We recently started the Serpent's Skull adventure path -- we are now level two. I'm playing a ranger from the Mwangi jungles and I've decided I want her to be uninterested in material wealth. She has seen men come to Mwangi in search of gold and end up dead, diseased, mad, etc. and she has grown to believe money is evil. (Not "I must eliminate it from the world" evil, just something she avoids.
This didn't really come up until last session when the party found some gold and I told them I don't want any. They looked at me like I had just spoken in tongues. One of the other players said, "you'll regret this later."
If he's right, it's only because wealth and acquisition are baked into the system, because it is assumed that all players (and, thus, characters) are motivated by it. I'm a little bored with this endless groping for the next big item and sack of gold. I want to try a character with different values. Yet buying equipment is so integral to the system, I know I'm setting my character up to be left behind. (Though I don't mind finding and using magic during my adventures.)
How can I play this character without totally gimping myself? I'm also the only combat character in the party, so I know this could get bad quick...
As there is no vow of poverty like in exalted deeds, i suggest this approach
Take the gp 'loot' one step further. Instead of gold/jewelry/gems, have your character hold onto weapons, armor, and magic items. Roleplay the character as bartering. Trading useful for useful and avoid the references to coin medium whenever possible.
That way you the player still gear up, but in character you avoid 'wealth' and the comforts of luxury.
There is a distinction between being non-materialistic and foreswearing equipment.
What you describe is a lack of interest in pursuing treasure in order to have it. Your character doesn't want a room full of coins to count or pretty jewelery to admire. That doesn't mean the character doesn't see a magical sword as a good tool for doing what does provide motivation, or a solid suit of armor as a way to stay alive.
You would ignore missions to build money, you wouldn't take chances in a fight just to get to the treasure chest, and you have no desire to kill dragons for their hoard. However, if you find gold there is no reason not to take it to use it for items.
Rathendar has it right; if you don't want to actually have gold, keep track of your 'share' anyway by voucher or agreement. You can still buy a new sword or some potions while your party keeps their gold. Alternatively, work out a deal where you get first refusal of useful items the party finds.
How can I play this character without totally gimping myself? I'm also the only combat character in the party, so I know this could get bad quick...
This is totally a character choice your party should support you on. Maybe they can help you out with gifts and such (from your portion of the wealth they get, even) to help you stay equipped, or they can make sure you get a compensating portion of 'useful' treasure.
But if this makes sense for your character, I would definately say, play it that way.
Sure you can.... In a campaign I am in I am playing a Paladin of the goddess of the hunt. Part of his belief is that his goddess will provide if he is "following the correct path".
He never keeps more than his level in gold. So, being third level he keeps 3 GP and gives the rest to those who are less fortunate.
As long as your GM is aware of your plan and willing to meet you half way on the RP side it can work.
|
This is simply a roleplay issue. You have 3 ways to deal with this. One, move on with the assumption that though your character does not carry the gold, your party members value and appreciate you so much so that they will use your equivalent "share" of the gold to provide you with the goods and services you need.
Two, find a single party member that you trust to be the keeper of your wealth. He/She will act in a simular manner as stated above. The only advantage to this is that for role play purposes someone is actually taking the gold.
Three, and this gets a little more indepth, but it might be the only way to manage it. Assist in the gathering of the valuable baubles, not for your own sake, but because you appreciate the your party, throughout a given dungeon, adventure, etc. At the very end of this time period, look at what you've found, determine the sale price equivalent in gold (this is usually half market price, but that depends on the DM), and take your share of the treasure in suitable loot. You may come up short on occassion, but your character can say that she just chose from what would suit her and not really dirty her hands in the money. Then, if you really have to purchase something you hadn't found you can then barter for it with the excess equipment you've gotten. Do keep in mind that for this to work you're probably going to eventually need a Type 3 or better bag of holding, as gold and jewells usually weigh less and take up far less space.
