Spending Gold

[jakdethe]

I wasn't exactly sure where to put this, so I figured the players' section is appropriate, since its the players spending the gold. In OD&D it's assumed (at least how I've understood it, and Referee) that most of the players experience comes from gold. If that's the case the players will end up with a ton of gold (literally). Other than building a castle, what are players supposed to spend this money on, especially if they can't buy magic items. What if players don't want to build castles, or baronies? I've realized in most of my games the players just end up hoarding the gold. If they're happy with it, I have no problem, but I can't but feeling there should be something to do with all of that money, other than build a stronghold (especially in AD&D where certain classes can't even build strongholds).

Am I just missing something really simple here?

[cadriel]

There are several ways you can go with this.

One: OD&D is extremely amenable to players buying ships. You can easily become a merchant or pirate leader. Ships are really expensive, and captain and crew have their costs listed. There are whole sections of the rules that are outright neglected for ship to ship combat.

Two: there are several high-ticket retainer types. Sages and assassins are extremely expensive, if PCs want information or dead enemies; spies and alchemists are very expensive, and can net you potions and intelligence. Sages in particular are great for soaking up PC wealth throughout a campaign. Animal trainers are also quite expensive, if a PC decided to have a personal menagerie.

Three: In The First Fantasy Campaign, Dave Arneson talks about how the Blackmoor characters gained experience by indulging their special interests: wine, women, song, wealth, fame, religion/spiritualism, and hobbies. PCs with enough wealth can go on epic benders, find expensive lovers or courtesans, spend lavishly on bards, create great hoards, become a patron of the arts, donate generously to their faith, or spend a fortune on their own special hobby (such as the aforementioned menagerie). All of these are valid ways to sink quite a lot of money. Think about football players or investment bankers, and their lavish expenditures. Civilizations always have ways to let people spend their wealth.

[talysman]

Until they build a stronghold and establish a barony, characters have to spend gold equal to 1% of their current experience points for support and upkeep. There's been debate about whether that is per week or per month, but even at a monthly rate, that can eat up a decent amount of treasure. That doesn't include the cost of equipment, mercenaries, other hirelings, and animals, or travel costs for long trips, or bribes.

I'd recommend the weekly rate. It will guarantee more frequent expeditions.

[Red Baron]

Each character must spend 260-780 gold a year must be spent on food alone.  Lodgings will cost more. When recovering to full hit points can take over a week, game time can be expended quickly, and the cost of living can quickly add up.

Most characters will spend their first hundred gold or so they take out of the dungeon to better equip themselves - purchasing better armor and more equipment.

Characters need to spend a minimal amount to replenish expended resources. Ammunition and light sources need replenishing. A dungeon adventure might use up around 5-10 gold worth of supplies.

There are also more expensive costs associated with better outfitting the party: Henchmen and hirelings take time and money to recruit and magic users may wish to expend time and gold on researching better spells.

---

Lastly, if you really needed a way to siphon gold out of the game, you could use Arneson's Special Interests rules from the FFC:

"Many characters wonder what they should spend their money on and what it will get for them in exchange. Just accumulating the money is not really enough of a guide in some case, as to what the players do between expeditions, besides healing themselves up. So the following is presented as a supplement or alternative to the players.

Instead of awarding points for money and Jewels acquired in the depths of the Dungeon or hoarding items against the indefinite future, the players will receive NO points until they acquire the items listed below unless it happens to already fall within the area of their interest."

It describes such hobbies as wine, women, song, wealth, fame, religion, each is assigned an experience value.
Magic user hobbies include - breeding bigger better monster body gaurds, making better torture machines, creating gold, making flying machines, learning languages.

Special interests is basically an older version of J Rient's carousing rules.

Edit: Cadriel was too quick...

[cadriel]

Another way you can go is crafting magical items. It's time consuming, but obviously very beneficial.

[Red Baron]

You'd have to house rule that magic users of any level may do so - not just "Wizards and above"(M&M p.6).

[Red Baron]

Here's a more thorough examination or the Special Interest rules.

Step 1: Determination of your major interest

Percentile dice are rolled on Table II.

