Players earned a lot of gold and newcomers may object


Advice

Sovereign Court

So the players in my current campaign managed to complete their objective earlier than I expected due to taking a few shortcuts. They're level 3 and have managed to obtain one of the campaign's major artifacts, for which their employers had promised a reward of 10,000 gp to each party member who had brought it back.

I have managed to recruit a few new players to the group, but now there's the problem of the newcomers having the standard PC wealth of 3000 gp while the other players now have 10,000 to spend on stuff. I'm worried that this will seem like I'm playing favorites.

The best solution would have been to change the amount of the reward to 10,000 for the whole party instead of 10,000 each, but I had already stated 10,000 each at the beginning and didn't want to go back on it. I suppose I could retcon it at the beginning of the next session when the new players arrive, but I understand that retcons are considered a bad thing for DMs.

This became an issue largely because in the previous version of the campaign, the characters didn't manage to get the artifact back to their employers until they were level 6.

Sovereign Court

don't bother, your player achieved the objective and got their reward. If the disparity becomes strongly apparent, just make sure to give a few things to the new players to compensate, not only it would make them happy, it would keep your old players happy as well, as they don't feel robbed or cheated.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

the other option is start the new players at 6000 gold or have them each start with a +1 weapon and armor on top of WBL so you don't completely make what the existing players did meaningless, but you also keep the new players from being too far behind

you are the DM remember everything in the books are guidelines and the goal is for everyone to have fun

Dark Archive

I think it was a mistake to offer the 10k in the first place unless you were expecting that to be the only reward players got for a long time. Or unless you do not care about wbl.

I suggest you tell the.players you made a unforseen mistake and ask the players for their understanding. Own up that the mistake is yours and that you apologize. Express your concerns for the state of the campaign. Point out the old version expected success at level 6 instead of 3. Ask them to understand the way too much gold would be a major throw off the guidelines for wbl and expected challenge rating. Ask them to be grown ups and accept a small reward of 1k now, maybe more later. You could say only so much hard coin is available at the moment, most of the wealth promised is currently in trade goods like grain and cattle.

If the players are not mature enough to understand then you could just accept that such over equiped PCs should have next to no challenge for a while. Consider telling them they just win the.next few fights, don't even bother wasting time on the fights, just hand wave them by. Give them a chance to maybe narrate their victory if they want. Be careful about actually rolling them out. Yes bad/good rolls can still make them a real fight. Clever tactics could come.I. handy but be swear that running so many mostly cake walk fights runs the risk of burning you out ad a GM from being disappointed at how hard it is to challenge them.

As for new players not getting a share, just.make a decision onwrather you want them to have the extra resources or not. Then tell all the.players to deal with it. Either you choose to be fair to everyone or choose nit to give an extra bunch of free hand outs they never earned in Ty he first place. They have no right to complain if you still give those players proper wbl and don't run up the challenges to compensate for the over equipped PCs.


I know its way over wbl but its still only 10k? what could they really do with that amount of money? if this was that % of wbl over at like 15 i could understand but its only 7k gold maybe 8k if you count what they already had so they get a +2 weapon or a +2 stat item nothing game breaking


I've typically seen the opposite, new players starting out with more wealth than current running characters. Hey, they are starting out with higher than 1st lvl characters, get to customize skills, and get a larger starting pool of gold for gear than the rest that started out at 1st lvl.

Shadow Lodge

Koshimo wrote:
I know its way over wbl but its still only 10k? what could they really do with that amount of money? if this was that % of wbl over at like 15 i could understand but its only 7k gold maybe 8k if you count what they already had so they get a +2 weapon or a +2 stat item nothing game breaking

The reward is 10K, on top of the old players' previous wealth of presumably 2-3K. The reward money alone could buy a +1 weapon, +2 belt of strength, +1 armour, +1 ring of protection, and +1 cloak of resistance for +2 to attack, damage, and AC, and +1 to saves. A level 3 character is likely to be missing most of these basic items so a little goes a long way. Casters could buy a +2 headband and lesser metamagic rods of extend and reach, which increase the odds they'll have major buffs up before an encounter starts and that they can stay at a safe range when casting.

That's probably not enough to make a huge difference to encounter balance; just bump things up about a CR using extra minions or the advanced template on bosses. (Be wary of using higher CR base monsters since at lower levels an extra point of CR can introduce stuff like level drain that's particularly lethal for low level characters.)

However it's probably enough wealth to make the new players feel very poor, so I second Koshimo's suggestion that you give the new players some extra wealth but not as much as the older players. It is especially important to give the new players more than standard WBL if you plan on slowing down rewards for the next few levels to get your group closer to normal WBL.


Giving the newcomers extra gold is an easily justifiable. Just give them some connection to nobility either direct or as an "agent" of someone who is. Clearly, being associated with your other PCs is extremely profitable.


Start the new folks off at 10k gold, problem solved.


kestral287 wrote:
Start the new folks off at 10k gold, problem solved.

the reason you dont start the new folks at 10k is because you don't want the existing players to feel they did this whole big quest (and very well since they finished 3 levels early) and people who didnt contribute get the reward as well i would be kinda annoyed if that happened and the new guy had nothing to do with it


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Koshimo wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Start the new folks off at 10k gold, problem solved.
the reason you dont start the new folks at 10k is because you don't want the existing players to feel they did this whole big quest (and very well since they finished 3 levels early) and people who didnt contribute get the reward as well i would be kinda annoyed if that happened and the new guy had nothing to do with it

... Seriously?

I've... literally never heard of that phenomenon. Heard of people being annoyed because their GM forced them to start below the level of the party, aye. But are you really going to hold them not being there against the when they had... no opportunity to be there in the first place?

Liberty's Edge

kestral287 wrote:
Start the new folks off at 10k gold, problem solved.

I second this, it seems the fairest thing to do.

Lantern Lodge

Yes.

One of my current campaigns has new players coming and going frequently. Not only do they seem to monopolize the time, but they then expect to be brought up to our level because... why? What did they do? We've spent more time, showed up, etc..., why should they get all the same rewards?

It's not punishment. Flat out giving them gold is wrong. However, giving them an item to compensate, such as a weapon or armor, or even a special item from their deity is so much better than "Well, they've made X amount of gold more than the WBL, therefore new players will have that much gold".

Part of it is also that those players have had to spend gold on consumables etc...


I'd be peeved if they got 10k for no reason.

Have them start with double. 6k seems appropriate and shouldn't have them leagues behind the party. Do not also give them +1 anything. You might as well give them 10k if you're going to do that. UNLESS the +1's are blank masterwork items they can enchant with the 6k. That seems appropriate.


I wouldn't give the new people anything extra. I'd simply expect them to understand that the existing players are being rewarded for something that was already in motion

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe encourage the existing players to spend some of that gold on gear for their new comrades? Makes sense in-character as your team is more powerful if a couple of new people have +1 weapons/armor/cloaks versus spending even more money on taking your own weapon from +1 to +2. And out of character, it's a good way to let the existing players' reward feel "real" (i.e., not cheapen it by handing the same to others for free) and simultaneously make the newbies feel welcomed and empowered/excited. Seems like an all-around win to me.


ccs wrote:
I wouldn't give the new people anything extra. I'd simply expect them to understand that the existing players are being rewarded for something that was already in motion

I agree.


I dont know your group so I cant say just give the new people 10k also. I would give the new people more gold than normal so the difference is not too great however.

Sovereign Court

Thanks for all the replies. I'm currently proposing a compromise of 15000 gp, that way the original players will still have quite a bit while the newcomers aren't too far behind.


I'd probably handle it like this:

In Character, tell the PCs that they got back sooner than expected and the money simply isn't completely available yet. Give them some more appropriate sum (e.g. 2k each) and promise them the rest will trickle in as soon as possible (probably another 2k per level).

If the Players complain OOC, tell them that you expected them to complete this challenge much later, so the reward will screw up your next encounters.

Then find some way to bring the new players up to a comparable level of wealth without giving them stuff for free.


I would say that it really depends on the campaign, the new players background and your group. But here's some thoughts:

1. I would not lower the promised reward, your group managed to get it before you anticipated that should be rewarded not 'punished'.
2. How generous are your players? In some of my groups the players would be happy to help gear up their new companion. (This too would depend on the characters)
3. If you don't think that they would want to help then I would say to give the new player some extra gold 6-8k sounds reasonable to me.
4. To the people that don't want the new players to have extra, why would you want your new companions to be weaker than the rest of the group?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread says a lot about folks playstyles, investment and entitlement issues. As a current player I would abide by the DM's decision to: reward the newcomers, divide the loot among us all or just leave us with more cash.

As an incoming player I'd be fine with a sack of coal or 20k.

What's with all the problems? When did roleplaying games become synonymous with greedy materialism or entitlement based on seniority? For imaginary characters in a make-believe world.

I'm profoundly disturbed by the comments here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:

This thread says a lot about folks playstyles, investment and entitlement issues. As a current player I would abide by the DM's decision to: reward the newcomers, divide the loot among us all or just leave us with more cash.

As an incoming player I'd be fine with a sack of coal or 20k.

What's with all the problems? When did roleplaying games become synonymous with greedy materialism or entitlement based on seniority? For imaginary characters in a make-believe world.

I'm profoundly disturbed by the comments here.

I have watched a game (didn't play, because of... well, mostly the upcoming story. And apparently the guy GMing it doesn't like me very much) where new players were expected to start a level below the party, at standard WBL and mythic tier one. The players at the point the game fell apart were tier 2-3 andmassively over WBL; one of them had two artifacts (and they were level six or so).

That game fell apart badly. It didn't matter if half the party showed up to encounters, because the other half was leagues ahead of them and could slaughter the fights on their own. So, half the players felt useless, and complained to the GM because of it, and he got sick of that complaining, then asked one of the players to slaughter the group.

Later, my merry three-man group (the other two of whom did play in that game) recruited a guy from it, and he was shocked-- legitimately surprised-- that we were 'allowing' him to start exactly where the party was. And this group has a much better dynamic, both in player-to-player and player-to-GM, than the other did. I see a correlation between the two things, myself.


I've played in groups where you come in a level beneath everyone else and whatnot. It's rather off putting.


I would go ahead and start the newcomers off at std WBL.

In the next section, drop a few more items that seem more appropriate for the new PC's class/build than for the old guys. Not a lot, You don't want the vertrans to feel like they never get anything. Just enough that they will slowly catch up.

The other thing you could do is make some of the catch up part of the campaign. If say the 2 new guys are brothers/friends they come in together because they need a group to protect them. They just got a big score (not enough to catch up with the others, but significant), but the former owners/competition/nemesis is coming to get it back.
However, some groups don't like that kind of thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another option might be to talk to the players about spending the promised money on infrastructure instead of personal gear. Perhaps they'd like a base of operations, or a ship, or a business?


kestral287 wrote:
Koshimo wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Start the new folks off at 10k gold, problem solved.
the reason you dont start the new folks at 10k is because you don't want the existing players to feel they did this whole big quest (and very well since they finished 3 levels early) and people who didnt contribute get the reward as well i would be kinda annoyed if that happened and the new guy had nothing to do with it

... Seriously?

I've... literally never heard of that phenomenon. Heard of people being annoyed because their GM forced them to start below the level of the party, aye. But are you really going to hold them not being there against the when they had... no opportunity to be there in the first place?

like other people have said if you are too far behind the party you will feel outshined and the game stops being fun, but at the same time you don't want your existing players to feel they just did this awesome thing and people who had nothing to do with it are getting the same reward you need to balance to keep everyone happy


Koshimo wrote:

like other people have said if you are too far behind the party you will feel outshined and the game stops being fun, but at the same time you don't want your existing players to feel they just did this awesome thing and people who had nothing to do with it are getting the same reward you need to balance to keep everyone happy

Personally I derive more enjoyment out of the roleplaying that got me the reward than the reward itself. It also seems really detrimental to fun when you are having party wealth reflect real-life circumstances.


GeneMemeScene wrote:
Koshimo wrote:

like other people have said if you are too far behind the party you will feel outshined and the game stops being fun, but at the same time you don't want your existing players to feel they just did this awesome thing and people who had nothing to do with it are getting the same reward you need to balance to keep everyone happy

Personally I derive more enjoyment out of the roleplaying that got me the reward than the reward itself. It also seems really detrimental to fun when you are having party wealth reflect real-life circumstances.

i don't disagree with what you are saying at all, my worry is just that if the new players are so far behind they won't have the fun rping because the old players will outshine them


I think a lot of it depends on the campaign.

What kind of person is it that promised the party this money?

There's a number of stories out there where the party once the quest was completed, they received something of equal value to the gold promised them. Could be anything from monster infested mine, a un-wanted 3rd son/daughter and the money is a dowery, to a title to contested land being held by another kingdom.
Lots of things can be done if you want to think outside the box.

...or you can be completely mean and have the artifact the party returned be a fake and have them start all over hunting for the correct one.

^_^

...or not so mean and have the artifact missing a small piece which requires another quest to complete.


As a player, I'd be more annoyed if the new guys were coming in under geared compared to the party. They won't be able to contribute in encounters that would be a challenge for the preexisting players, which isn't fun for them, and makes the whole party just inefficient. Massive power gaps between players rarely end well, no matter how "fair" they seem at the time.

Lantern Lodge

10k gold isn't going to mess up encounters too badly.

In a different campaign I finished recently, I came in late. Everyone was way over WBL (think a million gold to divide amoungst 5 players at level 4), all had special super powers, and I came in as a normal guy.

I died three times in two sessions :). But I was still able to contribute, even later with a new character in the same situation. I don't understand why people think that lower level/under geared players can't contribute. It makes getting that next piece of gear more satisfying, knowing that you worked so hard for it.


Well... At those levels 10K can have a big effect if they are clever. A +2 weapon a bit early won't have a huge effect.
However, if they are really clever and buy a bunch of consumables like wands, scrolls, and potions. They could suddenly become much more powerful than you were expecting. If each of them bought an extra 1/2 dozen level 1 or a couple of level 2 wands each with 50 charges, that could have a major impact.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prince Yyrkoon wrote:
As a player, I'd be more annoyed if the new guys were coming in under geared compared to the party. They won't be able to contribute in encounters that would be a challenge for the preexisting players, which isn't fun for them, and makes the whole party just inefficient. Massive power gaps between players rarely end well, no matter how "fair" they seem at the time.

100% agreed. It boggles my mind that there are players who are so obsessed with the reward itself, especially in a game where funds are used for basic survival rather than doing anything new and interesting, that they are willing to screw the balance of the game to ensure they feel special.

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

10k gold isn't going to mess up encounters too badly.

In a different campaign I finished recently, I came in late. Everyone was way over WBL (think a million gold to divide amoungst 5 players at level 4), all had special super powers, and I came in as a normal guy.

I died three times in two sessions :). But I was still able to contribute, even later with a new character in the same situation. I don't understand why people think that lower level/under geared players can't contribute. It makes getting that next piece of gear more satisfying, knowing that you worked so hard for it.

Imma gonna call bull on this entire post. Any character that dies three times in two sessions is a drag on the party, no exceptions.


Just give the new players an extra 10k. Very simple solution. Think of a reason.


You yourself said the reward was meant for later levels but yet somehow they accomplished it. If I accomplished something similar but am forced to cheapen it by either taking a lesser reward or have someone else come in doing nothing yet and suddenly jumping to our level I'm going to feel cheated. Why bother to play properly and do things at all if this is possible?

Better alternative would be to give the new players a slightly higher wbl or a free +1 equipment or equivalent. If they want more they are going to have to prove themselves. Pure and simple.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Prince Yyrkoon wrote:
As a player, I'd be more annoyed if the new guys were coming in under geared compared to the party. They won't be able to contribute in encounters that would be a challenge for the preexisting players, which isn't fun for them, and makes the whole party just inefficient. Massive power gaps between players rarely end well, no matter how "fair" they seem at the time.

100% agreed. It boggles my mind that there are players who are so obsessed with the reward itself, especially in a game where funds are used for basic survival rather than doing anything new and interesting, that they are willing to screw the balance of the game to ensure they feel special.

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

10k gold isn't going to mess up encounters too badly.

In a different campaign I finished recently, I came in late. Everyone was way over WBL (think a million gold to divide amoungst 5 players at level 4), all had special super powers, and I came in as a normal guy.

I died three times in two sessions :). But I was still able to contribute, even later with a new character in the same situation. I don't understand why people think that lower level/under geared players can't contribute. It makes getting that next piece of gear more satisfying, knowing that you worked so hard for it.

Imma gonna call bull on this entire post. Any character that dies three times in two sessions is a drag on the party, no exceptions.

He did though...he contributed to the casualty lists.

Lantern Lodge

Arachnofiend wrote:
Prince Yyrkoon wrote:
As a player, I'd be more annoyed if the new guys were coming in under geared compared to the party. They won't be able to contribute in encounters that would be a challenge for the preexisting players, which isn't fun for them, and makes the whole party just inefficient. Massive power gaps between players rarely end well, no matter how "fair" they seem at the time.

100% agreed. It boggles my mind that there are players who are so obsessed with the reward itself, especially in a game where funds are used for basic survival rather than doing anything new and interesting, that they are willing to screw the balance of the game to ensure they feel special.

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

10k gold isn't going to mess up encounters too badly.

In a different campaign I finished recently, I came in late. Everyone was way over WBL (think a million gold to divide amoungst 5 players at level 4), all had special super powers, and I came in as a normal guy.

I died three times in two sessions :). But I was still able to contribute, even later with a new character in the same situation. I don't understand why people think that lower level/under geared players can't contribute. It makes getting that next piece of gear more satisfying, knowing that you worked so hard for it.

Imma gonna call bull on this entire post. Any character that dies three times in two sessions is a drag on the party, no exceptions.

Call bull all you want, it's true. Does a character's death automatically bring down the party? It depends on the campaign, and in this case, there was very little impact from my death(s) due to the time between encounters during that time period. In fact...

I died to a trap that would've killed the entire party had I not gone first.
I died to a breath weapon from a dragon, which was a waste of an action on the dragon's part.
And I forget exactly how I died the third time, though dying three times in two sessions was famous amoung my party.

Tell me why you think it was a drag? My deaths aided the party. All the while I was still able to provide buffs to the group when I wasn't dying for the greater good.

There's always a way to contribute. The only complaint people can really have is not having the spot light, but that's still accomplish able by the DM to give a player the spot light.


Okay, so basically your character contributed as much as three castings of Summon Monster I.

How you managed to have anything resembling fun in that scenario is beyond me.


This is really about play style at tables & we've got lots of table variation in this thread.

My two cents: Go with the idea of explaining your original expectations to the current party - you thought they'd be level 6ish when the achieve the goal. Tie it back to the story, having the person(s) rewarding them not actually having all the cash available (tied up in trade goods, trade ventures, etcetera).

Make them feel special with an event to celebrate their victory. Have the sponsors take the party out to be wined and dined, and treated as heroes.

Deliver something like 1/2 the payout now (5k reward vs 3k new character start is not a big gap). Offer the players several scenarios for how the sponsors & party can structure the outstanding payment - you've seen some of those ideas above. This can be an effective role-playing tool if you offer the various options in-game.

Then remember, you can control access to magic items within your game. If they start going for a heavy investment in consumables like wands, maybe the market isn't there to support what they're asking for.

At the end of the day, you've got a lot of story hooks to support a slow pay scenario, and you can provide both in-game role-playing rewards (the feast, honors, etc) and out of game context so your existing players understand the direction of the game and don't feel gypped.


RegUS PatOff wrote:

This is really about play style at tables & we've got lots of table variation in this thread.

My two cents: Go with the idea of explaining your original expectations to the current party - you thought they'd be level 6ish when the achieve the goal. Tie it back to the story, having the person(s) rewarding them not actually having all the cash available (tied up in trade goods, trade ventures, etcetera).

Make them feel special with an event to celebrate their victory. Have the sponsors take the party out to be wined and dined, and treated as heroes.

Deliver something like 1/2 the payout now (5k reward vs 3k new character start is not a big gap). Offer the players several scenarios for how the sponsors & party can structure the outstanding payment - you've seen some of those ideas above. This can be an effective role-playing tool if you offer the various options in-game.

Then remember, you can control access to magic items within your game. If they start going for a heavy investment in consumables like wands, maybe the market isn't there to support what they're asking for.

At the end of the day, you've got a lot of story hooks to support a slow pay scenario, and you can provide both in-game role-playing rewards (the feast, honors, etc) and out of game context so your existing players understand the direction of the game and don't feel gypped.

I would be careful about betraying your players' expectations. Once in a while is OK, but basically taking away 5k from them. They have probably been shopping for gear they want to buy, and planning what to do with it. This is not the way to go. Give the players more money and up the challenge level. By level 6 the players won't even notice the difference.

Silver Crusade

Nicos wrote:
ccs wrote:
I wouldn't give the new people anything extra. I'd simply expect them to understand that the existing players are being rewarded for something that was already in motion
I agree.

I disagree, its the same reason people don't roll for stats, if I am running around with a MWK weapon, and another player a +2 weapon, thats a fairly large disadvantage, especially vs incorpreal or the like.

I would do this- Have the new players start with one item worth about 8k. Have them incorporate it into their backstory and you as the GM work with them on this.


I don't believe that everyone should always have an equal amount of wealth at any time, just as I don't believe that everyone should get a trophy in a competition (like they do in schools today). The first set of players earned the money, the second set didn't. I don't see what the problem is. If I joined a campaign that was already in progress, I would expect to have the same wealth and magic items as people already playing in it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nothing to be done about it now - don't go back on your promises as a GM, some players will never forget it, and question your every future move. But in future games, I'd advise against the whole "Fetch this powerful artifact and Ill pay you S***tons of gold!" motivation, because it's way too easy to start players on the slide into overpowering gear. Better gear = higher cr mobs to compensate = better loot/xp = more OP, = harder mobs/enemies to compensate = ... you get the idea.

This is why i stopped handing out the shinies. I'd rather a low magic campaign, against weaker enemies. That way when they face a really nasty boss, or find a +x weapon, it's worth something. Why are hill giants feared by the villagers? Hell, they're supposed to be terrifying to adventurers, just look at 'em. Sorta loses appeal when your level 6 zen archer with her flaming +3 composite bow and exploding arrows and custom constant effect cl 12 divine power booty shorts aces the whole tribe while she's eating popcorn.

It's not so bad, playing a low magic setting. Talk it out with your players - if they're too munchkin to try a setting like that, then go ahead, fall back on the "make more critters" option. Ultimately, after a few weeks/ games of utterly dominating everything and hitting level 12+ in quicktime, they might get bored and find themselves agreeing with you. Me, whatever

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
pickin_grinnin wrote:
I don't believe that everyone should always have an equal amount of wealth at any time, just as I don't believe that everyone should get a trophy in a competition (like they do in schools today). The first set of players earned the money, the second set didn't. I don't see what the problem is. If I joined a campaign that was already in progress, I would expect to have the same wealth and magic items as people already playing in it.

Did you mean you would NOT expect it, or you would expect it?

On a more serious note, the best option would be to discuss the situation with your players.

Whether that is privately with the existing players first, or with all of the players at once, is up to you.

Explain the situation, and see if you can all come to a satisfactory resolution, whether it is the existing PCs pooling the money and sharing it out, so that even their new allies get a share, or if they want to go with the "You get this as a deed.... to a haunted house/abandoned keep/etc." type thing.

That can lead into a new setup for future adventures.

At third level, giving them a title to, say, Fangwood Keep, but they have to clear it out, might be a good thing on all sides...

The Exchange

First off, for future reference, I usually offer specific magic items when people give out a quest, rather than large amounts of coinage. Non-liquid assets don't have quite as much potential for abuse...

Water under the bridge. Don't worry about your new players too much: in my experience, when a new player learns from the veterans that A) quests are generously rewarded and B) cleverness can be used to complete quests prematurely, they're far less interested in whining about cash disparity than they are in getting a quest themselves.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Players earned a lot of gold and newcomers may object All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.