However, this now begs the question, how will you be able to use certain equipment if you're trying to not be materialistic. That +4 belt of (str/dex/con) would come in handy, but it's made of mithril woven in platnim and gold with a huge ruby belt buckle, and if anything looks materialistic, you're character likely wouldn't use it.
Just because your character is uninterested in money doesn't mean she won't obtain and use the equipment necessary to do her job.
My druid spent her first five levels giving any gold or treasure to other party members. She grew up in a dryad grove and had no concept of wealth. She made her own MW bows and arrows, and she foraged for food.
That didn't stop her from collecting masterwork leather armor, some magic arrows, some potions and scrolls and even a valuable crystal lion she fancied (she is a lion shaman). She ended up well below the wealth by level guidelines, but she never felt gimped by it.
I role played her as a wise druid, so over time she realized that her view of wealth was short-sighted and since level six she has adopted a more reasonable approach to managing wealth.
Obtain equipment to do the job at hand (so you don't get your character killed because she didn't have the cold iron sword), run a bare bones character and give all the other stuff away to churches, kids, the poor, or what ever. But always take your share, just spread it out to NPCs.
Do what a Paladin would do; tithe it all away baby!
|
submit to the GM that you'd prefer to play by inherent bonus rules
I second this suggestion, if your GM will go for it-- with the caveat that if you're getting inherent bonuses, you have to forgo the magic items that boost similar areas as well... This could be the best way to do something like 3.5/Exalted Deeds's 'Vow of Poverty' in PF without introducing something that potentially throws the game way off.
(Played something similar-- different motivations though-- in 3.5, but 3.5 does have 'Vow of Poverty', which I used)
I'm not having any luck finding "inherent bonus" rules -- anyone have a summary or link?
Yep, the character has no problem using enchanted items she finds, but this does leave me at the mercy of the DM to "drop" suitable objects in. But as KrispyXIV mentioned, this should be something where I have the full party support -- after all, this also enriches them! I'll be sure to point that out at our next session.
And yes, I meant "melee" character, though I'm probably also the best ranged fighter. We have a cleric, a rogue, a wizard, and a druid also in the party. Rogues and clerics aren't bad at fighting; in fact, I think I'm probably a small notch above since I get full BAB. But they think of me as the front-liner. The fact that my character is only interested in "stone age" type weapons -- spears, clubs, daggers, bows, whips, nets, etc. -- might also nerf me a little, but I'm the type of player who is more interested in character than stats, so I guess I'll get by as best I can.
I'm not having any luck finding "inherent bonus" rules -- anyone have a summary or link?
Yep, the character has no problem using enchanted items she finds, but this does leave me at the mercy of the DM to "drop" suitable objects in. But as KrispyXIV mentioned, this should be something where I have the full party support -- after all, this also enriches them! I'll be sure to point that out at our next session.
And yes, I meant "melee" character, though I'm probably also the best ranged fighter. We have a cleric, a rogue, a wizard, and a druid also in the party. Rogues and clerics aren't bad at fighting; in fact, I think I'm probably a small notch above since I get full BAB. But they think of me as the front-liner. The fact that my character is only interested in "stone age" type weapons -- spears, clubs, daggers, bows, whips, nets, etc. -- might also nerf me a little, but I'm the type of player who is more interested in character than stats, so I guess I'll get by as best I can.
This is the time to ask your DM for help. See if she can't drop or send you to find specific "stone age" gear for you. Gear that is magical but you have to spend time to discover and the skill to unlock their potential. Translates to at the right level and if you have "passed up" enough gold your gear can bump up in level.
In general mixing parties with non-magical characters who get enhancements because they don't use magical items with characters who use magical items for their enhancments doesn't work out all that well. It's hard to balance it and verisimilitude suffers when the +5 magic sword just makes an otherwise useless fighter as good as the dude with the hunk of mundane metal.
But if you can make it work mechanically and the players are OK with the weirdness, more power to you.
