Iron Gods - PFS (Inactive)

Game Master Andrew L Klein

It's a ridiculous idea that causes havoc almost every holiday weekend when you live right next to the highway - and legitimately part of the reason I'm moving to a different area at the end of the year lol.

What's funny is this year has been light on incidents. Last year around 45th of July, I lost power and cable 4 times in the span of two weeks.

Ok now we have a rough visual outline. If we want to steal it, do we have the means to reduce person Iantha?

I do not.

Miranda can cast a scroll of it if we can go buy one.

Whether it's a scroll, or someone here casting it, keep in mind it's only a 10 round duration (since Caster Level 1).

Maybe we should use a Familiar for scouting, first, and then use Iantha for retrieval?

Oh, GM, how big was the piece? Could it even be squeezed out through a crack? If it's key-sized, it could fit in a toad's mouth. If it's a frisbee, it'll be problematic.

You know that Baine spent time at the temple of Brigh working on potions and scrolls of spells typically associated with clerics. It's possible the temple also has some non-cleric spells available in physical form of some kind.

Oh. Askimg the temple for help would be good. Also a good point to go back in character i think

As we're going downstairs again, I don't really see the need to divvy up stuff. Let's do that when we have some more gold to spend.

Loot distribution isn't something we should do in-character, unless there's like some storyline artifact that appeals to more than one character's personality. And everyone OOC needs to be happy with whatever we decide. Sharing wealth can be an incredibly contentious issue when not discussed (and especially when different people assume it will be handled differently).

Plus, we have a tough time as it is with posting rates. If we find X gold, each person should be able to assume that Y of it ends up in their pockets. We just need to establish what X and Y are.

I first asked this question back in March. My personal votes:

1) I'm in favor of a party fund (divvying up all money 6 ways, in this case). Purchasing items with the party fund should be voted on, and should have the capacity to benefit everyone in the party (like a wand of cure light wounds).

2) I'm in favor of giving items to whoever seems to benefit from them the most, and rolling off in the case of shared interest.

3) Should anyone ever sell anything, regardless of who used it for how long, that money gets divvied up the same as in #1 above.

It looks like Iantha, Miranda and I were of equal opinions back then. Would Smith or Forlen like to propose any amendments?

And I just noticed that GM is defaulting to 75% for sold values, give or take depending on factors. That's the most generous selling policy I think I've ever encountered ^_^

I agree with those suggestions. It's pretty much how I've always seen it done. If someone gets a lot of things because they really need it/others can't use it, they get less of a share from the gold findings in order to maintain a roughly equal wealth per person.

Your post describes two entirely different methods of handling loot.

How would you amend the previous suggestions?

Sorry, this just needs to be nitpicked. If we go forward assuming equal shares, but then you're assuming that one person holding the +3 BBEG-killer should get less gold, then that's a problem.

I've literally lost friendships and had campaigns die because of this very thing =|

I think he means, getting the +3 BBEG killer is fine. You find loot in bursts. But if you get the sword, then armor, then a shield, and then a ring, even if its just because you can use them and someone else can not, then you need to skip a few gold devisions.

Whoops, I see the confusion. I meant that everyone gets an equal share of gold (with maybe an extra share for party bag), and any items they claim get deducted from that. Say we find 1000 gold and some consumables/items. Everyone gets 200 (or 166.666 if we want party bag). And either we
A)divvy up the consumables equally, or
B) we "buy" the items by putting half the amount of gold in the party bag (basically, the sell value of the thing).

A) can lead to discrepancies but is more flexible, B can lead to more equal party loadouts.

I'm honestly fine with either option (or a different option), I'm not that interested in the loot anyway. I mean, loot's cool, but I'm not assuming I can get exactly what I want anyways. Part of the fun of adventure paths (for me) is making do with what we find.

EDIT: And ninja'd by Iantha. She pretty much sums it up.

Alrighty.

So, in the event that happens, then should the recipient of the lessened gold keep a tally of their deficit for reimbursement when that gear is sold, and/or when the rest of the party gets similarly equipped?

I'm trying to understand the numbers now so we don't argue later. I've never encountered this method before but if others have then I'm amicable to learning something new.

Miranda? Smith? Any thoughts?

