Speaking only for myself, there is a certain level of excitement, or at least, of anticipation. It's kind of like buying yourself a new gizmo or a new computer game - you look forward to using it. It's not as humdrum as weekly shopping - perhaps about the same level as a regular, anticipated treat.
How much of that anticipation is coming from getting the magic item(s) as it is of going up a level? Because if you attach magic item gain to level, it just becomes part of gaining a level and the selecting of new feats, powers, spells and stat inceases that is level advancement.
Well, if all players are as reasonable as that, we shouldn't have the other problem of complaining about too little treasure, either.
To much (Monte Haulism) and to little (Scroogism) are more factors of risk/challenge vs reward. Scroogism is best illustrated by a comment someone I knew made about the rewards in Everquest: Slay a Dragon boss monster and your reward would be... 100 cp and a rusty non-magical dagger. Monte Haulism is best represented by a situation that could pop up in 1e: Hey, guys! I easily picked the pocket of that Centaur we just walked by and look what I got: four 1 million gp gems! Switch the two rewards and you have stuff that people have an easier time accepting. 4 million gp for slaying a dragon maybe a bit much, but few are going to say that the campaign is Monte Haul just off that. Stealing a dollar in change and a under-maintained pocketknife off someone is not going to raise any eyebrows even if its a little less than it could be.
Reward by Challenge guidelines are actually better at stopping Monte Haul and Scroogism than Wealth by Level.
I would argue that wealth by level guidelines do. Removing the assumed bonus from wealth by level simply imposes a different guideline: that the assumed wealth at each level is close to starting level. Under such a system, the "swing" in effectiveness between a character with mundane equipment and the best possible equipment should also be kept fairly small - six points (as in 4E) might be workable, but I personally would keep it to four, assuming a d20 used as a randomizer. If monsters are designed around the assumption that they will be fought with +2 equipment, then the character fighting them with mundane gear would be at an effective -2 penalty and the character fighting them with the best equipment would be at an effective +2 bonus. Enough, I think, to make the impact of the difference in equipment felt without making it either to difficult for one or too easy for the other. And I still think that wealth by level guidelines make it easier to ensure that each PC has roughly equivalent gear.
Sigh. I don't know whether this is heartening or depressing.
FireLance said:
It's actually a moot question since I don't give out XP. All the PCs just gain a level after every adventure. The PCs take risks because the players think it would be enjoyable, cool, what the PC would do (roleplaying), or because it is the only way the player can think of to achieve an in-game objective. Conversely, the PCs aren't enticed to get into fights that they don't need to in order to gain an XP award (unless the players simply enjoy the tactical challenge of winning fights, of course - I'm DMed for a number of such players in my time).
Obviously I'm not Firelance, but let me take a crack at a few of these...
Our group re-equips w/magic items when they level in a similar manner, and to be honest, equipping our PC's isn't thrilling. But you know what? It shouldn't be. Our campaign is all about the nutty exploits of our brazen and quite possibly certifiable PCs. It's not about our stuff (or the stuff we find). The focus is on the PC's abilities, personalities, and goals, such as they are.
Congratulations, both of you, on having found a play-style you enjoy, but from the sound of it you are using a different set of concepts than normal. Nothing is wrong with that, but from how it sounds, if the system the system you were using did not have magic items or could easily remove them it would not change your play-style.
Sure, sometimes we miss the joy of looting that was ever-present in earlier editions. But our campaign is filled with a great deal of other, non-looting activity --note that many great adventure stories are not actually focused on looting-- so it's not a big deal.
I completely understand, but I don't like how wealth by level guidelines
expect me to have peasants hand out 1 or more +1 or +2 magic items (or hide the fact I'm doing so with inherent bonuses) for driving off the orc bandits. Sometimes a hardy meal of rice and the knowledge of doing a good deed should be the reward.
Also, not everyone thinks the emphasis on gear in ye olde days of D&D is a good thing, where the question of "who is your character" was frequently less important than "what items do you have?"?
The same editions were wizards and other spellcasters were more often defined in game by what their favor favorite spells were? What you are describing is more an example of character/item power disparity.
You still earn magic items by playing the game. That hasn't changed.
But the reason why you earn them changes
Because taking imaginary risks is fun. Playing out the taking if imaginary risks is fun. Isn't this why people play RPGs?
Not always. While there are those who do want to take imaginary risks, some just want to explore imaginary worlds. Others want to play heroes, and still others want to tell stories. There are many more motivations for playing, including just wanting to hang with your friends.