Looting and the State

[Ace]

The Spanish conquistadors, who were almost perfect analogs of D&D adventurers, were expected to set aside "the King's fifth" from any loot they collected.

Thats how I do it.Its usually a tenth or so .

A party of 1-3 level warriors (The default D&D standard) sent into battle with many monsters do not stand a chance of coming out alive --

Something 80% of people in standard D&D are level 1. You can change the assumptions (I have) but you are not playing standard D&D.

A standard warrior 1 human might have Toughness and Weapons Focus Stats 12 physical 10 other HP 10 AC 17 (Scale+ Large Shield +Dex +1) or 18 (Breastplate and Large Shield) Longsword +2/1d8+1

against many monsters they will simply die in droves

better to use adventurers -- if they die so what ? They weren't anyone you trusted anyway.

if you don't let them keep the loot they just won't work for you or worse they may turn on you.

granted good aligned sorts might share the wealth (or be paid by the church or whatever) but the supply of disposable suicidal crazy Paladins is small.

You can play D&D with the Urbis assumptions if you like but the DMG demographics don't support it

In D&D gear means power -- if you don't let people kit up you keep them weak. If they are weak they simply won't go adventuring. NO adventurers means no D&D

Ok you could assume there aren't any freelance adventurers as the state is too strong

If your group wants to play CSI Urbis or Bundeswehr Urbis or whatever thats cool but most D&D groups don't want to IME (YMMV)

D&D is based on an Aerican frontier model and I think it works best in that mode

 

[Merkuri]

You could use a "letters of marque" system, where adventurers pay for the privilage to loot certain places or people.

In Eberron, the Brelish government hands out letters of marque. A concept left over from war times, a traditional letter of marque basically gave one permission to be a pirate or a bandit against a certain group of people, usually an enemy nation's ships. Breland has shifted this concept a little in peacetime and now letters of marque allow one to plunder the continent of Xen'drik. Since they don't really own the whole continent a letter of marque isn't strictly necessary, but you'll be fined and have your treasure confiscated if you return from Xen'drik to a Brelish port with loot but no letter of marque.

 

[Bad Paper]

I just sweep everything under the rug of "this is why you sell things for half-price."

 

[Nyeshet]

Exactly, this question will have a different answer from every DM and possibly in every campaign. Before anything else you need to answer for yourself certain questions.
1.) How large are governments?
2.) How much power is at their disposal?
3.) How far does their physical enforcement reach and how widespread is it?

Depending on the answers it may be reasonable for the fantasy governments in your setting to do such things. In mine I purposely model it on the early bronze age city-state model and the answer is that governments are few, far between, and their reach is short. They aren't modern and they don't have a monopoly on force thus in the face of powerful individuals they aren't going to cause more trouble than the effort will gain them as their already too precarious to risk that.

I tend to do something similar. I use a bronze age model as it allows for vast unexplored regions, and except for a few 'empires' (some of which are really the size of kingdoms or even principalities), most settlements are self-sufficient towns and villages or powerful city-states - that only control the lands within at most a week's ride from their walls. Some of these empires and city-states are near enough to each other that there is little or no wilderness between them, but otherwise PCs are typically working in frontier lands.

Also, I don't think the size of the government is a concern - just its power and its reach. A vast government, lacking both or even either, will not notably affect whether a PC can or cannot realistically keep any loot they find. Either the PC is out of reach, too strong to make obey, or both.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Why aren't adventurers taxed?

Same reason you don't walk up to a sleeping dragon and poke it.

Especially if the dragon is keeping away Horrible Monsters.

Adventurers risk life and limb on a weekly basis to save the commoners. What the state misses out on by taxing treasures they make back by keeping more taxpayers alive and kickin'.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Also, I don't think the size of the government is a concern - just its power and its reach. A vast government, lacking both or even either, will not notably affect whether a PC can or cannot realistically keep any loot they find. Either the PC is out of reach, too strong to make obey, or both.

I meant it in a geographic sense not a number of people or enforcement sense, should have been more clear. Was trying to get at the idea of borders, how much blank ungoverned space is there on the maps. There's a vast difference between Eberron where the geographic borders have been filled in by governments and say the Wilderness of High Fantasy where the governments are little spots on a very large map.

 

[VirgilCaine]

There's also the possibility that the +2 flaming sword you picked up in that dungeon is the royal sword of the middle kingdom, lost generations ago and now the object of a paladin's quest as it is the only thing that can defuse the impending succession war. Give it freely, demand payment, hold it out of pique?

Of course you would give it freely. The king would undoubtedly reward you (unless he likes having stuff not returned to him) for your bravery and service to the royal family...and maybe remember your name for future endeavors.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I tend to do something similar. I use a bronze age model as it allows for vast unexplored regions, and except for a few 'empires' (some of which are really the size of kingdoms or even principalities), most settlements are self-sufficient towns and villages or powerful city-states - that only control the lands within at most a week's ride from their walls. Some of these empires and city-states are near enough to each other that there is little or no wilderness between them, but otherwise PCs are typically working in frontier lands.

Ditto. The typical political power in d&d seems to be a rather limited state with transitory borders, few or far neighbours, with a host of small-to-moderate threats.

This sort of situation could maybe encourage the localised excursions into hostile lands to defeat enemies and collect treasures. As mentioned, the sale at half price can simulate the merchants and tax collectors getting a health cut of the wealth.

 

[Warren Okuma]

Hmmm... the ref screws you by taxing you. Hmmm... I wonder how much loot can you get by taking over the city? Say when you are twentieth level or so...

And bad governments deserve to be overthrown...

Besides things with levels have the best loot, since if they do not have magical equipment they are easier meat than monsters. More XP, less effort or more loot.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Hmmm... the ref screws you by taxing you. Hmmm... I wonder how much loot can you get by taking over the city? Say when you are twentieth level or so...

And bad governments deserve to be overthrown...

So, bad government = governments that tax the PC's, so if the PC's take over, they'd logically abolish all taxes. Then they'd have to spend their loot to pay for public services, ending up with the same net result...

My view on this is that governments will set taxes (if any) at a level low enough that PC's will find it more convenient to pay than to fight. PC's are already rich beyond most commoners' dreams. Nations will also try whatever they can to get PC-types to help them out, and this will give them some ability to deal with "rogue" parties. Keep in mind that nations will have had centuries of experience in dealing with this sort of thing.