Post/Author/DateTime	Post
REL 07-26-05, 01:37 PM	O.k My friend (and DM) started running a campeign where we all come from noble houses, now this is a guy who doesn't belive that chars should be in the same streanth level so each Char got great equpment (being nobles and all) the problem is the diffrence between diffrent chars is big, very big, the weakest got equpment worth about 25K while the strongest about 200K, knowing my friend as a DM he doesnt belive in giving the chance to sell/buy magical items greater the potions and scrolls, and in general the magical finding are somewhat crapy, for example, in his campeign a few months ago, I finnished (the story line) as a barbarian with a +2 enchantment axe (from admentite), the problem was I was at 15th level. I know I'll find good equipment and so will everyone else, U can't expect a noble to say, "No no, youre house is weaker, and althou I'm in the status of saying 'Im taking it' I rather you taking this legendery vorpal sword" what I mean, should you give a big advantage to one Char knowing this advantage will last for the entire game?? BTW we've stated 5th level so this is a BIG equipment boost.
rbrt_Spade 07-26-05, 01:50 PM	your dm is messed up- all the pcs should start of at the same wealth level- and hes giving you guys to much wealth.-your dm is porly equiping you!-the axe at that level-how do you surive? thiers wealth by level guidelines thats in the dmg that the dm supposed to follow! i agree you should not have the uber players and the sissys from a dm with a 1 year ex
Ut-Napishtim 07-26-05, 02:04 PM	Sounds like your DM has a classic problem that seems to be affecting a lot of DM's these days - he hasn't read the DMG. Any DM that did would obviously know about wealth/level guidelines and little issues like "play balance." It seems like you have an understanding of these things, maybe you should be DMing. Aside from that option you can pretty much argue until you're blue in the face and it won't do you any good. Since the DM hasn't read the DMG he'll consider it a personal attack and probably react poorly. The only thing you can do is ride it out, or leave if it becomes unbearable. I'm in a game online ATM where the DM obviously has no idea what he's doing, but I'm still hanging out hoping it'll get better. If it doesn't I plan on leaving. As far as the campaign goes I personally wouldn't force all my peeps to be nobles if they didn't want to. The option is always there if they want to explore the Aristocrat class. Since you asked though I'll throw out my own breakdown on the extra cash. Starting out the Aristocrat gets about double the cash of your average PC class depending since they all vary. I generally start my games at third level, so it would work this way: Aristocrat 1/PC Class 2 starts with wealth/level 3 + Aristocrat starting rolled money, Aristocrat 2/PC Class 1 starts out with wealth/level 3 + NPC wealth/level 2, straight-up Aristocrat 3 starts with wealth/level 3 + NPC wealth/level 3. Those without Aristocrat can walk around claiming they're nobles all day, but don't get anything extra to back it up.
DragonDeadite 07-26-05, 02:42 PM	Right!! I hate threads that go like this. Look, I've read the DMG, and frankly I don't like it, part of why I didn't get the DMG2. It's SUGGESTIONS for the way a game is supposed to be run and I don't really like most of the suggestions in it anyways. I use it for the XP charts and the treasure, that's it! If someone wants to run a game that's high money, then they can do it WITHOUT A PROBLEM! IF they want to run it with almost NO money, then that's fine too!!! People need to stop saying that the DMG is the LAW!!! You MUST build characters this way and you MUST make sure they have this much money!! NOT!!! I'm in a game right now with my level 8 character having NO MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL!! The only magic item we had was a sword that vanished when the player had to move to another state. Building levels does not mean you build magic, it just means you get better skills and abilities. Now, with that said... I can understand the DM wanting the characters to start with different wealth... not all noble families are going to have the same amount of money. If you can't understand this, go and read the Belgariad and see how Tolnedra ends up being run by the different houses that do and don't have money. In game sense, no, it isn't really right. They should have different amounts, yes, but not to the point of one player starting with 8 times as much stuff as another player. The difference should be closer along the lines of 25k for player A and maybe 100K for player B. Otherwise, player C with 200K should be kind enough to spread out his wealth to the others, knowing that if they aren't equiped to survive, then they wont be able to help him survive either. That doesn't make this a bad DM, it just makes him a person I wouldn't trust with my accounting. :D So sayeth the Dragon! :dragon:
celtredleg 07-26-05, 03:37 PM	Not sure I would want to play the 25k charecter. I dont think you need large amounts of gear to make it. On the otherhand, I like charrecters to at least start close to the same power level. At 5th level thats a major power gap. Consider telling your friend you get to play the impoverished guy everyday in RL, so its not a new experience and you will catch the next game. Its just no fun to play the also rans that have to hang back to survive.
