[DF] - Party wealth disparity

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by Whyte

The problem is, for Hans (I assume) and I, that while the other players are using their full potential for the party's benefit, the Wealthy Fighter is using his Wealth for only his own benefit. Even in the the case of 50/50 split of the above 40%, he is still benefiting from doing something the others did without additional compensation.

If he's splitting the extra profit with his companions he's not doing it only for his own benefit - they are benefiting too. Maybe not as much as he is, but in the end it is HIS advantage, so shouldn't he be the one to benefit most from his advantage?

The Wealthy PC doesn't benefit directly from the Barbarian's 22 HP - he gets some benefit when the Barbarian doesn't die in the fight and can keep protecting him, but the Barbarian benefits more from his not dieing than the Wealthy PC does. Is that fair to the Wealthy PC? Well, yes, the Barbarian paid for the HP he should reap the biggest benefit from it.

The one place where this does break down is on abilities that are taken solely for the benefit of the rest of the party - mostly Healing spells, as most other abilities benefit the character possessing them as much, if not more, than any of the other characters. However, that is the niche that the Cleric has chosen for himself, just as the player of the Wealthy PC has chosen the niche of being Wealthier than the other PCs and the Barbarian has chosen the niche of being a walking wall of flesh.

[Whyte]

Originally Posted by Kromm

A rich character has chosen the niche of being, well, rich.

That isn't on the table for any PC, which is why – past a certain point – cash isn't as useful as points.

This is the opposite point I was trying to make in my previous post.

Cash is Points, IF you can transform your cash to items that grant you bonuses to your skills/stats/other. For example, if you can always afford to bribe someone (and other PCs can't) while using Streetwise and get +X to your Streetwise, then you have, in effect, X more levels of Streetwise due to your Wealth. This is even more so when you can buy magical items that give bonuses directly to your stats.

So Rich Guy is not only Rich, but he becomes more Powerful than the other characters, and this gets only worse the further along the campaign is, because of the gap in absolute cash levels increases (assuming proportionality). I have, so far, found no good ways to balance this, which I simply ban Wealth Adv/Disadv in campaigns where I am the GM.

One way that comes to mind is to adjust your thinking in DF. The Rich guy's niche is NOT being Rich. It is being the Fence. And this ability is balanced and does not diminish or overshadow the other PCs, as long as it is used communally (i.e. 'Party Loot is sold to coin and then divided equally, as per the Charter of the Crimson Cloak Adventuring Party...'. If you still want to plug that 'richness' into it, use it in the background and socially. Let the Wealthy Guy have a villa and servants. Let the King treat him with more respect. Make the town guards salute him. Make him the one the Mayor gives the key to the Town. When he throws a party, make it lavish. In short, give him all the benefits of being Rich WITHOUT allowing him to leverage his money to make himself more powerful in all the other niches as well! (In old D&D, there was a Rod of Healing, that was able to cast cure light wounds 1/day/person. I don't know if that is a legal item in DF, but I can easily imagine McMoneybags having a bunch of them, making the healer superfluous, for example.)

EDIT:
For example, let the Rich Guy get titles. More land. Stuff like that in the background. Let everyone know that once the dungeon delving is over, the Rich Guy is so Rich that he will live the rest of his life in luxury, while the Barbarian will go back to his rickety hut with his Sword+5 of Awesomeness, unless the Barbarian is using points to up his Wealth, too... Or money, in which case both of them might have a retirement plan, but the Barbarian has a Sword+3 of KindaCool, while the Rich Guy has that Sword+5 of Awesomeness.

[Whyte]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

The Wealthy PC doesn't benefit directly from the Barbarian's 22 HP - he gets some benefit when the Barbarian doesn't die in the fight and can keep protecting him, but the Barbarian benefits more from his not dieing than the Wealthy PC does. Is that fair to the Wealthy PC? Well, yes, the Barbarian paid for the HP he should reap the biggest benefit from it.

Just like the Wealthy PC wouldn't be able to get the loot to sell if the Barbarian had not enabled the Party to get the loot in the first place. Thing is, even if you say that the Barbarian is benefiting more for his hit points by not dying, the end result is that the party benefits as a whole. When the Fence skims from the top, the Party is not getting the full advantage, but a diminished version. This would be akin to the Barbarian letting the monsters past him and at the Fence, when his hit points are halved.

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

However, that is the niche that the Cleric has chosen for himself, just as the player of the Wealthy PC has chosen the niche of being Wealthier than the other PCs and the Barbarian has chosen the niche of being a walking wall of flesh.

If only this were so. See my answer to Kromm. Cash is Points. The Wealthy PC will continue getting Wealthier and hence More Powerful than the other PCs. His platemail makes him as good (or better) a meatshield as the Barbarian's extra HP due to the DR. That's my problem with Wealth. It is not the niche of Being Wealthy. It is the niche of Becoming More Powerful Than Everyone Else Just Mark My Words.

See my answer to Kromm for ways in which I would correct this in DF.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Whyte

See my answer to Kromm for ways in which I would correct this in DF.

and i would alway play dead broke in you game because in the end i was be as wealth as rich guy in you game, ok i me have $400 left but that is a pidances after a few runs.

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Whyte

Cash is Points, IF you can transform your cash to items that grant you bonuses to your skills/stats/other.

