D&D 5E XP for Gold in 5E?

[Warmaster Horus]

The thing is, 5e realy doesn't seem to have an expected wealth by level. I am pretty sure that it's a matter of taste.

Though you could average the random treasure results over time... but I'd honestly just play it by ear. Figure how fast you want the pcs to advance and set the treasure rate and xp/gp rate based on that.

There is a 'How much $$$ to start out characters of X Level' section in the DMG, however.

 

[aramis erak]

If I just let every monster (on average!) carry around "their xp" as gold in their pocket, the level speed will obviously stay the same (more or less).

But then characters will gain as many gold as the xp for level indicates.

And this is my question:

Is that a good fit?

The 5E DMG does not answer this important question, since it reportedly does not provide Wealth by Level guidelines.

Actually, it does, in a backhanded way. And they're not obvious nor labeled such... but I can tell you from the high level starting PC table that, no, it's not a good fit, because the number of magic items is pretty low for Tier 1 to 2 characters, and the gear isn't that much, either. Plus, they establish typical treasures with the treasure table.

Note that CR1 to CR4 monsters with treasure have between 5 cp and 6 PP each. Nowhere near their XPV. 60GP for a CR1 is 30%, and CR 4 is 5% of their XPV.

 

[Joe Liker]

A couple of questions!

First is about your reasons for doing this. Is it because you wanted to introduce a money sink into your campaign's economy, presumably so players won't want to spend all of their money on magic items? That's the impression I'm getting.

Second, what would you do if one of your players had a non-materialistic character? Not just a vow of poverty (because charitable donations would easily fall under your XP guideline), but more of a self-sufficient loner who neither needed nor wanted to worry about cash? That character would have a very hard time earning XP in your game if he remained true to his concept.

Back in my BECMI/AD&D days, I always thought the concept of XP for gold was a strange one. I'm sure it can be made to work, but I have a feeling you're going to run into a lot of trouble at higher levels. You're basically asking your PCs to fritter away 10,000 gp per level on nothing. Unless your economy is extremely inflated, even the most dissipated playboy might find that overly frivolous.

 

[The_Gneech]

There is a 'How much $$$ to start out characters of X Level' section in the DMG, however.

It's worth noting, that this boils down to about the same amount of GP for everyone, and then a number of magic items of varying quality based on level (e.g., "three uncommon and two rare items").

-The Gneech

 

[CapnZapp]

A couple of questions!

First is about your reasons for doing this. Is it because you wanted to introduce a money sink into your campaign's economy, presumably so players won't want to spend all of their money on magic items? That's the impression I'm getting.

Second, what would you do if one of your players had a non-materialistic character? Not just a vow of poverty (because charitable donations would easily fall under your XP guideline), but more of a self-sufficient loner who neither needed nor wanted to worry about cash? That character would have a very hard time earning XP in your game if he remained true to his concept.

Back in my BECMI/AD&D days, I always thought the concept of XP for gold was a strange one. I'm sure it can be made to work, but I have a feeling you're going to run into a lot of trouble at higher levels. You're basically asking your PCs to fritter away 10,000 gp per level on nothing. Unless your economy is extremely inflated, even the most dissipated playboy might find that overly frivolous.

But what else is there to spend your gold on?

Assuming a 3E-style campaign where you run published modules with characters focused on meeting their goals (as set out by the adventure: freeing the princess, killing the baddie, breaking the evil artifact and so on) for players not interested in "a greater picture" for their characters (building a castle, setting up a guild, managing a laboratory etc).

The players will still want to spend all their money on magic items, since all they care for is using their characters as vehicles toward adventure success: more powerful characters equal a greater chance of reaching goals without PC deaths. I imagine this playing style to be one of the most common in the d20 era.

Now, to your questions:

I want to try "xp for gold" because I am aware that
1) there is nothing to spend your gold on in 5E (in the short term)
2) magic items are much less required in 5E
3) I like the idea to encourage players to find solutions that doesn't always involve head-on combat

This makes me conclude another money sink is needed; one that still allows the occasional purchase of a magic item. Essentially, you buy magic items with your xp - buy too many, and you fall back in level relative to those of your companions that settle for looted items only, buy too few, and you lose opportunities to become more versatile, if not outright more powerful.

I could run a "default" 5E game where money is used to enrich your PC's background (history, allies, place in the world), but I know my players aren't very interested in stuff that doesn't tie directly to adventuring.

I could skip placing gold in monsters' pockets, making the problem of spending it go away entirely, but that feels very strange for a D&D game.