I have a set of homebrew rules I am using to eliminate the overt need characters have for material wealth. The details are here. That system comes in 2 parts, and assumes the characters will have little to no wealth compared to the normal wealth by level charts (maybe a handful of potions and scrolls and one or two actual magic items through their whole career). You might want to use something like this in exchange for a vow to your dm to shun material wealth (including magic items).
Why can't you exist based on found treasure? In our group we rarely shop and most of us lean largely on found items and it works fairly well. This is particularly true if everyone else is scrabbling for gold, you should get first pick on found stuff.
Basically, this.
My bard lives solely on found treasure. She still technically owns her 25% share of the coin, but she only really spends in on room and board. She gives the rest freely to fellow party members who want to buy things but can't afford it on their own, so long as she thinks that the things they want to buy are actually important. She actually got voted to keep the budget for the party by being the least interested in money. Now she holds onto pretty much all of our cash, and her vote breaks ties if we have a 50/50 split on whether something expensive is important enough to buy or not.
In our PF "weekly" (which is more like "monthly") game, we just completed a major campaign and have just hauled a veritable wagon full of loot back to a good-sized town.
We've spent about three days now on email working out the details of divvying up the loot. We've discussed how much loot to put into the party and how to spend the party loot.
It's been fun. Most players seem to enjoy shopping. I certainly do.
In a low magic "found only" campaign or a vow of poverty campaign, that part of the game would be greatly reduced or removed. I'm fine with campaigns like that, but I like heading to the mall too. No matter how much it might bother some other gamers that the local magic shop hasn't been robbed by enterprising villains. I'm glad they haven't thought about that yet.
Why can't you exist based on found treasure?
It depends on how your group distributes treasure, I think.
Most parties I've played in are pretty strongly against anything other than "distribute magic items evenly, then distribute gold evenly", which will end up short-changing a character who declines the gold part of the rewards.
Personally, I prefer something like "divide treasure equally by value", where one character might choose to get his share all in cash and one might get his share all in items (of equal value to the cash).
Why can't you exist based on found treasure?It depends on how your group distributes treasure, I think.
Most parties I've played in are pretty strongly against anything other than "distribute magic items evenly, then distribute gold evenly", which will end up short-changing a character who declines the gold part of the rewards.
Personally, I prefer something like "divide treasure equally by value", where one character might choose to get his share all in cash and one might get his share all in items (of equal value to the cash).
It can be hard to balance the magic items vs the gold since on occasion a player will change their mind and want a different magic item, and suddenly their "share" of the loot is reduced to what fraction of the value the GM allows them to sell it for.
The best thing to do is to recalibrate the party after each major milestone, that way those falling behind in treasure can catch back up. Of course sometimes that creates role play friction.
Personally, I prefer something like "divide treasure equally by value", where one character might choose to get his share all in cash and one might get his share all in items (of equal value to the cash).It can be hard to balance the magic items vs the gold since on occasion a player will change their mind and want a different magic item, and suddenly their "share" of the loot is reduced to what fraction of the value the GM allows them to sell it for.
No, that's exactly what I mean -- an item, as a share of loot, is basically worth what you can sell it for (IMO). So a Ring of Protection +1 is equal to a 1,000 gp share of treasure. That way, selling an item doesn't change your share of treasure at all.
No, that's exactly what I mean -- an item, as a share of loot, is basically worth what you can sell it for (IMO). So a Ring of Protection +1 is equal to a 1,000 gp share of treasure. That way, selling an item doesn't change your share of treasure at all.Personally, I prefer something like "divide treasure equally by value", where one character might choose to get his share all in cash and one might get his share all in items (of equal value to the cash).It can be hard to balance the magic items vs the gold since on occasion a player will change their mind and want a different magic item, and suddenly their "share" of the loot is reduced to what fraction of the value the GM allows them to sell it for.
That only means if your character KEEPS a magic item, their overall "worth" from a WBL calculation, is higher.
But I hate getting that caught up in "does my character have enough loot?" stuff.