PDA

View Full Version : How does your group distribute treasure?

Saph
2007-02-25, 02:48 PM
Up until now our groups have always distributed treasure in a fairly casual way. Gold, gems, and other money-type things are divided equally, and items are handed out on a who can use it / wants it basis.

Recently, however, a couple of players put in a vote for using the system recommended in the 3.5 Player's Handbook (it's on page 167) which uses a bidding mechanic and an exact value calculation based on what the item's sell price is.

We tried the PHB system for a week and found that after a dozen emails' worth of crunching numbers, the characters ended up with almost exactly the same distribution of items they would have had if we'd stuck with the done-in-five-minutes system, so we've gone back to that.

How does your party distribute treasure? Do you use an organised system like the PHB's one, or something more casual?

- Saph

Matthew
2007-02-25, 02:52 PM
A party fund helps in these circumstances. Magical Items remain in the party fund (but in possession of a nominated Player Character) until such time as all Characters have a Magical Item of roughly equivalent value. Money is divided equally, with a sum set aside for 'Party Expenditure', which may be for Healing, Food, Supplies, etc... If a party member leaves he forfeits any right to party equipment. There is also usually a nominal party leader.

Thomas
2007-02-25, 02:56 PM
People pick items, the values are evened out with gold and so on. It's not exactly complicated math. "So you get a 1,400 gp item, you get a 1,200 gp item, you get an 800 gp item, and there's 1,000 gp of coins, or 66, 266 and 666 respectively, with 2 left over..."

clarkvalentine
2007-02-25, 02:58 PM
Items are generally taken by the character for which they'd be most useful. Cash and gems are, for the most part, put into a common fund that we use as needed.

Sardia
2007-02-25, 03:01 PM
Fairly organized. But then again, my players have a good chunk of their otherwise liquid assets invested in a joint-stock company, vaguely similar to the East India company. Provides lots of reasons to go the ends of the earth, because what's good for the company translates very directly into what's good for them, albeit with a bit of delay.
"Okay, you kicked the werewolves out of the northern timberland, drove the Gnolls back out of the mithril mines, and did a splendid job privateering against the company's trade rivals. That'll be a 20% increase in investment assets this year in addition to whatever loot you picked up on the side. Good job.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-02-25, 03:02 PM
Almost every game I played does it similar the system you and clarkvalentine use. Magic items are given to whomever can benefit most from it. Items that cannot be used by anyone or that no one wants are sold. Hard cash is generally split equally between party members. Some groups in which I've been also use a Party Fund with occasional "allowances" distributed amongst party members.

2007-02-25, 03:02 PM
We're usually pretty good about fairness and whatnot. Gold goes into a party fund used to purchase things for characters that need them. Magic Items are always given to the most appropriate player in terms of usability. A magical sword, for instance, is going to the fighter or rogue no matter how much the wizard may want it. The party gold is used to purchase items for characters that get shafted by the magic item distribution. If a party with the four basic types of characters (divine caster, skillmonkey, tank, and arcane caster) finds a ring of lockpicks, a +3 suit of Full Plate, and a periapt of wisdom +2, the gold from the adventure will go towards buying the wizard a nice wand or something.

Kantolin
2007-02-25, 03:09 PM
We have two games running that use different styles.

In the first game, we split cash and objects we're selling evenly, and just give the rest to whomever can use them. So, sometimes a certain person will get a ton of treasure on one run and none on another.

In our second game, we math out the overall costs of everything, then split the money & items fiarly evenly. Still focusing on certain people get useful things, but it cuts from their money. For example, if we find 6000gp and an intelligence-boosting item which costs 2000gp, then three of us would get 2000gp while the fourth would get the int-boosting item.

A bit more paperwork, but ends up having us be more evened out.

*Shrug* Both ways work just fine and there's no real reason to prefer one over the other.

axraelshelm
2007-02-25, 03:16 PM
Items and weapons go to whoever can use them better.
Most things are sold to get better items or kept because of sentimental value.
There is a party kittie which everyone gives to that is for emergencys aswell as food and board.

