Post/Author/DateTime	Post
mithrilmoon 01-02-07, 06:22 PM	Money is easy you just split it evenly. But how do you split up items? do you tally up their total worth and try to split it that way? Do you play dice for them? Or do you use a more creative method?
FRRC 01-02-07, 06:32 PM	Depends. Not everyone is a money grubbing greed-monger. You are supposed to be a team. People get what they logically need. A Cleric isn't going to have ALL the healing wands. The Rogue and Ranger might have one. A Paladin might only take things that would help further his goal on restroring order to the world. Usually, the weakest gets pumped up till he is level with the party in power and then the items are spread logically.
MyNameForevermore 01-02-07, 06:36 PM	I agree, need before greed, if I can reference WoW without being destroyed. My party keeps all of its' funds in a single bank account to which anyone has access. It helps to have trust in a party. For example, if our Swashbuckler found +3 robes of Improved Slick, he might not want to just say "MINE", but give them to the Sorcerer, as he would have no penalty for wearing the robes and could severely benefit from the AC bonus. Just think about who needs it, and, if necessary, roll dice for stuff.
mithrilmoon 01-02-07, 06:44 PM	thanks for your input guys, but i probably should have phrased this better. what I meant to ask was what are soem of the more creative ways of splitting items out there.
Angelflesh 01-02-07, 07:34 PM	Why must we be creative? My players don't split their loot with a rube goldberg machine, when they find an item or weapon, the player who needs it most, or will get the most use out of it get's to take it if they want. As for items like art, gems etc., they either exchange it somewhere for cash, or someone just says "Eh, you can have it, i'm good with what i already have." I guess my players just aren't money hungry.
TheChilliGod 01-02-07, 07:45 PM	One group I play in has a "first in, first served" rule with treasure. The one who finds it keeps it, and the first one to bagz something in the hoard keeps it too. However, if you can't use it, you can't keep it. Another group splits everything according to what they don't already have. Those with MW weapons get the magic ones (assuming that they're proficient with said weapons), and those without cloaks or gloves are given the cloaks and gloves. Gold is split evenly. A third group donates all money (and items, if nobody wants to wear/use them) to "The Till." Any party member can make withdrawals from the Till with the permission of all of the other party members. This works doubly good, as my PC in this group owns a shop (stocked with phat lewt), so the Till is usually added to more than taken away from when we hit the market.
the_narrator 01-03-07, 01:20 AM	We tend to go with the "who needs it/ will use it most" rule. For example, a few sessions back we killed a Dragon and got his (ludicoursly huge) horde. My character, a fighter type who hisorically hates Dragons, got the Dragonbane Longsword, our Monk got the Natural Armor ammulet, and so on and so forth. If it ever comes down to two people needing something just as much, I suppose dice work well.
Magetastic 01-03-07, 02:08 AM	The NE wizard/fatespinner (check out seal fate) with suggestion prepared (me) gets first dibs. Always.
kelvinaw273 01-03-07, 03:34 AM	The NE wizard/fatespinner (check out seal fate) with suggestion prepared (me) gets first dibs. Always. Yes, well, you always get one ...
CzarGarrett 01-03-07, 09:44 AM	Generally my groups split it based on who needs it. While a Cleric could use a +2 Shield, a Fighter is probably better off using it. A Bard can use arcane scrolls, but the Wizard or Sorcerer should get them. And then we work a system of hand-me-downs. That fighter from before who gets the +2 Shield might give his masterwork shield to the Cleric, who can drop his regular shield. The non-specific items, especially Wonderous Items, we tend to bid on, or just roll for highest.
Seghan 01-03-07, 10:49 AM	We do who needs it gets it. Also, if somebody gets less magic swag (due to less need), he or she generally gets a bigger cut of cash and gems. My last rogue (who distrusted magic items) became quite wealthy that way.
