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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ulthwithian" data-source="post: 4267694" data-attributes="member: 60612">I for one am finding this conversation fascinating from many angles, so I would ask that you not bow out, Malraux.It seems the concern is about the liquidity of wealth rather than wealth itself.  Adventurers will always be wealthy, in the sense that their net worth is extremely high compared to almost any non-adventurer.  But that wealth is all tied up in their gear.  Therefore, the most straightforward answer is to only give liquid assets (i.e., money) to pay for recurring costs (e.g., food).The reason that you have the 'poor adventurer' archetype is that the adventurer in question is not willing to liquidate his wealth.  I can't speak to Conan, but as for the Dreaming Dark series, most of the characters could easily solve their wealth liquidity.  One of them has an adamantine dagger that could feed him forever, if it were sold and the proceeds invested anywhere near wisely.  Therefore, in no way can they be considered 'poor'.  They choose to eat summoned food rather than have liquid assets ready to hand to deal with that issue because they value their nonliquid assets more than their liquid equivalent.It seems fairly clear that the 4E designers put a price tag on magic items to facilitate the gaining of gear, and to allow economies to be in place for those who wish to do so.  The reason characters receive liquid wealth is so that they can translate it into nonliquid assets of their choice, which is not the case with magic items they just 'find'.  If the players in the game want their characters to take that wealth and then use it in an unintended fashion in the game, then there is a concern.For myself, by training I am aware of this issues.  I'm not that worried that much about them in game.  I would be worried if someone tried to take out a loan to buy an inn using his magic sword as collateral.  As an exit strategy in the game, that's fine.  For an 'active adventurer', it makes very little sense in the genre.</blockquote>

Verification