To Reimburse or Not to Reimburse?

[Tequila Sunrise]

I've little to no sympathy for pcs that are broke or under-equipped. Go on a damn quest for loot, then!

Damn straight, that's the D&D way!

*looks over a mountain of evidence in published modules, LFR campaign, DMG treasure suggestions, etc*

I'm pretty sure the default assumptions are very much not 'The players choose exactly what they get at all times'

Published mods are notorious for giving too little loot that isn't tailored to individual groups, as the DM is expected to do. I've never played a Living game, but I imagine they have similar problems. As for the DMG guidelines:

The trickiest part of awarding treasure is determining what magic items to give out. Tailor these items to your party of characters. Remember that these are supposed to be items that excite the characters, items they want to use rather than sell or disenchant. If none of the characters in your 6th-level party uses a longbow, don't put a 10th-level longbow in your dungeon as treasure.

The next paragraph then goes on to suggest asking players for wish lists so that they can get just what they want.

So like I said, it appears that players are supposed to get all items useful to their characters -- if not exactly what they want. Couple this with the PHB's explicit mention of enhancement bonuses, and how the PCs need them, and we get some pretty straightforward guidelines to ensure that players always have level-appropriate and useful loot. If I'm missing something, please point it out.

 

[S'mon]

I've noticed before that the 4e DMG has a lot of prescriptive statements that are directly contradicted elsewhere in the text. With no principle of abrogation, you can take from it a widely differing range of play styles. Most notably the stuff from "D&D for Dummies" takes a much more open, laissez-faire approach to DMing, while some of the 4e-specific bits seem to advocate a very tightly constrained GMing style.

Edit: I just got the 4e DMG2 and it's similar. Sometimes it seems that the different authors are talking about different games!

Personally I wish there were less "Dos" and "Don'ts" and more "If you do this, be aware that..." or "We suggest..." - The writing style of 4e put me off running the game for a year, until I realised it played much much better than it read, and was a far more robust system than the advice seemed to indicate.

 

[AllisterH]

So like I said, it appears that players are supposed to get all items useful to their characters -- if not exactly what they want. Couple this with the PHB's explicit mention of enhancement bonuses, and how the PCs need them, and we get some pretty straightforward guidelines to ensure that players always have level-appropriate and useful loot. If I'm missing something, please point it out.

I read it totally differently.

If nobody in the party uses a longbow, then don't bother handing OUT a longbow which I agree with in most cases.

However, if there is a longsword wielder in the party, ANY magic longsword is a good treasure. It doesn't mean you get the EXACT magic property but something that the PC could use.

 

[keterys]

I read it totally differently.

If nobody in the party uses a longbow, then don't bother handing OUT a longbow which I agree with in most cases.

However, if there is a longsword wielder in the party, ANY magic longsword is a good treasure. It doesn't mean you get the EXACT magic property but something that the PC could use.

Exactly! Similarly, the wish lists let you avoid items that no one would use at all, but they hardly mean that you won't be purchasing items. Especially if multiple people want the same item.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I read it totally differently.

If nobody in the party uses a longbow, then don't bother handing OUT a longbow which I agree with in most cases.

However, if there is a longsword wielder in the party, ANY magic longsword is a good treasure. It doesn't mean you get the EXACT magic property but something that the PC could use.

That's how I read it as well. Maybe I've been wording my posts confusingly, because some readers seem to have missed the comment before "if not exactly what they want" -- the "all useful items" [though not necessarily exactly what the players want] is equally important.

In other words, 4e suggests two ways to hand out loot: In the first the DM simply ensures that the long sword wielder gets a new long sword every five levels, for example. In the second, the DM gives the players exactly what they want via wish lists. Either way, there won't be much selling of items -- which is the assumption that I wrote my WBL charts under.

 

[firesnakearies]

I really dislike the idea of tailoring magic item finds to the PCs. It's too metagamey and fake for my tastes. I understand that many people do find such a system enjoyable, but for me, it's just not as fun. That's true whether I'm a player or a DM.


$

 

[Dausuul]

I really dislike the idea of tailoring magic item finds to the PCs. It's too metagamey and fake for my tastes. I understand that many people do find such a system enjoyable, but for me, it's just not as fun. That's true whether I'm a player or a DM.
$

I agree. I hate wish lists. If you want Item X that much, that's why we have item creation rules; make it yourself. Otherwise, you find what you find and make the best use of it that you can. That's part of the fun.

 

[firesnakearies]

I agree. I hate wish lists. If you want Item X that much, that's why we have item creation rules; make it yourself. Otherwise, you find what you find and make the best use of it that you can. That's part of the fun.

Yes, that's exactly how I feel.


$

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I really dislike the idea of tailoring magic item finds to the PCs. It's too metagamey and fake for my tastes. I understand that many people do find such a system enjoyable, but for me, it's just not as fun. That's true whether I'm a player or a DM.


$

It is metagamey, but it doesn't bother me, 'cause so are many accepted traditions of D&D: usually/always encountering challenges that are tough enough to learn from but not enough to kill you, high level NPCs and/or torch-wielding mobs somehow haven't exterminated the monsters already OR the monsters somehow haven't exterminated humanity/demihumanity, "I'm tougher and better than everyone else because I'm a PC, but for no solid in-game reason," etc...

What bothers me a hundred times more than wish lists are "I can throw a hundred knives in one round if there are a hundred foes nearby, but otherwise can only throw one" powers that don't even make sense within the context of D&D's wackiness.

 

[MoxieFu]

Is it just me or wasn't 4e supposed to get RID of the Christmas Tree Effect? All this talk about Wish Lists sure makes it sound like Christmas to me.

How is this any better, or even different?