Tobrian
2007-02-25, 03:43 PM
Items are generally taken by the character for which they'd be most useful. Cash and gems are, for the most part, put into a common fund that we use as needed.

Same here, usually.

The point is, if our characters work together as a team to survive and solve a quest, then it follows that making your buddies more effective helps you, too. Denying a looted +5 INT headband to the wizard just because he already found a bunch of scrolls and a wand last time and the fighter got no new magical weapon during that encounter is ultimately childish. What good is it selling a rare or unique item instead of giving it to Ben the cleric or Jack the rogue just so that the rest of the group gets some extra cash? And any scrolls, wands etc that the wizard finds (or has to buy or craft) usually get used up to buff up other PCs, anyway.

What used to annoy me in a "everyone gets the same cash" group I was in: the wizard was supposed to dig into his own cash to buy (or sacrifice his own XP to craft) items that benefitted the group more than they did him. The party cleric even demanded that 10% of the loot value had to be tithed to his deity's temple... 10% of the loot prior to distribution, not 10% of his own share, mind. Arguing that we got premium healthcare at his temple in exchange... um yeah provided we were anywhere close to it. Yes, scrolls and potions are fire-and-forget, like arrows. But ammo doesnt cost nearly as much. And most importantly, it doesnt cost XP to make. And it's not as if the wizard doesn't need money for other things, like updating his spellbook, buying bracers of protection for himself etc. Perhaps ammo, scrolls, wands and healing potions for the group should be bought from party cash altogether.

Of course, if the group consists of a lot of "lone wolves" who merely teamed up briefly to beat down some ogres and afterwards go their separate ways, that changes. But selling off items will always mean a) you lose 50% value, and b) you're at the mercy of the guy who has appraise skill and have to be sure the merchant where you fence the stuff won't rip you off or isn't making an underhanded shadowy deal with the appraise guy (usually the rogue).

We have two games running that use different styles.

In the first game, we split cash and objects we're selling evenly, and just give the rest to whomever can use them. So, sometimes a certain person will get a ton of treasure on one run and none on another.

In our second game, we math out the overall costs of everything, then split the money & items fiarly evenly. Still focusing on certain people get useful things, but it cuts from their money. For example, if we find 6000gp and an intelligence-boosting item which costs 2000gp, then three of us would get 2000gp while the fourth would get the int-boosting item.

I admit, if one PC got a major item that only he can use, it's polite not to also demand the same share from the money and gems as the rest of the group. Unless the character really really needs some cash for something vital, like paying his wizard mentor, and he's totally broke... but in that case the other characters should be smart enough to understand that keeping your buddy in play is more important during the run than nitpicking about goldpieces.

Of course, GMing style has an influence, too. When I played in a module (Night Below) that had so much loot (both items and gems) that towards the end it felt like monty-haul, the GM allowed custom-making of items at the wizards guild, and we had our own NPC alchemist and cohort mercenaries. We only sold items that no-one wanted, but you always knew that you could sell items you didn't want and use the cash to buy whatever you wanted, or have existing items upgraded with additional powers.

On the other hand, in most others groups I play in, GMs are still "old school", used to AD&D where buying or crafting magic items was almost impossible. So every time we find something masterwork or magical, no matter what, it is hoarded in case we might still need it later, maybe for bartering with another adventurer. Selling it is out of the question, because if you do, it's gone, and there's no magic item shop around the corner to pick up what you want.

Dr. Weasel
2007-02-25, 04:00 PM
It's simple: 40% to the Bard, 60% to be shared by the other four people.
Yay for only one party member with appraise, detect magic and astronomical bluff!

Kantolin
2007-02-25, 04:05 PM
I admit, if one PC got a major item that only he can use, it's polite not to also demand the same share from the money and gems as the rest of the group.

True ish, but there are two lines of arguments with this.

First is that, well, he shouldn't get money if he's also gotten a nifty item that's worth more than all the money. This is option 2 that we utilize, and does work fine.

