The logic of Character wealth by level.

[MichielHagen]

I was checking what the level appropriate wealth was for a character i was making, and i figured i knew what level 11 wealth was, i should remember that, and remember what logic the system uses so i will never have to look it up again.........i do not see it!

{Scrubbed. Please don't reproduce non-OGL material wholesale. Especially not such purposefully excluded and often sought material. Discuss any point you may have in a manner that someone with the book can follow.}

Seriously...why!?!?!

[Asbestos]

Quick! Someone make a graph for wealth ny level! Then let's start messing around with logarithms and derivatives until we force a pattern or confuse people into thinking a pattern exists.

Anyway, WBL is probably just arbitrary even though a smooth curve would probably make more sense. Either way, I just cast Wall of Iron or break up ladders.

[Random832]

I think it's derived from the treasure tables - 13 CR= encounters per level split four ways.

[onthetown]

I think it's more or less just based on what the average character will have made by that point... It's assuming that you're taking paying jobs, or fighting monsters with treasure hordes appropriate to your level and looting said hordes. It can't take into account what your employers are actually willing to pay you, or if you're morally opposed to looting treasure hordes, etc...

But it's a great table to show your DM if you don't think you have enough gold, and want some more

[Duke of URL]

Frankly, as much as I'm not noted as being a big 4e fan, I would much prefer a "pick one level-appropriate weapon, armor, one misc. item, and one package of consumables from the following lists" type approach than deal with WBL.

First of all, it is a little arbitrary, as noted. It's actually less than encounter-based wealth, bu then again, it does presume some money is spent on consumables. On the other hand, wealth in the form of quest-type rewards isn't factored into encounter-based wealth, either.

Secondly, it encourages a "MageMart" mentality of players being able to choose the exact items they want, rather than simulating the fact that they wouldn't have necessarily been able to find (or craft) those items via normal adventuring.

[Sliver]

But it's a great table to show your DM if you don't think you have enough gold, and want some more

It would be amusing if someone does that without reading the table first and actually getting more treasure.. "Why you are right, I wasn't giving you the right amount of treasure.. Here, I will reduce it by say... half sounds about right.."

[PhoenixRivers]

It may be advisable to remove the WBL information: It's not OGL, and is copyrighted, IIRC.

[drengnikrafe]

I find it more advisable to investigate your own WBL rate (as far as what your PCs regularly make in your games) and/or just start at fairly low levels. That way, you don't get the absolutely perfect gear that it's almost impossible to actually get at those levels, which seems to happen a lot in character creation at high levels (but virtually never when my group goes from a level like 3).

[Mongoose87]

I'd like to think it's somehow related to the price of magical items appropriate for that level.

[onthetown]

It would be amusing if someone does that without reading the table first and actually getting more treasure.. "Why you are right, I wasn't giving you the right amount of treasure.. Here, I will reduce it by say... half sounds about right.."

Hahah, with me it was a matter of not getting enough gold. I'd love to hear about it if somebody ended up the other way around.

[Starbuck_II]

Hahah, with me it was a matter of not getting enough gold. I'd love to hear about it if somebody ended up the other way around.

Yeah, this one DM was monty haul wealth and did say, "okay I will reduce it". and so I quickly said, "no you had it right the first time".

[ericgrau]

That table is only for character creation to represent what the average character would have gotten from the treasure tables. For an in progress game you just use the treasure tables.

Btw, making radical adjustments to loot up or down skews the balance. Too low hurts non-casters more than casters (though both find it useful), for one. Another example is that offense is much more expensive than defense, whereas class levels give the reverse. So then you gotta weaken the monsters to match, and attack rolls start hitting like crazy on both sides.

Oh, and I've tried to fit a curve but there is no pattern. Maybe past level 5 there kinda sorta not really is one. It gets better at very high and epic levels though.

[RagnaroksChosen]

I wish the wbl was more random...
I once heard it was derived by taking all the monsters for that CR and averaging out the gold amount for it.

[Glimbur]

Frankly, as much as I'm not noted as being a big 4e fan, I would much prefer a "pick one level-appropriate weapon, armor, one misc. item, and one package of consumables from the following lists" type approach than deal with WBL.

MiC has rules for this sort of thing. It doesn't quite work in 3.5 because you need so many items though.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Quick! Someone make a graph for wealth ny level! Then let's start messing around with logarithms and derivatives until we force a pattern or confuse people into thinking a pattern exists.

I saw a WotC thread with very complex (and fairly accurate) graphs. The most fitting graph went way, way down at levels below 0, but that was irrelevant. Prolly got eaten by the new forums though.

[Duke of URL]

MiC has rules for this sort of thing. It doesn't quite work in 3.5 because you need so many items though.

I disagree about "needing" so many items. On the whole, a well-designed party using decent strategy and tactics should be able to handle CR-appropriate encounters at WBL too easily, in my opinion. Especially with so many good build strategies available on the web.

DMs tend to adjust for this by upping encounter levels, but the reverse could be true -- adjust for wealth (or more precisely, non-optimized wealth) and encounters might be more of a challenge at the intended levels. Worst case, the DM adjusts encounter levels down if the players are "too weak".