Sareld 01-03-07, 11:46 AM	Well, my party has an easy way of dividing the loot. The party leader (for some reason always me) divides the loot up in shares of approximately equal value, and divide the loot as follows: The party leader himself gets 3 shares, and gets first choice of treassure. Party members in good standing gets 2 shares each. Party members in bad standing, newcomers, or characters from outside the party that for some reason has earned the right a pick in the treassure gets 1 share each. This way of splitting treassure works wonderfully, and we are all (almost..) very fond of it. The system was invented during a campaign where the party constantly lost PCs, because we felt that it was unrealistic to the total newcomers an equal share of the treassure that the party had fought long and hard to find, as well as I hoped that it would encourage the other players the party to relieve me of the party leader job once in a while.. not that it worked, but at least I get more treassure to play with now. Of course the party dweeb whos character can never do anything right is kind of unsatisfied, but at least he doesent blow our gold on caster level 5 cure light potions and swarms of +1 returning daggers anymore..
Sereno 01-03-07, 12:31 PM	First, we convert all acquired loot to a GP value (taking all items/goods at 1/2 market price ... what we could sell it for) and divide up the total into "virtual treasure" one share for each PC and one extra share for the "party fund." Then, each PC "buys" the items they want using their "virtual treasure." If someone doesn't want any items, they will end up with cash equal to their "virtual treasure" share. A PC can put in an IOU if you want an item that's worth more than your "virtual treasure," but you have to pay back the IOU before "purchasing" items in subsequent treasure dividings. We generally don't divide up the loot after each encounter, we wait until there's a number of items and cash built up so that the "virtual treasure" is more likely to cover the items PCs are likely to want. For RP reasons, we generally don't divvy up the treasure IN the dungeon, because it's just too easy for something big and nasty to come along while you've got all your loot scattered around on the floor! PCs can use items that seem to have an "immediate" value as soon as they're acquired, but they still get put back into the pool at treasure dividing time. So, the cleric can immediately start using that Mace of Disruption against the undead foes, but it doesn't actually *belong* to him until we divide up the treasure and he "buys" it. This has worked great for many, many years.... Oh, yeah, the "party fund" is generally used for things like Raise Dead, paying for meals, lodging or transportation fees; basically, anything that benefits the party as a whole....
Sereno 01-03-07, 12:36 PM	This way of splitting treassure works wonderfully, and we are all (almost..) very fond of it. The system was invented during a campaign where the party constantly lost PCs, because we felt that it was unrealistic to the total newcomers an equal share of the treassure that the party had fought long and hard to find, as well as I hoped that it would encourage the other players the party to relieve me of the party leader job once in a while.. not that it worked, but at least I get more treassure to play with now. Hmmm, I wouldn't join a party in which I didn't get a full share of the treasure. I'm going to be facing the same challenges the "established" PCs are and risking my life right alongside them. If they aren't going to give me "fair pay" I don't see myself risking my neck for them.... I could understand not getting a share of the items that were collected *before* I joined, but once I'm in the party I would expect full treasure for full risk.
FRRC 01-03-07, 12:42 PM	Yeah, it isn't a MMORPG. There are no Dragon Kill Points (Hooray!) :P
Sareld 01-03-07, 12:51 PM	Hmmm, I wouldn't join a party in which I didn't get a full share of the treasure. I'm going to be facing the same challenges the "established" PCs are and risking my life right alongside them. If they aren't going to give me "fair pay" I don't see myself risking my neck for them.... I could understand not getting a share of the items that were collected *before* I joined, but once I'm in the party I would expect full treasure for full risk. And as a party leader I wouldnt be paying you a full share of treassure untill I know that you are worth your pay, and that you are trustworthy. And furthermore, as a party leader IŽll be spending a lot of time planning routes, maintaining and keeping track of the party supplies, negotiating on your behalf and so on, and I want to get paid for that. If any character thinks that he/she can do my better than me, all he/she needs to do is to get the majority of the party to vote for him/her as the new party leader, and I will step down from my well paid job immediately. No one can enspect to get the same pay for the same job as people who have had that job for longer.. It works that way IRL, and it works that way in the parties I lead as well. Also, keep in mind that the amount of time that you will be spending in the lowest paid catrgory is determined by yourself. Proove your worth quickly, and you might not even have to exprirence getting only one share at all. Also, this system is a wonderful way of punishing characters that act stupid and put others to risk.
Sereno 01-03-07, 02:15 PM	And as a party leader I wouldnt be paying you a full share of treassure untill I know that you are worth your pay, and that you are trustworthy. You would know that I'm "worth my pay" and that I'm "trustworthy" when we all emerge from the dungeon; bloodied, but alive, and *with* the loot. Surely, if I was playing a cowardly dirtbag PC who took no part in the dangerous stuff, you'd be well within your rights to re-negotiate the "terms of service" ... however, I don't play those sorts of characters so it wouldn't be an issue. :) And furthermore, as a party leader IŽll be spending a lot of time planning routes, maintaining and keeping track of the party supplies, negotiating on your behalf and so on, and I want to get paid for that. If any character thinks that he/she can do my better than me, all he/she needs to do is to get the majority of the party to vote for him/her as the new party leader, and I will step down from my well paid job immediately. Let me preface this reply by stating that I'm not saying you're wrong, or that your way of playing is wrong. Or, that I'm right. I'm kind of RPing this.... I would also hesitate to join a party that had a leader who took on so many tasks that I would normally expect to be "party decisions" or personal decisions. I'd consider it *if* you were the captain of the pirate ship, but not in an adventuring party. Where we go and how we get there, negotiating, and keeping track of party supplies are everyone's job ... not just the leader's. I'd hesitate to travel with any group of adventurers who left all of the "big decisions" up to one guy. No one can enspect to get the same pay for the same job as people who have had that job for longer.. It works that way IRL, and it works that way in the parties I lead as well. Also, keep in mind that the amount of time that you will be spending in the lowest paid catrgory is determined by yourself. Proove your worth quickly, and you might not even have to exprirence getting only one share at all. Also, this system is a wonderful way of punishing characters that act stupid and put others to risk. IRL, I don't risk my life for my co-workers or my boss when I sit down at my PC and write code. There aren't many jobs where you DO risk your life, IRL. Adventuring isn't much like any RL job I can imagine; not even "Deadliest Catch" or "Dirty Jobs" But, who decides "you might not even have to exprirence getting only one share at all" ... just the leader? The whole party? Do *I* get a say?
Tyler Do'Urden 01-03-07, 02:24 PM	Money is easy you just split it evenly. But how do you split up items?Sell them. If someone wants to keep an item, add that item's full value to the pot and then divide evenly; if the value of the item is less than one share, subtract the value of the item from that person's share; they get that much coin and the item in question. If the value of the item is more than one share, then that item becomes that character's share; remove that item from the pot and divide it amongst the remaining party members. For example, you've got a cloak of charisma +2 and 3,000 platinum to be divided amongst five party members. The sorcerer obviously wants the cloak and whose to argue? So you add the value of the cloak (400 pp) to the pot (now 3,400 pp) and divide (3400/5=680). The sorcerer gets 280 pp and the cloak, everybody else gets 680 pp. Another example; same party, same treasure but with half as much coin. 1,500 pp + 400 pp (the value of the cloak) is 1,900 pp, divided by 5 is 380, less than the value of the cloak, so you remove the cloak from the pot and you divide the remaining 1,500 pp amongst the other four party members. The sorcerer gets the cloak, everybody else gets 375 pp. In a perfect world, the sorcerer would owe the rest of the party 100 plat (25 for each ally), but you know he's never gonna pay it back. If it's at all possible, a character taking an item worth more than one share should contribute some of his own coin to the pot so that it divides evenly; it simplifies the math and eliminates the need for tracking the character's debt. When I'm the one doing this math and there's a remainder, I usually divide the remainder among the rest of the party, paying a few of my own copper so that their shares come out even. If five copper means I don't have to deal with, "why do I always get the small share, blah blah blah," it's money well spent.
Ocalus 01-03-07, 02:38 PM	And as a party leader I wouldnt be paying you a full share of treassure untill I know that you are worth your pay, and that you are trustworthy. That is not a party leader, that is an employer. Adventuring parties are, overwhelmingly more often than not, an equal partnership among all involved rather than everyone working for one of the PCs. When we split up loot in most of my games we do it as Tyler suggests but with an extra share (so divide by 6 instead of 5 in his examples). Out of this sixth share comes group operating expenses and hirelings' pay with the remainder going into a common pot to buy group loot (healing wands, transportaion, etc.).