But overall, items tend to pseudo-even out. Sure, this run we found a spelbook, a headband of intellect, and a staff of the magi. But odds are, if we keep playing for awhile, there'll be a run with a +5 Vorpal Sword and Belt of Giant's strength. *Shrug* So that's incentive to just split money and items nobody wants, and to just divy out items to whomever can use them better.

That Lanky Bugger
2007-02-25, 04:09 PM
Typically I make things casual as a rule when I'm DMing... Unless the characters can accurately appraise and identify the items they've found, I see no reason to divulge how much the items they've found are actually worth.

It's worked pretty well in ensuring a "casual" distribution... Though most party magical item crafters (rightly) demand a little more gold. It never gets to the proper XP to Gold conversion rate specified in the DMG, but I always side with the party Wizard in any disputes over item creation. It makes no sense to make the party Wizard take an equal share of the gold while making him craft party-use items (like magical armor) which costs him XP.

AoiRorentsu
2007-02-25, 04:28 PM
If you don't mind a little intra-party tension, giving the characters a reason to be greedy (see Haley's motivation) also creates some interesting role-playing opportunities. After all, if you assume that, alignment-wise, the bulk of people are neutral and not on some kind of grand morality quest, chances are they're in it for the money. They could have a good (moral-wise) reason to be working for the money, but ultimately if they're not getting what they want, why stick around? Adventuring is a high risk-reward career. If you need 10,000 gp to post your dad's bail before his execution next week, and your haul is 2500 and everyone else gets the same but doesn't have any particular plans for spending it, isn't the temptation going to be to find some way to get their money? Your alignment might determine whether you ask everyone for it or try to just steal it, but yeah - treasure and paydays can be good for intra-party roleplaying.

Also, having "operating expenses" take up a certain share of the gold off the top is an interesting idea. That or giving more to whoever's the party leader with the proviso that they have to save it as an emergency fund.

All interesting ideas

LotharBot
2007-02-25, 04:59 PM
We're pretty casual about it. "Found some rings of protection +2. I think those should go to the fighter, rogue, and barbarian. Oh, you already have a ring +1? Pass that off to one of the other characters, then." Once we sell things, we divide the money equally (leaving a small bit in the party stash for use on potions, healing wands, etc.) unless someone got a really big item, in which case we'll usually split most of their share of the gp between everyone else. If someone is a little bit short of being able to afford a nifty item, they can take some out of the party stash or borrow it from a friend.

Even though some of us are "in it for the money", we understand that the money will flow in more if our allies are well equipped.

averagejoe
2007-02-25, 06:04 PM
We basically talk about it, decide who needs what, and basically everybody leaves happy, more or less. We're more into the concept of "group" ownership, and that what's good for every individual is good for the group, and the interests of the group directly corralate to the interests of the individual. So, it's like, "Cool, that other guy got a +3 sword. I didn't get anything, but that's okay, it still increases my survivability."

Orzel
2007-02-25, 06:36 PM
We roleplay how they share.

Orzel the Second "I killed all the guards from here through the throne room. Killer gets the loot, right?"

Dausuul
2007-02-25, 06:39 PM
I've ended up as party accountant for my group. When the time comes to divide up the plunder, I calculate the total sale price of everything we've found, and figure out what each person's share is. Then we go down the list of items. For each item, if somebody wants it, they can "buy" it out of their share; they get the item and their share gets reduced by the selling price. If two people want it, we discuss who would benefit most from it and that person gets to "buy" it. Once we're done, we sell everything that nobody wanted.

Note that we use selling price rather than purchase price--i.e., if you want to "buy" a +4 headband of intellect out of the party loot, you pay 8,000 gp rather than 16,000. Your decision to keep the headband rather than sell it is costing the party 8,000 gp, so you have to shell out that much to cover it.

Some items, like healing potions or scrolls with buff spells, get designated "party loot" and don't count toward the total. And we also apply some common sense; if there's an item that would be hugely useful to one character but that character doesn't have the funds to "buy" it, we let him pay us back later.

I find this is a good system for a world in which you can buy and sell magic items more or less freely; it lets the party balance the utility of found items against their cash value. In a world with a less Wal-Mart-ish magic item market, we'd probably go with a more casual system.

