What does a DM owe his players?/ Are the rules written in stone?

[Keifer113]

From a recent experience of mine, I was very surprised to see from several players dismay that I would not give them the so-called appropriate level of magic items/gold piece value (whatever that chart says) for 10th level characters.

I did not give them the option to purchase what items they wanted because then you end up with players tailoring their characters abilities and the items for a complete synergy. Had the characters been played from 1st level, they would have totally been upto the mercy of what I, or another DM, had given them. You could also end up with a player buying a game breaking item ( but this is rare).

I did not just give them the items I felt they would need or should have because I feel that by earning the items as part of the adventure, it would add to the character of the item, and give them some back story. "Oh yeah, I got this sword from the DM" is not as cool as "I got this sword from a bunch of trolls!"

So, in short, my question is this. I feel the players felt they were owed magic items, and felt they were owed appropriate magic items of their choosing. I also feel that they felt that the idea that PC's of that level NEED magic items to be good characters or to be able to contribute was a rule of the game. IMHO the rules are more like guidelines.

What are your thoughts?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

From a recent experience of mine, I was very surprised to see from several players dismay that I would not give them the so-called appropriate level of magic items/gold piece value (whatever that chart says) for 10th level characters.

I did not give them the option to purchase what items they wanted because then you end up with players tailoring their characters abilities and the items for a complete synergy. Had the characters been played from 1st level, they would have totally been upto the mercy of what I, or another DM, had given them. You could also end up with a player buying a game breaking item ( but this is rare).

I did not just give them the items I felt they would need or should have because I feel that by earning the items as part of the adventure, it would add to the character of the item, and give them some back story. "Oh yeah, I got this sword from the DM" is not as cool as "I got this sword from a bunch of trolls!"

So, in short, my question is this. I feel the players felt they were owed magic items, and felt they were owed appropriate magic items of their choosing. I also feel that they felt that the idea that PC's of that level NEED magic items to be good characters or to be able to contribute was a rule of the game. IMHO the rules are more like guidelines.

What are your thoughts?

I no longer run DnD. The magic item issue is a big part of it.

If you're going to give PCs less magic items, you should tell your players ahead of time. You might notice fewer light fighters or non-spellcasters or other concepts that get screwed in low item games. (It's a bit like powering down fighters and powering up mages. You wouldn't do that without telling your players first, right?)

To put it another way, all rules are guidelines. The rules for fighter hp, for instance, are as much as a guideline as the rules for magic item value by level. (This is just my opinion, though.) It's just harder to get magic item values "right". If you are going to give fighters more hp, or less hp, per level, you would tell your players, so you should do the same thing with magic items.

Furthermore, it is my experience that giving out the wrong amount of magic items will cause big balance issues, larger than many DMs can handle. (These issues are generally defensive - saves and AC are screwed more than save DCs and attack bonuses, so while you can just weaken encounters, it's often unsatisfying for the player. "Dang it, why don't the monsters ever miss hitting my Dex 20 elven rogue!?" etc.) Doing so requires the DM to put a lot of work into balancing their campaign. If you're not using other house rules like class bonuses to AC or what not, and are simply reducing the amount of magic items your PCs get to use, then you're hurting their balance and a lot of character concepts. It also makes players wonder how their characters survived to 10th-level ... well, it would make me wonder that anyway.

If you're uncomfortable with the massive amounts of magic items you're expected to give your PCs, maybe you should try another system. I recommend Iron Heroes as the solution that presents you with the least amount of work. I am uncomfortable with the magic item glut and found the solution in D20 Modern.

 

[Hussar]

Wut the headless guy said.

OTOH, how much less are we talking about here? 10th level characters with zero magic items? That's not very realistic.

 

[Glyfair]

From a recent experience of mine, I was very surprised to see from several players dismay that I would not give them the so-called appropriate level of magic items/gold piece value (whatever that chart says) for 10th level characters.

You owe it to your players to let them know what sort of game your are going to run. You especially owe it to them to let them know where you are going to significantly vary from the assumed standards.

I think a DM also owes listening to the players concerns and wants about a game. He also owes it to them to explain his reasoning behind certain "metaconcepts" of them game, at hte appropriate time.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

In general, if the character is starting at more than 2nd level or so, there is a presumption that he is not a babe in the woods, and that at some point in his prior experiences he would have picked up the odd trinket. That doesn't mean the DM has to give them carte blanche to go on a DMG shopping spree. It does mean he should work with the player to come up with appropriate kit. It doesn't have to be 'by the book' equal to the wealth guidelines, but it should be more than base starting money, for certain.