Vanulf 01-03-07, 02:56 PM	We use a system similar to Sereno's, except we take a straight 10% of all monies right off the top for our party fund. The remaining 90% is divided up evenly amognst the group. Mundane and masterwork items are valued at 50% of thier actual worth while magic items are valued at 60%. The items are then totaled and that amount is divided amongst the group as "Adventure Bucks" with which party members can purchase any of the items they want. If two or more players want the same item, all concerned roll of on a D20 with the highest winning the right to purchase that item. Players may add any additional money they may have to thier Adventure Bucks total to purchase an item they want if the AB total is insufficient to purchase said item (Never thought about allowing IOU's though, might have to float that one by the group next time we play). Characters recieve the differnce between the AB total and any items they may have puchased as hard cash as soon as all remaining items have been sold.
Sareld 01-03-07, 05:17 PM	You would know that I'm "worth my pay" and that I'm "trustworthy" when we all emerge from the dungeon; bloodied, but alive, and *with* the loot. Surely, if I was playing a cowardly dirtbag PC who took no part in the dangerous stuff, you'd be well within your rights to re-negotiate the "terms of service" ... however, I don't play those sorts of characters so it wouldn't be an issue. :) Indeed, if you pull your own weight from day one, you would get 2 shares of the loot right away. Not a problem at all. Let me preface this reply by stating that I'm not saying you're wrong, or that your way of playing is wrong. Or, that I'm right. I'm kind of RPing this.... I would also hesitate to join a party that had a leader who took on so many tasks that I would normally expect to be "party decisions" or personal decisions. I'd consider it *if* you were the captain of the pirate ship, but not in an adventuring party. Where we go and how we get there, negotiating, and keeping track of party supplies are everyone's job ... not just the leader's. I'd hesitate to travel with any group of adventurers who left all of the "big decisions" up to one guy. You know, I actually play pirate or mercenary captain more often than not. And anbut the jobs you say are personal tasks, well, thats just easier to do by yourself sometimes. Negotiation is a delicate situation, and if you have five characters who all want to speak at the same time, you are basically undermiming your own authority as a negotiator. A single, well speaking individual does a much better job IMO, but it is his responsibility as a leader to take the needs and preferences of the people he is negotiating on behalf of into account. And on the supplies and route plotting part, well, someone has to do it. My party just prefer to let me handle everything, so we dont have to wait for 5 diffrent people to buy food, hire a stupid commoner to cook for us, and make sure that there will be enough for everyone. I actually rarely get more loot for myself than any of those who gets two shares, because I blow the extra money on potions, torches, blankets, wagons, hireling salaries, transportation, healing potions, food and water.. the only real bonus I get is the first choice of treassure. Im not saying that your way is wrong either, I just think that it seems a bit unnatural to have to divide the loot up in a way that is fair down to the last piece of copper. Most characters have no idea about how much the items he find is worth anyway, and dividing it all up perfectly fair seems a tad like metagaming to me. IRL, I don't risk my life for my co-workers or my boss when I sit down at my PC and write code. There aren't many jobs where you DO risk your life, IRL. Adventuring isn't much like any RL job I can imagine; not even "Deadliest Catch" or "Dirty Jobs" But, who decides "you might not even have to exprirence getting only one share at all" ... just the leader? The whole party? Do *I* get a say? That level 1 warrior you just hired a few days ago is also risking his life, so why dont you give him a full share? Simply because he dont deserve it as much as the fighter that has been your trusted friend and ally since level one. Right? And how do you know that the new guy you just hired to replace the late paladin Bob isnt just a level one warrior? And what is a 'level' to your character anyway? To get the two shares, a character needs to show that he is worth two shares to you, and there is only a few ways that he can proove that without spending some time as a 'prospect' in your party. As soon as the leader feels that he is pulling his own weight. A good leader is of course always open to suggestions, and that means that everyone gets a say. And that means you too.
Geek_of_Doom 01-03-07, 08:58 PM	My party doesn't have a fancy item dividing method. If someone wants it, they take it. If multiple people want it, the uninvolved party members discuss and come to a decision. If every member of the party wants it (which has never happened) we'd just randomize it. But if no one wants it, we sell it and split the gold we got up equally.