The Fightin'-Man for example has a 15% chance to have wine as his major interest, a 20% chance to have women as his major interest, a 15% chance to have song as his major interest, etc.

Table II

Character Type	Wine	Women	Song	Wealth	Fame	Religion	Hobby
Fighting-Man	15	20	15	10	30	5	5
Clerical	10	5	5	5	15	50	10
Magic User	5	5	5	10	20	5	50
Ranger	10	10	10	10	35	15	10
Paladin	10	10	5	5	30	35	5
Assassin	5	5	5	25	5	10	45
Merchant	10	5	10	45	20	5	5
Sage	10	5	5	10	15	5	50

Step 2: Minor Interests


Once you have found your major interest, reference Table I to see what % of the gold spent is awarded as experience for each interest.

A character who's major interest is in wine, consults row a. A character's who's interests lie with women, consults row b.

A character who specializes in interest a - wine - would therefore receive 100 experience for every 100 gold he spends on wine, but only 80 experience for every 100 gold he spends on women, etc.

Table I

	Wine	Women	Song	Wealth	Fame	Religion	Hobby
a.	100	80	90	20	50	10	nil
b.	80	100	80	25	70	nil	nil
c.	90	80	100	30	85	15	nil
d.	20	25	30	100	75	25	50
e.	70	50	85	75	100	80	80
f.	10	nil	15	25	80	100	nil
g.	nil	nil	nil	50	80	nil	100

---

Lets look again at how Arneson's given example plays out.

"Fighting Man: Prime area is 'A'. He has just returned with a 10,000 Gold Piece share of a treasure, he spends 500 Gold Pieces on new Equipment, 50 Gold Pieces on a new Horse. To aid a comrade, he spends 1,000 Gold Pieces on a Party (area 'C') and takes 8000 of the rest to spend on Wine (area "A"). The 400 (Actually 450) remaining , he keeps against future expenses.

1) Purchase of Horse Equipment and Unspent Funds		0 Experience Points
2) 1,000 Gold Pieces spent on Area C		900 Experience Points
3) 8,000 Gold Pieces spent on Wine (Area A)		8,000 Experience Points
	Total	8,900 Experience Points

During the party, a fight breaks out that causes 3,000 Gold Pieces of damage. As one of eight men in the fight that were caught (our example was found snoring under a table!), he is held responsible for 375 Gold Pieces (3000/8=375) of damage. Still retaining his money, he pays the fine but gains no experience.'

The fighting man in this example would be left with 75 gold pieces, 500gp of shiny new equipment, and a horse.

---

The rules are more complex for wizards with the special interest "Hobbies", as they can gain or loose magical ability and even become "bad guys" from their various successes and failures. These rules seem a bit more loose and all over the place and I suspect that they were probably hammered out on an individual basis. I recall a thread asserting that wizards had to do a "Research Project" to gain a level in blackmoor.

[waysoftheearth]

Great info Red Baron!

I'd add that hunting and tourneys were very popular medieval interests--particularly for the physical types

[Red Baron]

Jun 12, 2014 19:42:45 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

Great info Red Baron!

I'd add that hunting and tourneys were very popular medieval interests--particularly for the physical types

Finally a chance to use the jousting rules, and you get experience for it too!

[jdjarvis]

Good breakdown above.

In my own games I'm a stinker I don't give exp for treasure hauled out of a dungeon but instead give exp for gp spent on training, sacrifice, gifting and such. It keeps the money flowing.

[LouGoncey]

Jun 12, 2014 18:02:27 GMT -6 talysman said:

Until they build a stronghold and establish a barony, characters have to spend gold equal to 1% of their current experience points for support and upkeep. There's been debate about whether that is per week or per month, but even at a monthly rate, that can eat up a decent amount of treasure. That doesn't include the cost of equipment, mercenaries, other hirelings, and animals, or travel costs for long trips, or bribes.

I'd recommend the weekly rate. It will guarantee more frequent expeditions.

I started out with 1% of XP in gp per level.

Then I went to a monthly collection.

Then I went to a weekly collection.

Now it stands at a weekly collection, and if the character does not have enough money, then he pays off what he can, and what he does not pay off loses 10% of the XP value of what has not been paid off.