If the group has been playing together for a while and there is a level of trust, starting everyone off in the classic 'you wake up on a slaver's galley with no gear' type scenario is certainly permissible, but you have to be sure that everyone is up for that ahead of time.

Like it or not, basic D&D presumes a certain amount of equipment at each level. It's certainly possible to lower that and lower encounters correspondingly.

What's crucial, though, is making sure that everyone plays by the same rules. If you're inserting a new character into a long running campaign, for instance, you have to equip them in some appropriate manner, or the player is going to be bored off his butt watching the others get all the glory.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Wut the headless guy said.

To be technical, it's the torso and limbs that are missing. Kind of hard to be psychic without a head!

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Are your players having fun?
If so, I don't think you have a problem.

Are your players not having fun?
Then I think you need to discuss it with them and maybe not us.

As the DM, you can have a lot of ideas about how things should be. And if this does not differ too much from your players, they will enjoy your vision. However, if there is differentiation between what you envision and what they expect, then something needs to be sorted out. If you're looking for justification of your position, I'm sure some here will back you 100% while others will call you a scrooge. However is this supposed justification going to enhance your game?

I think you have to tread a careful line between what's reasonable and what's just the DM putting on the "fun police" cap. For example, what if one of the characters wanted a crafting feat to produce their magic item of choice? Would you let them do this? As soon as players feel that they have a lack of autonomy over "their" creations they lose interest in "their" game.

As DM I think you can ask a lot of your players but in turn you have to give quite a bit too. Take for example my group of players. I told them we were going to play our new campaign using the rules as written using the core rules and the complete series. While some baulked more than others, they accepted this decision. In turn, I have given them opportunities to sporadically get stuff from outside the norm making their characters feel special - having something in the game that no one else does. Other elements in the game that made me hesitate, I let through on this same basis.

I suppose what I'm saying is that even though you are the DM with your vision; your players are your partners in the game and they have their own visions. If you start thinking that yours is more important than theirs, the game starts to develop an imbalance that will show itself in player or DM satisifaction. It's all about treading the line.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Doctor Shaft]

There should be a negotiation.

As DM, it's important to, as others have said, let everyone know ahead of time what your plans are. This is like any kind of transaction, whether business or pleasure. Let people know ahead of time what your intentions are. If it's going to be controlled magic environment, let people know.

On the other side of it, negotiation is good so that everyone is kept happy. If players can offer a suggestion or desire for their character that they see as fitting in your framework of the world, then you can work that out and provide it to them at the appropriate time.

They know ahead of time what to expect in terms of how treasure is doled out. You don't have to work as hard, sometimes, to come up with the items they might receive.

I can understand your position on not giving out certain items though. But if you're not going to let them "shop," I would suggest at least being very creative about what kind of item you give them, rather than just the standard "Ooh, a +1 sword."

The sword from the Troll only has meaning if it doesn't seem like you're mercifully giving them that +1 item that was simply denied them for oh so long.

 

[Uder]

You're right, although letting the party pick their own items can be more convenient.

Try limiting them by only allowing one item at a set percentage of their loot value, and give the rest as random rolls. New PCs in my game come in one full level lower than the lowest party member, with full gold by the book. No more than one item can cost more than 20% of the total, nothing more than 50%.

If you're really enterprising you could roll up 13 encounters of the same EL for each level, then let the player choose a quarter of the loot.

Or you can give them nothing. Okay, maybe give 'em a little laugh.

As long as you make sure to tailor encounters to their true abilities (as opposed to what the game assumes PCs will be able to do) you should be fine even if you stiff 'em and give them random 1st-level starting gold. To mollify the player, there's always that old line, "well, I'm shorting you now because there are some really good treasure hauls in the next couple of adventures...".

As a side question: What do you do with the loot from dead players? Does the party divvy it ("I want his boots!") or does it get sent off to relatives? Seems kinda ghoulish the way my players do it - they roll off d12s for each bit of loot.

 

[Keifer113]

Just a note....

I was not limiting the players in their magic, just delaying a session or two in giving things out. I wanted to see their power levels so I could gauge what I could give them without becoming overpowering. No one wants to be the fighter with a +1 sword when the other fighter has a +5 Vorpal Dancing sword that is Holy and has fiery and Icy burst and also does sonic damage. They will ultimately in a session or two be geared upto the appropriate levels.