Quote:
Originally Posted by martinl
In my experience, this goes two ways - either there is absolute trust and co-operation within the group, or at least for Mr. Moneybags, and the ability to get better prices on loot is just a small subset of the benefits. Co-operation without suspicion is just a powerful tool, period. (As Kromm mentions, it is less important to group success than having a good & trustworthy healer.)
|
Total and essentially unquestioned cooperation is hugely powerful, yes. It makes a bigger difference than "character builds" to overall success. (Those who play
GURPS will understand it when I say this: "It's like having a gang of equally powerful Allies around constantly, meaning each fellow party member effectively gives you a free 20-point power boost, or a 40-point one if we treat the inevitable meta-game connection as de facto Summonable.")
In the specific case of finances, I see little game-balance problem with it (see below for the
social problems). The truly powerful stuff – very fine rapiers ($10,000), suits of epic plate ($12,000), ironskin amulets ($28,720), Might items ($30,000 for +1 to ST), etc. – is just so costly that even a Very Wealthy delver with $20,000 won't be equipping the whole party with it. One or two such items are about as good a use of 30 points as anything else, and handing gewgaws off to friends rather than keeping them to compensate for the effectiveness lost by not having those 30 points in combat abilities . . . well, that level of team spirit is admirable!
Quote:
Originally Posted by martinl
The other way is that someone gets resentful or suspicious, and suddenly it matters a LOT that only one PC owns all the stuff, but is significantly weaker at the murderizing part of the game...
|
And that can be
bad.
If the wealthy person who equips everyone ends up on the other side of an argument with those who carry the equipment, and tries to give orders or ask for the gear back, the likely outcome is a forceful "no" to Moneybags – or worse, the assassination of Moneybags. There's no upside to that, as it most likely leaves Moneybags' player upset and ruins the game for all. And if Moneybags' player was complicit in a scheme to equip allies, get assassinated or otherwise die, and create a replacement character who's useful in other ways . . . well, that's very skeevy and likely to upset the
GM and also ruin the game for all.
There's no easy fix for this.
"No loans!" is heavy-handed, difficult to explain, and liable to be yet another way to upset people and ruin the game. The fairest method is probably to give a voice to Moneybags' "excellent financial connections in town." If Moneybags is assassinated, they'll make it impossible to buy and sell in town, and might send well-armed repo critters. If Moneybags is merely given no say in how the gear is used, Moneybags might be able to pull strings that mean the others had better like that gear, because once again, they can't buy and sell in town. Making these potential consequences known ahead of time, before any loaning happens, is reasonably fair and not
too heavy-handed.
Ultimately, though, "Don't be a jerk!" and "Know your fellow players!" are the only sure-fire solutions.