Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="airwalkrr" data-source="post: 5845041" data-attributes="member: 12460">I will address a few general points that have been brought up below:"WBL already existed in AD&D because earned gold equaled XP."This is not the same thing. In the first place, not every DM ran the game that way. Second of all, there was a large amount of variance in how the DM chose to run the game. If the PCs faced monsters with relatively low levels of treasure, then they could earn most of their XP by defeating monsters and doing other tasks. If the PCs faced monsters with lots of treasure, then they could earn most of their XP from treasure alone. Finally, even if the rudimentary or understated assumption was there that PCs of a certain level would have a certain amount of wealth, that did not assure that the PCs were properly equipped for challenges. The PCs could still be under or over-equipped. The point is, the system of judging character power even in part by wealth is fundamentally flawed because wealth can be used for many different things and acquired in different proportions."4e allowed for inherent bonuses so you did not need +X magic items in your game if you did not want them."I think this sort of misses the point of the thread. Let us put aside for the moment that inherent bonuses was an option in the DMG2 (and primarily intended for use in Dark Sun) and not the DMG. A +X to hit or a +X to defense or whatever was still a necessary part of the calculation to "balance" things out. A +1 to hit and damage, whether it comes from a sword or a system designed to compensate for a missing sword, should not be built-in to the expectations for the game. It should be a BONUS. That is, it should be a treasure, a reward, a magical tool of great importance on top of your character's already heroic ability. And PCs and DMs alike should treat it with the wonder and respect it deserves. It should be a merry occasion when one is found, and a great tragedy when one is lost. It should be a tool that gives PCs an edge against their foes, not an expected part of their adventuring experience."So how do you balance items like this anyway if there is not a WBL guideline?"My whole point is that you do not need a WBL guideline at all, and such a chart is misleading in the first place. What there needs to be instead is an extensive discussion in the DMG of appropriate treasure rewards for appropriate challenges, the effects of certain magic items on the game, and ways to manage PC inventory so that magic items remain both cool and impressive, but not something that is going to throw game balance out of whack. Several side-bars from designers who have run games themselves should describe experiences which taught the designers lessons in their own games about the things to avoid and things that worked well in wealth distribution. But the designers need to avoid a "one-size fits all" chart that gives the perception that a certain amount of wealth equals a certain amount of power and that only that amount of wealth is fair. If there even is a chart at all (and I am not sold on the idea that there needs to be one in this regard), it should be less specific and give very broad guidelines. As an example:Level 1 - no magic items, just mundane equipment, possibly one masterkwork or exceptional itemLevel 2 - 0-1 minor magic items and 0-1 pieces of masterwork or exceptional equipmentLevel 3 - 0-2 minor magic items and 1-2 pieces of masterwork or exceptional equipmentLevel 4 - 1-2 minor magic items and 1-3 pieces of masterwork or exceptional equipmentSomething along these lines would be much better as a guideline for DMs than a WBL chart and would be much less misleading. It would offer the perception that there is a wide variety of what is acceptable and expected in a game. But I still do not like the whole idea of a chart in the first place because 1) you cannot keep it away from the eyes of players forever and 2) when the players do see it, they will (intentionally or not) judge the "fairness" of your game based on how closely you follow that chart.So truthfully, I say ditch the chart in favor of a more candid discussion on treasure awards in a chapter of the DMG devoted to rewards. An oversimplified chart gives false impressions and has the potential to delude player and DM alike into thinking there is balance in the game. Give the DM some helpful guidelines on how to manage treasure and then let the DM decide what is appropriate from there.</blockquote>

Verification