So what's gold gonna be for?

[SpiderMonkey]

One of the things we keep hearing about 4E is that the "christmas tree" effect is gone (and good riddance, I say). One of the things that's weird about it is the question of what to do with the gold pieces.

In 1E and 2E, after the first few levels gps were basically for xp and (if you wanted to bother) saving up for a keep. In 3.X, we actually got to put those gold pieces towards character advancement in a well-thought out system that incorporated this accumulation of wealth into developing appropriate challenges.

This, of course, had the unfortunate effect of making the PCs dependent on their wardrobe (according to the RAW, we can quibble about how "good" DMs can tweak it somewhere else). If this is going away though, what do we do with treasure? I *like* getting treasure. It makes your pockets jingle, all jingly like. But if it's just so much debris...

I hear there are still ways to make magic items, but to be honest, I miss the "wow" factor of going out and actually finding one.

I dunno. What do you guys think?

 

[Mercule]

Um... maybe PCs will actually be able to afford to build and maintain a stronghold again?

That's one thing I missed from 1E.

 

[Mark]

If this is going away though, what do we do with treasure? I *like* getting treasure. It makes your pockets jingle, all jingly like.

Indeed and still will, I suppose. I like jingly.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Um... maybe PCs will actually be able to afford to build and maintain a stronghold again?

That's one thing I missed from 1E.

Ditto. If the plan is indeed to have a new DMG every year, then there should be plenty of room to include stronghold and territory rules for high-level characters.

 

[Shroomy]

If the preserve some of the elements from the Weapon of Legacy system, then you will need gold to unlock the powers of your magic items. I hope they do implement some of the WoL into the magic item system of 4e (maybe redo some of the balancing the items so wielding one doesn't seem so onerous). Based on their many appearances in late 3.5e products, I do expect to see this in 4e.

 

[SpiderMonkey]

If the preserve some of the elements from the Weapon of Legacy system, then you will need gold to unlock the powers of your magic items. I hope they do implement some of the WoL into the magic item system of 4e (maybe redo some of the balancing the items so wielding one doesn't seem so onerous). Based on their many appearances in late 3.5e products, I do expect to see this in 4e.

I could get behind that. I really liked the idea of the legacy weapons, but it wasn't implemented quite the way I'd have liked it (too much book keeping, too much of a double-edged sword *ahem*). If the kernel of the idea was put into 4E and streamlined, it might be love at first sight, particularly if it's how you describe it.

 

[Morrus]

It's for food. You eat it, and it "charges up" your powers.

 

[Lanefan]

If the preserve some of the elements from the Weapon of Legacy system, then you will need gold to unlock the powers of your magic items.

I'm not familiar with Weapons of Legacy, but what's written here tells me that not only do you have to pay for your items (as part of your treasury share, usually), but you have to pay to use them as well? Is that how it works? If so, that'll add to the bookkeeping...

Another place to spend gold is in training, which really should (but probably won't) become a core rule.

Lanefan

 

[blargney the second]

Bling!

 

[Mouseferatu]

Another place to spend gold is in training, which really should (but probably won't) become a core rule.

Oh God, no. Keep training as far away from my core rules as possible, thanks. Maybe--maybe--as a purely optional rule, fully labeled as such, buried somewhere in the DMG.

But as an assumed part of the default core? There aren't enough syllables in the word "No" to fully express the no-ness of it.