In DF, you can't. Or rather, you can only do it to a limited extent. The GM is supposed to put significant limits on that sort of thing. See the initial notes on Special Orders (DF1, p. 25) and Magic Items (DF1, p. 30).

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Whyte

Cash is Points, IF you can transform your cash to items that grant you bonuses to your skills/stats/other.

That's a big "if," though. DF is careful not to make this easy. DF 8 is the first volume to offer numbers on such items, and it makes it clear that the GM doesn't have to sell such gear. Wealth works indirectly, providing abilities that points can't normally buy in DF, like DR: Sure, a barbarian or a martial artist can get tougher – a little – but serious DR, as from armor, costs $. The same goes for lots and lots of other goods available for cash. Fundamentally, while there's crossover in places, some capabilities require points and others require cash. Somebody who decides to focus on money is going for the latter.

Healing rods, DX amulets, etc. are generally rare finds – treasures – and not for sale. Every PC has equal odds of finding such things down the dungeon. On the other hand, Mr. Moneybags can buy finer gear that weighs less and breaks less often. This makes him useful, but the quantification is difficult because these factors show their value over a very long time scale, not turn-by-turn in combat, say.

[Keeh]

Originally Posted by Whyte

This would break up as (201, 401, 401, 401, 2596). The Wealthy Fighter, in this scenario, would be buying everyone a round of beers and then pocketing about 6.5 times the others' share. Everyone benefits. So what is the problem?

That would be a case of wealthy guy trying to abuse his wealth advantage :)

The problem is, for Hans (I assume) and I, that while the other players are using their full potential for the party's benefit, the Wealthy Fighter is using his Wealth for only his own benefit. Even in the the case of 50/50 split of the above 40%, he is still benefiting from doing something the others did without additional compensation.

Were I the healer of this party, I'd tell the guy that the next time he is wounded, my services would be available for a fee. Taken into account dangerous surroundings and the potentially life-threatening nature of the wound if left untreated, I'd say it would be very fair for him to pay a good chunk of his share. After all, without me, he would die in the dungeon or at the very least, need to head back to town to buy healing from them, costing time and money (and additional danger as he staggers bleeding through the countryside, where robbers might very well take this opportunity to jump him). Similarly, the Mage would be presenting a bill for every spell cast, the Fighter for every monster fought and the Thief for every square foot of the dungeon searched for traps, with an additional bill for actually disarming the traps rather than letting the Wealthy Fighter to walk into it. After all, why should our services be free simply because they happen in the Dungeon, while his services (as a fence) allow him to skim from the top?

Got it. My problem with this is that I have a really hard time considering Wealth a Niche, as it's just a really small part of a character.
Wealthy thief really is a thief, with the skills, stats and core advantages of a thief, but 20 of the 30 free advantage points out of the 300 points thief template went into the wealth advantage. He didn't join the group to sell their loot, he joined to do sneaky thievery things. The party may not get a direct benefit from his Wealth, but, as Ericbsmith said, they don't benefit from the barbarian 22 HP. Of course, it sure is nice when they put these advantage to good use.

Now back in town, wealthy thief has already do its part in the dungeon, and he could go sell only his share. Which would be stupid as that wouldn't benefit the party as much as it could, so he takes care of all the loot. And now, instead of disgressing on "what's the good way of sharing loot", I think I'll stick with martinl idea of Wealth as a Mental Disad. It really makes thinks easier :)

[Whyte]

Originally Posted by Turhan's Bey Company

In DF, you can't. Or rather, you can only do it to a limited extent. The GM is supposed to put significant limits on that sort of thing.

If this is limited enough, i.e. stopping the Free Lunch Express, then this would solve my problems with DF Wealth.

If Money cannot be used to buy 'Points' (via magical items or other augmentations), then it reverts to its normal role, i.e. being rich means better living and luxury, and a fatter bank account to retire on.

EDIT:
I see Kromm posted pretty much the same clarification moments later. Thanks, that does make it much clearer where you guys are coming from. I was under the misunderstanding that DF is the no-holds-barred Monty Haul of the Really Bad Old Days. :)

[Whyte]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

and i would alway play dead broke in you game because in the end i was be as wealth as rich guy in you game, ok i me have $400 left but that is a pidances after a few runs.

And I would cheerfully tell you that:
1) I don't allow Wealth Adv. or Disadv. in my campaigns, AND
2) Even if I did, I certainly subscribe to Kromm's mantra 'A Disadvantage should be disadvantageous.' (not an exact quote)

I am an old school GM. If I notice a player trying to be a smarty-pants, I have no problems throwing the book at him. Literally if need be. :)

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Kromm

On the other hand, Mr. Moneybags can buy finer gear that weighs less and breaks less often. This makes him useful, but the quantification is difficult because these factors show their value over a very long time scale, not turn-by-turn in combat, say.

More than buying improved delving gear, I'd suspect that a money-oriented character is best suited to providing logistics: making sure the PCs have a place to stay in town, buying plenty of mundane stuff like rations, lighting, ten foot poles, and so on; replacing items which are dissolved by acid slimes, tainted by demonic contact, melted by living flames, and disintegrated by spells; hiring wagons and/or beasts of burden to haul back loads of treasure; and underwriting resurrections for PCs who didn't make it out of the dungeon under their own power. The more I think about it, Moneybags sounds more and more like Don Rickles in Kelly's Heroes.