If the logistics are too confusing, I don't mind doing it differently, I'm just saying how my other campaigns have done it.
In my other PbP, the GM keeps an Excel sheet with what gear has been found and tallies a total gold value, then we claim stuff from there. Basically, he converts everything to GP value (as if through selling) and says after every encounter with big loot, "everyone gets X gold, if you wanna reclaim stuff, just remove that amount of gold from your tally." We haven't run into the problem yet that we come up short, as usually it's pretty weird stuff we're not using anyway. A communal pool would be a good idea though, right now I've been paying for random scrolls we find. >_>
This is all a hassle on the GM's part, but one of us could do that if the GM prefers to focus on the story.

I don't have a strong preference for how we deal with loot, unlike Dromer I've never had it be a real issue, I've always found people to be quite agreeable no matter what system used from:

we give loot to whomever it makes the most sense regardless of balance to a very finely balanced every copper accounted for system.

I do think we should figure out a way that makes the GMs life as easy as possible and puts it into our hands though.

In my other PbP, the GM keeps an Excel sheet with what gear has been found and tallies a total gold value

Ok. Yes. THAT method I understand. I mentioned it earlier. It's pretty much the opposite of the one I was proposing, Lol.

How do you make it work without getting a migraine?

In the end, I dont care a lot how we devide it, as long as its fairly honest (dividing money 6 ways so we have a party pool and giving items to the person that needs it most is fine), as long as we do it accurately. The most loot grief I've seen is when the book keeping is shoddy, and things devolve in 'yes but we sold that item then so we schould have more gold, no we sold it later and already spend the money' and such.

Again, if it's too much of a hassle, we don't bother with it. Like Smith, I've never had any problems with loot division. Party fund and "you can use this the most" is also a good idea. Since people seem hesitant to use the method I suggested, I'll retract it.

Not hesitant.

Legitimately asking how to make it work.

I'm a numbers person. Throw an example at me.

Maybe my past groups were just doing it wrong.

When I ask questions, it's because I'm looking for answers.

Tackling the details now means we don't have questions later.

Okay, say we find 1000 gold and one potion of CLW. Assuming we don't do party bag, we calculate the sell value of everything and everyone gets 205 gold (sell value of CLW potion is 25 gold). If I want that potion, I subtract 25 gold from my gold gained and I have a potion. Everyone else still gets 205 gold and I have 180 gold and a potion. If we do party bag it's split six ways and the gold I "bought" the potion with goes to the party bag to stock up again on spent stuff.

Maybe CLW potions aren't the best example, but replace it with a weapon for more personal use.

Dromer: Here's a very detailed example of how I've seen the system I believe Forlen is describing work in detail:

party finds:
A +2 Club (8.300)
Gold (5,500)
Fancy Art (5,000)
Mithral Shirt (1,100)
Wand of Magic Missile (750)
Wand of Lesser Restoration 10 charges (900)
3 Potions of CLW (50x3)

Total value is 21,700

However, we actually want what items look like when sold, giving us 16,100.

Dividing that by 6 (5 party members + a party share) Gets 2183.33

Spreadsheet

Note I chose this example on purpose because of the high valued greatclub making it harder to split the loot properly.

Both Doug and Ellen want the want of MM, they roll off or otherwise come to a civil agreement.

Nobody wants the Mithral shirt, so it gets sold. Doug and Ellen are too snooty for CLW potions but Abe, Bob and Carol will take them.

The wand of lesser restore gets put in the party fund.

If Abe happens to have the cash on hand to pay the rest of the 1491.67 on the Club great, if not its accounting time. (which I'm assuming below)

We've got 11050 in cash to split up among the rest of our party, meaning everybody but Abe get 2210gp each (including the party fund).

While negative Abe won't get any cash, since he's busy paying off his club.

See Sheet 2 for a hypothetical future...

Next time its convient to split loot the party has accumulated

Ring of Prot +2 4000
Scroll of Haste 187.5
Mundane Junk 450
Money 3200
Ring of Prot +1 1000

(all in sold prices)

Now we've got some history. Abe, Bob, Carol and Doug all want the ring of protection +2.

If anybody had enough owed value (Difference)+available cash to buy the ring from the party, they'd get preference.

In this case we'll assume people spent their money and nobody does.

Abe is still in negative value so Bob/Carol/Doug roll off.

