Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pax" data-source="post: 1085343" data-attributes="member: 6875">Re: Re: Re: starting gold, and how it's messed up.Then where's the problem?Then the DM needs to put out more treasure.  If his PCs regularly find, say, half the treasure ... then the DM needs to double the treasure he puts in each place.The treasure per encountr is an AVERAGE value, not an absolute.  And it's what's supposed to make it's way into the PC's hands, not merely into the DM's notes.  MY DM nots, for example, often make mention of the treasuries of often-wealthy nations.  Does all that count against what I've given the PCs, simply because it's in my notes, associated with a map location?Good lord, I hope not, or they won't see a copper piece until they rob the local king ... !!Don't use WOTC adventures, then.  IMO, they tend to overbalance to one-shot and other expendable items because they're trrified of being labelled "monty haul" by giving out coin, tradegoods, jewelry, art objects, and so on.I don't see a problem with this concept.  Why do you?Simple rule of thumb: if you, as DM, know that the party will NOT use a magic, say ... warhammer ... then only count it's SALE value towards the treasure allotment for any encounter(s) thatinclude that warhammer.Only of the DM is a real bastard, and enjoys screwing the players.No offense, but ... my first 3E GM played this way, and it's a very 2E playstyle: he handed out a few items here nad there, and we were supposed to be grateful for every damned +1 dagger.  The problem is, 3E isn't built the same as 2E, and handing out treasure needs to be done entirely differently.Anecdote time: the DM threw our party against a Diamond Golem.  We ddn't have a SINGLE weapon which could pierce it's not-inconsiderable DR.  Not one.  And we weren't high enough level to MAKE one on the spot with GMW, either.Of course, there was an outcry -- faced with a foe who dropepd our PRIMARY fighter in one full attack routine, realising that even HIS weapon (then the best in the party, a +2 at the time) wasn't enough to punch through the DR ... we were absolutely TICKED that he'd throw us against such a beast, with no appreciable hope of victory (we had to run away, and that hosed our quest but GOOD).He looked at us like we were ungrateful @$$wipes for daring to complain we couldn't HOPE to hurt the golem, with the attitude of "what?  I gave you a +(whatever) weapon two sessions ago ... that woudl work against this!"*SIGH* ... nevermind that NOONE in the party wielded anything REMOTELY like it (every one of us was either a spellcaster - and thus loathe to enter melee with a friggin' golem - or had expended a not-inconsiderable number of feats on fairly SPECIFIC weapon types (exotic WPs, WFocus feats, WSpecialisation for one or two of us).  Nevermind the fact that the weapon (a warhammer, ofc) was useless to us in general, and so, we'd sold it -- which bought, amusingly, the +2 weapon ineffectually wielded by our party's "anchor" fighter.Yet, his position was, he'd deigned to place a single weapon of sufficient power to bypass the Golem, and counted the full value of the weapon against our cumulative treasure even though we'd sold it for half.  A SINGLE weapon, for a party of six, half of themfighter-types.WTF, the rest of us should've made popcorn, and watched the one properly-armed fighter get turned to hamburger in solo combat with a critter 3 or 4 CR's above his level?Well, when all was said and done, can you say "H.M.S. Bounty" ... ?  I dunno about you be we did.And the paradigm you're espousing was the one we as a group had to rebel against.Only if the DM is a bastard and has been screwing his players (see anecdote above).Only if the DM is a bastard and enjoys screwing his players (see anecdote above).  If a player can be expected to sell item X, then item X should only count for it's SALE VALUE, not it's purchase value.  After all, regardles sof the shape ofit ... if you hand a double-sword-wielding fighter a +4 Warhammer worth 32,300-odd gold, you can EXPECT them to sell the damned thing, so all you're REALLY doing is giving them 16,250-odd gold, in a hammer-shaped ingot.Again ... only if the DM is a bastard and enjoys screwing his players.The Wealth-by-level tables assume and intend that players have THAT much gold in stuff ON HAND, not "accumulated to date".  If you sunder the Barbarians +5 Battleaxe, you're fairly obligated to arrange for hm to find something that will make up the general value (though not, of course, identical).And with the specificity that many characters get in terms of the weapons they wield -- which is a near-inevitable outgrowth of the feat system -- it woudl be wholly and grossly unfair to not either (A) tailor the found magic items to them as much as you can swallow, and/or (B) only count the stuff you can about GUARANTEE they will sell, as the SALE value, not the market value, towards what they have been doled out.After all, after the fighter takes exotic weapon (double sword), two-weapon fighting, improved two-weapon fighting, greater two-weapon fighting, weapon focus (double-sword), weapon specialisation (double-sword), and improved critical (double-sword) ... and they spend their saved-up gold on a +2/+2 double-sword of force ...... you'd have to be friggin' NUTS to expect them to KEEP a +5 flaming greatsword[/b].  Even if it DOES have 3 more enhancement.  And EXPECIALLY with the changes to tehcurrent DR system.And you'd have to be a real rat-bastard GM (in a BAD way, rather than the exected half-funny way), in order to count the gratsword's FULL value against the treasure you hand out to the party, if they DO turn around and sell it.You might as well cut all COIN treasure in half, too, at that point.</blockquote>

Verification