Quietus
2007-02-25, 07:04 PM
My groups tend to go for a more "You win what you grab" sort of style, though things do tend to even themselves out, as we're reasonable; When we get a large amount of loot, we put everything into a single pot that things get taken out of. But generally, if one of us can use it more than anyone else, that person gets it.

It also depends a lot on the character's alignment; I have a chaotic good character who gave away nearly 10% of his cut to the party's tank, because A) I didn't have any immediate use for that, and B) Buffing the tank means longer survivability for me. We had issues with Charm Person spells... I paid for the tank to get an amulet of will+4, and then tossed another grand at him so he could afford to get his spiked chain up to +2.

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-25, 07:50 PM
Well there are benifits to doing it based on calculation. One of my DM's basically srewed our party by poorly dividing loot. The rogue got a 10000gp item(at level 4), and the rest of us had the same stuff that we had at level 3. He still defends his decision that it wasn't unbalanced.

Tobrian
2007-02-25, 08:16 PM
It's simple: 40% to the Bard, 60% to be shared by the other four people.
Yay for only one party member with appraise, detect magic and astronomical bluff!

:smallbiggrin:

You know, I play a halfling rogue/bard in one group where everyone is a caster, and the other chars all have at least some levels in wiz or cleric, so I'm the weakest caster of the group. But of 5 players total, three of them seem very disinterested in loot, or getting better equipment. It's a player, not a character problem, it has nothing to do with their characters being philanthropes not interested in worldly things. If I want to scrounge a magic ring off them I only have to ask. It's annoying. When I insisted on dragging a highly magical BLACK RUNE COVERED SWORD out of a crypt where we had found it and taking it to an allied NPC wizard for identification, the warrior/wizard elf gal asked me "What on earth for?". When I demanded we search the library, lab and desk of a major villain (vampire wizard), I had to prod those three to actually cast Detect Magic (i was out of cantrips). I consider myself a roleplayer not a munchkin item-hogging-monkey, but... not even looking for loot? It's bizarre.

THey're happy with using the magic weapons they are given by a GM-mouthpiece NPC ally, they say "That's nice", but that's all. THey don't care much about what spells they memorize every morning either, they use the same 3 spells on themselves mostly, never with an eye towards helping the group, and the clerics have to be prompted to actually heal someone after a battle... one actually said "But I might need those cure spells later on!" Yeah... after we're all dead after the next ambush, buddy, because you didn't heal us right now.

So technically while they may scoff a bit or look annoyed when i ask for certain items, they always hand them over to my halfling - they dont seem annoyed that I the player want too big a share, they're annoyed that the halfling is so "greedy". (Come on, i started two levels lower than them with no magical equipment at all, when they'd already played those chars for years and have all sorts of stuff they rarely use.) I dont even need to roleplay persuading their characters. It's too easy. :smallannoyed:

Stevenson
2007-02-25, 11:13 PM
We give out magic items on a fairly casual basis. Rogue wants the +3 ring of protection, Rogue usually gets it, unless somebody's being a pain about it. Same goes for everything else. My gnome favored soul gets most/all of the magic items that are spell related (rods, scrolls, etc.), as well as any longswords we find, as he's got weapon focus.

Gold we do in a pot. It's all one group fund.

Everyman
2007-02-26, 12:52 AM
In my groups, we try to divide the treasure evenly, though characters are free to grab items that would be useful to them. We just take that out of their share. If that one item would be too much, then we just keep in mind that character gets a bit less next time.

However, we do tend to give healers a bit more money than normal, due to the investment healing wands and items are. After all, if those character are devoting part of their funds to keep us alive (a resource they buy for everyone), I'm quite willing to pitch in a couple extra GP for them.

Fhaolan
2007-02-26, 01:05 AM
I'm currently in two D&D groups, one as a player (dwarven rogue), and the other as DM.