Leaving Bob and Carol to roll off for the Ring of Protection +1.

Assuming Bob wins, this leaves Carol, Ellen and the Party fund being owed value so we give them cash. It's possible we have to split cash distributions if it would more than 0 somebody out

---

Next time the party finds a Cloak of Resistance +2. Everyobdy wants it, only Doug is negative but Carol and Ellen have saved up enough cash to cover the difference.

They roll off and Carol wins. She pays the 1316.04 to the group which then splits into cash for people

This system keeps everybody on about the same wealth, while allowing expensive items to be distributed fairly over a long time period.

---

Basically anybody who can afford an item with their share/existing gold gets preference on items over those who can't, and they have preference over those who owe the party money.

And now I'm having Wold of Warcraft flashbacks with Dragon Kill Points :P

And now I'm having Wold of Warcraft flashbacks with Dragon Kill Points :P

Thanks for starting my day with horrible memories...

Glad to be of service. My WoW experience was actually pretty good. My guild had a group of incredibly relaxed and slightly insane Norwegian guys. It was awesome hanging out online with them.

Alrighty. Thank you for that. Something's different about it from my previous experiences, but it may be because we never used a spreadsheet that everyone could see.

I'll be honest in that I don't see the benefit. In my past experiences it caused everyone to constantly be looking over everyone else's shoulders since there was this eternal struggle to be equal. Wealth was nitpicked down to the copper. Nobody cared about flavorful "fluff" items for their characters because of the argument over their monetary value. Although those weren't PbP games. Maybe in this format it works better.

I see my method as being simpler, quicker, and easier to conceptualize. No spreadsheets required, and no constant struggle. When the party stumbles upon a pile of gold, everyone instantly knows what they get.

But since I'm obviously biased, can someone show me what's wrong with my method, what problems you anticipate, or why you prefer it less? I'll give an example:

Encounter1, Party of N finds:
Coins (X gold)
Item1 (Y gold)
Item2 (Z gold)

X gold is divided by N+1
Item1 is given to PC1
Item2 is sold for Z gold
Z gold is divided by N+1

Encounter2, Party of N finds:
Coins (A gold)
Item3 (B gold)
Item4 (C gold)

A gold is divided by N+1
Item3 is given to PC2
Item4 is given to PC1
PC1 no longer wants Item1
Item1 is sold for Y gold
Y gold is divided by N+1

Say PC1 spent D gold on Enhancement1 for Item1 in between Encounter1 and Encounter2. The formula would change as such:

Item1+Enhancement1 is sold for Y gold and D gold.
Y gold is divided by N+1
D gold is given back to PC1

This example is no different than if PC1 had instead used D gold to purchase Item5, which was also sold along with Item1 (or E years later).

Thoughts? Comments? Concerns?

The only setback using this system (which I personally don't see as a setback in the long run) is that obviously somebody is first and somebody is last in acquiring the Power items like Ring of Protection +1 or Cloak of Resistance +1. But everyone gets gold to spend after every encounter, and nobody has to bicker over the value of items. I think that's an entirely reasonable trade-off.

My guild had a group of incredibly relaxed and slightly insane Norwegian guys.

<== is also Norwegian (well, mostly)

Dromer I feel like you have a system you really want to use. None of the rest of us seems nearly as concerned as you, I'm happy to just use it and move on. I've already spent way more effort on this discussion that I wanted to.

No. That's ok. I'm clearly the minority.

But, again, if I'm asking a question, it's because I'm curious as to the answer.

What problems exist in just splitting gold equally?

Separate question. Not arguing, just asking.

Say we find a pile of gold, and a weapon.

I don't want to *keep* the weapon, but until we get the chance to sell it, it's better than what I currently have.

How is this handled in your system?

That's easy, you use the weapon for now and we sell it later.

Even if you did choose to take the weapon and later sell it, you'd come out the same since you only 'paid' the sale price to the party for it.

If people don't act in good faith there are abusive ways to manipulate who gets gold in what order. (like I take the big item that nobobdy wants and immediately sell it, although that's solved by either the DBAD rule or having them immediately pay the party back the sum they owe the pot.

Iantha Narili wrote:

My guild had a group of incredibly relaxed and slightly insane Norwegian guys.

<== is also Norwegian (well, mostly)

No wonder we get along so well, the Dutch and Norwegians have good synergy.