And so I thought that a marriage between "xp for gold" and carousing tables would fit the bill. It would mean that PCs do have a life outside the dungeon, but it would be structured and not something to spend much play time on.

I am still very much surprised that
a) WotC have created a game that does not seem to support the playing style I associate so strongly with d20-era D&D
b) so few of you share my complaints. I would have thought lots of players played the game "kick in the door, loot the corpses, upgrade"-style, but perhaps they don't frequent EN World...

Zapp

PS. Regarding your "non-materialistic loner" character I must say I view that as a very special corner case. It certainly won't be any of my players making such a character! ;-)

But still, I don't see the problem. Assuming a player insisted he could make the concept work, I would have no problem making his share "disappear" and granting him the occasional "gift" from his friends or backers (or just lucky breaks, if he's truly a loner). In essence, managing his economy invisibly. But it most definitely won't be a problem with the players I've got...

Regarding "fritter away 10000 gp on nothing": how well are you acquainted with the rich and the fabulous (in our world). I'm sure you can see how 10000 gp is nothing for a character traveling the planes, besting demons in single combat, and deciding the fate_ of nations on her whims...

Heck, you don't even need to go high-level zany bonkers for 10000 gp to be next to nothing. Even at mid levels, where characters visit large cities and interact with regional movers and shakers, 10000 gp is nothing to sneeze at, but it would not overwhelm these NPC players. Roleplaying games are traditionally made by geeks completely clueless about economics, that grossly underestimate how much capital circulate even in a modest economy, say a guild, a church, or a small city.

Heck, if you gave me a million dollars it would still not be enough to transform my life. Sure, it would be nice (very nice, in fact) and it would ease my life in several ways. But it would not be enough to retire on. It would not enable me to buy a haunted mansion and cacklingly play the organ all night It would not be enough for me to out-do Elon Musk and invent interstellar travel. And so on...

 

[CapnZapp]

It's worth noting, that this boils down to about the same amount of GP for everyone, and then a number of magic items of varying quality based on level (e.g., "three uncommon and two rare items").

-The Gneech

Thank you.

Yes, that sounds completely unlike the wealth by level table of 3E.

 

[AmerginLiath]

As The_Gneech hints at, 5e's DMG doesn't have the same granularity of Wealth By Level. Instead it's basically Wealth By Tier (with options for Low, Normal, and High Magic Campaigns). Most folks starting higher indeed get about the same gold (larger than the starting amount, although I believe that Level 1-4 have starting gold?) but with some extra items depending on the nature of magic in the world.

I personally like that idea. Much of the Wealth By Level in 3.x and 4e was due to the implicit or explicit Christmas Tree requirement of magic items, which isn't the case in 5e. With more economic avenues put out in the standard and optional rules, it makes sense that even a higher-level character who isn't raided dungeons on a regular basis is going to have a certain base wealth versus all the expenses paid over time (consider how much of our own paychecks go into bills, expenses, and luxuries).

As for XP-for-gold, I liked it is 1st ed, but I think that the assumptions have changed enough in the underlaying game to make it difficult to 'patch in' such a system over all. Consider that players have changed in their modus operandi on fight vs. flight since the days of the original Unearthed Arcana at least. We've seen multiple editions using Wealth very differently (hence how players who grew up with 3.x versus those that grew up with AD&D/BX often talk in circles around each other on subjects like this) – as well as characters being powerful enough, especially at low levels, to not look at flight as the necessary option (there's been the question of "balance" too, but I think that that's more the shift away from sandbox gaming than any blithe accusations to be made about MMOs or the like).

To be fair, I think that one could run some great adventures where PCs need to return stolen treasure to a town/kingdom, avoid the monsters (or traps!?), figure out how to get all of that loot out of there, and then be awarded the XP for what they recover (with bonuses for exceptional skulking). However, I think that the morphing of underlaying assumptions means that there would be a lot of unanswered questions – many asked here – if XP-for-gold was a default mechanism in the 5e rules as they exist.

 

[Joe Liker]

The players will still want to spend all their money on magic items, since all they care for is using their characters as vehicles toward adventure success: more powerful characters equal a greater chance of reaching goals without PC deaths. I imagine this playing style to be one of the most common in the d20 era.

The default rules of the game assume they cannot spend their money on magic items. I'm not going to judge you for letting them, but it's important to keep in mind that the basic design of the game discourages it, because there are some subtle ramifications.

I could skip placing gold in monsters' pockets, making the problem of spending it go away entirely, but that feels very strange for a D&D game.

