Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 8261358" data-attributes="member: 20564">If you can get agreement that's prefered.&nbsp; But we usually do it out of character so that everyone is satisfied.&nbsp; Having an ongoing irritant such as one player unhappy with how treasure is divided is actively losing the game - with winning defined as having fun.&nbsp; Since different personality characters can easily want to do it in different ways, we smooth it out, often in session 0.&nbsp; Just like our usual no PvP rule includes no stealing from other PCs.No problem looting the bandits and then turnign them in for a reward.&nbsp; It's just gold gotten earlier, good for the party.&nbsp; I can easily adjust future loot if it's a game changing amount, but otherwise be enterprising and clever.It's artificial in the same way AC is.&nbsp; And they have rather different outcomes and non-monetary results, no one would mistake one for the other.4e introduced the concept as treasure packets, where you aren't locking players into certain types of actions and plans to get material rewards.&nbsp; It's extremely freeing in how you play your character.&nbsp; Otherwise you get what you reward and players will often eschew options like stealth, diplomacy, bribery, or even just avoiding encounters strategically because they don't want to miss out.I find old school &quot;if you do any solution but combat you will be penalized by missing out on rewards&quot; games to be stifling now that I've experienced the freedom treasure packets brought in 4e.The Masks of the Imperium just about to hit the one year mark and there's plenty ahead of them.&nbsp; The last three D&amp;D/D20 campaigns I ran were 4 years (D&amp;D 3.0-&gt;3,5), 7 years (D&amp;D 3.5) and 4.5 years (13th Age), so I wouldn't expect it to be a short campaign.&nbsp; Curious what makes you think that?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 8261358, member: 20564"] If you can get agreement that's prefered. But we usually do it out of character so that everyone is satisfied. Having an ongoing irritant such as one player unhappy with how treasure is divided is actively losing the game - with winning defined as having fun. Since different personality characters can easily want to do it in different ways, we smooth it out, often in session 0. Just like our usual no PvP rule includes no stealing from other PCs. No problem looting the bandits and then turnign them in for a reward. It's just gold gotten earlier, good for the party. I can easily adjust future loot if it's a game changing amount, but otherwise be enterprising and clever. It's artificial in the same way AC is. And they have rather different outcomes and non-monetary results, no one would mistake one for the other. 4e introduced the concept as treasure packets, where you aren't locking players into certain types of actions and plans to get material rewards. It's extremely freeing in how you play your character. Otherwise you get what you reward and players will often eschew options like stealth, diplomacy, bribery, or even just avoiding encounters strategically because they don't want to miss out. I find old school "if you do any solution but combat you will be penalized by missing out on rewards" games to be stifling now that I've experienced the freedom treasure packets brought in 4e. The Masks of the Imperium just about to hit the one year mark and there's plenty ahead of them. The last three D&D/D20 campaigns I ran were 4 years (D&D 3.0->3,5), 7 years (D&D 3.5) and 4.5 years (13th Age), so I wouldn't expect it to be a short campaign. Curious what makes you think that? [/QUOTE]

Verification