Also, I dont care about what loot system we use. Nefreets sounds good. (this is not passive agressiveness, just filling in as things dont really convey well trough text).
As long as we keep good track of things. We have a campaign where Forlen and I play together where loot was tracked badly, and now we are in a situation where we dont know what we have to spend. Neither for the party or ourselves, which is annoying as we could use an upgrade or two.

If people don't act in good faith there are abusive ways to manipulate who gets gold in what order. (like I take the big item that nobobdy wants and immediately sell it

That's not possible with the method I proposed above. It's designed to prevent that very thing from happening.

Using your system, wouldn't it *always* be beneficial to just take gold? I would never want to "buy" the Ioun Stone that gives Half-orcs +1 to Climb (for example), but if we find one it can't benefit anyone else.

As long as we keep good track of things.

Then we had better go with the spreadsheet idea, because there's no need for a tracker using the method I proposed above.

Last question (I think): if I drink a potion, do I forever have to keep track of its value? It seems that if we didn't, it'd be beneficial to use as many consumables as possible to artificially keep your WBL low.

Normally I wouldn't chime in on something like this, but seeing as Miranda wants to buy some things and what she can buy depends on the party loot decision, I felt I should. This isn't meant to come off as negative towards anyone or their suggestion, and I apologize if it does. If anyone thinks I'm overstepping my bounds as GM, say so and I'll step away on this matter.

Ratfolk Biologist 4

This explains so much, I just thought you get more immersed in your characters than anyone I've played with and learn all about the race lol

Quote:

Ratfolk Biologist 4
This explains so much, I just thought you get more immersed in your characters than anyone I've played with and learn all about the race lol

I was a molecular biologist, but currently work in IT.

GM I'm happy to do that, just trying to answer Nefreet's questions.

I am absolutely fine with whatever look system the group wants to use. I just wanna add some pretty stones to my awesome familiar. LOL

I already know that familiar is going to become a real pain my ass after a few levels lol

Miranda, while I do the exact math, consider your money-only portion of the loot to be 290gp (40 of which is from silverdisks, they aren't just an item with a value, they are actually used as currency 10gp in this region), with another 90 if you'd like to sell of your credit slip (it's not plot relevant, just kind of a headstart if you guys ever decided to go spend some time gambling).

I already know that familiar is going to become a real pain my ass after a few levels lol

When mine starts soaking up damage, providing an escape route and aiding on my skills I sense that aliens might start abducting the party's familiars =|

Ok cool, Miranda will pick up just the Cracked Mossy Disk stone for 200gp for now. She'll also grab some scrolls: protection from evil, air bubble, and color spray.

In other news, I'm leaving tomorrow afternoon for a conference in Boston for several days, so my posting may be restricted through next Wednesday.

Awesome roleplay Forlen, Dromer :)

I'm returning from my conference tonight and will be available to post tomorrow. Unfortunately, I will be completely out of touch Friday through Sunday because I had a death in the family and will be going to a funeral and visiting family. Please continue to bot me as needed, and I apologize for this uncharacteristic lack of posting.

Will do, and sorry for the loss :(

Oh. Shoot. Sorry to hear. Hope everything else is well. I'll hold off on conversation with Miranda until you get back =)

On my phone, I'll update when I'm at a computer but wanted to answer Forlen. Yes, common knowledge like "don't stab a skeleton" would be known. I've seen some GMs who say otherwise and I've always found it odd. I've also seen many of those same people do things like roll a die to see which weapon you try next so you don't "coincidentally" grab your alchemist's fire first thing against a troll so lacking common knowledge isn't the weirdest thing I've heard of lol.

Most, if not all, of this group seems to be experienced enough to know what would fall under common knowledge, but if you aren't sure about something feel free to ask. If it is enough of a possibility you're willing to ask, chances are I'll allow it.

Unfortunately, Dromer's only bludgeoning weapon is a sap.

When I save up enough coin I'll probably go for something like a Silver Heavy Flail.

Until then I'll just keep critting with the Greatsword ^_^

Quarterstaves and clubs are free, they're literally lying on the ground. :)

But, more importantly, would they clash with his outfit?

They would, but they'd also do a good job clashing with skeletons, so it's a fair tradeoff.

Clubs, the real beatstick.