D&D 3E/3.5 3rd Edition Revisited - Better play with the power of hindsight?

[Thomas Shey]

I never had problems about getting my 3e Era players excited about magic items. What I missed was the 1e Era excitement about finding gold.

I suspect only reason anyone even cared there was because gold translated into experience.

 

[Celebrim]

I suspect only reason anyone even cared there was because gold translated into experience.

Almost certainly, but that was a major incentive to interact with the environment that was missing from later editions. I didn't like what gold for XP did to any adventure format that wasn't haven/delve (what is today called West Marches), but I did miss that enthusiasm for poking around to try to find treasure. Much of the exploration pillar of the game turned out to be built on that mechanic, and it wasn't easy to replace it when it was gone.

 

[Alzrius]

Primeval Thule (the Pathfinder version, written by Rich Baker) has an optional rule to use gold and treasure for XP, at the same ratio as 1e. I have imported it in my 3.0 games, and it works very well in a "standard" campaign.

I personally like "carousing" rules, where it's not the treasure that the PCs take home that counts for XP, but the money they spend on inconsequential things (i.e. things with no mechanics under the game rules).

If you spend 100 gp on new weapons, that 100 gp earns you no XP whatsoever. But if you spent another 100 gp on the stereotypical ale and whores (or anything that results in the money being essentially thrown away; tithing it to a church works just as well), then you get 100 XP for it.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Almost certainly, but that was a major incentive to interact with the environment that was missing from later editions. I didn't like what gold for XP did to any adventure format that wasn't haven/delve (what is today called West Marches), but I did miss that enthusiasm for poking around to try to find treasure. Much of the exploration pillar of the game turned out to be built on that mechanic, and it wasn't easy to replace it when it was gone.

I can see that argument, but it always ended up feeling oddly perverse in OD&D, because people would go to a lot of trouble to get gold (for the experience yield) and then, well, leave it sit around because nothing they could do with it was all that compelling for anyone who wasn't big about running their own business and the like.

Even for characters for whom "getting rich" is a motivator, by any reasonable standards it was not hard for OD&D characters to be "rich" by fifth or sixth level, given the treasure tables. The contrast between people's attitude toward treasure in OD&D and RuneQuest (where you were getting copper and silver most of the time, and there were things like mounts and heavier armor that were actually expensive enough to use it) was pretty striking. And even there at some point money would stop being a motivator (fortunately in early RQ religio-political power and its personal expression was more of a driver anyway).

I personally like "carousing" rules, where it's not the treasure that the PCs take home that counts for XP, but the money they spend on inconsequential things (i.e. things with no mechanics under the game rules).

If you spend 100 gp on new weapons, that 100 gp earns you no XP whatsoever. But if you spent another 100 gp on the stereotypical ale and whores (or anything that results in the money being essentially thrown away; tithing it to a church works just as well), then you get 100 XP for it.

Non-mandatory training rules (in that you don't have to do it to level, it just gives you more experience moving in that direction) also can have this effect from what I've seen in other game systems.

 

[Pedantic]

I personally like "carousing" rules, where it's not the treasure that the PCs take home that counts for XP, but the money they spend on inconsequential things (i.e. things with no mechanics under the game rules).

If you spend 100 gp on new weapons, that 100 gp earns you no XP whatsoever. But if you spent another 100 gp on the stereotypical ale and whores (or anything that results in the money being essentially thrown away; tithing it to a church works just as well), then you get 100 XP for it.

It felt under-supported by the vague scene rules, but I directionally liked Fantasy Craft's Prudence/Panache system. You got points modified by your class, level and Charisma you invested between those two stats. Panache gives you a lifestyle bonus to social rolls and a pool of starting money at each adventure, Prudence determined the percentage of treasure you managed not to blow on luxuries and could keep long term, with everything else disappearing during downtime.

Combined with an extensive equipment and equipment modification list, money was targeted as a resource players would care about.

 

[rabindranath72]

Almost certainly, but that was a major incentive to interact with the environment that was missing from later editions. I didn't like what gold for XP did to any adventure format that wasn't haven/delve (what is today called West Marches), but I did miss that enthusiasm for poking around to try to find treasure. Much of the exploration pillar of the game turned out to be built on that mechanic, and it wasn't easy to replace it when it was gone.

Yes it doesn't always work thematically (see e.g. Dragonlance) but it gives players a simple, self-sustaining objective.