| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my experience, if all players are friends and mature enough, there's next to zero trouble with the loot. But it only takes a single immature or problem player to have the grown ups pissed.
Also, maturity doesn't always relate to the age. The most immature player I've ever had was a 36-year-old married woman who acted like a 4-year-old brat.
Also, if two players don't get along well is not unusual that they have continuous disagreements in game.
In theory we are all mature grown up and sensitive players. In theory. But reality is not always that and sometimes you have to set rules to avoid childish behaviors that come from supposedly grown ups.
And even if you are not using that rules from the start, it's useful to have them as a resource if things start going south.
I'm glad when I find a group where we can just talk our way and distribute everything based on what is needed.
Said that, I often need as a player some rules to make a fair share of the loot because I tend to leave almost everything to other players and have almost no equipment. So I need to be forced to be a bit more greedy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think making sure the martials have enough stuff is the GM's job, not the party's job.
Disagree. I make magic item shops available. The rest is up to you.
If I'm running an adventure path, I'm not going to go through the books and change everything just so everyone can have the exact weapon they want. I mean, I might out of pity if your character was particularly pathetic, but it's not something I'm going to do routinely. It harms the realism of the world if you get whatever you want for free.
Well, in my recent S&S game one of my players decided to play an Inspired Blade and I decided to turn some of the cutlasses into rapiers so he could get some loot that could fit his class.
I'm not against personalizing some of the loot to help the PCs to gear themselves, specially with some builds that have some specific requirements.
Also, even if you can sell the cutlass and buy a rapier, when a specific weapon is looted from a named enemy it can become sort of a trophy that the PCs want to keep. Having one of them being able to use it is something that they'll often appreciate.
This is a big thread so I might have missed it, but did anyone suggest that they just keep two separate pools? One for consumable and one for non-consumables?
The way my party does it is, "Does anybody want this item?" If one says yes they get it. If multiple say yes their characters settle it and we move on. Anything the party doesn't want gets sold and the gp is split equally.^ this is the best way.
It's the best way for you. Not necessarily everyone else.
In all honesty, this is giving me flashbacks to the Mummy's Mask game I was in. I was a ranged geokineticist, and at level 6 I had a grand total of 300 gp worth of stuff because 'other people could use/wanted items'. I had barely more than my starting gear.
So please. Continue to tell me how 'fair' that is.
My group had no problem distributing loot until our GM threw us a curveball in the form of a +6 ring of protection. The other players were getting ready to roll off on it when I pointed out that something was off here. We had not agreed to use any particular set of epic level rules, so that item had no defined value -- and we could not rule out the possibility that it was worth several times what the standard price formula would value it as. It could also have been an artifact and/or nasty cursed item.
So we finally agreed to put the item aside and see what we could sell it for -- it was quite possible that we could get enough for it to distribute +5 rings to the entire party. It turned out that this ring was indeed an artifact with some nasty drawbacks, so it is a good thing that no party member ever tried it on. We eventually did sell the ring for a hefty amount of money.
The way my party does it is, "Does anybody want this item?" If one says yes they get it. If multiple say yes their characters settle it and we move on. Anything the party doesn't want gets sold and the gp is split equally.^ this is the best way.It's the best way for you. Not necessarily everyone else.
In all honesty, this is giving me flashbacks to the Mummy's Mask game I was in. I was a ranged geokineticist, and at level 6 I had a grand total of 300 gp worth of stuff because 'other people could use/wanted items'. I had barely more than my starting gear.
So please. Continue to tell me how 'fair' that is.
Well, did you say "yes"? if you didnt, then not the system's fault.
And if you did, did you always lose out? Ifso then that's not the problem with the system.
Unless of course, every loot item was something a ranged geokineticist couldnt use, like melee weapons and medium-heavy armor. In which case that's the DMs' fault.
I could see a situation arising where every time there's light armor in the loot pile the rogue grabs it over the geokineticist because "you don't even want to be in melee, so you don't need armor like I do" and every time there's an amulet of natural armor or ring of deflection the wizard grabs it over the geokineticist because "you can actually wear armor, but I can't!"
I feel like this sort of thing cropping up (as with many failures to share loot) is ultimately a people problem more than anything else.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way my party does it is, "Does anybody want this item?" If one says yes they get it. If multiple say yes their characters settle it and we move on. Anything the party doesn't want gets sold and the gp is split equally.^ this is the best way.It's the best way for you. Not necessarily everyone else.
In all honesty, this is giving me flashbacks to the Mummy's Mask game I was in. I was a ranged geokineticist, and at level 6 I had a grand total of 300 gp worth of stuff because 'other people could use/wanted items'. I had barely more than my starting gear.
So please. Continue to tell me how 'fair' that is.
Well, did you say "yes"? if you didnt, then not the system's fault.
And if you did, did you always lose out? Ifso then that's not the problem with the system.
Unless of course, every loot item was something a ranged geokineticist couldnt use, like melee weapons and medium-heavy armor. In which case that's the DMs' fault.
No, it's called being an Adventure Path, with a GM who doesn't have time to customize loot to their group.
Let me think, the heavy armor? Nope. Can't use it. Oh, a swarmbane shield! Nope, it makes it so I can't use gather power. Oh, the amulet of natural armor? Goes to the warpriest tank or the squishy rogue, because I'm ranged and I don't need it.
Plus they talked over people, were loud, and didn't let words in edgewise. Guess what. What works for one group doesn't work for all. That isn't the best way. It's the best for some people.
I think if the GM doesn't have time to tailor loot to the party and is using published material, the clear solution for a GM is "Use ABP and delete loot no one can use from the lootpiles" (then you can add or subtract currency from lootpiles pretty easily.)
I think if the GM doesn't have time to tailor loot to the party and is using published material, the clear solution for a GM is "Use ABP and delete loot no one can use from the lootpiles" (then you can add or subtract currency from lootpiles pretty easily.)
That is a possibility. However, personally? Specifically as a kineticist, I'd consider that worse than just sharing loot. If I got my fair share, I could get enough saved up to buy a Belt of Constitution +2 by level 4, where the ABP doesn't give you a bonus to a physical attribute until level 7.
Just because distributing according to who can use an item best may be the most effective, it isn't necessarily the best method, and is very unlikely to be the most fair.
As an aside, to anyone, really, I got a bit feisty before because that particular group pissed me off. Remember, there are people who lack confidence to speak up when you use a 'need-based' loot system, and you may be penalizing them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could see a situation arising where every time there's light armor in the loot pile the rogue grabs it over the geokineticist because "you don't even want to be in melee, so you don't need armor like I do" and every time there's an amulet of natural armor or ring of deflection the wizard grabs it over the geokineticist because "you can actually wear armor, but I can't!"
I feel like this sort of thing cropping up (as with many failures to share loot) is ultimately a people problem more than anything else.
Well, how many suits of light armor can the rogue wear at once? How many amulets of natural armor or rings of deflection can the wizard wear? Even if they get the first one, or even if they get the new +2 one, that leaves the old +1 set.
As GM, I give the players the list, and they divvy it up as they wish. Only once has more than one player wanted the same item. I had them do a d20 roll-off for it.
Same here, although the rollout-offs seem more frequent. I do try to make sure there's something for everyone, but how they divide it is up to them. I don't direct their fighting, I won't direct their looting/dividing.
When we've talked about it, I've told them there is no such thing as "fair" or "best" on that since every method of division or distribution will have someone unhappy, so it's up to them to work out what method the group of players wants.
When we've talked about it, I've told them there is no such thing as "fair" or "best" on that since every method of division or distribution will have someone unhappy, so it's up to them to work out what method the group of players wants.
Yes, in the end the best method is the one that causes the less conflict among players. And that varies from one table to another.
In a mostly well behaved group most semi-fair systems will work well. In a conflictive group every system will cause issues anyway.
I try to have always some alternative systems in mind, just in case my players don't feel comfortable with the one I use, but fortunately it's working flawlessly for now.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
ALL HAIL LORD WRAITHSTRIKE!!!!!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
because not every one wants to play a caster, because a martial is a way better wall than a caster i can have a martial with 45+ ac arround level 10 and deal out 130-150ish damage a round with each save getting arround a +25 and a pretty good cmd would love to see a caster try and do thatWhy are you having martials be meatshields? Summoned creatures do that jib better and dont ask for loot. A druid can do that job better. Casters can make meatshields if they even need them.
Why have martials taking up the party slots?
Heightened mount turned into any ranged summon by alter summoned monster. No danger for the caster to send them into battle and no cost. 45 ac is still hit 5% of the time.
You can summon elementals with all your second level or higher slots. I am assuming your nebulous martial character has to sleep. Wizard can be safe in a private demiplane. Martial doesn't provide that.
Your character can have high saves. So it can survive 20 banshees. If he dies he has no way to come back. Caster doesnt have to even be present to contribute to the party. Having anothe rcaster whould help the party more than just having another martial. That damage isnt that good. A dual blooded sorceror dip into any blaster caster makes it able to compete with that damage and i suspect it is a melee build.
Toppling magic missile would wreck it. A caster provides better out of combat utility and comparable damage while not being in danger. Caster is better and having a meatshield doesnt need a martial.
Well, how many suits of light armor can the rogue wear at once? How many amulets of natural armor or rings of deflection can the wizard wear? Even if they get the first one, or even if they get the new +2 one, that leaves the old +1 set.
I think this is where a lot of people run into issues with the Need/Greed thing. Someone claims the item, let's say it's a +1 ring of protection. A few levels later a +3 ring of prot. is there and this person needs it for the upgrade. That person will then sell the +1 ring and pocket the money.
I think having a central loot table where everyone can see what everyone else has, would alleviate a lot of the problems.
Well, how many suits of light armor can the rogue wear at once? How many amulets of natural armor or rings of deflection can the wizard wear? Even if they get the first one, or even if they get the new +2 one, that leaves the old +1 set.I think this is where a lot of people run into issues with the Need/Greed thing. Someone claims the item, let's say it's a +1 ring of protection. A few levels later a +3 ring of prot. is there and this person needs it for the upgrade. That person will then sell the +1 ring and pocket the money.
I think having a central loot table where everyone can see what everyone else has, would alleviate a lot of the problems.
In your example, the +3 ring would go to the person who needs it and the +1 would go back into the loot pool
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In your example, the +3 ring would go to the person who needs it and the +1 would go back into the loot pool
Well, how many suits of light armor can the rogue wear at once? How many amulets of natural armor or rings of deflection can the wizard wear? Even if they get the first one, or even if they get the new +2 one, that leaves the old +1 set.I think this is where a lot of people run into issues with the Need/Greed thing. Someone claims the item, let's say it's a +1 ring of protection. A few levels later a +3 ring of prot. is there and this person needs it for the upgrade. That person will then sell the +1 ring and pocket the money.
I think having a central loot table where everyone can see what everyone else has, would alleviate a lot of the problems.
Right, so at worse the person who is always picked second would end up with second rate stuff, not nothing.
|
|
There are a lot of ways to go about loot. Different DMs handle loot drops differently, different players have their own expectations, and different characters have different needs. I can think of one method off the top of my head that I would suggest, assuming a theoretical group that are not strongly opposed to it.
1) Do It Yourself
- Someone plays a 9th level caster with Craft Arms/Armor and Wonderous Item. (I am more than happy to)
- All players make an ideal wish list of items for their characters
- All loot value is calculated (half value) and split evenly between the party as a phantom gold pool
- Any time an item drops that is not on a wishlist is sold and the gold is split between party members. They spend phantom gold to gain real gold on a one to one basis
- Caster makes items for characters if they can supply the materials in gold
- If someone does want a drop, its total value is taken from their phantom gold. They are allowed to go into negative phantom gold but once negative they cannot gain real gold or drops unless the party unanimously votes on a case by case basis
- Consumables may or may not count as drops. To be determined by the players in Session 0.
In your example, the +3 ring would go to the person who needs it and the +1 would go back into the loot pool
I agree this is how things *should* work, but without having that central loot table so everyone knows what everyone has, some people may not understand the loot rules (if I'm being gracious) or aren't as honest as they should be (if I'm being cynical).
I'm not as lucky as most seem to be. My "home" games are PFS games that someone said "Hey I want to run an AP sign up on warhorn" so we aren't a group of close friends. I've seen a lot of the issues that people are complaining about and sometimes it's difficult to bring up because you don't want to sound like you're whining, or step on toes with people you don't know that well.
yes they may be a melee martial but they can full attack on a charge and charge from a distance over 120 feet away and while they only do 42.5 average damage per punch they still get 4 punches a round which are at like a +35/+35/+30/+30 they also have immunity to mind efecting effects,immune to fort saves,immune to stat drain and energy drain as well as death effects, can come back from the dead by themselves, have a fly speed, doesnt need...because not every one wants to play a caster, because a martial is a way better wall than a caster i can have a martial with 45+ ac arround level 10 and deal out 130-150ish damage a round with each save getting arround a +25 and a pretty good cmd would love to see a caster try and do thatWhy are you having martials be meatshields? Summoned creatures do that jib better and dont ask for loot. A druid can do that job better. Casters can make meatshields if they even need them.
Why have martials taking up the party slots?
Heightened mount turned into any ranged summon by alter summoned monster. No danger for the caster to send them into battle and no cost. 45 ac is still hit 5% of the time.
You can summon elementals with all your second level or higher slots. I am assuming your nebulous martial character has to sleep. Wizard can be safe in a private demiplane. Martial doesn't provide that.
Your character can have high saves. So it can survive 20 banshees. If he dies he has no way to come back. Caster doesnt have to even be present to contribute to the party. Having anothe rcaster whould help the party more than just having another martial. That damage isnt that good. A dual blooded sorceror dip into any blaster caster makes it able to compete with that damage and i suspect it is a melee build.
Toppling magic missile would wreck it. A caster provides better out of combat utility and comparable damage while not being in danger. Caster is better and having a meatshield doesnt need a martial.
What is this? I don't even...
This is largely incoherent, possibly due to the removed post(s). I can glean that it's a strategy useful in a game being played in the higher levels. Trouble is that the majority of games are played at low levels and generally conclude before level 12. This advice, while probably solid, is not going to apply to a lot of situations.
As an example, we've just hit level 11 in our GS campaign. We are beginning to bandy about the idea of our conjuror handling all the tanking with summoned critters and the rest of us all bringing in casters or ranged characters as we replace our dead ones. It's starting to look viable, even attractive with the hammering our melees take, but we had to get through 10 levels to get to this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, how many suits of light armor can the rogue wear at once? How many amulets of natural armor or rings of deflection can the wizard wear? Even if they get the first one, or even if they get the new +2 one, that leaves the old +1 set.I think this is where a lot of people run into issues with the Need/Greed thing. Someone claims the item, let's say it's a +1 ring of protection. A few levels later a +3 ring of prot. is there and this person needs it for the upgrade. That person will then sell the +1 ring and pocket the money.
I think having a central loot table where everyone can see what everyone else has, would alleviate a lot of the problems.
Or just don't be a wiener. Ask if anyone else needs it before you sell it.
Of course virtually all loot problems call be solved by people just not being weiners. Too bad that seems to be such a tall order.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Trial by combat.
To the death.
TO THE VICTOR BELONG THE SPOILS!
From now on my character will be named Victor.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You should call yourself THE Victor. As in:
"That sword now belongs to The Victor."
"The Victor will have stew and beer."
And
"The Victor is displeased."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You should call yourself THE Victor. As in:
"That sword now belongs to The Victor."
"The Victor will have stew and beer."
And
"The Victor is displeased."
So... yeah... doing this from now on. I'll be sure to let my group know where the responsibility lies.
And sometimes you have to be careful because they might work out. We named one of our Wolfhounds "Morrighan", just to give one example of "maybe we should have thought of something else."
When we got a new kitten, I wanted to name him "Nergal," but Mrs. Gersen vetoed it. Maybe she was right!