Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Loot Split
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Infiniti2000" data-source="post: 5842885" data-attributes="member: 31734"><p>Your doing this because everyone has to pay 20% of their item's worth, right? Maybe I misunderstand the percentages, so I apologize for that.</p><p> No. It only has to even out over the "long term." IME, this is about 4 levels. You're right that if you want immediate status quo, then it can't be done, even in your system, unless the PC getting the item can afford paying the 20% immediately. That sort of a system really sucks wind, though, because now it's a lot like winning a car in a game show. Sounds great until you get the tax bill. No thanks, I don't want any magic items like that.</p><p></p><p>I'm a little confused by your example. It's incomplete. At level 1, 4/5 PCs get an item, one each of Level 2-5. So, by the time Dalat got his item, there were quite a few additional items to go around, very likely evening things out. And the answer is no, it wouldn't make sense to me for a PC to owe the group anything for a found item (I suppose there might be a corner special case somewhere, but I don't know what). I hate taxes and if you make me frackin pay taxes in a game that isn't called Monopoly, I'm gonna get angry. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p> This is a separate issue. If no one wants to keep the item, the DM should treat it just like gold from he parcel because that's what it becomes. Time for the DM to pick a non-sucky item next time.</p><p></p><p> I think we miscommunicated here. My point was in response to my inference that your system somehow makes it fair that when a party member doesn't get any items from treasure, that the "paying for items" makes it fair. I'm saying that that perception is fundamentally flawed. This has nothing whatsover to do with unbalanced items.</p><p></p><p> Exactly. This proves my point. By "paying off" your items, you will never make your fellow party members balanced with you. They MUST acquire items through treasure as well, AS MUCH as you do. Thus, all this paying out does nothing whatsoever to mitigate unbalancing selections. Nothing. </p><p></p><p> Again, this is a separate point. It's clearly the DM's fault if this happens and it's not for some specific reason (such as righting a previous imbalance or perhaps for temporary story reasons).</p><p></p><p> Oops! Very sorry. Typo, there was a missing NOT. I meant to write "I know you haveN'T said this." I really apologize about that. The next part of the sentence should now make sense. Again, very sorry. My tech writer missed it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":o" title="Eek! :o" data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":o" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Infiniti2000, post: 5842885, member: 31734"] Your doing this because everyone has to pay 20% of their item's worth, right? Maybe I misunderstand the percentages, so I apologize for that. No. It only has to even out over the "long term." IME, this is about 4 levels. You're right that if you want immediate status quo, then it can't be done, even in your system, unless the PC getting the item can afford paying the 20% immediately. That sort of a system really sucks wind, though, because now it's a lot like winning a car in a game show. Sounds great until you get the tax bill. No thanks, I don't want any magic items like that. I'm a little confused by your example. It's incomplete. At level 1, 4/5 PCs get an item, one each of Level 2-5. So, by the time Dalat got his item, there were quite a few additional items to go around, very likely evening things out. And the answer is no, it wouldn't make sense to me for a PC to owe the group anything for a found item (I suppose there might be a corner special case somewhere, but I don't know what). I hate taxes and if you make me frackin pay taxes in a game that isn't called Monopoly, I'm gonna get angry. ;) This is a separate issue. If no one wants to keep the item, the DM should treat it just like gold from he parcel because that's what it becomes. Time for the DM to pick a non-sucky item next time. I think we miscommunicated here. My point was in response to my inference that your system somehow makes it fair that when a party member doesn't get any items from treasure, that the "paying for items" makes it fair. I'm saying that that perception is fundamentally flawed. This has nothing whatsover to do with unbalanced items. Exactly. This proves my point. By "paying off" your items, you will never make your fellow party members balanced with you. They MUST acquire items through treasure as well, AS MUCH as you do. Thus, all this paying out does nothing whatsoever to mitigate unbalancing selections. Nothing. Again, this is a separate point. It's clearly the DM's fault if this happens and it's not for some specific reason (such as righting a previous imbalance or perhaps for temporary story reasons). Oops! Very sorry. Typo, there was a missing NOT. I meant to write "I know you haveN'T said this." I really apologize about that. The next part of the sentence should now make sense. Again, very sorry. My tech writer missed it. :o [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Loot Split
Top