Elemental_Elf 01-03-07, 10:54 PM	We do this: 20% For Necessary Party Expenses. Example would be Wands of Cure X Wounds, Wands of Fireball, etc. 80% Is split up amongst each Party Member, basically 13% for each member. When Cool Loot, like Weapons or Armor are obtained we give it to the party member who could use it the most, like a Bow to the Archer. If that person declines or more than 1 person are deserving we draw lots or we simply allow each claimant to place a secret bid on the item and write that number on a slip of paper. Each member gives their slip to the DM and he sees which has the highest bid. From there that amount is deducted from that member's gross sum from the adventure and added to the total sum to be divided amongst the remaining members. It's sorta complicated but it works! :D
pedro2112 01-04-07, 01:11 AM	I split it when I rolled a natural 20 on my perform check and then failed my subsequent will save.
danielinthewolvesden 01-04-07, 01:35 AM	First, we convert all acquired loot to a GP value (taking all items/goods at 1/2 market price ... what we could sell it for) and divide up the total into "virtual treasure" one share for each PC and one extra share for the "party fund." Then, each PC "buys" the items they want using their "virtual treasure." If someone doesn't want any items, they will end up with cash equal to their "virtual treasure" share. We generally don't divide up the loot after each encounter, we wait until there's a number of items and cash built up so that the "virtual treasure" is more likely to cover the items PCs are likely to want. PCs can use items that seem to have an "immediate" value as soon as they're acquired, but they still get put back into the pool at treasure dividing time. So, the cleric can immediately start using that Mace of Disruption against the undead foes, but it doesn't actually *belong* to him until we divide up the treasure and he "buys" it. .. Right. This is the only complete fair method, and if you have arguments about how loot is distributed, it's the only way to go.
Tyler Do'Urden 01-04-07, 03:07 AM	I split it when I rolled a natural 20 on my perform check and then failed my subsequent will save.Hey, I remember that thread.
Falln 01-04-07, 03:36 AM	We keep everything we find in a "stronghold". This is a protected area we control where we put everything we don't need on our adventures. Everything everyone has belongs to the group. This keeps the items balanced in the party between the members. If someone new shows up he gets equipment from the storage, if a player leaves/dies his equipment is given back to the storage. If expenses are made, the storage pays, ... Once in a while players get payed from the storage. This is money the players spend on non-adventure stuff. Like investing in a local merchant, buying a castle, ... This way there isn't much trouble with who keeps which item and noone gets greedy abouyt looting the bodies first, or opening treasure chests in the middle of combat, ... In case two people can use the same item, there's a party vote OR the players can negociate: If I take the ring of protection you can take the bracers of defence, while the paladin takes the shield with him, the rogue the poisoned dagger, we all take 2 potions of healing with us and we leave those 15 potions of healing at the storage.
FreeTheSlaves 01-04-07, 03:47 AM	The current band of heroes are led by two Knights who worked out a compromise early on. New members can join in. (OoC we just agreed to my method - had bad experiences) All desired magic items get distributed by need, and the hand me downs do the shuffle. Disposable magic items get redistributed to where they are most optimal. Treasure get sold and the pool gets divvied up equally with the party pool being a full share. Cohorts and very new arrivals get a half share. The party pool has been used to finance research, disposable magics, restorative items and the remainder acts as an interest free lender. If there is a problem the characters discuss it and solve it. We've gone from 4th to 9th level without an issue yet, mind you, we've had a steady stream of successes so we haven't really been tested yet.
BW0222 01-04-07, 03:58 AM	mithrilmoon, Good Parties Players agree. Folks give items to those who can use them the best. Over long campaigns things even out and anything to help the other guy ends up helping you. Not So Good Parties 1. Subtract any consumable expenses used during the combat. Expensive components, potions, scrolls, wands, etc. Pay their owner immediately. 2. Total the rest along with 1/2 the value of each item. 3. Divide by the number of PCs. Each get's that share. 4. Players may either take gold or 'purchase' items with their share. Items cost at 1/2 their value. 5. If two or more PCs want the same item, each bids on it -- using first their share of the treasure and then any coin/items (at half value) they already own. Any amount over the value of the item is divided (and immediately) added to the 'purchase' share of all other PCs. 6. Any item not purchased by a PC is sold (at standard 1/2 cost) at the nearest location. Terrible Players All items are sold at 1/2 value at the nearest location. Each PC gets an equal share of the coin. PCs can then purchase items back from the merchant at full cost and (if necessary) bid amongst themselves for them.
FreeTheSlaves 01-04-07, 05:18 AM	Bwo222, our party isn't just a bunch of goody two shoes - we're ruthless optimizers. Someone not pulling their socks up will get a wedgie royale! :D
Varia 01-04-07, 05:53 AM	I use two methods of loot-splitting. 1- Grab loot. Split. 2- Split fellow party members with axe while they examine the loot. I'm not chaotic evil. AT ALL!!! :P Or, if I have to- magic items to the people who can best use them, with replaced items being handed down to others if useful to them, and cash split equally after expenses. Granted I havent really played 3.5 to have to deal with potion/wand etc costs, which may make a formal share or two for the group kitty a necessity.
Sereno 01-04-07, 09:43 AM	That level 1 warrior you just hired a few days ago is also risking his life, so why dont you give him a full share? Simply because he dont deserve it as much as the fighter that has been your trusted friend and ally since level one. Right? I would only hire a level 1 warrior if he was "about" equal to the general party level and, yes, he would be treated as a "full member" of the party (assuming he wasn't a coward and was taking the same risks as the rest of the party). In all my years of playing, I don't think I've ever hired low-level hirelings (or "cannon fodder" to accompany my adventuring parties). I almost always play a "heroic" or at least an "honorable" character and bringing people along who are MORE likely to be killed (due to being less experienced than me/my party) seems irresponsible. One exception I can think of is the "native guide" ... someone to get you to the mysterious site, but they wouldn't accompany the party into the site, either.... And how do you know that the new guy you just hired to replace the late paladin Bob isnt just a level one warrior? And what is a 'level' to your character anyway? If I'm hiring a fighter-type, I'd have the "best" fighter in the party spar with them and it would be pretty clear (levels and meta-gaming aside) if they were equivalent to our party level or not. A level 1 warrior will NOT be able to hold his own against a level 10 paladin. If I'm hiring a spell caster, it's even easier ... just ask them what's the most powerful spell they know. Even PCs should understand the difference between Magic Missile and Ice Storm. With a rogue or bard, it's a little harder but you could ask them to demonstrate their best skills and get a rough idea of how good they are from that. To get the two shares, a character needs to show that he is worth two shares to you, and there is only a few ways that he can proove that without spending some time as a 'prospect' in your party. As soon as the leader feels that he is pulling his own weight. A good leader is of course always open to suggestions, and that means that everyone gets a say. And that means you too. Personally, I wouldn't hire someone I doubted could pull their weight. If I'm going to risk my life for someone (even someone new) and expect them to risk their life for me, I'd better feel pretty good about them before we crack the seal on the ancient tomb. Pay someone less and they're likely to give a little less effort, too.
Falln 01-04-07, 01:02 PM	@sereno: We equip henchmen, followers, guides, mercenaries as good as we possible can. If one dies we try to bring them back to life. Even if it costs us a lot. When we complete an adventure everyone got his share. Even the level 1 ranger who was needed to bring us to the temple. The only ecception is if we discussed a cost befor. If the rangers asked 50gp to bring us there he'll get payed 50gp and maybe something extra later. If the ranger got killed during the trip, we'll ty to bring him back to life (even if this costs us 1000gp). If one of us has an enchanted leather armor that we don't need, we will equip the ranger (if he wants to). We won't equip chaotic evil people who we don't know at all and who weonly need to give us some info about the boss they have. After the adventure we ask our equipment back. If a henchman joins us, then he has the right on his part of the treasure. Why should the fighter PC get the best magical weapons while John the NPC gets only the masterwork weapons. If you give the best items to the best players all the time, then you create an unbalance in the party. The best fighter gets the best weapons, the best armor, the most potions, ... While mister weak-guy the fighter gets the worst stuff. This makes him even more weak compared to the strong one. Concerning the check if a mage is strong or not: what is the mage is an illusionist/scammer who casts an illusion to fake a higher level spell?
Leo 01-04-07, 02:54 PM	In my first campaign, when the battle ended, we would each one in turn choose a body to loo, then roll initiative if 2 or more players wanted the same body, then each one of us kept whatever it found. It didn't work very well, but it was somewhat fun, for a while, untill the ranger(who was specializing in ranged) got a nifty magic longsword and prefered to sell it than give it to the paladin, who could have used it very well. Since then we've been doing the who needs it most keeps it and then split the money. Certain items go from hand to hand like the pearl of power.
Sereno 01-04-07, 03:06 PM	@sereno: We equip henchmen, followers, guides, mercenaries as good as we possible can. If one dies we try to bring them back to life. Even if it costs us a lot. When we complete an adventure everyone got his share. Even the level 1 ranger who was needed to bring us to the temple. The only ecception is if we discussed a cost befor. If the rangers asked 50gp to bring us there he'll get payed 50gp and maybe something extra later. If the ranger got killed during the trip, we'll ty to bring him back to life (even if this costs us 1000gp). If one of us has an enchanted leather armor that we don't need, we will equip the ranger (if he wants to). We won't equip chaotic evil people who we don't know at all and who weonly need to give us some info about the boss they have. After the adventure we ask our equipment back. If a henchman joins us, then he has the right on his part of the treasure. Why should the fighter PC get the best magical weapons while John the NPC gets only the masterwork weapons. If you give the best items to the best players all the time, then you create an unbalance in the party. The best fighter gets the best weapons, the best armor, the most potions, ... While mister weak-guy the fighter gets the worst stuff. This makes him even more weak compared to the strong one. All of this makes perfect sense to me ... and is pretty close to how we've always played in my games. You pay for "services" what you agree upon and you pay "party members" with a fair share of the treasure. It's one of the reasons we use the "virtual treasure" to assure that every PC has an equal chance to get good gear. That way, as you point out, the "best" fighter doesn't continually overshadow the "2nd-best" fighter by always getting the best gear/upgrades. We like party balance in our games. Concerning the check if a mage is strong or not: what is the mage is an illusionist/scammer who casts an illusion to fake a higher level spell? The only practical defense against a scam-artist is a good Spellcraft check by an existing/trusted party member. I'll admit you might be in trouble if you don't currently have any spellcasters in the party, though. There's always Gather Information checks to find out what IS known about the potential party member. What do the local bards know about the guy? What guilds does he belong to? Any other affiliations that might be important to know? And, you can always locate former party members and ask them. If you can't find ANY former associates, you might want to think about that before letting the fellow join up. :)
Kursk 01-04-07, 04:06 PM	Usually the magic item goes to who can use it best for the benefit of the party. If it s/g where it doesn't matter we round robin it and deduct from the monetary treasure share.
Firestar27 01-04-07, 07:20 PM	with the party i'm in we share gp. (sort of) really the items someone needs belongs to them, items no one specifically needs (like out Deck of Many Things that we hate and that no merchant will recognize the value of) no one really cares about, and gp and items that are only worth raw gp (like gems) we share. If someone needs something they just say they are going to buy something, and if it is worth it, then they are allowed. If it's stupid, of course it's not allowed. We are all good friends and trust each other. The assumption is that you will get more in the long run, if each person is stronger. sure, if you split it, you might be good now, but then you won't be as strong later because you couldn't lend some of your money. It also saves time and makes it easier to keep track of things.
seldom_seen 01-04-07, 11:02 PM	Being as my sneaky bastard of a thief was the only safecracker in the group, he naturally got first shot of the loot,(mostly without the rest of the party's knowledge.) Anything left over went to whoever needed it or could use it. The fighters would not keep wands, and the spellcasters would fork over the weapons and armor. Anything left over that would go into my bag of holding for later distribution. This may sound unfair to some of you, but I felt that if my character took the chances with opening chests and traps and such, he should be renumerated. I should add, there was NEVER a complaint or question from any other players about my thief. He was actually a valued member of the party.
dworkenelfkiller 01-05-07, 10:54 AM	i like to split my loot between orcen *****s and gay wizards with ticklish beards
dworkenelfkiller 01-05-07, 10:56 AM	i like to split my loot between orcen women of the night and gay wizards with ticklish beards