Phrennzy 07-26-05, 03:41 PM	Look, I've read the DMG, and frankly I don't like it, part of why I didn't get the DMG2. It's SUGGESTIONS for the way a game is supposed to be run and I don't really like most of the suggestions in it anyways. Now, with that said... In game sense, no, it isn't really right. They should have different amounts, yes, but not to the point of one player starting with 8 times as much stuff as another player. The difference should be closer along the lines of 25k for player A and maybe 100K for player B. Otherwise, player C with 200K should be kind enough to spread out his wealth to the others, knowing that if they aren't equiped to survive, then they wont be able to help him survive either. So what you are saying is that even though you don't agree with what the DMG says about balancing characters by giving them the same starting gold, their starting gold should be the same, and if it isn't, then the character with the most money should spread his around until everyone is equal. What a compelling argument.
Ni! 07-26-05, 03:46 PM	Holy :censored:! What does your DM have against balance? I can't realy see any arguemnts supporting lack of balance. If I were the 25K character I would just leave the game. If I am 1/8 as strong as the 200K player I am obviously not going to accomplish anything, and I tend to find watching some one else kill everything we meet before I can move pretty annoying. I could see starting out with different gold IF THE POORER CHARACTERS WERE COMPENSATED WITH XP. Beat him over the head with the DMG. I realy can't see how it would be any fun for the guy with the 25K.
DragonDeadite 07-26-05, 03:49 PM	What a compelling argument. :P Phrennzy, you're a sweetheart, you know that? But for some reason we alway clash. I'm a very complicated man, and as my fiance says, I'm a hypacrite on SO MANY LEVELS. My arguement really does make sense... somehow... I think... maybe... and I didn't say they should be equal, just not so far spread apart.
rbrt_Spade 07-26-05, 03:53 PM	Tolnedra -ends up with the same ruler and the nobles have about the same money for the throne!-what book are you reading? :uh-huh:
Phrennzy 07-26-05, 03:54 PM	We always clash? That's so cool. Does this mean we are Arch Nemesises? That would be cool. I'm obviously the good guy, because of the white horse...
rbrt_Spade 07-26-05, 03:55 PM	Right!! I hate threads that go like this. Look, I've read the DMG, and frankly I don't like it, part of why I didn't get the DMG2. It's SUGGESTIONS for the way a game is supposed to be run and I don't really like most of the suggestions in it anyways. I use it for the XP charts and the treasure, that's it! If someone wants to run a game that's high money, then they can do it WITHOUT A PROBLEM! IF they want to run it with almost NO money, then that's fine too!!! People need to stop saying that the DMG is the LAW!!! You MUST build characters this way and you MUST make sure they have this much money!! NOT!!! I'm in a game right now with my level 8 character having NO MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL!! The only magic item we had was a sword that vanished when the player had to move to another state. Building levels does not mean you build magic, it just means you get better skills and abilities. Now, with that said... I can understand the DM wanting the characters to start with different wealth... not all noble families are going to have the same amount of money. If you can't understand this, go and read the Belgariad and see how Tolnedra ends up being run by the different houses that do and don't have money. In game sense, no, it isn't really right. They should have different amounts, yes, but not to the point of one player starting with 8 times as much stuff as another player. The difference should be closer along the lines of 25k for player A and maybe 100K for player B. Otherwise, player C with 200K should be kind enough to spread out his wealth to the others, knowing that if they aren't equiped to survive, then they wont be able to help him survive either. That doesn't make this a bad DM, it just makes him a person I wouldn't trust with my accounting. :D So sayeth the Dragon! :dragon: i hope you dont dm
