Armor, slightly used

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Normal quality of gear on non-noteworthy bad guys should be fairly low.

Why?

Seriously, why?

And how is "non-noteworthy" defined?

I should put cheap junk on weaker opponents because the PCs are really tough (250 points) and the enemies are normal quality foes? These foes are the same you'd find in a 150 point game as "worthy" but against 250 point guys they are "fodder."

Plus automatically sticking cheap armor and cheap weapons on "fodder" means to avoid needing to account for wear and tear doesn't do anything except push off the question of a rule for wear and tear for later. Plus cheap junk becomes a "tell" for "these guys were time-wasters because I gave you so many points."

Why is that better than a simple die roll that allows for wear-and-tear on armor and, which combined with existing DF rules for selling gear, means that cashing in empties is profitable but not as profitable as finding more and better loot?

The OP said:

So the characters have defeated the enemies and discover that the greatest treasures are their enemies' armor. However, it has slight holes in it. What value will this armor fetch in the nearest city?

. . . and I explained what I do, why, and how it has worked in my actual gaming.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

Why?

Seriously, why?

Because there's a pretty good correlation between 'noteworthy' and 'successful', and between 'successful' and 'wealthy'.

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

I should put cheap junk on weaker opponents because the PCs are really tough (250 points) and the enemies are normal quality foes?

They should have poor equipment relative to the PCs. The PCs in a 250 point game should probably not have average equipment, however.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Because there's a pretty good correlation between 'noteworthy' and 'successful', and between 'successful' and 'wealthy'.

They should have poor equipment relative to the PCs. The PCs in a 250 point game should probably not have average equipment, however.

If it's the start of a DF campaign, I'd expect them to have average equipment for the most part; TL3 starting wealth is incredibly low, and DF templates don't have much room for gaining $$$.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Langy

If it's the start of a DF campaign, I'd expect them to have average equipment for the most part.

If I wanted to start with average equipment in a DF type game, I wouldn't give people 250 points. There's epic quest games where that's appropriate, but in those games you aren't going around buying and selling stuff. My rule of thumb is that you should have wealth appropriate to what you could have reasonably acquired prior to play, given your skill set, and 250 point characters are not average people.

Another way of looking at this: PCs should not expect to be able to gain a level of wealth in less than 5-10 sessions. Thus, average wealth PCs shouldn't expect to be able to get more than $200 from a single session 'fight of the week'.

[Crakkerjakk]

It has been my experience in DF that you can generally avoid this problem by having time-sensitive issues that will come to fruition before the PCs can make multiple trips back to town to sell all the junk.

Also, by rewarding them for passing up looting the hell out of every location they visit by rewarding them relatively richly when they DO prevent certain time-sensitive issues from occurring.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Anthony

If I wanted to start with average equipment in a DF type game, I wouldn't give people 250 points. There's epic quest games where that's appropriate, but in those games you aren't going around buying and selling stuff. My rule of thumb is that you should have wealth appropriate to what you could have reasonably acquired prior to play, given your skill set, and 250 point characters are not average people.

Another way of looking at this: PCs should not expect to be able to gain a level of wealth in less than 5-10 sessions. Thus, average wealth PCs shouldn't expect to be able to get more than $200 from a single session 'fight of the week'.

I'm specifically referencing GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, which provides specific Templates for players to take and specific rules for Wealth, etc. The majority of DF characters do not start out with Wealth, though they often do trade points for cash.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Langy

I'm specifically referencing GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, which provides specific Templates for players to take and specific rules for Wealth, etc. The majority of DF characters do not start out with Wealth, though they often do trade points for cash.

That's a flaw with DF. If you're doing GURPS D&D, sure, people start with average wealth, but they also start at 100 points and gain 10 xp/session.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That's a flaw with DF. If you're doing GURPS D&D, sure, people start with average wealth, but they also start at 100 points and gain 10 xp/session.

Whoa, where on earth did you read 10 XP per session? That seems far too high for anything other than once a month gaming.

[Trachmyr]

My solution for DF games is to give the PCs access to some slightly untrustworthy NPCs that do the "clean-up"; collection, transport & selling. Often these are some goblins or the like that had their lives spared. The NPCs take their cut, and as long as the PCs make some $$ and don't have to do all the grunt work, they're quite happy.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Whoa, where on earth did you read 10 XP per session?

Nowhere. That's just how you achieve the D&D power escalation feel -- you don't start people at 250 points.