Starting Wealth, What cost of Living gets you, and Cost of a Sedan

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by darebear

Maybe it is just me but this sounds too much like real life. If I needed to track all that in a game I may as well just do some online banking instead. There is something to be said for rules-lite for some things.

That's the whole point of the 80% rule. You don't have to keep track of all that stuff. Just spend 80% of your starting wealth and BAM! you have any random thing that you probably ought to at your Status as long as you don't try to use it to conquer Luxembourg.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

That's the whole point of the 80% rule. You don't have to keep track of all that stuff. Just spend 80% of your starting wealth and BAM! you have any random thing that you probably ought to at your Status as long as you don't try to use it to conquer Luxembourg.

Right. To conquer Luxembourg you use your Ally(Girl Scout Troop) advantage. A message to our friends who may be listening: "Operation Bake Sale" is a go. John has a long mustache.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

No matter what your Status, I don't let PCs use any of that "lifestyle" gear extensively on adventures. If you haven't paid for it with the 20%, signature gear, a vehicle perk, or otherwise with adventuring budget and you willfully put it in a situation where it's stats actually matter, you are probably going to lose it.

That I don't do. If it is theirs, it is theirs. I don't punish people for utilizing their assets. They want to drive their motorcycle or ride their horse around, fine. Use their impressive wardrobe to impress the femme fatale? Awesome! It is theirs and they did pay for it. The PCs use the Wayne mansion as their base of operations? Fine. I'm not going to mess with them because the mansion was part of the 80% not the 20%. *Especially* if the players paid points for that wealth in the first place.

Players use their assets to their advantage. Just like real people do in real life. I'm not going to punish the players for playing a character to the fullest that I as a GM approved.

Depriving players of 80% of their assets that they paid for if they try to use those assets, I think is not cool. I'd never do that as a GM, and if I had a GM who did that to me, I'd probably not play with them again.

Also, the line between adventure and not-adventure is very fuzzy in the games I run. I was playing in a THS game run by the amazing whswhs, and all our apartments (and living arrangements) ended up being quite important. The things we spent that 80% on ended up being core parts of are adventuring lives. Now, they were stationary things (i.e. computers and labs and physical security for our offices) rather than the mobile things we bought with our 20% (body armor and stun guns)...but they mattered. Heck, there were a number of very important plot points that happened in the apartments of the PCs...not even the detective offices that they owned together...and the bulk of our investigation planning and research happened in those detective offices. If the GM had decided to through an earthquake at us an destroy all our homes because he thought they were too useful and they were bought with the 80% rather than the 20%? Epic Fail.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by trooper6

That I don't do. If it is theirs, it is theirs. I don't punish people for utilizing their assets. They want to drive their motorcycle or ride their horse around, fine. Use their impressive wardrobe to impress the femme fatale? Awesome! It is theirs and they did pay for it. The PCs use the Wayne mansion as their base of operations? Fine. I'm not going to mess with them because the mansion was part of the 80% not the 20%. *Especially* if the players paid points for that wealth in the first place.

I think you and I are talking past each other again. I meant that I don't allow players to say "Well I guess I'll get in my tank." "What tank?" "I'm rich, so maybe I own a tank." Nor would does the average guy's average car get any kind of plot protection if he tries to use it in the car chase (unless he got it some other way) and Badly Mcawful shoots a rocket at it.

[Farmer]

If PCs put their possession into play, they risk losing them - that's the trade off from gaining some advantage through their use. Typically, the more risk, the more advantage so it works out.

I'm currently playing a character with 100 points of wealth. She uses it frequently and it all fits and suits - it's the character. If she spends some money or uses some possession and it gets broken, stolen, taken, etc then so be it :-)

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I think you and I are talking past each other again. I meant that I don't allow players to say "Well I guess I'll get in my tank." "What tank?" "I'm rich, so maybe I own a tank." Nor would does the average guy's average car get any kind of plot protection if he tries to use it in the car chase (unless he got it some other way) and Badly Mcawful shoots a rocket at it.

A tank is not status appropriate for a rich person so it's not covered by the COL and 80%. However if their status and wealth is high enough that they are a target, that limo will be armored! If they want to drive that into the seedier parts of town fine, the only thing I would hit them with it stands outs.

Originally Posted by Farmer

If PCs put their possession into play, they risk losing them - that's the trade off from gaining some advantage through their use. Typically, the more risk, the more advantage so it works out.

I'm currently playing a character with 100 points of wealth. She uses it frequently and it all fits and suits - it's the character. If she spends some money or uses some possession and it gets broken, stolen, taken, etc then so be it :-)

I could not disagree more... that what that 100 point is spend for on wealth... Security their continued ability to play a wealthy character... If the comb buy a plot monetary windfall, and don't spend the points on wealth then I will have them burn though it but if they pay the point the then their money tank keeps on getting toped up and the get to stat at their status level

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

A tank is not status appropriate for a rich person so it's not covered by the COL and 80%.

The Governator owns a tank.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The Governator owns a tank.

and his wealth level is such that he can easily pay for it in the 20% portion... but also has form that 80% that impressive town car... that would be repaired and replaces if damaged in an assassination attempt...

That tank is one of his toys not part of his status.

I'm surprised you did not mention Tom Cruise's F-16.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

and his wealth level is such that he can easily pay for it in the 20% portion... but also has form that 80% that impressive town car... that would be repaired and replaces if damaged in an assassination attempt...

That tank is one of his toys not part of his status.

That was my entire point.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

That was my entire point.

yes and missed my point of the armed car would be, and would not be "lost" if brought into a fire fight.