Handling loot & problems with sharing.

[TyGuy]

Is it common to have loot sharing issues in D&D? Or, is it common to have first-come first-serve looting practices?

I'm annoyed with my table, specifically two players. They run headlong into any situation that gives a whiff of potential treasure. They narrate over others
Player A: I want to check out the cabinet
*DM* gets distracted for a moment resolving something
Player B: I check the cabinet, what do I find?
DM: Gold and a trinket
Player B pockets everything and tells nobody.

It's never asked if anyone ever wants something that's found. In fact, they use treasure as purchasing power from other players. Hey, I'm a caster that's been holding on to this sword for a while but since you now have something I want, I'll trade this sword that I'll never use for the shiny that I wasn't able to snipe for myself outright

[ad_hoc]

This is, first and foremost, a player problem. If people you are playing with are jerks, find new people.

Secondly, it can also be a game issue. If the game isn't challenging enough then splitting up loot doesn't matter and often the challenge people invent is against other players. In a challenging game the party will want the best people for the loot to have the loot.

Also, as far as how the DM adjudicates it is good to ask everyone what they're doing and then resolve everyone. Rather than the first person who speaks then gets resolved, when I DM I would say 'okay you're doing that' what is everyone else doing?

[DeTess]

Is it common to have loot sharing issues in D&D? Or, is it common to have first-come first-serve looting practices?

I'm annoyed with my table, specifically two players. They run headlong into any situation that gives a whiff of potential treasure. They narrate over others
Player A: I want to check out the cabinet
*DM* gets distracted for a moment resolving something
Player B: I check the cabinet, what do I find?
DM: Gold and a trinket
Player B pockets everything and tells nobody.

It's never asked if anyone ever wants something that's found. In fact, they use treasure as purchasing power from other players. Hey, I'm a caster that's been holding on to this sword for a while but since you now have something I want, I'll trade this sword that I'll never use for the shiny that I wasn't able to snipe for myself outright

This is not particularly common in my experience. Most tables I've played share loot based on who needs it. Though pure monetary items (like some gems or whatever) get pocketed once in a while, but items are divided depending on who needs them. it makes very little IC sense to do otherwise after all. 'Hey, this warrior protects me from all the dangerous mosnters around here. let's keep the sword that he could use, and is completely useless to me, for myself.'

I'd have an OC chat at your table about this behaviour, and explain why you don't like it. Just be careful about not framing it as 'you guys are doing it wrong' (rather make it 'I don't really like this'), as that can easily lead to conflict.

[Man_Over_Game]

At least everyone knows where their loyalties lie, right?

It's harsh, but not every team is a cohesive unit. Whether it's a problem isn't up to the DM to solve. If the players have a problem with it, they have to squabble about how to fix it.

However, there is an all-knowing alignment system that can still work out in the players' favor. Maybe the one Good player is rewarded when the team comes across a helmet that hurts anyone who's not Good. Maybe a priest of a kind deity recognizes the one good apple in the bunch, and provides some divine insight (which may be in the form of a Resilient feat or a new/improved skill).

This is a game of magic. Reward the martyr.

Personally, my favorite system is to have 50% of the profits go towards each person individually, and the other half goes into a group fund (for paying for travel, bases, or anything the entire group benefits from). Magic items are divvied to who can best use it.

[JeenLeen]

Seconding the discussion out-of-character, I think it could be good to discuss expectations and gameplay.
It's completely possible they don't realize it's unfair or bad, and just consider it part of playing a thief-type character. They might think it's a fun interaction for all, or at least not bugging other players. (I think this can especially be true in new players or in groups where such is acceptable behavior.) I think it's best to discuss these things and figure out what code of conduct you want for the game. For example, is player-vs-player okay? What about sabotaging goals even if you don't go to combat? Likewise, stealing from other PCs, withholding knowledge, or how to share loot. It's one thing if a thief does a solo RP to steal a neat ring from a noble who was a prick; it's way different if they find a chest of gold and potions and keep that secret.