In a weird fit of insanity, the group where I'm a player has turned over all loot record-keeping to the chaotic good dwarven rogue. Me. So, the concept of 'distribute' takes on whole new meanings. Not because I'm playing a rogue, but mostly because the character is chaotic good. I distribute the loot to other players as I think they either deserve it, or need it. Nobody seems inclined to question my methods. Dunno why, actually.

In the other group, the distribution seems more a case of who can carry the stuff without either falling down under the weight, or blowing up in case the latest magic item is combustable. Everything seems to go into a pool of 'party treasure', and drawn from as needed. Now that I think of it, that entire party if Chaotic as well, though the players are more 'Lawful' in their RL personalities.

Dareon
2007-02-26, 09:09 AM
We share out magic items as needed, occasionally just letting unwanted things kick around in our inventory lists until they come in handy. for instance, during our first session, one of the pieces of loot was a +4 Charisma facemask. It wasn't in character for any of the group to wear it due to its design, despite having two Cha-based characters. Eventually my character wore it because he was expecting the enchantment to be handy, and we weren't expecting anyone that mattered to be negatively influenced by the appearance.

Otherwise, all the cash and generic stuff goes into my character sheet, probably because I'm the only one with a wagon. If someone needs some, I just mark it off on my sheet and call it good. Ordinarily I'd question the wisdom of letting the CN warlock spy handle the party finances. But, I as a player happen to enjoy inter-party harmony, so there's no trouble over the bank accounts.

Brauron
2007-02-26, 09:25 AM
We have the Party Bank, i.e., a couple bags of loot strapped to the barbarian's back. Any loot gleaned from chests, etc. go there, while players get to keep any money/items they take off the dead bodies of fallen enemies (we haven't really found any magic items yet, other than a wand of Teleport and a couple Potions of Cure Light Wounds, which went to the Wizard and Cleric, respectively. With Magic Items they go to the person most capable of using them.)

dorshe1
2007-02-26, 09:52 AM
We've had a string of rather ambitious rogues lately. Our groups distribution goes like this....

5-6% of the treasure is taken secretly by either rogues or other characters that don't disclose it to the party.

10% of the remaining goes to the chuch of St. Cuthbert (cash)

10% of the remaining goes to 2nd cleric's god (can't remember it offhand)

The rest of the cash is then divided equally among the party.

Magic items are given out by lot and can be traded. If someone doesn't get a magic item then they are first in line with the next time.

It actually works out pretty well, and it has been pretty funny. We had a fighter who was trying to develop a skill to determine how much money the rogue had... The GM let him do it, but the rogue had a bag of holding.... it was awesome.

Golthur
2007-02-26, 10:32 AM
My groups tend to use the "casual" system - hard cash split evenly, magic items doled out to who can make the most effective use of them, or who has the fewest items, or who wants the particular item in question the most (usually in that order of priority). Extra cash from selling items no one wants goes into the party healing / resurrection / inn / new-horses-'cause-they-just-got-hurled-into-a-tree-by-a-giant fund.

With my current group, this works out well, because we all just sit around and figure it out, and we usually all agree on who should get what. On occasion, we've had a "chaotic stupid" player in the group, and the rest of the party has had to use a scapegoat (i.e., the "party leader") to impose the agreed-upon distribution from on high.

Telonius
2007-02-26, 10:42 AM
We're very organized about it. Any healing, buffing, or transportation items (teleport scrolls, Aid scrolls, CLW potions, etc) are communal property. Of the remaining, we calculate the total worth, and take a percentage of that (usually about 10-20%) and put it in the group fund. Divide the rest in equal shares; that's your share of the loot. Everybody gets a shot at the items available; whatever's leftover gets liquidated. Taking an item decreases from your share of the GP total at the end.

Overlard
2007-02-26, 11:27 AM
In our 5 person group, gold & gems go 6 ways. Everyone gets an equal share, and the sixth share goes into the party pot (used for scroll scribing, curse removal & resurrections).

Items go to people who want them, not necessarily need them. If the wizard wants that +2 longsword, he has as much right as the fighter, but when we find that headband of intellect +4, then he has a lot of justifying to do. It's not an ideal way of doing it, but keeps people happier than assigning them an item because of their class (introduced after a rogue was getting pissed off due to all the "worthless" items he was being assigned while the fighters were getting weapons & armour, and the wizards getting wondrous items & wands).

mikeejimbo
2007-02-26, 11:53 AM
First we go by who could use it the most, followed by who wants it the most. Often, we get things that no one wants anyway, so we toss that in group loot for backups. Money is split evenly between us, but is generally lent around. I, being the cleric, tend to carry around a bunch of diamonds for resurrections and the sort. I also tithe 10% of my own share to my deity, and my deity being a chaotic one, I think he's fine with that.

The DM has an interesting system for crafting scrolls, potions, etc. If a party member wants it, they can donate XP of their own to the wizard specifically for making it.

Baalzebub
2007-02-26, 12:29 PM
Casual. Usually one characters stays with the money of the encounters and all the gems and goodies (usually the party leader or something similar) while all the other magical items are distributed according to the needs of each player; swords for fighters, scrolls for spellcasters and so on.

ElHugo
2007-03-17, 09:33 PM
Being pretty green players, both us and DM, we usually math it up. Items go on a who-needs basis, but the value (or at least the appraised value) is taken out of their cut of the gold. Earlier on, we even had players pay the others if they had a grossly over-valued item, but we've since decided that was too stupid.

Still, we do make calculations and everything, because we simply don't have any 'on the fly' idea what anything is worth.

themightybiggun
2007-03-17, 09:36 PM
My players take the loot based off of who killed the baddy, they usually swap items freely to who actually needs em, but when they come up with something thats only really good for selling, then whoever killed the bearer gets it.

They have yet to actually fight a single monster ( i do a lot of mobs) so we'll see what they do then.

Seffbasilisk
2007-03-17, 09:53 PM
My group was a weird way. For some strange reason, my Warmage/Rogue was let to be in charge of it. So after each combat, he searches the room and such (the others search too and try to grab things he misses) then he puts it in a big pile and divvys it up. And no one really argues. He tries to keep things fair and all, but I mean, no one even CHECKS. Sometimes he just takes all the loot because no one really pays attention to it. He tries to balance it out, but then they just think he's being a nice guy.

He's chaotic-neutral! He routinely assaults the Lizardman Wizard, and continually insults the Silver Dragon Wyrmling and the Elven Barbarian! NO ONE CARES! They just leave it to him!

Well...he finally died, and chose NOT to come back (even though he was sent to hell) because he hated the party and thier home-nation so much, and my next roguish character's a Kender.

I want to see how this works out.

Stephen_E
2007-03-17, 11:15 PM
So many groups/parties, so many ways.

The funniest was special/magical items (there weren't a lot) went to whoever wanted them and could use them. If 2 people wanted the same item we looked at who already had the most. The party Rogue handled all the cash (the rest of the party were non-capatilist orientated - Hermit/Mage, Savage Halfing, Archeologist/professor, Barbarian). The Barbarian was learning accounting because he was supicious of the Rogue who was investing the money into shell companies so that it was been funneled into his own pocket. The rest of the party simply operated on the principle "we need "x". Rogue pay for". We made clear that if at anytime the Rogue said "there's no money left", we'd kill him for theft.

Mostly my groups have used the casual method. Items get handed over to who wants them. If they're upgrading the old item goes back into the party pot. Cash gets split between party fund (healing, Food, mission specific equipment) and evenly split between PCs.

A few times we've done the value items, add up cash, everyone gets "x" pot which they can take as cash and/or items. Occasional checks to make sure everyone has equal value. Basically this approach is normally used if we have LE PCs or Players, or PC's/Players we really don't trust.

The casual approach brokedown spectaculay once when one PC, a big arse Fighter type, kept grabbing items on the principle that he could use them better than anyone else. When it got to him grabbing his 3rd magic item vs my characters 0 items, and the 3rd item was a weapon that my PC could use, albeit she didn't spend as much time in the frontline, thus wouldn't use it as much, the party hit meltdown point, with me planning to have my PC nick the items she felt were hers and leave in the night (possibly killing the Big Arse Fighter type at the same time). Some of the other party members supported a more even distribution and the resulting brouha saw the player with the Fighter type/magic item collector, leave the game. Well techinically he left a few sessions later over a "My PC is the boss, and I decide what the group is doing" but it was largely a follow on from the magic item distribution argument.

The only time I've ever been involved in a deliberate treasure split-up fraud was when (Spacemaster) the party voted to sell of a slightly antiquated combat robot we'd aqquired. My PC wanted to keep it. Since he was the person handling the disposal of it he told them it was only worth 20% of ots real value and with two other players brought it as their part of the loot. Him and another PC then proceed to invest a large amount of cash and time upgrading it and using it as heavy weapons support for the party. Not a lawful act, but definitely not evil.

Stephen

alchemy.freak
2007-03-18, 01:14 PM
we just figure it out and try to be fair.

money is given out evenly if the situation calls for it, however we can give bonuses to a player if the others give up part of their share. items the same way, just go around the table and take what you want, if you want to give up an item because you don't need it or don't want it thats fine too.

Generally the DM stays out of it, unless its really needed to settle a dispute.

this system really works for one reason, its simple. our characters wouldn't spend forever deciding if the distribution is fair.

Maxwell
2007-03-18, 02:58 PM
mostly a leader like character divides the loot based on need. however, if these leader like characters have decided to play a dumb barbarian or some other difficult PC then it can come to blows. Two fighters, same AC, one ring of protection +3, no other magic items. This situation almost got them killed.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-03-18, 03:04 PM
There's practically no distribution in the games I play or run. When I'm playing, I'm usually a rogue with sticky fingers and a high bluff check that manages to obtain the lion's share of the party loot (in some particularly bad instances, up around 70% of everything). When I'm DMing, I find that my players have taken several cues from my own gameplay style and, while not as cutthroat about it, still play by an "every man for himself!" rule. They only really share items if it's obviously better for the team to do so (like the wizard giving the fighter that really nifty magic greatsword), but often including some sort of trade (and so the wizard asks for that magic wand the fighter ninja'd earlier).

Stephen_E
2007-03-18, 11:59 PM
There's practically no distribution in the games I play or run. When I'm playing, I'm usually a rogue with sticky fingers and a high bluff check that manages to obtain the lion's share of the party loot (in some particularly bad instances, up around 70% of everything). When I'm DMing, I find that my players have taken several cues from my own gameplay style and, while not as cutthroat about it, still play by an "every man for himself!" rule. They only really share items if it's obviously better for the team to do so (like the wizard giving the fighter that really nifty magic greatsword), but often including some sort of trade (and so the wizard asks for that magic wand the fighter ninja'd earlier).

I never really understand this sort of thing. Sure, the 1st few treasure distributions work out with the Rogue getting the lion's share, but after that -
"I make my bluff check. I get a total of 32 to convince you I sharing things out fairly". Fighter - "I make my sense motive check and get 16. You appear to be telling the truth. Then I remember that you have far more loot than I have, and have done so for some time. I hit you with a full attack for stealing. I continue to hit you until you're unconcious. Take a substanial time to carefully compare treasure/equipment, and then kill you if the discrepancy is to big".

Bluff stops people been able to tell from your body language/words that you're lying. It doesn't stop them knowing you're a lying scum. I've gamed with people (real people. Not characters) with high bluff checks. After a while you simply assume the person's word is worthless BECAUSE you can't beat their Bluff check, and they've screwed you often enough that it's simply the most sensible approach.

Stephen

RMS Oceanic
2007-03-19, 05:44 AM
1. After an adventure, a share of the gold is taken out in order to cure/raise people who could not be cured by our cleric (e.g. Our cleric couldn't remove the blindness that affected our Warmage as he wasn't high enough level, so we took 150gp from the pot to get cured at a temple).
2. For each item, we decide who could possibly use it. If it's just one guy, they get it. If it's more than one, we each roll a d10, highest roll gets it.
3. Everything else we don't want, we sell.
4. We split the resultant pot evenly between us.

