Apologies for necro-ing this thread, but it's a top Google result and presumably even more relevant after three years, given more familiarity with 5e.
My own idea is to allow 1 XP /1 GP. But I'll break it down.
Given my OS roots, to me some part of FRPG has to be about gold 'n' gems 'n' carousing. Besides, the challenges of dragging a huge haul out of the back of nowhere can lead to some truly awesome adventures.
That said, treasure absolutely *wrecks* economies, even if you know NOTHING about economies. Gygax tried to hand-wave this away by claiming it was like a gold rush town--eggs for a dollar each in 1840, etc.--but this collapses quickly if your "world" is anything more than Frontiertown and Enormous Wilderness. Also, the hyperinflation this would cause in a small medieval society is not to be sneezed at. Nor do you want characters to be able to "get rid of" that loot by sinking it into a castle. That's like driving away gremlins by spraying them with a hose. Works for a bit, then you have a MUCH bigger problem.
So you have to drain the money, but most of the ways to do so are in direct opposition to player experience quality. The problem is that a realistic solution--one that works--will quickly appear *unrealistic* to the players, doing damage to the consensual suspension of disbelief. Carousing drains a lot of dough, sure, but THAT much? Training has limits too--any reasonable PC will wonder why she shouldn't just set up as a trainer, as fast as possible. Similarly, logic would suggest a world jammed full of people who can train 3rd or below, while you'd have to be stone crazy to adventure long enough to be able to train 8th or below. And so on.
So here's my solution.
The players are frontier/West Marches types in a sandboxy environment. They're pretty loot-motivated to begin with (although not murder hoboes), but they've also been sent by a nearby ruler into the area to help bring it under her control after a devastating war. Things are a lot worse than anyone knows--she is *completely* broke (fairly common for medieval war participants, btw) and needs as much loot as you can give her, stat, or all hell will break loose again.
So the characters have a choice. They can send loot of any kind back to the queen from their frontier base. (99% of the time, this loot will get there just fine/offstage.) For every GP worth they send, they will get 1 XP. This loot is GONE. The queen will not give them a medal, tell her knights to do favors for them, etc., except maybe once in a very blue moon. In other words, the payoff is faster advancement without any "external benefit" of any kind.
Or they can keep the money and spend it as they will--on gear, carousing, temple donations, etc. In short, on things that have at least some chance of benefiting them immediately or later. (If you routinely carouse at the Green Griffon and shower the publican with gold to fix the holes you keep putting in the wall, he will probably grit his teeth in private and treat you handsomely in public.) Such gold gives NO XP.
So the players get to make some choices about their characters. There will be some obvious benefits to each choice (and the GM does need to make sure these choices are meaningful and even a little painful). Players also don't get to take a long time to decide. If they "give" the goods are basically gone immediately. If they bury the hoard in their secret stash, perhaps saving up for a suit of plate, and then change their mind and decide to send it to the queen later, they'll derive no XP benefit.
What do you think? Especially interested in what 5e-experienced players think of this. I'm new to 5e, was a stone 1e expert for quite a long time who then took a big break.
My own idea is to allow 1 XP /1 GP. But I'll break it down.
Given my OS roots, to me some part of FRPG has to be about gold 'n' gems 'n' carousing. Besides, the challenges of dragging a huge haul out of the back of nowhere can lead to some truly awesome adventures.
That said, treasure absolutely *wrecks* economies, even if you know NOTHING about economies. Gygax tried to hand-wave this away by claiming it was like a gold rush town--eggs for a dollar each in 1840, etc.--but this collapses quickly if your "world" is anything more than Frontiertown and Enormous Wilderness. Also, the hyperinflation this would cause in a small medieval society is not to be sneezed at. Nor do you want characters to be able to "get rid of" that loot by sinking it into a castle. That's like driving away gremlins by spraying them with a hose. Works for a bit, then you have a MUCH bigger problem.
So you have to drain the money, but most of the ways to do so are in direct opposition to player experience quality. The problem is that a realistic solution--one that works--will quickly appear *unrealistic* to the players, doing damage to the consensual suspension of disbelief. Carousing drains a lot of dough, sure, but THAT much? Training has limits too--any reasonable PC will wonder why she shouldn't just set up as a trainer, as fast as possible. Similarly, logic would suggest a world jammed full of people who can train 3rd or below, while you'd have to be stone crazy to adventure long enough to be able to train 8th or below. And so on.
So here's my solution.
The players are frontier/West Marches types in a sandboxy environment. They're pretty loot-motivated to begin with (although not murder hoboes), but they've also been sent by a nearby ruler into the area to help bring it under her control after a devastating war. Things are a lot worse than anyone knows--she is *completely* broke (fairly common for medieval war participants, btw) and needs as much loot as you can give her, stat, or all hell will break loose again.
So the characters have a choice. They can send loot of any kind back to the queen from their frontier base. (99% of the time, this loot will get there just fine/offstage.) For every GP worth they send, they will get 1 XP. This loot is GONE. The queen will not give them a medal, tell her knights to do favors for them, etc., except maybe once in a very blue moon. In other words, the payoff is faster advancement without any "external benefit" of any kind.
Or they can keep the money and spend it as they will--on gear, carousing, temple donations, etc. In short, on things that have at least some chance of benefiting them immediately or later. (If you routinely carouse at the Green Griffon and shower the publican with gold to fix the holes you keep putting in the wall, he will probably grit his teeth in private and treat you handsomely in public.) Such gold gives NO XP.
So the players get to make some choices about their characters. There will be some obvious benefits to each choice (and the GM does need to make sure these choices are meaningful and even a little painful). Players also don't get to take a long time to decide. If they "give" the goods are basically gone immediately. If they bury the hoard in their secret stash, perhaps saving up for a suit of plate, and then change their mind and decide to send it to the queen later, they'll derive no XP benefit.
What do you think? Especially interested in what 5e-experienced players think of this. I'm new to 5e, was a stone 1e expert for quite a long time who then took a big break.
Last edited:
