Money-to-point comparison/conversion

[sir_pudding]

You could take Dead Broke and then take Not Dead Broke as a Potential Advantage for 1-24 points and use it to buy off Dead Broke as soon as you start accumulating savings.

Really though, I'd just let a character try to do this. By the time they managedy to get an Average job and socked away 80% of average starting wealth in establishing a Status 0 lifestyle, they will have earned some points. If they don't spend some of those points on regaining wealth then they aren't going to able to retain savings for whatever reason (and really having been there in real life there are a lot reasons for being unable to establish savings). Otherwise their savings are capped at whatever Wealth level they've managed to get.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by WingedKagouti

a) The other players or NPCs can lend you any vital equipment needed for a task without penality.
b) It's a very temporary disadvantage that only has any gameplay effect for the first few sessions.

#1 comes with strings attached, though. That can very well reduce the freedom of that PC, if another PC or an NPC lends him equipment, especially valuable stuff such as a high-end assault rifle or a suit of mail.

I contemplated that dynamic some years ago, when I was working on Modern Action RPG. One player could choose the Wealthy character class, and then buy gear for all the other players' characters. I was concerned that that might be bad, but after some thinking I reached the conclusion that no, it's not bad, because the other PCs will be under a sense of obligation towards the Wealthy character, quite likely giving him a greater than 1.0 weight vote in communal decision making, or the equivalent.

The same applies to GURPS, and any other system where players can pay points to start wealthier or get points for starting poorer, regardless of whether the purchased wealth is sticky or not.



#2 seems to me to be very true, at least for traditional adventuring campaigns. Even if you start poor in resources, it's my experience that you're quite likely to soon come across some nefarious personage who needs to be killed, and after that you can take his stuff. Or collect a bounty, or both. In which case #2 has gone away.



In some settings, cash isn't all that useful since there are few places that sell what you might want, e.g. expensive war-gear or Very Fine adventuring equipment (places that cater to wealthy Vikings coming home from looting mostly rent out hookers and sell beer).

That's one reason why it can be much more useful to start with the gear you want, because then you know that you already have the rare stuff, the good stuff, instead of having to bang your head against world simulation realism repeatedly trying to get hold of it (let alone an obstructionist GM who might covertly not want you to get hold of it).

On the other hand, insofar as stuff is available for purchase, such as is the case in a modern setting (in most places), starting with ready cash, instead of purchased gear, is more flexible, because then you can adapt to circumstances and equip yourself based on what kind of adventures lie ahead, based on the clues your character gets early in the first session.

Back to the first hand, most characters have some kind of concept, often revolving around a few high abilities, and when those require gear, you might as well buy it right away. Even if there is some constraint on that, such as the GM requiring a Perk-grade UB to own VF weapons and equivalent quality non-combat gear, it's helpful to start the campaign with normal gear and then try to find a purchase opportunity for the rare stuff during play, saving those points.

Although if you can stomach metagaming, then you can skip buying mundane grades of the gear that's vital to your character concept, so that there's maximum pressure on the GM to make it easy for your character to reach a source of VF stuff, so that he avoids looking like a nay-saying butthole in the eyes of the other players.