Dhavaer
2007-03-19, 05:48 AM
Whoever benefits most gets the items. Wealth is divided evenly, rounding down.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-03-19, 02:35 PM
I don't quite bluff like that though, see. It's more of "Oh, you looted the bodies already. What did you find?" *searches pack and notes five magic weapons, three magic wands, and 80,000 gold* "Yeah, I found this magic sword and 40,000 gold. You guys can have it, you worked hard." Then I proceed to hide these goods well on my person until, at my nearest convenience, I liquidate it all into financing one of my various ventures- be it supplying a hidden army/country, developing powerful new items that happen to be disguised as crappy items, or in at least one instance, single-handedly eliminating poverty from the face of the planet. Since one silver piece a day could feed, clothe, and shelter any single member of most all humanoid races, I found that it was surprisingly easy to finance the several hundreds of thousands of poor people in that game's world. I was a saint.

Well, except to the players, I guess. They were probably pretty mad that I not only hid all that wealth from them with clever deception, but that I was also one-upping them on the hero scene.

Tach13
2007-03-19, 04:32 PM
We definately go by the "give it where it does the most good" thing. It's a play by Chat Server game, so I'm usually quick pointing out "that axe should go to the Dwarf fighter, that Dex adjuster to the Archer,", etc. That means when it comes to things I can use,there is usually not much doubt because the group knows I (the guy playing the rogue, go figure) want the group to be stronger. The fact we've been together for like 2 years helps a lot. The other group runs about the same, though. The other players are smart enough to undestand "more power means more treasure means more power".

the_tick_rules
2007-03-19, 05:58 PM
my SOP is equally divide all money equally, with the remainder going into a communal pot until it reaches and equally divisible number or something the whole group consents to buying mutually. items go to whoever would benefit from them the most.

Vaynor
2007-03-19, 06:46 PM
I like to distribute treasure in character, so if they're a neutral/evil character, they can take whatever the hell they want, at the mercy of the other players, of course.

Charity
2007-03-19, 06:57 PM
Well we give magic items to whomever has the most obvious requirement for it, any conflict is resolved by someone not interested in the contentious item. Everything else goes in a giant kitty where we buy the biggest most useful item for whomever seems to need it most, we get bigger better stuff this way.
NG socialist party, it actually works yay.
The group I run a game for are an entirely different matter, a few players just try to grab what they can, the rest tend to just let them... I prefer our method.

^ Vay I agree to be honest, it goes against character for half a dozen CN characters having hard and fast rules govening shares of the booty.

The_Blue_Sorceress
2007-03-20, 11:46 AM
We always divided the treasure in accordance with which party member would find it the most useful, with the remainder being sold for cash, and that cash distributed to the party members who didn't receive any magic items, or who received less valuable or less useful magic items. In situations where selling an item wouldn't be immediately possible, such as in the middle of a dungeon, various people would hold them until we could get to a town.

-Blue

LotharBot
2007-03-20, 02:00 PM
Everything else goes in a giant kitty where we buy the biggest most useful item for whomever seems to need it most, we get bigger better stuff this way.

I like this method an awful lot, but it takes a special group to pull it off.

In a group where I'm running all of the PC's (the family we played with moved overseas) I can fairly evaluate who needs what equipment when... but in your average adventuring party, it's difficult to decide whether it's better to get a nice +3 axe for Thog or a headband of int+4 for Casterius. And Shywick McHeal never speaks up so nobody realizes he's still wearing MWK chainmail and doesn't have any magic items at all by level 12...

How does your party avoid leaving anyone behind?

Kender
2007-03-20, 03:03 PM
Really depends on the group, and the players. If the group is truly a tight-knit party, we just divvy stuff up out of character, and whoever wants X gets X, if two people want it badly, they high-roll for it.

However, when you play games like the last one I had a rogue in, you need an in-character way of doing it, or else the rogue will strip the dead PC monk naked before he's buried, and no one will pay any attention. :belkar: :biggrin: