|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Our group has been having an ongoing discussion about treasure split, how it should be done and how un-fair it seems to be.
What ends up happening is items get found, people that can use them claim them and someone feels like they got left out.
If we have any items no one wants or claims and mundane items and gold, silver, copper, etc, all of this gets divided by the party.
In this case we have 6 - 8 players in a typical game. Some of those players where not there the entire game, yet feel they got slighted treasure.
So the question, how does your group divide treasure and not have hard feelings?
This has always been a sore issue with every group I have played in as someone always feels they did not get as much.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In short, we divide treasure and not have hard feelings because we are all friends and get along with each other. :)
That said, our parties always give the item to whomever we think gains the most benefit from it, or rather to whomever can use the item to the parties best advantage. If someone isn't there for a session their character still gets an equal share of the loot. We try not to penalize players for having a life away from the table. Life happens.
When a character no longer wants an items such as when the fighter with a +1 longsword finds a +2 longsword, the unwanted item is sold and the money is divided among all the players. If another character wants the item instead (maybe the elven rogue is still using a masterwork longsword), then the fighter in this case would give the item to the rogue. When the rogue found something better the item would be sold for party treasure.
This method maximizes treasure (by not selling useful loot for half-price), maximizes party effectiveness, and keeps someone from getting to wealth imbalanced.
An example of wealth imbalance would be a party with one arcane caster who gets all the scrolls, wands, staff, etc. for arcane caster, but then just sells them to buy whatever she wants. If this arcane caster has decided she isn't going to use that Wand of Arcane Lock that has been on her character sheet for several levels, it reverts to party treasure.
I think I have belabored the point enough and have probably succumbed to a murder of ninjas by now.
EDIT: Hey, no ninjas!
|
Usually the groups I'm in will give the magic items we find to whoever can make the best use of the item. We sell anything leftover and divide the money up equally with one extra share set aside as a "party fund" to pay for Raise Dead spells or other expensive material components.
The party fund is managed by the cleric and is in the form of diamonds rather than coins.
|
|
In the past both methods posted where how it was done. But with new players, comes new feelings on how it should be done.
If the Fighter has a +1 mace and the Cleric the Masterwork, before selling the +1 the Cleric got next rights. Now If the party agreed in whole to sell the mace and to buy something better, the person selling it took his treasure and the sell to buy the item
In the past we had a player that was always bugging the rest of the party for their gold so he could go buy something that he could use. Yes it might benefit the party, but in most cases it benefited him. When players refused, he got mad and pouted. But the sad thing is it was never done in reverse. if someone needed treasure to get something he refused saying he was saving his treasure up.
Thanks for the 2 inputs so far
i recently started a game where the GM makes a list of all the loot and we then roll percentage dice with the highest roll having first choice. Its a fair way to do it, but you could have one guy that rolls really well all the time and gets the best gear. But even with this method there is a need > greed factor.
Add up the sale (half) value of all items, split that amount out, players buy the treasure at half value with the split number they were given. Unpurchased items are sold and the actual gold is split up and given to match everyones remaining unspent value.
Alternatively, dock every 10% immediately for a party fund.
We vote for who can best use an item. Some are obvious, others not so much. This also becomes harder if for example you have two barbarians in the same party. We tried to make sure that no one was getting short changed in the long run.
If an item was awarded out of the party loot, when someone got an item that was better than the one they had, they had to return the item to the party loot, either to give to another player or to be sold for party funds. They didn't get to pocket the money for an item they were given.
This does rely on the players being fairly mature and the GM making sure there is an even distribution of types of magic loot, but that can probably be said of most schemes.
I've seen the dice for first pick. Eventually, this should even out, but try to tell that to the barbarian who just saw his +3 greataxe sold to buy that swishy elf a headband of alluring charisma +3. The party also saw it's total loot decrease by 9000gp, because the the barbarian could have used the axe as is, without having to sell it at half value.
You also have a problem with a large group and people coming and going during the game, those also really complicate matters. You're more likely to have have two people crave, and deserve, a particular item. What if the barbarian isn't around when you find that perfect greataxe. Does that mean he should be denied a useful magic item.
I've tried more complicated methods but no one seems to agree on those either. One thing you could try is to have everyone calculate total wealth occasionally and make sure no one is one or more levels behind. If they are perhaps give them a double share of cash. But even that is problematic because sometime you want to keep obscure but expensive items.
