And I'm back with another loot problem.

[A_Man]

Probably don't remember, but I'm back with a loot issue. (first problem here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...php?p=16211677)

So, we have another fight on our hands (This team is greedy. real greedy). One guy (new) is arguing that loot should be distributed based on how much they did in combat. Huge fight going on, and I'm looking for an answer. Is this a proper way to deal things out? Or is it a proper way (He's saying that giving loot based on who has the most magic items is stupid (A B and C won a magic gauntlet, A and B already have magic items, C gets gauntlet)).

thanks for you answers.

[Anxe]

People with more magic items are probably going to be more useful in a fight. So his means of distributing the loot is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer?

This is probably the worst way of distributing treasure I've heard of. It may make sense in a realism fashion (ancient soldiers distributed plunder this way), but its not fun. Players whose characters aren't as effective don't get to have as much fun in combats or in wealth distribution afterwards. Distributing the way you suggested (ABC etc) is the way my group does it.

[INDYSTAR188]

Split the gold evenly. Magic items are distributed to who can use them best and if no one can agree then the party sells the item when they can and split that or start a party fund. As the DM, try to get a list of stuff people want and include something from the lists when you can.

[Red Fel]

Split the gold evenly. Magic items are distributed to who can use them best and if no one can agree then the party sells the item when they can and split that or start a party fund. As the DM, try to get a list of stuff people want and include something from the lists when you can.

This, very much. In fact, a party fund is a very good idea, as it keeps players who invest in consumables (potions, wands, scrolls) from feeling put-upon by the party. Having a common pool of wealth is very helpful in that regard, prevents a given PC from hoarding, and generally helps to avoid conflict. As for the rest, in my parties, it usually goes primarily to PCs for whom it is an upgrade, secondarily to those for whom it is useful (e.g. a sidegrade), and finally to the pool for party funds and common usage.

[Cloud]

Just...split gold evenly, it saves a lot of headaches. I find effort a bad metric because it can be subjective and lead to arguments. ("I did all the damage!" "Only because I cast that buff!" "You all would have died if I didn't find that trap!" "You guys would be imprisoned or worse by now without me, you can't talk your way out of a paper bag.") Besides someone might have bad rolls one game, or be out of their element, etc. (If someone regularly in all situations doesn't contribute...that's a different matter and why are they an adventurer?)

For items you find the PHB actually goes into this pretty well, just when you're counting up loot, count the sell price of the loot, and if anyone wants the item, they can just buy it for the sell price (If two people want the item they get bid over it and pay more than the sell price, but I find it's rare that comes up with some civil discussion.) On the party fund it's at this step normally when I play that as a party we just buy party items using the loot from the adventure before it's split. Things like wands of lesser vigor/resurgence/lesser restoration.

So for example, if you have 5 people, 9,500 gold and a +1 cloak of resistance to split up (10,000 gold if the item was sold), everyone gets 2,000 gold. One person can take the cloak of resistance, but obviously gets 500 less gold.

[jaydubs]

In my experience, I have the most luck with:

-Split gold/gems/etc. evenly. Split gold earned by selling loot evenly.
-Pay for party consumables off the top. Cure wands, situational scrolls, potions, material costs for utility spells, etc.
-Divvy up magic items based on a combination of who needs them most, and making sure everyone has roughly the same amount of items.
-Divvied magic items are still party property, and if/when sold the gold is still split evenly.


The advantages of this system are:
-Everyone gets a roughly even share of treasure.
-Magic items usually go where they are the most useful.
-Useful party items get bought.
-Little book-keeping, besides remembering which items are "on loan" and which were personally bought.

[Mnemnosyne]

I prefer to handle loot in-character, personally. The characters should sit down and draw up a charter for their adventuring party that defines exactly how loot will be handled, and handle it that way from then on. Anyone who is found to be in violation of the charter has penalties exacted which themselves are defined in the charter. This is especially true if loot disagreements have come up multiple times. A charter is unnecessary if everyone seems happy with the distribution (although it's still a good idea, because it'll head off disagreements before they happen) but once disagreements have taken place, it is a very good idea to make sure it's detailed out exactly how they will be solved in the future.

As for exactly what method to detail in the charter, I like totaling up all the earnings, then appraising the items, and allowing the party members to purchase them out of their share of liquid funds. A proviso should be made in case someone wants something but isn't able to purchase it from the rest of the party right away due to lack of funds, because it would cost more to sell it and then have them re-purchase it later.

[BWR]

If your group is fine with this way of splitting loot, fine, but I would not use it for the reasons others have mentioned. It really sounds like this one guy wants to build a better character than the others and screw them over that way.

The way we usully do it is
- items useful to particular characters are given to those characters. Some negotiation about who gets what in cases of more than one person wanting something.
- leftover loot is sold and divided equally.

Sometimes the group keeps a party fund of some of this money, but for the most part people are pretty generous about buying stuff for the entire group. This, however, does not sound like the OP's "real greedy" group so I would probably suggest they go with the party fund idea. If they are really greedy and want to make sure they don't lose any money to the group, the best option is probably to just calculate gold value of treasure and a certain amount, say one quarter, of this is the party fund, to be spent on things like food and lodging, party consumables like wands and potions, temple visits for raising/healing, miscellaneous expenses, etc. What's left is the personal share of the PC. If anyone wants gear from the pot, it's taken from their share and if the item is more expensive than their share they have to pay the extra to make up for the others' loss.

[Rhynn]

One guy (new) is arguing that loot should be distributed based on how much they did in combat.

Ridiculous idea because that can't be measured in any useful way.


Solution: The party should write a charter that every member signs, which details loot division (1 share for every "full member," i.e. the PCs, ½-shares or whatever for "secondary members," i.e. henchmen, or whatever works), compensation for injury (including provisions for raising the dead and any other expensive healing spells; does it come out of your share or are such costs deducted before splitting the loot?), and any other questions involving money and reimbursement.

If anyone wants to propose changing something, there's a vote (they can require a simple 50+% or strong 2/3 majority).

Put the idea out there but let your players negotiate and write it out. Any disagreement should be voted on instead of argued.

Breaking the charter you've signed will, obviously, result in being expulsed (possibly killed or marooned, depending on the party's approach to life) and having to create a new PC who better follow the charter.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

Breaking the charter you've signed will, obviously, result in being expulsed (possibly killed or marooned, depending on the party's approach to life) and having to create a new PC who better follow the charter.

And a week later, the same player will be doing the exact same things.

Sounds like this guy just wants the most toys, and doesn't care who he tramples over to get them.

[Rhynn]

And a week later, the same player will be doing the exact same things.

If the player goes out of his way to cause trouble, you kick him out. (Although, frankly, I think realizing that they won't get away with crap without consequences will curb most of these types.)

This isn't rocket science!

If the problem is IC, then you solve it IC (the charter is exactly as good, theoretically up to 100%, at solving these problems as you make it). If the problem is OOC, you solve it OOC (by talking to the problem player or kicking him out).

[scurv]

<in DM voice> Loot distribution is an in character decision, Just remember everyone is free to leave whenever and excuse me i need to set up this ambush to gank your arguing characters. </In DM voice>

As a rule, I tend to discount any suggesting put forward by someone that just happens to favor their character. Just remind them they are at a table with dice and gambling for spoils was not unknown in the past.....and just a reminder just because the wizard identifies something, Does not mean the group automatically knows what it is.

[Thialfi]

I've always been something of a loot communist. Most of my characters are pretty selfless and suggest items go to the characters in a method that would be most beneficial to the party.

When I do play selfish characters we usually end up drawing lots to establish pick order. The party won and the party got the items. Everyone thinks they are awesome and deserve the item, so highest rolls on a d20 establish pick order. It's fair and it adds an element of fun to the process. Once a character makes a pick, they cannot acquire another item until everyone in the party has got one, then the random numbers start over. Characters are always free to trade if a later item strikes their fancy more than the item that they got.

[Jay R]

One guy (new) is arguing that loot should be distributed based on how much they did in combat.

I'm guessing that he is a combat-focused character. It should be clear that this method is unfair to the people with non-combat skills like lockpicking, diplomacy, etc. Those skills help the party, but not during melee.

The correct answer to give this guy is, "No, you will not get more than your share, based on any argument whatsoever." Don't fall into the trap of arguing against the specific reason he came up with this time for why he should get a larger share, or he'll just come up with a new rationale for getting more. That's an infinite sequence. The point - the only point - is, "No, you won't get more than the rest of us."

Repeat that single line, over and over, against any argument offered.

"No, you won't get more than the rest of us."