Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nagol" data-source="post: 5503233" data-attributes="member: 23935">The original purpose of the WbL guidelines was for published adventures to take into account the expected resources of the 'typical' group when planning for barriers and obstacles.&nbsp; It was also a way for a DM to measure the actual wealth in his campaign against a published norm -- it's at least a way for the DM to guard against Monty Haulism or reward parsimony.I dislike the thought that a set of characters should be restricted or entitled to WbL guidelines and further rewards should be adjusted to maintain that level.In my 3.5e campaign, the PCs wealth has varied away from the WbL (both up and down) as a consequence of player strategy, group success, and mission choice.I've felt no need to bump up rewards when the player group became smitten with consumables (potions and scrolls) and spent several thousand gp to recover a few hundred on mission after mission.&nbsp; I've felt no need to pare down the rewards when the group had a specacular success in a treasure haul and ended well above WbL guidelines for a level or two.&nbsp; Nor did I feel the need to bump the potential rewards when most of the group's items were lost in a near-TPK and the guideline wealth was well above their actual wealth.For me, wealth is one of the measures the PCs should take into consideration when the group is making is strategic choices as to what missions to accept, what resources to commit, and what contingences to prepare.&nbsp; It really isn't a concern for the DM save to help guard his own behaviour when designing scenarios and challenges.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nagol, post: 5503233, member: 23935"] The original purpose of the WbL guidelines was for published adventures to take into account the expected resources of the 'typical' group when planning for barriers and obstacles. It was also a way for a DM to measure the actual wealth in his campaign against a published norm -- it's at least a way for the DM to guard against Monty Haulism or reward parsimony. I dislike the thought that a set of characters should be restricted or entitled to WbL guidelines and further rewards should be adjusted to maintain that level. In my 3.5e campaign, the PCs wealth has varied away from the WbL (both up and down) as a consequence of player strategy, group success, and mission choice. I've felt no need to bump up rewards when the player group became smitten with consumables (potions and scrolls) and spent several thousand gp to recover a few hundred on mission after mission. I've felt no need to pare down the rewards when the group had a specacular success in a treasure haul and ended well above WbL guidelines for a level or two. Nor did I feel the need to bump the potential rewards when most of the group's items were lost in a near-TPK and the guideline wealth was well above their actual wealth. For me, wealth is one of the measures the PCs should take into consideration when the group is making is strategic choices as to what missions to accept, what resources to commit, and what contingences to prepare. It really isn't a concern for the DM save to help guard his own behaviour when designing scenarios and challenges. [/QUOTE]

Verification