[DF] - Party wealth disparity

thulben · 04-18-2010, 03:25 PM

In the party of DF characters for the game that I'm running, I have most with Average wealth and one with Comfortable. DF suggests handling the Wealth advantages as how much you can get for selling loot. The last time this came up, it handled itself nicely as the character with above-Average wealth was the appointed loot seller and he skimmed off the top. My conundrum now is that we just had a new player join with Struggling-level wealth. It would seem that with the typical egalitarianism that happens in these sorts of games that those are going to be free points. That is, after the money from selling the spoils of adventuring are divvied up that the Struggling character will get just as much as the Average character. Because the new character is a Druid, I can't pull something obvious like tithing to a church or something. How have you handled this in play? Thanks in advance.

Crakkerjakk · 04-18-2010, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thulben

In the party of DF characters for the game that I'm running, I have most with Average wealth and one with Comfortable. DF suggests handling the Wealth advantages as how much you can get for selling loot. The last time this came up, it handled itself nicely as the character with above-Average wealth was the appointed loot seller and he skimmed off the top. My conundrum now is that we just had a new player join with Struggling-level wealth. It would seem that with the typical egalitarianism that happens in these sorts of games that those are going to be free points. That is, after the money from selling the spoils of adventuring are divvied up that the Struggling character will get just as much as the Average character. Because the new character is a Druid, I can't pull something obvious like tithing to a church or something. How have you handled this in play? Thanks in advance.

No Wealth in DF is how I handle it. You can trade points for cash, but everyone starts with Average wealth and isn't required to spend points on buying more once they start to pull in the loot. And I base how much you can sell your gear for on your reaction mods, with Merchant adjusting it up.

Jamaraq · 04-18-2010, 04:40 PM

If he gets the same share as all the others, then he basically got free points by taking Struggling wealth.

Perhaps it's time to let a certain druid be victim of a theft?

Kalzazz · 04-18-2010, 05:04 PM

Id suggest that Mr Comfortable take an extra skim off Mr Strugglings share would only be fair

chris1982 · 04-18-2010, 05:43 PM

All XP that is gained is going directly to paying off the Disad until it is paid completely off.

Veton · 04-18-2010, 08:15 PM

Tell the player "It looks like your low Wealth isn't as much of a disadvantage I thought it would be. Would you be fine with either buying it off or replacing it with another one worth -10 points?"

cosmicfish · 04-18-2010, 08:17 PM

What I usually do is state that changes to initial wealth are just fine, but any longer-term wealth needs an appropriate out-of-campaign reason for the income (or lack thereof). So increased wealth provides an investment income, or rents, or stipend that ensures they always have a certain amount of money. Likewise, decreased wealth REQUIRES that excess funds go to a tithe, or to support family back home, or to perpetual gambling losses. Changing this requires spending the points.

omeyer · 04-19-2010, 11:52 AM

If the character is just from a poor background but try to get rich over the course of the campaign, status might work better, perhaps coupled with Regard or Reputation from co-religionists.

If the player really wants to play a relatively poor character, with all the problems that entails, and not just get free points, let him or her do so. Whenever the character uses 'party funding' to get something expensive, that would be out of character and reduce earned points.

B517 makes it clear that poor characters must buy off the disadvantage (or buy the advantage) if their actual savings change for good.

Anaraxes · 04-19-2010, 01:07 PM

There's no reason a druid couldn't contribute to a "church" (or other organization), or even independently fund causes. The thread has useful suggestions for disposing of money; all the usual ones would apply.

If the character took Struggling for actual concept reasons, they won't have a problem with getting rid of the money. They find the idea of the Struggling character interesting, and getting rich would violate their concept, every bit as much as losing all their nature powers.

If, on the other hand, Struggling was chosen just for "free points" or outright munchkinism, then they'll object to foiling their plan to get rich and have bonus points. In that case, just have them buy off the disad immediately. If you're really harsh, they get no roleplaying xp while they mis-play their Struggling disad, making it even harder to pay it off. Any munchkin will instantly be motivated, since CP are far harder to come by than GP.

A central trope of the DF genre is rags-to-riches. If you incorporate that into your game, then it's probably best to disallow Wealth-related advantages and disads.

Maz · 04-19-2010, 01:34 PM

I don't see a problem unless people really exploit it.

It's not any different from people taking low apearance and/or social disads, and rely on the party "face" to talk to NPC's.

For the group as a whole it might be an advtange as the players getting "free" points" can spend them to increase the party "dombat effeciency".

It's only a problem if the GM has a problem with it. And then, the GM has all the power to do "something interesting". For instance, if it's the "Dwarf knight" in the party who has high wealth, then they might not be able to sell elven-made items at all through his contacts as his contacts are dwarven nobles, and they don't like each other.

This problem also only pops up if you have one character to sell all loot and all character trust that character unconditionally. It will be quite easy for the selling character to stash some of the money for himself. (Or for the GM to give him some 'motivation' to do that).

There might also be situations where the "good seller" can't be the one to sell. If his out of action, by sickness or death. Or in a city that don't take kindly to his race/class/culture/looks.

