Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 5371729" data-attributes="member: 92511">This is just a bunch of observations as:a) I presume, this &quot;deck of cards&quot; business is referring to 4e, which I really know nothing about. b) I pretty much always randomize my treasure to be completely dependent on the encounter/situation/location/etc. Simply defeating a troll out in a corridor doesn't get you the trolls treasure unless you find its lair, for example.I will say, other than the &quot;neat/nifty&quot; player involvement angle, it IS merely presenting the &quot;illusion of transparency&quot; as you aptly put it. The player rolling randomly for themselves vs. you rolling on a random table for them. So, I think a lot of people (DMs) would say &quot;thanks but no thanks&quot; based on the amount of work generating the tables/decks would be when they could just as easily use already established published &quot;random loot&quot; tables.Given the feedback you've received from your players and that they enjoy it (the delusion that they hae some &quot;control&quot; over a die roll) then &quot;Good DM&quot; points for you for engaging and making your players enjoy themselves at your game. I will certainly give you kudos for that even though this &quot;system&quot; is not something I would opt to use myself.Another observation...an almost assured chance at finding a magic item in EVERY locked and trapped chest?! I think that is...what's &quot;more than generous&quot;?&nbsp; 11% every locked/trapped chest is going to have magic items? Now, I'm ALL FOR high magic settings and characters dripping with magic items. So, if that's the style of campaign world you're working with, then fine. But I feel many other DMs here would find this 11% &quot;chance&quot; per chest to be very (too) high.And on a &quot;simply curious&quot; note...why when generating the decks with all of the magic items for &quot;arms, hands, feet, etc...&quot; did you NOT include rings?Seems to me rings, especially in a &quot;high occasion of magic items world&quot; would be a very common find! So, I'm just wondering your thought process for excluding them.As I said, your players like it and you don't mind the work, have a ball. But not something I think I would use when a) I distribute treasure in ways that make sense to me and b) there are other pre-made random tables already to work from.Have fun and happy treasure hunting.--Steel DragonsEDIT PS: And don't sweat the lack of responses. Sometimes people have stuff to say (in abundance) and sometimes they just don't. My thread on the &quot;Plots and Places&quot; board, <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/plots-places/284160-orea-world-its-people.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/plots-places/284160-orea-world-its-people.html</a> currently has 987 views...and has garndered not a single comment to any of the content...other than someone I'd never seen on here before telling me &quot;thank you&quot; and subsequently deleting the post, so I think it was a mistake.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 5371729, member: 92511"] This is just a bunch of observations as: a) I presume, this "deck of cards" business is referring to 4e, which I really know nothing about. b) I pretty much always randomize my treasure to be completely dependent on the encounter/situation/location/etc. Simply defeating a troll out in a corridor doesn't get you the trolls treasure unless you find its lair, for example. I will say, other than the "neat/nifty" player involvement angle, it IS merely presenting the "illusion of transparency" as you aptly put it. The player rolling randomly for themselves vs. you rolling on a random table for them. So, I think a lot of people (DMs) would say "thanks but no thanks" based on the amount of work generating the tables/decks would be when they could just as easily use already established published "random loot" tables. Given the feedback you've received from your players and that they enjoy it (the delusion that they hae some "control" over a die roll) then "Good DM" points for you for engaging and making your players enjoy themselves at your game. I will certainly give you kudos for that even though this "system" is not something I would opt to use myself. Another observation...an almost assured chance at finding a magic item in EVERY locked and trapped chest?! I think that is...what's "more than generous"? 11% every locked/trapped chest is going to have magic items? Now, I'm ALL FOR high magic settings and characters dripping with magic items. So, if that's the style of campaign world you're working with, then fine. But I feel many other DMs here would find this 11% "chance" per chest to be very (too) high. And on a "simply curious" note...why when generating the decks with all of the magic items for "arms, hands, feet, etc..." did you NOT include rings? Seems to me rings, especially in a "high occasion of magic items world" would be a [I]very[/I] common find! So, I'm just wondering your thought process for excluding them. As I said, your players like it and you don't mind the work, have a ball. But not something I think I would use when a) I distribute treasure in ways that make sense to me and b) there are other pre-made random tables already to work from. Have fun and happy treasure hunting. --Steel Dragons EDIT PS: And don't sweat the lack of responses. Sometimes people have stuff to say (in abundance) and sometimes they just don't. My thread on the "Plots and Places" board, [url]http://www.enworld.org/forum/plots-places/284160-orea-world-its-people.html[/url] currently has 987 views...and has garndered not a single comment to any of the content...other than someone I'd never seen on here before telling me "thank you" and subsequently deleting the post, so I think it was a mistake. [/QUOTE]

Verification