys items useful to everyone and all curatives (which are always useful). Party fund pays dues, taxes, living expenses and healing when needed. We have decided not to use any resurrection or raise dead magic. We also fund the Wizard's Spell books and some party Scrolls made by the wizards. How the party fund is used is decided on by one character and then possible vetoed by the rest. Luckily no one is playing a greedy or copper pinching character. We are all fairly relaxed about it wanting the best for each other to increase our survivability.

We did the same thing in a previous campaign but the person administering the party fund was a proclaimed thief who made sure he had the best stuff but still wanted to increase his survivability so made sure the party was never seriously short changed. He was just arrogant and thought he was the most important person, which may or may not have been true.

Basically Characters decide the splits and different alignments and personalities will determine that.


The treasure distribution by the GM could fill an entirely different thread. I think treasure done by the gm should provide be believable within the games context. So if a bad guy has a magic sword he uses it if he can or has a reason he doesn't. And there isn't tons of gold just lying around without a reason. How tailored it is depends on the Gm's World/gaming view.

Later

 

[Thanee]

I'm fine with giving good treasure to whoever can use it the best. That's how we do it.

However, unless this turns out to a somewhat fair distribution by itself, then the remainder of the treasure (sold stuff and gold) should be used to even it out.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

Giving treasure to whomever will best use it is the best idea all way around. If the group is together for a common goal (as most parties are) then distributing the items to the best person can only help the whole group. You and I and Bob are on an island (ala 'Lost' - shaemless plug). We find a bow and arrow, a firearm and a medical bag. We should giver the gun to someone who knows how to use it. Same with the bow and arrow and the medical bag (assuming someone knows how to use it). Anything other than that is kind of silly.

 

[wedgeski]

This is wholly and completely down to the DM. If anyone in the party thinks they're getting a bum deal because all of the good items are being given to other characters, then the DM is doing a poor job. It's that simple. If you have an empathetic DM who even remotely understands group fairness, then, in the long term at least, this problem should never arise. In the short and medium term, every player should understand that, even if they were the only one not to benefit from a juicy item in the last adventure, their turn will come.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think it 100% should be: How the Characters in-game have decieded what to do.

Discuss it IN CHARACTER. If you character feels he's getting a bum deal, tellt he other characters. It is a role playing game after all.

We have done it once a couple of years ago. Someone suggested to do so to bring more roleplay to the game: actually the idea was spawned by the fact that the fighter was getting all the weapons for the only reason that "he was the frontline fighter" and needed magic stuff more than everyone else. The bard then thought it was obvious that since he was very charismatic, the leader and spokesman of the party, he was going to convince the others to give them a larger share. He largely won any check, and also roleplayed the situation quite well. First time the fighter catched the bard alone, he killed him because he was roleplaying his anger

Sharing stuff based on who's going to have more use of them is fair as long as what you find is balanced by the DM towards everyone. Front-line warriors shouldn't get more protections than the archers and spellcaster just because those other stay in the rear lines, after all this is already counted into the class features such as HD and armor use.

If someone is owning much less magic equipment than the others AND much less than the standard amount per level (assuming a standard D&D campaign), he should be entitled to ask that the others provide for his lack, by selling the extra equipment if necessary.