Wealth in DF does not represent "wealth" so the "must buy of if you get rich" doesn't hold. In DF WEalth represent only 2 things.
1) Starting wealth.
2) "Merchant contacts" you can sell too.

Excluding nr. 1 as thats only relevant under character creation Wealth in DF is a social trait, and IMO, should be used that way by the GM.

04-18-2010, 03:25 PM	#1
thulben Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: SF Bay Area, CA	[DF] - Party wealth disparity In the party of DF characters for the game that I'm running, I have most with Average wealth and one with Comfortable. DF suggests handling the Wealth advantages as how much you can get for selling loot. The last time this came up, it handled itself nicely as the character with above-Average wealth was the appointed loot seller and he skimmed off the top. My conundrum now is that we just had a new player join with Struggling-level wealth. It would seem that with the typical egalitarianism that happens in these sorts of games that those are going to be free points. That is, after the money from selling the spoils of adventuring are divvied up that the Struggling character will get just as much as the Average character. Because the new character is a Druid, I can't pull something obvious like tithing to a church or something. How have you handled this in play? Thanks in advance.

04-18-2010, 04:40 PM	#3
Jamaraq Join Date: Apr 2009	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity If he gets the same share as all the others, then he basically got free points by taking Struggling wealth. Perhaps it's time to let a certain druid be victim of a theft?

04-18-2010, 05:04 PM	#4
Kalzazz Join Date: Feb 2009	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity Id suggest that Mr Comfortable take an extra skim off Mr Strugglings share would only be fair

04-18-2010, 05:43 PM	#5
chris1982 Join Date: Nov 2006	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity All XP that is gained is going directly to paying off the Disad until it is paid completely off.

04-18-2010, 08:15 PM	#6
Veton Join Date: May 2006	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity Tell the player "It looks like your low Wealth isn't as much of a disadvantage I thought it would be. Would you be fine with either buying it off or replacing it with another one worth -10 points?"

04-18-2010, 08:17 PM	#7
cosmicfish Join Date: Mar 2010	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity What I usually do is state that changes to initial wealth are just fine, but any longer-term wealth needs an appropriate out-of-campaign reason for the income (or lack thereof). So increased wealth provides an investment income, or rents, or stipend that ensures they always have a certain amount of money. Likewise, decreased wealth REQUIRES that excess funds go to a tithe, or to support family back home, or to perpetual gambling losses. Changing this requires spending the points.

04-19-2010, 11:52 AM	#8
omeyer Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Germany	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity If the character is just from a poor background but try to get rich over the course of the campaign, status might work better, perhaps coupled with Regard or Reputation from co-religionists. If the player really wants to play a relatively poor character, with all the problems that entails, and not just get free points, let him or her do so. Whenever the character uses 'party funding' to get something expensive, that would be out of character and reduce earned points. B517 makes it clear that poor characters must buy off the disadvantage (or buy the advantage) if their actual savings change for good.

04-19-2010, 01:07 PM	#9
Anaraxes Join Date: Sep 2007	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity There's no reason a druid couldn't contribute to a "church" (or other organization), or even independently fund causes. The thread has useful suggestions for disposing of money; all the usual ones would apply. If the character took Struggling for actual concept reasons, they won't have a problem with getting rid of the money. They find the idea of the Struggling character interesting, and getting rich would violate their concept, every bit as much as losing all their nature powers. If, on the other hand, Struggling was chosen just for "free points" or outright munchkinism, then they'll object to foiling their plan to get rich and have bonus points. In that case, just have them buy off the disad immediately. If you're really harsh, they get no roleplaying xp while they mis-play their Struggling disad, making it even harder to pay it off. Any munchkin will instantly be motivated, since CP are far harder to come by than GP. A central trope of the DF genre is rags-to-riches. If you incorporate that into your game, then it's probably best to disallow Wealth-related advantages and disads.

04-19-2010, 01:34 PM	#10
Maz Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Denmark	Re: [DF] - Party wealth disparity I don't see a problem unless people really exploit it. It's not any different from people taking low apearance and/or social disads, and rely on the party "face" to talk to NPC's. For the group as a whole it might be an advtange as the players getting "free" points" can spend them to increase the party "dombat effeciency". It's only a problem if the GM has a problem with it. And then, the GM has all the power to do "something interesting". For instance, if it's the "Dwarf knight" in the party who has high wealth, then they might not be able to sell elven-made items at all through his contacts as his contacts are dwarven nobles, and they don't like each other. This problem also only pops up if you have one character to sell all loot and all character trust that character unconditionally. It will be quite easy for the selling character to stash some of the money for himself. (Or for the GM to give him some 'motivation' to do that). There might also be situations where the "good seller" can't be the one to sell. If his out of action, by sickness or death. Or in a city that don't take kindly to his race/class/culture/looks. Wealth in DF does not represent "wealth" so the "must buy of if you get rich" doesn't hold. In DF WEalth represent only 2 things. 1) Starting wealth. 2) "Merchant contacts" you can sell too. Excluding nr. 1 as thats only relevant under character creation Wealth in DF is a social trait, and IMO, should be used that way by the GM.