[Deleted]

If you don't build a stronghold you will never be part of the landed nobility. Make it clear to players that there is an entire segment of the game they're missing.

Also, for an 11th level wizard to reach 12th, they need 300,000 XP. All gold will be multiplied by (monster level/11). And that's THEIR share of the gold. At some point, you just get tired of trying to find enough gold to level up and start doing other things.

[Deleted]

A big portion of the character's treasure XP will be coming from magic items (how big depends on how you value them), so a portion of their treasure either won't be spendable or will be in one use items like potions and scrolls that will get used and, thus, go away.

This is one place where 3e is superior since that game's magic items cost increased exponentially rather than linearly. So high power magic items were closer in value to their rarity/usefullness.

[talysman]

In OD&D, which is what we're talking about, *none* of your xp will come from magic items, unless you sell them. The set xp va!UE for magic items was an AD&D addition.

In that context, the 3e approach doesn't sound superior at all. Suddenly, you're raking in extra experience? Tons more, if the item is powerful? Sounds like a recipe for power inflation.

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2014 10:24:43 GMT -6 talysman said:

In OD&D, which is what we're talking about, *none* of your xp will come from magic items, unless you sell them. The set xp va!UE for magic items was an AD&D addition.

M&M Pg 18 lists magic items, along with money, gems and jewelry, as forms of treasure that grant XP. I don't see where it says you have to sell magic items (or gems/jewelry for that matter) in order to get XP for them.

If you don't give out XP for magic items, then having PCs with too much money is what I'd call a "self inflicted wound".

[talysman]

Jun 19, 2014 13:27:11 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

Jun 19, 2014 10:24:43 GMT -6 talysman said:

In OD&D, which is what we're talking about, *none* of your xp will come from magic items, unless you sell them. The set xp va!UE for magic items was an AD&D addition.

M&M Pg 18 lists magic items, along with money, gems and jewelry, as forms of treasure that grant XP. I don't see where it says you have to sell magic items (or gems/jewelry for that matter) in order to get XP for them.

If you don't give out XP for magic items, then having PCs with too much money is what I'd call a "self inflicted wound".

It doesn't exlicitly say that you have to sell magic items, but there is no xp value listed for them, so the implication is that you get xp for their monetary value. Either you give them the sale price, or give them the potential sale price without requiring an actual sale, GM's choice... but the latter is basically double-dipping, allowing characters to get the benefit of a magic item and also xp for merely having the item in their possession. A character with a magic sword earns xp faaster than one with a normal sword, by virtue of being able to defeat tougher monsters and take their treasure. Why give them more xp on top of that?

I think people make too big a deal about "having too much gold". Gold is only valuable for what it can buy, so if you don't use the support and upkeep rule, don't allow strongholds, and don't have anything else for characters to spend money on, all they have is a nice, large number on a piece of paper. Not really a problem, but it's more interesting not to do it that way.

[cooper]

The paradox of not giving XP for magic items is that a wizard can find 1000gp and create a sword+1 (and thereby have 1000xp and a sword+1) which a fighting-man can never do. Therefore, if wizards can make magic items and potions using GP, then all characters need to receive XP for magic items equal to their cost of creation (which is what ad&d clarified).

[jakdethe]

Jun 19, 2014 10:02:22 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

A big portion of the character's treasure XP will be coming from magic items (how big depends on how you value them), so a portion of their treasure either won't be spendable or will be in one use items like potions and scrolls that will get used and, thus, go away.

This is one place where 3e is superior since that game's magic items cost increased exponentially rather than linearly. So high power magic items were closer in value to their rarity/usefullness.

Have you used 3e treasure costs with OD&D or AD&D before? I found the same thing (the exponential increase), and came to the same conclusion as you.

[Red Baron]

Jun 19, 2014 15:19:25 GMT -6 cooper said:

The paradox of not giving XP for magic items is that a wizard can find 1000gp and create a sword+1 (and thereby have 1000xp and a sword+1) which a fighting-man can never do. Therefore, if wizards can make magic items and potions using GP, then all characters need to receive XP for magic items equal to their cost of creation (which is what ad&d clarified).