There is nothing in the game that truly requires players to really have any particular wealth. A low-wealth game can be managed quite easily through encounter level adjustment, allowing the characters' abilities to matter more than their equipment. That skews game balance toward classes less dependent on equipment, of course (i.e., Fighters are even more screwed than usual), so equipment "packages" can be adjusted to account for this.

[Dervag]

In 3rd Edition, the Challenge Rating of monsters was such that one monster of CR X would award the same XP to an given party as two monsters of CR (X-2). Therefore, we can say that one ECR X+2 being was a match for two ECR X beings, all else being equal.

This implies that power scales with ECR according to
P = (P_initial)*{2^[X/2]}.
Increasing a being's ECR by 1 increases its power by a factor of 1.4 or so, as that is the square root of 2.

Yes, I know, this breaks down for levelled characters because different classes have different power growth curves (fighters grow more or less linearly; casters do not). And it doesn't take specialization into account: one ECR 6 fire-monster may be a match for far more than two ECR 4 hideously-flammable-monsters. But it's a good place to start.
______

Aaanyway. If wealth is supposed to be a constant fraction of a character's overall "power," and its power is on average supposed to fit the curve above, then overall wealth by level should scale with 2^(X/2), where X is character level. It doesn't quite, but it comes reasonably close.

I'll check this more formally when I get home, if the discussion is still active.

[Snails]

I disagree about "needing" so many items. On the whole, a well-designed party using decent strategy and tactics should be able to handle CR-appropriate encounters at WBL too easily, in my opinion. Especially with so many good build strategies available on the web.

Sure, assuming that the PCs are both reasonably optimized and apply good teamwork. But those are not assumptions I would make about most groups.

Furthermore low wealth creates (or enhances) a power skew between the spellcasters and non-spellcasters. Every smidgeon of magic is more valuable when you can afford few or no magic items -- this is just the other side of the Diminishing Marginal Utility coin.

The problem of overall potency of the party is easily addressed by throwing extra monsters or making modest enhancements to the monsters on hand (increase HPs, boost saves, etc.). The problem of relative power level within the party can suck the fun out of a game and is messier to fix.

[Fhaolan]

I went up to a sixth level polynomial fit, but I still couldn't get it to work out. It fit reasonably well at levels 5 and above, but 4 and below were significantly off.

= 0.08*level^6 - 4.2123*level^5 + 96.452*level^4 - 1075.1*level^3 + 6515.4*level^2 - 16716*level + 15808

I'm not willing to go further than that.

[Egiam]

I went up to a sixth level polynomial fit, but I still couldn't get it to work out. It fit reasonably well at levels 5 and above, but 4 and below were significantly off.

= 0.08*level^6 - 4.2123*level^5 + 96.452*level^4 - 1075.1*level^3 + 6515.4*level^2 - 16716*level + 15808

I'm not willing to go further than that.

This is why I now prefer NWOD. Just play. Make a story. No brain hurting maths.

A few months ago, I decided that the WBL system is silly. Fun, but silly.

[Drenn]

There is nothing in the game that truly requires players to really have any particular wealth. A low-wealth game can be managed quite easily through encounter level adjustment, allowing the characters' abilities to matter more than their equipment. That skews game balance toward classes less dependent on equipment, of course (i.e., Fighters are even more screwed than usual), so equipment "packages" can be adjusted to account for this.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't D&D 3.5 grant certain bonuses to characters who intentionally shun wealth via the "Oath of Poverty", but I believe it was done away with in 4e?

I'm just saying it seems as though there should be at least some kind of trade off.

[Prime32]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't D&D 3.5 grant certain bonuses to characters who intentionally shun wealth via the "Oath of Poverty", but I believe it was done away with in 4e?

I'm just saying it seems as though there should be at least some kind of trade off.

The Book of Exalted Deeds has the Vow of Poverty feat. It has another feat as a prereq and your character will be left with some pretty glaring weaknesses (such as lack of ranged combat ability). Plus, the items required to duplicate the VoP bonuses cost less than WBL.

[Jack_Simth]

It may be advisable to remove the WBL information: It's not OGL, and is copyrighted, IIRC.

As he's discussing the logic behind it, and only quoting a section, he's got a very good argument for the Fair Use clause of copyright law, should it come to that.

[Duke of URL]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't D&D 3.5 grant certain bonuses to characters who intentionally shun wealth via the "Oath of Poverty", but I believe it was done away with in 4e?

I'm just saying it seems as though there should be at least some kind of trade off.

That's a different matter entirely. I'm not talking about a character choice to "shun wealth", I'm discussing the need for "character wealth" in the first place.

Theoretically, the game is balanced around a certain amount of expected wealth by level. But of course, in practice, that's about as well balanced as the CR system is, and it encourages players to optimize wealth.

In short, it's a "rule 0" issue. Give the DM more control over what the players start with, bearing in mind that (s)he also has the responsibility to ensure that the challenges they face are "balanced" against that.