The Campaign Builder's Guild

I've been wondering about people's preferences when playing in typical fantasy games, and thought I'd ask.  Most of this came from mulling over the degree to which magic items should permeate a setting and the seeming dnd/diablo-eqsue drive to always find more loot in order to get the next level of gear.  So I started wondering to what extent the drive to get gear really factored into most people's actual gaming goals.

Well, that depends on a lot of things.

"Typical fantasy games" is so broad as to be... hard to have a conversation with. I don't suppose it helps to say "in games where loot is fairly important, I consider loot to be fairly important" but I think that's the only answer I've got.

I guess I mean that some people consider loot as a major part of character growth.  Adventuring is as much about getting new gear as it is about getting more powerful to some.  I play too many video games, so i get scewed a little toward the Moar Dakka! end of the spectrum, but it seems that the loot really isn't the most enjoyable part to me.  I'm sure a lot of people would disagree, which is why I'm asking.  :)

I was considering removing items entirely from my 4E D&D games. Considering there are 10 magic item slots and 18 feats, I figured swapping out the magic items for 12 more feats (increasing the feats to 1/level) would be balanced as long as feats were comparable to magic items.

I ended up abandoning it upon further consideration and review with my players. Magic items present a different side of your character's growth, namely one that's outside of the "turns" of leveling up. You know what you're going to get next level, but you don't know when you're going to get a magic item.

Now, if the game was set up so that magic items weren't "required", and they were just cool alternate uses for things you already have (like a "flaming sword" would give you a fire-at-will, and a higher level one would give you a fire encounter that takes up one of your encounters ...), we wouldn't have to worry about them so much. But having magic items that you have to pick up for proper character growth feels ... unfortunate.

I prefer games where the gear is less important than how the character is built. Something I find myself always trying to do for my players is giving them gear that is fun to use and that will remain useful for extended periods (especially when it comes to weapons and armor on weapon types, where it really is unfortunate to have to keep looking for better gear even though you just dropped the value of several peasant homes on equipment made by the King's blacksmiths).

The appearance of that kind of play seems fairly rare in newer games to me. The Diablo series has always been pretty big on loot; Demon's Souls and Dark Souls both do it to a degree (the combat system is also a bit more advanced than most RPGs), and obviously D&D and some other RPG systems embrace the idea. I have noticed however that any game/system that allows you to upgrade a weapon out of your own prowess (Skyrim with the Smithing skill is one example) diminishes the feeling that one might need "better" gear frequently.

Would you fellows agree or disagree that part of the issue, in addition to a lack of sufficient character advancement, is that characters simply don't have enough distinct combat/interactive options?

I'm not a fan of the DnD model of requiring certain magical gear to be a viable character. On the other hand, getting cool shit for my character is fun. I think the distinction for me is that it's the coolness that counts. If my character found a totally nonmagical sword that functioned rules-wise just like any other sword with some kind of coolness about it like.. I dunno it was the sword used to slay some monster during some epic battle x number of years ago and has since had the hilt remade using the fangs of said monster and runes etched into the blade that translate to like the motto of the elite badasses in the army that fought against the monster then that's exciting to me - especially if my character had some connection to the monster, the battle or the elite badasses - in a way that a +1 sword really isn't.

I'm sort of with Xeviat here and might be phasing actual bookkeeping out of my personal set of rules.  I find it tedious and difficult to use in conjunctio with concepts like having a personal blacksmith that makes you things when you want.  I also enjoy getting loot, but the plunder-sell-upgrade cycle bugs me to no end.  I am just worried about removing a part of the game that potential players really like and would miss.

I like the idea of a certain character concept having "signature equipment," and if the GM wants to throw something cool and thematic my way to fit that, I quite like that. However, I don't want to have to constantly care about plundering and upgrading, either.

In the case of Kindling's example, having to choose between using that awesomely detailed sword and a rather bland "generic +1 sword" would be a difficult choice that I wouldn't enjoy making.
Better to make that sword the +1 sword and make it both thematically and mechanically interesting, I think. :grin:

This is a pretty difficult an far-reaching question.

the OP says gear, so I am staying in the realm of items.
I very carefully made the decision that gear would really hep a lot; and take a lot of time creating unique items pretty regularly, many of which are very off the wall.  Also, real 'gear' tops out pretty quickly; but items are normally charged with real, in game spells.
recent example (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/55210840/Flamberge%20of%20Vitality)
example 2 (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/54401469/Crystal%20Decanter%20of%20Air)

in a skill based game, many spelols affect certain skills, so there is a huge amount of variety of items.