I really wish I could tell you an completely fair method that won't involve a lot of record keeping.
we have had loot whores but for the most part.
we get loot.
who ever can best use it gets dibs.
hands down what ever they have that some one else can use.
if that last person with a +1 sword now has a +2 he is free to keep or sell the +1 and keep the cash.
why? because micromanaging that is pretty petty and besides... he just passed on the +2 item so maybe he can use the sell cash to bring himself up to par with the rest.
Add up the sale (half) value of all items, split that amount out, players buy the treasure at half value with the split number they were given. Unpurchased items are sold and the actual gold is split up and given to match everyones remaining unspent value.
The above is what my groups have pretty much always used.
During the adventure, the magic items are "loaned out" to the PC that can make the most of it. But after the adventure, or when there is downtime to sell off items, things done as indicated above.
Consumables are party pool items, used up as needed.
When the treasure is divided up, the party get's a full share (if not more), mostly for upkeep and consumables (like wands of cure light wounds).
Once an item has been bought, it belongs to the PC, who can do what they want with it. If another party members needs it, it is usually sold to them at half cost.
I deal with this on a regular basis, try not to let it bother you too much.
My current character has less than half of the wealth-by-level of a 7th level PC, while some of the other players have newer characters with double or triple that wealth, because characters get generated at a higher level.
I'm thinking of retiring or killing off my much loved character to even the income scales.
It looks like most of us are doing it the right way. Treasure has always been taken on an as needed basis. One or two battles may yield the fighter more treasure or items that the rest of the group. The next two battles might favor the wizard or rogue. No big deal, it all evens out. It sounds like you have a pouty child that wants everything all the time. Put him in a time out and explain the strategies that everyone seems to be using.
You can't please everyone all the time. Also, using diamonds (to raise dead or ressurect) instead of coins is an awesome idea. I will incorporate that in tonights game!
My group always do loot splitting in game so it can be different each time. Once the party leader was a very hands one kinda guy so he handed out loot to each character and knew exactly what each person had. Another ( and most times)the party talked about each item and who needed it most. usually loot is sold that isn't needed and split among the party. Items that no one is using is put in party treasure and then sold and divided.
Treasure split can be done in 2 ways :
- magic items are given to PC who want them, if several PC are after the same item, they negociate to see who get it. Weaker items are put back in the treasure. At the end, all remaining items are sold and money is divided equally.
- no treasure split. Items are given to who needs them the most, money is not divided and if someone needs 1 specific magic item, he has to speak everyone so that we get it crafted.
In my experience playing with that many players creates all kinds of shortages, Loot being one of the most mechanical. I would say, not knowing anything more about your group than you have posted, that the GM should increase the amount of rewards received overall.
Your initial post suggests that there is a subset, possibly rotating between layers, who feel unfair loot is given. In gaming i include the idea that "if someone is asking for attention, someone should probably pay attention to them." If the consensus is loot is unfairly divided, make it more divisible.
If however your problem is more a specific subset or just one person out of many, and this problem is causing strife among the others, it may be time to trim the fat of the group. Or not, the above adage can be quite applicable if you are in fact overlooking someone. It happens sometimes, and i remedied it the next loot drop. (For an Ancient Azlanti tomb there sure were a lot of Halfling-sized-Bard-relevant equipment.)
I've dealt with both and in both examples, both solutions worked. When everyone complained about bad loot, more loot overall fixed it, even if it was just things they would have bought anyways, or wouldn't think to. (A few potions of Blur, True Strike, and Invisibility seem to go a long way in shoring up the loot list.)
Money, and the equipment is buys is a big part of character viability. Since everyone having a viable character is pretty necessary for the game to be fun, it makes sense to make sure everyone has the same amount of money. In my opinion, this should trump things like missing a session or stuff like that.
A short term deviation (the Paladin gets the lion's share this time because we found a holy avenger) is fine, but it should be corrected as soon as possible (i.e. if we keep giving all the best gear to the Paladin everyone else probably isn't going to have a good time, the Paladin needs to suck it up for a while).
The exact mechanics of how you do this don't matter a whole lot. In my games sometimes it varies from party to party, for example a more 'noble' group will usually have part of the treasure go to a group split to purchase things like consumables, emergency resurrections, etc. while in a more selfish party their won't be a group treasure and everyone has to provide for themselves.
In any event, we almost always do the assume the value of everything as if we sold it, offer to sell items at that price to party members if they want them (discuss it out or random decide who if more than one) and then make sure that everyone gets an equal share. IOUs extended if the group agrees, is more cooperative etc. etc.