This is solved in ad&d by requiring a wish or permanancy spell in the creation of a magic item (ie. A permanent loss of one point of constitution or being aged several years of the wizards life). Plus a magic user needs to be a Wizard before he is able to fabricate such things.

[cooper]

Wish and permanency are only required for permanent items, which does not include wands or potions or even a non-permanent magic sword. The constitution loss for permanecy is not certain and there are magical means of obviating this (using magic jar to have the host suffer the constitution loss).

Magic potions are able to be created at level 7. So the paradox still stands, why does a wizard get to make a potion of healing from 200gp he finds and earn 200xp. Where a fighter who finds a potion of healing would get no XP?

We are all arguing under a false premise, as the majority of XP comes in the form of gems and jewelry according to 0d&d if one follows the chart on placing treasure in a dungeon as the probabilities of having gems and jewlery worth up to 10,000gp dwarfs all other forms of XP accumulation.

[talysman]

Jun 19, 2014 15:19:25 GMT -6 cooper said:

The paradox of not giving XP for magic items is that a wizard can find 1000gp and create a sword+1 (and thereby have 1000xp and a sword+1) which a fighting-man can never do. Therefore, if wizards can make magic items and potions using GP, then all characters need to receive XP for magic items equal to their cost of creation (which is what ad&d clarified).

You are neglecting the fact that, if it costs 1000 gp to make a sword+1, a fighter can find 1000 gp and give it to a wizard to make a sword, and then will have 1000 xp and a sword+1... and will be able to use it. No real paradox at all.

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2014 17:26:24 GMT -6 talysman said:

You are neglecting the fact that, if it costs 1000 gp to make a sword+1, a fighter can find 1000 gp and give it to a wizard to make a sword, and then will have 1000 xp and a sword+1... and will be able to use it. No real paradox at all.

If you don't give out XP for magic items, a fighter who finds a +1 sword will get a plus one sword and no XP. If that same fighter found 1,000 gp instead, he could buy a +1 sword and end up with 1,000 XP and a +1 sword. Not giving out XP for magic items makes magic items less valuable than gold pieces. Which is why OD&D was right in giving XP for a magic item's full value, rather than the reduced amount in AD&D or, even worse, nothing in basic. We can add that to the long list of changes that made the game worse; right next to variable hit dice and initiative.

[waysoftheearth]

Carrying a +1 sword is a boon to the fighter while carrying 1,000 gp around is a burden.

The gold slows him down, prevents him from carrying more such treasure, and potentially makes him a juicy target for attack.

The sword helps him to beat further opponents (some of which he couldn't challenge at all without a magic weapon), to potentially progress further in the adventure, to access more areas and more loot, and more XP.

I think the major part of the "value" of a magic weapon is its utility, not the XP award attached to it.

[cooper]

1000gp buys a lot of men at arms which has utilitarian value probably greater than that of a +1 sword. More areas and more loot and more xp leading a band of men than not. Or not, depending on your game. So if greater utility somehow translates to less XP, then xp=gp should have diminishing returns.

What is absolutely clear in ad&d is that magic items are worth xp and this is also fairly clear in 0d&d (as much as anything is) that for wizards, "Costs [to create magic items] are commensurate with the value of the item. Assuming that the "value" here is XP value as was interpreted by gygax a few years later in the DMG.

[Fearghus]

Jun 19, 2014 10:24:43 GMT -6 talysman said:

In OD&D, which is what we're talking about, *none* of your xp will come from magic items, unless you sell them. The set xp va!UE for magic items was an AD&D addition.

In that context, the 3e approach doesn't sound superior at all. Suddenly, you're raking in extra experience? Tons more, if the item is powerful? Sounds like a recipe for power inflation.

3.0. 3.5 and Pathfinder do not award experience for the finding of magic items and treasure. There are separate magical item creation rules, so 2000 gp to make a sword +1, 8000 to make a sword +2, 18000 for a sword +3, etc.

3.0 (and 3.5?) required the caster to expend experience points in the creation of the magic item as well as the gp cost, so their was a hesitation to not pump out magical items at the cyclic rate. Those are simply the mechanics. Individual DMs might still require quests, special materials, etc in addition to fulfilling the mechanical rules.