FWIW, I am doing exactly this in my current campaign, and the players don't mind a bit. It doesn't feel less like D&D to anyone; it's just a piece of mundane record-keeping they no longer have to worry about. (In fact, because it's our first 5e campaign, everyone's still marveling at how closely this matches the kind of game they always wanted D&D to be.)

And so I thought that a marriage between "xp for gold" and carousing tables would fit the bill. It would mean that PCs do have a life outside the dungeon, but it would be structured and not something to spend much play time on.

I actually think the idea has some merit, but I also think you are carrying it too far. It would be better to award extra XP for realistic amounts of gold spent carousing, as a bonus, rather than withhold earned XP and force this system upon them.

I am still very much surprised that
a) WotC have created a game that does not seem to support the playing style I associate so strongly with d20-era D&D
b) so few of you share my complaints. I would have thought lots of players played the game "kick in the door, loot the corpses, upgrade"-style, but perhaps they don't frequent EN World...

For better or worse, it's a callback to the 1e days when magic-item commerce was strongly discouraged. It significantly alters the feel of the game and the foundations of your campaign's structure. It is also something you can easily allow (just as many players in the 80s allowed it), if you don't mind a very different flavor and altered player behaviors. So they left it as an obvious, mostly unspoken option so as not to draw attention to it.

Regarding "fritter away 10000 gp on nothing": how well are you acquainted with the rich and the fabulous (in our world). I'm sure you can see how 10000 gp is nothing for a character traveling the planes, besting demons in single combat, and deciding the fate_ of nations on her whims...

Heck, you don't even need to go high-level zany bonkers for 10000 gp to be next to nothing. Even at mid levels, where characters visit large cities and interact with regional movers and shakers, 10000 gp is nothing to sneeze at, but it would not overwhelm these NPC players. Roleplaying games are traditionally made by geeks completely clueless about economics, that grossly underestimate how much capital circulate even in a modest economy, say a guild, a church, or a small city.

I would argue that a lot of this spending is not "nothing," and I didn't realize you were including it in your carousing budget because most of it generates very real benefits to the character. Buying a mansion or an estate increases social standing and allows for new quests of a different nature to be undertaken. Donating large amounts of money to a charity ensures the good will of the recipient and its allies. And, to be fair, most of the things the modern wealthy waste their money on are the modern equivalent of magic items, so I'm not sure that's the comparison you want to make.

SO ... back to your specific situation. You want to allow magic item commerce, but limit it and create more of an opportunity cost. You also want to include some kind of nod to the PCs' social life outside the dungeon.

I, as a player, would not enjoy the idea of withheld XP and enforced carousing, so I offer these suggestions:

1) Allow players to buy magic items, but add an XP cost to the price. Your system does this anyway, but in a forced, convoluted way. Why not just be straightforward about it? If you need an explanation, you could tie it to the process of attuning to the item. (Attuned items are the ones that need the stricter controls, anyway.) 3e wizards had to pay XP to create magic items, so the idea isn't far-fetched.

2) Ask players to create personal goals for their characters that do not involve magic items or direct character advancement. Treat these goals as minor quests, and award bonus XP when they fulfill them. That way, it's completely optional, but most players will at least make some effort. You don't have to take it very far -- even if it only adds a line or two to the character's bio, it has value.

3) Encourage carousing by awarding token XP whenever they roll on the tables.

 

[AmerginLiath]

The players will still want to spend all their money on magic items, since all they care for is using their characters as vehicles toward adventure success: more powerful characters equal a greater chance of reaching goals without PC deaths. I imagine this playing style to be one of the most common in the d20 era.

I've never understood this style of play, the groups that I've played with over the past 25+ years always being concerned with actual affecting the world and building up a non-adventuring life (whether there's explicit rule support or not). I think twice I've been in situations where folks have entered play (as rogues both times, of course) playing such a murder hobo idea. In both cases, two separate groups (from different groups of friends who had never met each other) kicked the money-grubber out in-game when he wouldn't be civilized.

We live paycheck to paycheck in real life, awaiting the Sphere of Annihilation that is our own mortality. Why shouldn't our fantasy actually involve building something for the narrative future with our work?

(Of course, it's probably part of why I can play Evil but refuse to play Chaotic, short of a narrative regarding a loner character learning to rejoin society and drift into Law...)

 

[CapnZapp]

The default rules of the game assume they cannot spend their money on magic items. I'm not going to judge you for letting them, but it's important to keep in mind that the basic design of the game discourages it, because there are some subtle ramifications.

What use is money then, for groups focused on the current adventure with no interest in world-building?

Should such groups give up on 5E? Just resign themselves to playing 3E or Pathfinder?

Of course not!