Pretty much the common sense things everyone else has said.
If you find a Cloak of Resistance +1 and need to decide who gets it, you give it to whoever has the worst saves in the party.
Is stuff like this entirely RP and realistic to your adventuring party? Probably not, but it's entirely needed to prevent your game from falling apart.
Our group has been having an ongoing discussion about treasure split, how it should be done and how un-fair it seems to be.
What ends up happening is items get found, people that can use them claim them and someone feels like they got left out.
If we have any items no one wants or claims and mundane items and gold, silver, copper, etc, all of this gets divided by the party.
In this case we have 6 - 8 players in a typical game. Some of those players where not there the entire game, yet feel they got slighted treasure.
So the question, how does your group divide treasure and not have hard feelings?
This has always been a sore issue with every group I have played in as someone always feels they did not get as much.
This is a deceptively easy problem to solve. The liquid assets and how you divide them is fine.
Magic items should be divided randomly. If an item comes up that is usable only by one class/race/religion, then that particular character gets it, end of story. Anyone who argues about it is just being a dick and should be told to quit b+$*~ing or ejected from the game. Problem solved.
When items come up that can be used by anyone (Boots of Striding and Springing, for example) and everyone wants it, everyone rolls a d20, highest roll gets it (reroll for ties). No bonuses to the roll, none of that crap. Simple number on the die.
Now, here's the kicker. The person who won the toss, isn't allowed to roll for another magic item until everyone else has gotten an item. So, eventually even the people who weren't there, will be left with some sort of item.
Yes, I know this can cause it's own problems, such as 'Well, that item is cooler than mine'. This is, unfortunately, something that can't be helped, but randomly rolling for items is the best way to absolve any guilt. It was up to the dice, not a particular player.
And if you have a player that is the only one that can use something, he is automatically banned from rolling for anything additional on the grounds of, by process of elimination, he already technically won the toss. If your players are even remotely understanding, this should solve most of your problems.
It's the method I've been using since Advanced Dungeons and Dragons and still employ today and haven't had a single problem with it.
We usually roll a d20 to determine who gets to pick in what order, highest goes first.
It is a fair system and everyone has a shot at an item he would really like, even if it may be more beneficial to someone else. Even other players than the wizard would like an extra INT point if it means another skillpoint/level.
Nothing hinders us at trading with each other, too, or simply handing an item to someone (with the understanding that you now have an IOU).We have occasionally skipped the whole thing and just decided as a group who gets what, if we found only one or two items, too. The relative power and options of the characters, personality and such are usually a consideration then.
If someone gets an upgrade to an item - say cloak +3 to cloak +4 - someone else who hasn't got a +3 cloak yet will get that one handed down (unless the original owner still has a use like a follower).
I can expect to get any and all scrolls for example, since I have the highest UMD and am usually free and able to use them. I won't get considered for high level weaponry, since I never go into melee, either. Armor will most likely end up with the martials, but shields are all mine...nobody else uses them. The better stat items are greatly desired by all and always go by roll :)
|
Money, and the equipment is buys is a big part of character viability.
Very true, this.
Personal suggestion is to allow PCs to handle who gets what on their own.
As for loot, CRB has a table of character wealth per PC by level. As GM, I suggest trying to make it so the party's wealth averages to the individual character wealth multiplied by the party size. Doesn't need to be exact, but gives a general number of how much loot players should have access to.
For example, a party of 5 characters with 2nd level each, should have a total value of about 5,000gp. Regular NPCs should be included in this calculation, but class feature NPCs (like familiars or companions) should not.
If the party incurs major expenses, like the 5000 gp diamond dust required to raise dead, they should be given opportunities to regain that gold, so their overall wealth remains at the average. That doesn't mean make it free or easy, but you could allow the PCs to spend a year doing day jobs (or other petty questing) so as to get their gold back to a manageable level. Or you could just create one or two big extra random encounters with valuable loot options.
I will note that if a party member dies or quits the party, this can create issues maintaining average wealth for the party. You could have the party hire the new PC, or you could start the PC with no gear, or you could just create an "unrelated" encounter that was very expensive for the party.
Right now we're working on doing the 'gear counts at sale value for your loot' method, even if it's things that only one can use. We've rarely had loot arguments (one of which was a fun roleplaying moment), but otherwise it's not a major thing.