[waysoftheearth]

Jun 19, 2014 19:17:10 GMT -6 cooper said:

1000gp buys a lot of men at arms which has utilitarian value probably greater than that of a +1 sword. More areas and more loot and more xp leading a band of men than not. Or not, depending on your game. So if greater utility somehow translates to less XP, then xp=gp should have diminishing returns.

What is absolutely clear in ad&d is that magic items are worth xp and this is also fairly clear in 0d&d (as much as anything is) that for wizards, "Costs [to create magic items] are commensurate with the value of the item. Assuming that the "value" here is XP value as was interpreted by gygax a few years later in the DMG.

True. I was more thinking about the process of finding treasure in the dungeon, then returning to safety with it to claim your reward. Whether or not mercenaries will go on dungeon crawls is different debate (personally, I allow it, and I have observed that it's actually quite challenging to make good use of large numbers of mooks in confined spaces. That is not to say they don't have their use; they are useful especially for low level PCs. They can also be a logistical challenge to manage. Higher level PCs are typically better off spending more coin to get fewer, better quality retainers).

Also, the FAQ article in SR says magic-items should have minimal XP value, then immediately goes on to give explicit XP values for a bunch of OD&D magic items

[Red Baron]

A more detailed look at Arneson's special interests system can now be found here.

[luc]

Jun 12, 2014 19:26:59 GMT -6 Red Baron said:

Here's a more thorough examination or the Special Interest rules.

Step 1: Determination of your major interest

Percentile dice are rolled on Table II.

The Fightin'-Man for example has a 15% chance to have wine as his major interest, a 20% chance to have women as his major interest, a 15% chance to have song as his major interest, etc.

Table II

Character Type	Wine	Women	Song	Wealth	Fame	Religion	Hobby
Fighting-Man	15	20	15	10	30	5	5
Clerical	10	5	5	5	15	50	10
Magic User	5	5	5	10	20	5	50
Ranger	10	10	10	10	35	15	10
Paladin	10	10	5	5	30	35	5
Assassin	5	5	5	25	5	10	45
Merchant	10	5	10	45	20	5	5
Sage	10	5	5	10	15	5	50

This table puzzles me. (Actually, there's a lot about the rules in this section that is puzzling. )

Now, looking at the table it appears as though you roll on each column based on your character type. That raises the possibility that you roll high on every column and end up with NO area of interest.

However, the description of using it reads as:
"In addition to the normal attributes that players roll for their characters, one will now consult Chart II and by determining which Character Class they will be using, they roll two percentile dice reading one for tens and the other for singles, to determine the motivation of their characters."

I notice that the values of each row add up to 100. This leads me to believe that each value is actually supposed to define the range for each area.

Eg. 

	Wine	Women	Song	Wealth	Fame	Religion	Hobby
Fighting-Man	1-15 (15)	16-35 (20)	36-50 (15)	51-60 (10)	61-90 (30)	91-95 (5)	96-00 (5)

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2014 18:52:23 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

If you don't give out XP for magic items, a fighter who finds a +1 sword will get a plus one sword and no XP.

Yes.

That +1 sword helps him get MORE TREASURE.

Gary didn't give XP for magic items and neither have I, ever. Magic items are their own reward.

Yes, it will slow down progression.

THAT. IS. THE. POINT.

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2014 16:40:13 GMT -6 cooper said:

Wish and permanency are only required for permanent items, which does not include wands or potions or even a non-permanent magic sword. The constitution loss for permanecy is not certain and there are magical means of obviating this (using magic jar to have the host suffer the constitution loss).

Magic potions are able to be created at level 7. So the paradox still stands, why does a wizard get to make a potion of healing from 200gp he finds and earn 200xp. Where a fighter who finds a potion of healing would get no XP?

We are all arguing under a false premise, as the majority of XP comes in the form of gems and jewelry according to 0d&d if one follows the chart on placing treasure in a dungeon as the probabilities of having gems and jewlery worth up to 10,000gp dwarfs all other forms of XP accumulation.

I don't know what rules you're looking at, but it's not OD&D.

Nowhere does it say magic users get 200 XP for creating a potion of healing.

Furthermore, on page 6 of Men & Magic it says explicitly you have to be a Wizard to create a magic item, including potions.