And I will admit that judicaious use of items is often what makes or breaks the survival of a party.

The recurring theme I'm seeing is that people like getting cool and interesting items, but they generally dislike the cycle of adventuring for loot, selling loot, and upgrading what they currently have.  In short, they don't want to play Diablo so much as partake in an adventure.

So if I'm understanding the positions presented here, a wealth system that did away with tracking individual sales, cash on hand, and such wouldn't really infringe on anyone's enjoyment, so long as they still got to find cool and interesting items once in a while.  Is that fair to say?

 I, for one, enjoy advancing a character materially.  The lowly squire wants to be a great knight one day; while money alone doesn't make a knight, progressing from cudgel and gambeson to sword and mail is surely as much a part of his hero's journey as progressing from a middling brawler to a master swordsman, or from a rough country boy to a cultured and elegant knight.

Furthermore, the buying (and creating) of equipment can also be an important part of player choice.  I get to decide what's important to my character, both from a mechanical perspective and a role-playing perspective.  Trying to obtain that equipment, even if it's just a matter of obtaining the requisite amount of cash, can be a source of plot hooks in itself.  I don't think I'd enjoy a system that eliminated that choice by abstracting wealth away and simply having the GM give me interesting things once and a while, because I want to be able to decide what is "interesting" to me and be able to pursue it.  When the GM simply drops your new magic weapon in your lap, no matter how interesting it is, I feel that an opportunity for player initiative has been lost.

Quote from: Humabout
The recurring theme I'm seeing is that people like getting cool and interesting items, but they generally dislike the cycle of adventuring for loot, selling loot, and upgrading what they currently have.  In short, they don't want to play Diablo so much as partake in an adventure.

So if I'm understanding the positions presented here, a wealth system that did away with tracking individual sales, cash on hand, and such wouldn't really infringe on anyone's enjoyment, so long as they still got to find cool and interesting items once in a while.  Is that fair to say?

Not for me or my systems.
My PCs play heavily in town...and that involves the cost of everything.  Town clothes, barbers, Baths, food, each is pretty carefully described and valued
Same is true for items.

Quote from: HumaboutI guess I mean that some people consider loot as a major part of character growth.  Adventuring is as much about getting new gear as it is about getting more powerful to some.

I don't think this is always a meaningful distinction, though. If you're playing in a game where, by convention and by mechanics, getting new gear is a big part of the established means of becoming more powerful, then I don't think it's sensible to act surprised when that's what people do.

There are a ton of other types of systems proliferating lately where advancement is driven by other factors (interestingly, to me, the recent systems driven by player completion of player-defined goals, which feeds back into the "you get power from this" parts of the game mechanics), so I'd venture to say that if you want a break from loot-intensive games, it might do you good to try some different games for a while.

Right now, I have the impression that this is an issue of "I've noticed that these days there's a trend for all cars to be red (but what I'm not realizing is that I'm skewing my data by selecting to look at red cars only)", or perhaps I'm misreading your posts or misunderstanding your point somehow. Anyway, I'm just not seeing the same issues you seem to be describing.

Working on the economy for my game, I'm trying to get it so players stay mostly broke in the first five levels. I liked that aspect of Samurai Champloo, and want that sort of play in a game.

For low levels things are mostly expendable. Potions and ingredients, for example. There are fewer permanent magic items (and I'm using stricter weight, no bags of holding, and limited "ready" item slots to put diminishing returns on those). And when you've got enough money, you're into armies and castles and things.

So... loot's a big deal, and kind of changes the game's paradigm over time.

But I didn't want it to become 3x or 4's system, or anything like it. No scaling bonuses. No magic weapons with stat boosts in general. Maybe severely limiting qualities and the combat utility of qualities.

I guess the thing to take away here is loot as reward not loot as character.

I personally don't mind a wealth system as long as it's a bit abstracted for daily expenditures. I have no interest in keeping track of every small daily thing. On the other hand, like Polycarp said, saving up for some cool piece of fancy gear helps convey a sense of advancement and "getting more stuff."

Te biggest expenditures in GS are spells, skill kits, property, and Raise Dead spells, I think.

Sort of kidding.

Spells are really expensive to buy and hard to get in Guildschool, and it is a huge limiter to free cash.  And for those few players who decide to make their characters 'VoidBlind', skill kits take the place of money sinks, since it is a skill-based system, and this is the in-game mechanism for growth,

The sense of accomplishment gained from finally being able to purchase that bit of fancy gear is what I feel like I'd miss in an abstract wealth system.  At the same time, I also find myself torn over issues such as, for instance, noblemen or samurai who have unpaid retainers who simply owe them services.  Such things aren't really incorporated into a literal monetary system--they may have no actual money to spend--, but could easily be subsumed into an abstract system where you are more concerned with what you can acquire at a given time than how you paid for yesterday's meal.  I might be overthinking it or worrying about nothing, but I think I need to find a way to combine the two.

This makes me wonder - how gameable is the Conanesque adventuring-looting-debauching cycle? Like, you have no cash, you do some adventurey dangerous stuff, you get a mass of gold and jewels and stuff, you spend the next few months blowing it all on wine women and song. Repeat.

I can't decide if that's something I'd do as a player. Maybe I'd enjoy it, and it would suit the character I was playing, but I think even so some small metagamey part of me would be like "Yeah, blow most of it on having a good time, but spend like 1k on something useful"

In terms of combining abstract wealth with saving up for things, it's probably not too hard to marry the two types of mechanics. Let's brainstorm:

Perhaps you have two stats, "wealth" and "treasure" (or whatever). Where wealth is your overall standard of living in sort of a permanent way. Perhaps on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0-wealth is living on the street, 1-wealth is being a poor peasant farmer, and 10-wealth is being as rich as a sultan, etc. Wealth informs your level of comfort and luxury, as well as what possessions you can sort of take for granted that you have: with 7-wealth, just go ahead and assume you have as many horses as you need, but with 2-wealth you probably don't own one.

So "treasure" is your temporary save-and-spend cash money income. You get "points of treasure" (or whatever) as loot or payment for things. It's an abstracted value: maybe winning a high-stakes card game is worth 1-treasure, looting the treasure from a tomb might get you 2-treasure, or winning a reward from a grateful monarch is 3-treasure. While wealth is for long-term lifestyle, treasure is for short-term expenditures. Maybe you spend a point of treasure to live above your normal standard of living for a month (enjoying luxuries as if your wealth were a point higher. Maybe if you amass a bunch of treasure you can spend all those points at once for a permanent wealth increase (clever investing or whatever). Maybe you spend points of treasure on one-time big-ticket items you couldn't normally afford, like your fancy magic swords and whatnot.

So you still keep a system that's abstract and doesn't have you counting pennies, you have a way to represent general resources and standard of living, and a way to represent phat loot that you can save and squander.

Quote from: KindlingMaybe I'd enjoy it, and it would suit the character I was playing, but I think even so some small metagamey part of me would be like "Yeah, blow most of it on having a good time, but spend like 1k on something useful"

This is a real concern, but I don't think it's separate from any general discussion of metagaming.  My character turned down that reward on principle, but I really wanted to accept it; my character would never associate with that man, but if I don't I'm missing out on a new adventure or an important clue; this feat would be really appropriate for my character, but it's mechanically mediocre (and so on).  The bottom line is that some people are comfortable with making sub-optimal choices for the sake of role playing, and some people are not.  As long as the players are of a similar mind on the issue it's usually not a problem, at least in my experience.

Quote from: LCSo you still keep a system that's abstract and doesn't have you counting pennies

I'm afraid I have nothing to contribute to that system - I, for one, like to count pennies.  :)

or, my new litmus test...do you keep track of encumbrance>  then, of course you keep track of money.

Handwavium tracks across both continuums

LC, that's very similar to the system I was planning on using.  You could live below your normal standard of living and save up bonuses to buy stuff or blow everything and temporarily reduce your wealth level.  Frankly, it just struck me as solving an issue I was having with Elyria - that thanes generlaly dont have a lot of material wealth; they have land and people who don't charge them for goods and services.  Abstract wealth solves this issue quite elegantly, but it does remove all of the plundering and bean counting some people enjoy.

Vreeg, I do track encumbrance, but in the form of loadouts (it cuts down on ingame math).  But I also prefer more detailed combat (I also track combatants' fatigue, hit locations, bleeding, weapon breakage, and shield breakage).  I'm not a personal fan of accounting, and I've never been much of a stickler for making players declare every single item they own.  I've usually gone with "if it makes sense for them to have had it, they have it," with the caviat being for large ticket items, like armor, weapons, horses, etc.  That worked for my group then.  Now I'm largely groupless and trying to explore other options.