Ut-Napishtim 07-26-05, 04:44 PM	Right!! I hate threads that go like this. Look, I've read the DMG, and frankly I don't like it, part of why I didn't get the DMG2. It's SUGGESTIONS for the way a game is supposed to be run and I don't really like most of the suggestions in it anyways. I use it for the XP charts and the treasure, that's it! If someone wants to run a game that's high money, then they can do it WITHOUT A PROBLEM! IF they want to run it with almost NO money, then that's fine too!!! People need to stop saying that the DMG is the LAW!!! I suppose you could take it that way. The only problem with that is when a player complains. Then what can you say? Rule 0. What if a player doesn't like such-and-such? Rule 0. Player being overpowered by the other characters? Rule 0. If you're just going to run a game of Rule 0 why bother with the window dressing of the treasure and xp tables when you could just tell the players what they get, and even if they hit and how much damage they do? If you head over to the What's a Player to do? board you'll get a better idea of why DM's who lean so heavily on rule 0 soon find themselves without players. Oh wait, we're already there! And there's a player! Complaining about a game where the DM's Rule 0 isn't any fun! We always clash? That's so cool. Does this mean we are Arch Nemesises? That would be cool. I'm obviously the good guy, because of the white horse... ... and the whole respect for the dignity of sentient life thing. ;)
DarknessEternal 07-26-05, 04:56 PM	This situation will absolutely lead to one outcome: poor PC killing rich PC and claiming his stuff.
Wenin 07-26-05, 05:39 PM	I completely agree with DragonDeadite. The DM has the right to design his group dynamic however he wants. It is the epic battle of roleplaying vs rollplaying. It makes complete roleplaying sense that characters from different noble houses could very well have different amounts of resources available to them, especially if you're talking about DROW noble houses (original poster didn't specify so I'll not assume this to be true). I also agree with DragonDeadite that the resources should be relatively close to each other. 25K vs 200K is much to large of a difference. talk to your DM air your concerns, ask that he even things up a bit more. As for the Level vs Wealth tables in the books.... they can be thrown out if the DM wishes, but he has to make sure that the balance is maintained by either upping the difficulty or lowering the difficulty of encounters accordingly.
allenchan 07-26-05, 06:46 PM	Sure, the DM has the right. But if the pcs arent having fun, then whats the point? the Dm sounds like a prick to me. I'd leave.
Siduakal 07-26-05, 07:44 PM	Currently in my world.. Our group is.. (FYI, if we don't have background limitations, our DM rolls %s to find out our family wealth levels) Half-Celestial Paladin.. He's the son of a king, and as such, has some VERY nice equipment. Human Psychic Warrior/Monk... His parents own the biggest chain of magic shops.. also has nice equipment. Human Psion/Thrallherd.. He has like 30k worth of gear at level 10. Why? I didn't want him to have a family, so he made it on his own. Half-Dragon Ranger... Family..powerful..lots of nice gear. War Troll Barbarian.. +2 Greataxe, +1 Studded Leather, Huge Mount w/ Studded Leather Barding, Ring of Sustenance, and trinkets... why? He's a GOOD aligned troll.. A CG! In a culture of LEs.. His family shunned him completely.
High Octane 07-26-05, 07:48 PM	For the OP: Your DM is NUTS. More specifically, hes a control freak.
weasel fierce 07-27-05, 12:46 AM	If each character is influential and meaningfull to the game, its balanced. If one of the characters is outclassed and has nothing to contribute at all, to play, its not.
Traevanon 07-27-05, 01:19 AM	Currently in my world.. Our group is.. (FYI, if we don't have background limitations, our DM rolls %s to find out our family wealth levels) Half-Celestial Paladin.. He's the son of a king, and as such, has some VERY nice equipment. Human Psychic Warrior/Monk... His parents own the biggest chain of magic shops.. also has nice equipment. Human Psion/Thrallherd.. He has like 30k worth of gear at level 10. Why? I didn't want him to have a family, so he made it on his own. Half-Dragon Ranger... Family..powerful..lots of nice gear. War Troll Barbarian.. +2 Greataxe, +1 Studded Leather, Huge Mount w/ Studded Leather Barding, Ring of Sustenance, and trinkets... why? He's a GOOD aligned troll.. A CG! In a culture of LEs.. His family shunned him completely. Just as many players say that they would leave a bad DM, I would leave this group of players and tell them to find another DM. Just the race / class choices scream out Superheroes in a Fantasy setting. Two psionics, a half-dragon, a half-celestial and a War Troll... they should be going after Doctor Doom instead of monsters and treasure. Sorry I chose this particular post to snap on. Its been bugging me a while. PC races and classes are too full of exotic content. If you arent a half-undead, spellwarped, part troll, part demon, psionic, divine, arcane, monk, warrior you arent playing right. But I digress... consider the previous an uncontrollable splat of opinion that is completely off topic. Your DM should try to make all the characters feel included in the game, if he can do this while giving you a huge disparity in wealth then so be it, but it will be difficult. Good luck.
Siduakal 07-27-05, 01:38 AM	Just as many players say that they would leave a bad DM, I would leave this group of players and tell them to find another DM. Just the race / class choices scream out Superheroes in a Fantasy setting. Two psionics, a half-dragon, a half-celestial and a War Troll... they should be going after Doctor Doom instead of monsters and treasure. Sorry I chose this particular post to snap on. Its been bugging me a while. PC races and classes are too full of exotic content. If you arent a half-undead, spellwarped, part troll, part demon, psionic, divine, arcane, monk, warrior you arent playing right. But I digress... consider the previous an uncontrollable splat of opinion that is completely off topic. Your DM should try to make all the characters feel included in the game, if he can do this while giving you a huge disparity in wealth then so be it, but it will be difficult. Good luck. I am playing a troll because I've always WANTED to play a troll. In fact, when I first got D&D.. I asked to be a troll. Why? I had a character on EQs RP servers who was a Troll that I LOVED to bits. The Half-Celestial was mine, also. Because I wanted a paladin that was TRULY angelic. It was a concept I came up with. Another player took over the character because I wasn't able to play LG very well. We play things that are strong, yes.. But we also fight epic level mobs. We fought a winter wight as a party that can handle CR 17s roughly. So it's still a challenge. We play the oddities because it's fun. In fact, 2 of the 4 players in this group have played since 2.0 and earlier. One of which has played since the earliest days of D&D. Sure, there's a lot to do with the CORE races/classes. But you get bored playing them after so long. You want to try other things. My War Troll is CG (The race as a whole is LE) and is a Barbarian (They're almost exclusively fighters) .. And he keeps a collection of flower pressings. Books full of them. He also carries children books in his bag for both himself and the small blind human child he protects and travels with. The Human Psion, ALSO, is my character. Because I wanted to play a pure out blaster. That's what he is. His thrallherd aspect is his lust for power and the will to control those around him. He likes to burn things. He's a pyromaniac. He's the main evil character in the good party. (Though he wears a ring of mind shielding and is subtle most the time) The Human PsyWar/Monk is a re-creation of the player whose played forevers old old character from early psionics. Don't assume that ti's just some power gamer campaign, it's really not. We fight on average ONE encounter a night. Most our time is spent roleplaying. In fact, last session set the record for this parties encounters fought at 3. That's 3 in a 6 hour session we hold every Saturday/Sunday night.
REL 07-27-05, 06:59 AM	PPL, you're miising the point I only wanted to know if you think it's right to give a lasing advantage! I know the charcers are unbalanced and BTW the "weakest" in money terms doesn't make it the weakest!!! I agree that it's a very big advantage (a + 6 overall weapon instead of a +3) and so on, don't make a mistake the game is not balanced as it is (IMHO) but should the DM increase the gap?? anyway...
nyysjan 07-27-05, 07:40 AM	the DM needs to be shot, in the face, with a hammer haven't seen the expression used for a while, odd :confused:
SeidonVanDolf 07-27-05, 09:30 AM	I get that the DM wants you to play nobles. I guided my Players on what races/classes they could play once or twice for a particular story. I ran a game once where one character was a Prince (an Aristocrat), one was a commoner (the class- commoner) and the other was a mage (a sorcerer of good alignment). The Prince was in love with a commoner woman who was kidnapped. She just happened to be the commoner PC's best friend since childhood (and the player had decided that his character was secretly crushing on her but knew that she loved the Prince so didn't have a chance). So they worked together to get her back but they didn't know much about adventuring so they had to turn to this sorcerer guy to help them out. It wasn't until they were quite a ways out into the adventure that they learned that the sorcerer hadn't really had any field experience either. (He was level 1 just like them but told them that he had been an experienced adventurer so that they would take him along.) My players had a great time with this until one of my players started having problems at home and we had to disban our little group for a while and the campaign just sort of got lost somewhere along the way. Anyway the point is that even though one was of high wealth and one was average wealth and the other had respectively low wealth they all managed to work together and get along. And I allowed the Aristocrat and the Commoner to begin to pick up PC classes along the way if they wanted to. But despite the background differences and the financial differences I maintained the balance in my group by making them depend on one another. Essentially they couldn't make it without working together and these characters actually began to forge decent friendships with one another. It was awesome, like something out of one those old fantasy movies like Dark Crystal or Legend or the Labyrinth. But as for a difference of 150k in resources... I would not go so far. This would totally disrupt the balance of power within the game. One PC would dominate each combat and the others would struggle constantly just to survive. I would gently voice my concern to my DM were I you. Have your peers back yoo up but don't make it sound like an attack. Just ask him simply, "Aren't you just a little concerned that this will harm the balance of the group?" and then add that "We are. So maybe we could have a difference but maybe not such an exponential difference..." Or something to that effect, since he is your friend. He is probably only trying to keep the realism in the game but there is only so much realism one can apply to a fantasy game.
celtredleg 07-27-05, 10:37 AM	If each character is influential and meaningfull to the game, its balanced. If one of the characters is outclassed and has nothing to contribute at all, to play, its not. Agreed. If it is a heavy RP type game, the gear should not make that much diference. If its a combat heavy game, it can mkae a huge amount of difference. REL posted that the game is balanced. So there must be something added to the low wealth people to increase the effectiveness. REL, back to your OP. If it is balanced, then no, its not a big deal. There can be 1,000,000 gp difference, as long as all players can have an equal part. I do have a bit of trouble seeing how it can be balanced with 150k difference, but suppose it could be done.
SonsOfKyuss 07-27-05, 03:18 PM	REL, to actually answer your question, no, the DM should not give one player such a huge advantage if it will last for the majority of the campaign. The only good reason that I can see to do something like that is if the party was interested in roleplaying their way through the problems that arise from financial disparity within a party. Other than that, I think it is an extremely lame idea. Either A) the DM takes steps to neutralize the rich character's wealth, or B) the rich character quickly becomes the focus of the campaign as his powers, abilities, and wealth outstrip the rest of the party. I can't really see what the point of playing in a game with option A would be, and I can definately say that option B doesn't sound like fun either. If everyone in your group is having fun though, I guess there isn't much to say. But if they aren't having fun, then you either need to fix the problem or stop playing.