And, yeah, keep it away from blame. Even if they are being jerks, opening with that doesn't help discussion, and you can give the benefit of the doubt.

That said, I would find their behavior really annoying and want to discuss it, if I were in your shoes.

Caveat for 5e: after a certain point, at least if you can't buy magic items in your campaign, gold loses a lot of importance. So pocketing extra gold might not matter, but pocketing magical trinkets or weapons definitely isn't cool.

[SkipSandwich]

I generally have the division of treasure as part of the "adventuring pact" binding the party together. All loot found during an adventure is considered to be joint property and to be freely shared by the party until it can be officially sorted. Said sorting then proceeds as follows;

PC 1 takes any portion of treasure they want, in any combination of gold or other valuables they desire, then sets it aside.

PC's 2-X then do the same on thier turns.

Once every PC has created a pile, they then take turns claiming which pile they want for themselves in reverse order starting with PC X and ending with PC 1.

Players may then barter or trade with one another for any specific items they wanted but were not able to claim.

[Xetheral]

Back when magic items could be freely sold at half price, it was simple to have the default be to sell everything. Characters could then decide if they want to "buy" any of the items from the party at the normal sale price (less their own share of that price). If multiple characters wanted the same item, the one who would pay the party the most for it got the item. (If a single item represented the majority of the loot, and was more valuable than any character's available liquidity, the party was usually willing to extend credit.)

[LibraryOgre]

I'll also note, that early D&D has a lot of rules on how loot sharing could go, but let's hop on one particular example...


Hey, I'm a caster that's been holding on to this sword for a while but since you now have something I want, I'll trade this sword that I'll never use for the shiny that I wasn't able to snipe for myself outright

Where is the character HIDING this sword that no one is saying "Hey, what's the mage doing with a sword that he never uses?" Like, why isn't the rest of the party saying anything about this?

[Pex]

Tell the players to knock it off. You're a party. Sharing the loot means everyone gets good stuff so the party is stronger together. If they refuse get the DM involved to solve it by fiat. If he refuses, I don't care what his excuse is, leave the game because they certainly don't think you're of any worth so why should you think they are.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'll also note, that early D&D has a lot of rules on how loot sharing could go, but let's hop on one particular example...



Where is the character HIDING this sword that no one is saying "Hey, what's the mage doing with a sword that he never uses?" Like, why isn't the rest of the party saying anything about this?

Bag of Holding, probably.

[DMThac0]

I played a character who loved to pilfer things whenever he could. There were quest items that made their way into his pack that the group never knew about, there were helpful trinkets that he'd squirrel away, heck he had 6 rings of warmth at one point in time.

The trick was, I never withheld them from my party if there was a need for them. I always had a reason for keeping something secret, even if it was as petty as "I want to figure the answer out to the puzzle first". When things got hairy, or when it was necessary for the story/situation for an item I had to be revealed, I always did. The first dozen sessions or so were very rough, my players thought I was being "that guy" since I was the only rogue of the party. Once I started to show them that it wasn't going to be used as a detriment to the party, it was simply my role play quirk for this character, they relaxed and had fun with it in game. By fun I mean they would tear into me about being so secretive and making my life miserable by rummaging through my packs, but it was all in game never bleeding over to IRL.

If the player you are describing is being petty and just wants all the stuff for him/herself because of some sense of power, then express yourself. Explain that you feel loot should be handed out to those who need it. However, if you are the only one that seems to have an issue with this, then it might be prudent to understand the norms of the table. Some tables I've been at do play with the first come first serve attitude, loot is bartered for and it's perfectly acceptable to them, I personally find it bothersome. The thing is, I played by character, I was generous in comparison to them, and it confused them that I was so loose with my rewards.

In the end, if the table is fine with the approach you've seen, and you cannot reconcile with that, you'll need to move on to a new game. If it's something that this other person needs to change, because of table consensus, then that's what needs to happen. You are a player at the table, it's your choice to stay or leave.