|
When splitting up loot from their first adventure, my group got into a little argument over how to divide up the treasure. Basically the issue was whether or not to treat items kept (not sold) should count as their full price or the sell value. IE. if someone kept a masterworked sword out of the loot, does that count as ~150gp or ~300gp worth of their share?
As small aside, how much do you normally put aside for a party fund to use for healings, bribes, and other group expenses?
Sale value is the best (IMO), but usually the games I play in go for the usual Commie pinko "to each according to his needs" approach. :-)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Best ignore that sword completely for sharing treasure.
Sell what is not needed, then split up the money/gems equally.
Items that someone wants goes to the person that needs it most or can make the best use of it. Even if that means the frontline fighter will have alot more gear than the wizard maybe. He's the one that keeps the wizard safe, so that +1 Longsword is better with him than the wizard.
Once those items aren't needed anymore (say fighter finds a +2 longsword), he gives the item to someone else who needs it. If noone needs it, it gets sold and the money split up between the group.
Here's a thread I made a few months back about pretty much the same question: Clicky link
In there's also a link to a podcast that takes a look at this issue in depth, and is very informative and compares different options of loot-handling and distribution. Has changed my own view on this matter.
For WBL calculations (for the DM to see if the party is under or overgeared) I'd count it as sell-value, since that's what they get for it if they decide to sell it instead of use it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
we don't count gear for distribution. If there is gear that more than one character wants, we roll for it. Any gear that is not claimed is sold and then split with other coin/gems in equal share.
Yes, I might get lucky and get the Mithral breastplate, putting my wealth (especially at low levels) above my companions, but generally it will even it's self out over a few sessions. This also assumes that your players are not being greedy. With the example above, if one player gets the Mithral breastplate, that player won't roll for the ring of protection and the magic sword, etc.
For group costs, we just split it when we need to. i.e. as a 5 person group that needs 1500gp to buy spell casting or to pay a bribe, we just deduct 300gp each. If one player doesn't have the cash, then it will just be deducted from his next share. This also goes to gear that is mutually beneficial to the group, like a bag of holding.
|
My group tends to go with the "who can get the most use out of the item" approach mentioned above and it doesn't count towards dividing loot up. It kinda evens out in the long run. Oddly, if something is claimed from any loot it doesn't count. As for party expenses, we either add an extra share for party stuff or all help pay for it.
I've also played in groups where we made loot distribution way too complicated and it just became a headache (though, being the one who did all the calculations, I figured out a way to exploit things a bit). I much prefer the other method.
|
When I DM what we do is separate out all the stuff no one wants. That's Separate, sold right away and split evenly.
For the rest, Well that goes to whoever wants it and I let the party figure that out. The general rule is that the party tries to get an even share of the practical loot to each player, mitigated by the idea of "I probably need it more, so let me have it".
Going solely by monetary value just seems like a recipe for sorrow.
My group tends to go with the "who can get the most use out of the item" approach mentioned above and it doesn't count towards dividing loot up. It kinda evens out in the long run. Oddly, if something is claimed from any loot it doesn't count. As for party expenses, we either add an extra share for party stuff or all help pay for it.
I've also played in groups where we made loot distribution way too complicated and it just became a headache (though, being the one who did all the calculations, I figured out a way to exploit things a bit). I much prefer the other method.
This is what we also use, although the gold will get split evenly. Instead of using the random generation tables, which will give us a lot of things that make no sense, whoever DM's usually will create the magic items we "randomly" acquire things our characters could at least get some temporary use out of. I like the mix of about 2/3 custom tailored items to 1/3 sellables.
Frequently, my parties are employed by either the military or a noble patron. In such instances, the party will keep items they can actually use, but most gold, gems, etc. go to 'The Crown'. At regular intervals, the party members are paid their salary/wages, while living expenses and other fluff-based expenses (food, lodging, etc.) are covered/hand-waved as part of their per diem.
In theory, this helps to keep the characters closer to the level of wealth I intend for them to have, while avoiding the annoyance of both avarice and paying for drinks, meals, etc. Likewise, even if no one in the party can craft items, it provides a basic structure for being able to commission or requisition specific equipment thru their organization. It's also nice to see good-aligned characters turn over evil items for purification/destruction rather than selling them.
On a side note, I'm really tempted to try and implement a fantasy version of the wealth system from d20 Modern. I think it would suit our approach better, but I'm a bit leery of the [potential] work involved.
Going solely by monetary value just seems like a recipe for sorrow.
How do you figure? It's not really any different from giving out only gold and letting the players buy whatever they want, except you get the occasional 50% discount.
My group tends to go with the "who can get the most use out of the item" approach mentioned above and it doesn't count towards dividing loot up. It kinda evens out in the long run.
My experience is different; we usually end up fighting "fighter-ish" bad guys much more frequently than we fight "wizard-ish" bad guys, so we end up with lots of fighter treasure and not so much wizard treasure. Now you could argue that wizards are awesome enough that they don't deserve as much treasure (which has a measure of truth to it), but I've rarely found that it evens out.
How do you handle treasure division? Very, very, carefully; that's how. You want to make sure that everyone gets an equal share, likewise you want to make sure the appropriate items go where they can best be used. It's a delicate dance.
Just don't do it like how it was done in one game I participated in; high roll gets the item ... for every item. Coins were split evenly at least. As you can imagine, there was quite a bit of tension at the table between players ...
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
My groups typically don't bother with figuring out values of treasure that we keep. If someone can use it, they take it. If multiple people can use it, we talk about it and decide as a group who will take what. What isn't claimed by a party member is sold. We then divide up all of our coin equally. Also, if we find that someone really needs an item, we each pitch in some gold to help them buy it.
In the games that I run, I allow the players decide how to do treasure division.
While this might seem like someone in the party is going to fall behind in their wealth, we generally are really close to each other.
|
|
In home games I've played we generally go with giving items to whoever will benefit the most from it (as it provides a benefit to the group as a whole to have everyone equipped as well as possible). Items that are not claimed are generally sold for 50% value and the proceeds divvied up. If the group as a whole needs to buy something (like a wand of CLW for after-combat healing, or the material component for a Raise Dead for one of the party members) we split the costs.
Why do we split the costs on Raise Dead? It distributes the (rather significant) hit among everyone. This way everyone gets assistance when they need it.
Back in the Living City days, we would calculate the sale value of every item, add it all up, then divide it by the number of players. Every player then got that much to "spend" buying items out of the pot. If he wanted to buy something that was worth more than his share, he had to contribute gold or items with a sale value sufficient to make up the difference. If there was a conflict as to who got it we would just talk it out or, if things were at an impasse, roll off.
My groups typically don't bother with figuring out values of treasure that we keep. If someone can use it, they take it. If multiple people can use it, we talk about it and decide as a group who will take what. What isn't claimed by a party member is sold.
[..]
While this might seem like someone in the party is going to fall behind in their wealth, we generally are really close to each other.
I agree that "if you can use it, claim it" usually works well. But sometimes there's an issue with certain borderline items.
For instance, suppose your group finds a pair of Gloves of Swimming and Climbing. Clearly, just about anyone can use such an item. But the question is: Are the gloves worth 6,250 gp? Or 3,125 gp (the sale value)? I would argue that you can buy a whole mess of potions of Spider Climb and Touch of the Sea for that money (which would be more useful than the gloves in some situations and less useful in others) and still have cash left over to share with the rest of the party. But if you go with the "claim it or lose it" option, then you get people claiming it because otherwise they might get nothing at all. So you end up with party wealth tied up in an item that nobody would ever buy in the first place, if they had a choice.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just don't do it like how it was done in one game I participated in; high roll gets the item ... for every item. Coins were split evenly at least. As you can imagine, there was quite a bit of tension at the table between players ...
So just name your character "High Roll".
I've played in games where there was no division of loot--items went to whoever needed it (by consensus), and the party kept a pool of money, also spent by consensus. It worked pretty well.
it's fair to do it at sell value, the group profits just as much, and you get rewarded for being flexible or lucky enough. If two players want it, you can bid on it, whoever pays the most, up until the full price, will get it.
In our groups there were never such issues as noone was disciplined enough to play the accountant.
On the other hand, if such a problem gets out of hand, I would suggest the same thing as for "ask money for crafting" thread that got over 2000 messages: give in to group pressure, no amount of made up gold pieces is worth the loss of fun you will have over such debates.
For us, it depends on the characters. If someone is taking item creation feats, the item's value would be its cost to craft. If we don't have item creation, we count its value as the merchant price. The basic idea is that the value of the item is the smallest amount of money one could spend to get that item through other available means.
In general, my group pretty much divides up the exceptional goodies by consensus, then sells the rest and splits the cash evenly.
We tried the "item sale value deducts from cash award" path in the past, and it ended up causing more trouble than it solved. First of all, the calculations got tricky (such that we needed to use Excel to figure it out). Then, it was difficult to figure out who got the "quest item" type stuff, especially when such items had sale values that were greater than a single monetary share. I mean, if you recover the Lost Sword of Awesomeness, and it has a sale value of half a million gold pieces, does that mean that the claimant doesn't get money for the next twenty-seven encounters? More trouble than it was worth!
IOW, efforts to be scrupulously fair ended up causing far more intra-party strife than just saying, "OK, the fighter gets the +2 chain shirt, the wizard gets the wand of magic missiles, and the rogue gets the potion of invisibility. The size small +1 gnome hooked hammer of frost? Sell it."
I basically never roll magic items randomly. I do my best to give out goodies as loot that I know will appeal to particular characters, so that it pretty much all evens out. If I notice that one character is looking a little light in the loot dept, then I'll add an item or two in the next encounter for that character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While my players tend to a really good job in general, one trick I use to get the players to distribute items in a certain way is to fluff the items in a way such that they'll clearly appeal to certain players. If the marauding northern barbarian/ranger hasn't picked up a weapon upgrade in a while, the treasure will contain Goretusk, a rough-hewn mammoth-pelt-handled spike of a weapon that happens to be a +1 Frost Shortsword. If the grim, sneaky rogue is more due, the treasure will contain Cold Blood, an elegant, razor-sharp blade that's always cold to the touch and never reflects bright light, which happens to be a +1 Frost Shortsword.
Well to be honest I let my group fight it among themselfs. But then I have a good group of players. Anything people will use they just give it to the other player. Anything left over they split evenly. Have had one or two times when more than one player wants an item, but they work it out themselves.
We tend to divide according to usefulness, heap up the garbage and spend money on the ones who were deprived of anything useful at distribution.
We also have a GM that is rather strict with what is available for sale, so we tend to jump when something REALLY good is for sale, even if it shifts the distribution.
Power of the Team > Power of the Individual. We refuse to sell a Keen Greatsword +3 when there is a fighter spec'd in greatswords, no matter the imbalance of loot.
I mean, if you recover the Lost Sword of Awesomeness, and it has a sale value of half a million gold pieces, does that mean that the claimant doesn't get money for the next twenty-seven encounters?
Of course not! You sell it and live like kings! ;-)
|
|
Our GM tries to make sure that everyone gets the kind of magic items they need. When it comes time to split up the treasure, he'll actually ask who hasn't gotten a magic item in a while, and what kind they need, before telling us that we just so happened to find an item like that.
The coins and otherwise worthless items we sell and divide evenly-- excpet that we divide it so that there's an extra share, which is dubbed "communal". The whole party has to agree on spending any of that money, but if one player can convince the others to let him dip into it for that must-have item, it's there.
As a DM I just tell them what they got and let them figure it out. They're adults, they deal with it quickly or I have time to sit back and nurse my beer.
For those of you that just have one communal pile of money, how do you explain that in character? Or is money mostly just hand-waved? That's fine if that's the way you do it, some people just don't want to worry about the money. I was just curious how it is handled.
My own groups seems to be pretty close to what most have already said. Items that are needed go to those that need them. Everything else is sold and divided up. The in game rationalization for some people getting expensive items "without paying for it" is that it is to be used for the benefit of the party. If that person were to leave for any reason (maybe the player wants to bring in a new character) then they would have to settle up. This could mean that they get extra money if they leave if they haven't been getting anything valuable recently. This rarely happens though, so we don't worry about it too much.
For group expenses everyone chips in. Usually equally although exceptions might be made for those that might have less or more treasure than usual. This includes expensive healing for those that need it.
|
|
my group got into a little argument over how to divide up the treasure.
As a GM, it is your duty to sit back and enjoy the show. *grin*
It is *their* duty to decide which method they use to share treasure (if any), what to do with in-party thieves and greedy ones (why is everyone looking at the rogue?) and so on.
Seriously, this is one moment you as a GM can relax. Just make sure they roleplay during the discussions.
As a DM I just tell them what they got and let them figure it out. They're adults, they deal with it quickly or I have time to sit back and nurse my beer.
That's the spirit :-)
Besides, younger, XP-hungry players tend to get over with the loot quickly so they can go kill more monsters.