IceFractal 07-27-05, 06:54 PM	Some people say that wealth level doesn't matter, and that it is merely "rollplaying" to care. Well, to those people I say: Would you run a game where some players were level 1 and others were level 15? Because that's what you're doing. In D&D, wealth determines character capabilities as much as level does. If you are a level 1 character with 200k, you are actually stronger than level 1 for all practical purposes. Likewise, if you are level 20 with no items or anything, then you are effectively lower level. When all the PCs have the same wealth, it's fine, although the DM has to remember to compensate for the effectively higher/lower level. However, when they have significantly different wealth then each other, it creates the same problems as having them be different levels from each other. In dangerous situations, obviously, the high wealth guy may be barely challenged by something that nearly kills the low wealth guy. Even in purely roleplaying situations, it makes a difference. The small town mayor who's sending the poor adventurers out to do something for the reward really can't motivate the guy who's rich enough to buy the whole town. Someone with the wealth of a kingdom doesn't even need to do their own adventuring, they can just send their private army to deal with it. Finally, just because the noble houses have different resources, doesn't mean the characters have to. A heir apparent to a minor noble house may have the same wealth as a second cousin in a more major house. If you want to make the characters less dependant on money for their power, it can be done, but it takes some work, and shouldn't just be thrown in there. One method is simply to say that magic items can't be bought, which makes money less of a factor. Then keep a virtual tally of how much wealth each character would have according to the DMG. The character can use that virtual money to "buy" magical abilities, special training, and bonded artifacts that give the same powers their items normally would. These abilities wouldn't necessarily take up a slot, but they shouldn't stack with items that do the same thing. Example: Lud Ironfeet is an Orc mercenary, specifically a level 5 Fighter. Being who he his, he only has a few silver and some mundane weaponry to his name. However, he has a virtual wealth of 9000 gp. He uses this to "buy" the Iron Mountain sword style, which gives him a +1 to hit and damage with his greataxe and lets it break through DR/magic (virtually making it +1). He also has ritual scars that grant his skin the hardness of leather, giving +1 to AC (virtually making his armor +1). After raiding an Elf village and destroying it in the name of Gruumsh, he recieves Gruumsh's favor, which gives him +2 to Strength (virtual gloves of Ogre Strength). He has 2000 gp of virtual wealth left over, which may be used later when he does something noteworthy. This is a good way to use extremely low or high wealth characters without unbalancing things, but it does require some work.
DragonDeadite 07-28-05, 11:16 AM	Tolnedra -ends up with the same ruler and the nobles have about the same money for the throne!-what book are you reading? :uh-huh: Was thinking more along the lines of the rich houses buying the votes to become the rulers and the poor houses killing the votes in hopes of having only their voters left alive... Rich houses vs. poor houses! Get it? And yes... Phrennzy, you sould be the good guy. I like being evil!! MUAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Wenin 07-28-05, 01:17 PM	Some people say that wealth level doesn't matter, and that it is merely "rollplaying" to care. Well, to those people I say: Would you run a game where some players were level 1 and others were level 15? First I don't believe anyone ever said it didn't matter. Second, Level 1 vs Level 15, is a MUCH larger difference than 25K vs 200K To answer your ill written question.... I would run a game where the players were of differing levels, but just like I advocate the allowing a reasonable difference in wealth... I'd also advocate allowing a reasonable difference in levels. Hell combined them inversely... rich low level characters joined by broke high level characters. Low level character is from a rich noble family and wants to go adventuring, so s/he goes and finds a down on his luck higher level character that is a drunk. That'd set the stage for some interesting roleplaying.
Iron Kobold 07-28-05, 05:50 PM	O.k My friend (and DM) started running a campeign where we all come from noble houses, now this is a guy who doesn't belive that chars should be in the same streanth level so each Char got great equpment (being nobles and all) the problem is the diffrence between diffrent chars is big, very big, the weakest got equpment worth about 25K while the strongest about 200K... what I mean, should you give a big advantage to one Char knowing this advantage will last for the entire game?? BTW we've started at 5th level so this is a BIG equipment boost. Here's a couple of qustions to ask both you and your GM. Descrepencies like these can work as long as the encounters are TAYLORED to take this into account. If your DM is using the standard monsters from the MM then he's a little wack. Besides just because a nobel house is better than another this shouldn't equate to ONLY just better equipment. Houses do have other resources beside gear... There should be experts at their disposal, henchmen, horses, supplies, CASH... You might need to have a heart to heart talk with your DM and plead your case... At least thats what I would do.
IceFractal 07-28-05, 10:50 PM	I never claimed that 25k vs 200k was as big a difference as level 1 vs level 15, just that it was a big difference, and that wealth does determine a character's effective abilities as much as level does. I fail to see how that is "ill written". As to your other point, it is theoretically possible to balance level with wealth (eg high-level poor character with low-level rich character). However, it is very difficult to balance it correctly, and even when done perfectly the low-level character will be a lot stronger in some areas and barely survive in others. Also, when you say you'd run a game where the players were different levels, do you just mean that you'd let the circumstance occur in play, as most people would - or that you'd start the players out at different levels. And if it's the latter, then who gets to chose which characters are high level and which ones aren't?