Player Problems with Character Wealth

[Metus]

My players regularly chew me out because their characters do not have the "appropriate" character wealth, as seen on pg. 135 of the 3.5 DMG. At 8th level, one character had 13k worth of items and another 16k. The players whole-heartedly believe it severely handicaps their characters' performance, and that the challenge ratings for their level are unbalanced due to their lack of funds.

I think the wealth is fine as is. I don't think that the chart in the DMG is supposed to be followed to the letter - it's just a guideline, and if you don't have that much (or if you have more), it's not a big deal. Obviously, my players believe otherwise.

So, after getting another earful from them at tonight's game, I decided I would see how other DMs and players were handling the wealth. As a player, do your characters have around the same amount of wealth as listed on the chart? As a DM, do you always make sure your players have such? I understand there would be a definite difference for low-powered or high-powered campaigns, but I'm just talking about regular D&D.

Your thoughts?

(As an aside, I'm sure some are thinking, "It's just a matter of what you and your players are happy with." That's all well and good, but the amount of character wealth ties in with the game mechanics to a certain extent, and so it's more an issue of game balance then preference.)

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

You seem to know the answer. It is the level you are comfortable with. But yes, you do need to keep in mind that CRs are assuming characters are equipped fairly close to the proper level.

 

[MerricB]

I'm lucky enough to have a group that doesn't compare such wealth so much...

Actually, I do think that it can be an advantage: it gives you an idea when you're weighting the treasure a little too much towards one character or another, or when you're just not giving out enough.

(Players will rarely complain when you give out more than the standard, after all!)

Cheers!

 

[Mouseferatu]

The CRs are determined using the amounts given in the DMG as a baseline.

But...

So long as you adjust your playing style accordingly, there's no reason you can't run a game with far lower or far higher amounts of magic items. That's entirely a DM call, so long as you don't use it as an excuse to lord it over the PCs.

And frankly, I think it's a rotten thing for players to whine about. But that's just IMO, obviously.

 

[Crothian]

I agree, I don't even use it as a guideline. I just hand out the treasure I want them to have. I don't need a book telling me how much treasure to hand out.

Solution: Give them the treasure amonth they want, just make them less useful. For instance all 5k items are not created equal. If they want to sell the items, give them like one tenth what its work, have the current economy be a buyers market.

 

[spunky_mutters]

I find that I can give my players rewards straight out of the DMG, and they still end up with less than their level average. In a recent session they were forced to leave 25,000 gp behind (I had aggregated all the gold from a settlement into a treasure room) when they were chased off. The room is now hip deep in demon-moss, so they're not likely to go back for it. That and money they spend getting raised really eats into their budget. I end up actually having to beef up the treasure I dish out just to keep them from falling off the curve.

 

[Owen K.C. Stephens]

A group that is seriously below the level noted in the DMG are underpowered. it does make it difficult for them to face some things of their CR. For example, when groups get magic weapon, when they can afford ghost touch of holy magic weapons, and when they can afford adamantine weapons has a direct relation to when they are expected to bypass the DR of various creatures rather than punch through it.

A GM can run a game with lower gp levels, but that;s all he's changing, he's asking them to face things more powerful thanh they are prepared for. So if you are taking their pverty into account, they're fine. If you're not, they may have a point.

It also can play havoc with class balance. Wizards often depend on wands and scrolls to manage multipel encounters in a day. Non-spellcasters depend on other magic items to keep up with spellcasters in single encounters. Reducing them doesn't abalnce these groups, but cause two imbalances.

Owen K.C. Stephens

 

[Numion]

I give out the standard wealth, and allow new characters to start with about the recommended level (or usually for one level less). I'm not too keen on bookkeeping, so I rarely count what the PCs have and neither do they.

But, if your players are unhappy .. why not give them the standard amount? It's not a big issue, and could prevent a lot of crap later on.

 

[BSF]

Character wealth definitely factors into CR's. It is quite possible to run a low-wealth campaign, but you do need to be a little more cognizant that the PCs might not be able to handle the same CR that the baseline assumes.

Lookout for things like DR. Be aware that your PCs might not have as many expendable magic items. Keep a little closer eye on challenges and you can do fine. Especially if you run a game where the opponents are classed humanoids.

If you are already keeping this in mind, your players have no real reason to gripe. If you aren't doing this, you need to start or you need to equalize the wealth. Otherwise you are looking for an inadvertant TPK.

 

[Frostmarrow]

My group is seriously impoverished. My character doesn't own a thing although he's fifth level. But that's okay with me. I prefer a low magic campaign anyway. It does put us at a disadvantage when it comes to CR and encounters however. We need to be extra clever to make it work - but it can't be done without sacrifices. Last session the paladin died and the DMs saw to it that he was raised by his church. -So in conclusion: magic is real and powerful but it's not in our hands. Neat-o.