Yesterday I discussed one possible solution to the problem of slow advancement due to small amounts of treasure in AD&D. As I mentioned, this was a problem that particular loomed over my Nightwick Campaign. I found this somewhat odd as I was generating treasure more or less by the book, so I decided to look into it. Yesterday's solution focused on increasing the amount of xp a single gold piece provides. Today I'll talk about the method I'm actually using in the Greyhawk campaign: increasing the amount of treasure.
This method is not without precedent. Quasqueton at EN World was kind enough to do some of my work for me. Since it is a starter module written by Gary Gygax and designed specifically with AD&D in mind I'll be primarily focusing on T1: The Village of Hommlet. According to Quasqueton's figure, whcih I sadly have not had time to confirm, the total value of the treasure in the module is 30,938gp.
A large sum, especially when compared to the amounts suggested for a first level dungeon in the DMG. In total, the moat house consists of 35 rooms, well below the hypothetical 100 I used for yesterday's example. It somehow manages to provide ten times the amount of treasure that would be allowed using the DMG's method. How do we square this?
It's likely that Gygax was aware of the slow pace of advancement with the above system and that he inflated the treasure to compensate. The method I used in my version of Castle Greyhawk provided a similar amount of treasure. Obviously that's a much bigger structure, but there is quite a bit more empty space in it than there is in the moathouse.
This method works best if one maintains the other rules as they are. Upkeep and training are designed to take away this excess coinage so that the players don't screw up the campaign economy -- which is different from the economy of the milieu. It strikes me that Gygax likely sought to solve the new problem created by training costs rather than changing everything over to a silver standard. I'm not sure what his motivation would be, but I've more or less replicated his fix so I can't complain too much.
Now to put a fly in the ointment. Yesterday, -C commented "I thought AD&D changed the rules so that you recieved 1xp per 5gp, so that you would accumulate more money between levels, allowing you to pay for things like training." This makes some sense; however it wouldn't solve the bigger problem of the pace of advancement. If you use the rules in the DMG as is, it would take even longer to level up because each PC would still be only getting 600gp on the first level. Now they only have 120xp from gold. Even the inflated amounts don't hold up to this metric. The moat house would only give a total of 1,031xp for treasure, which isn't even enough for a thief to level off of.
Ultimately, I think it's best to use whatever works for your campaign and your group. If you're looking for a more realistic economy, then increasing the xp from gp is probably the way to go. If you prefer piles of coins to realism, then it's probably better to just use the rules as is and up the treasure substantially.
Or, you could give out more treasure.
ReplyDeleteYou state three of four options, ignoring the one that is functional. Don't just hand out 600 gp (and 120xp), hand out 3000gp (and 600 ep) Now, by the time they have 1250 experience (for a thief) they have 6000gp they need for upkeep (it took several weeks to acquire that no?) and leveling, along with enough to pay for their hirelings and various taxes and fees.
I think it's somewhat spurious reasoning to use a game manual written in 1977, and then a supplement written thirty years later to determine the amount of gold the DMG intends.
Gygax answers this very question ("placement of monetary treasure) on page 91.
As someone who has run a BTB 1e game for the last three years, I can assure you, that giving out 1xp per 5gp works excellently with the training, hireling, and upkeep costs. (1500xlevelx1-4 weeks in gp, 100gpxlevelxweek in upkeep, and 5-15% of player share per hireling) makes for players who can stay ahead of the curve but barely.
Why is this preferable to other distributions? Gygax says, "Heroic fantasy is made of fortunes and king's ransoms in loot gained most cleverly and bravely and lost in a twinkling by various means - thievery, gambling, debauchery, gift giving, bribes, and so forth."
Those 100 rooms, using the standard set forth in the DMG (not Kellri's guide) should contain 20 rooms with treasure around 1600 gp each. (some of course smaller, some larger). Obviously adventures became more encounter dense in the mid 80's.
There is nowhere in 1st edition where it suggests greater than a 1xp to 1gp ratio, and explicitly says you should tie it into the difficulty in acquiring the treasure.
I'm confused by this whole series, which sets forth a ?strawman? (hey, 5xp per 1gp doesn't give right treasure values) and proves it. You are correct - I don't know how I'd make that work in old school D&D. But then, I haven't seen anywhere that was actually suggested, so I guess I'm confused.
Some comments: Characters usually gain about 1 level every 3 to 6 weeks, until they hit level 7, at which point it takes double that to earn 8 and 9, and then it's about 1 level every six to eight months.
ReplyDeletePlayers that come in with level 1 characters are usually 1-2 levels behind the party in four weeks, and always 1 level behind by the time the party makes its next level.
I stock my dungeons almost identically to the way you stocked your Castle Greyhawk, except I remove the step where you total up all the lair treasure. I take average XP needed to level and multiply it by the number of people in the party and multiply it by 4, and divide it among the rooms designated as having treasure. This accounts for character attrition, time attrition, and missed treasure. I do this until level 7 is reached, and then I use those numbers.
Evan, are you also considering these facts - AD&D gives out significantly more XP for killing monsters than regular D&D; AD&D gives out XP for magic items; AD&D anticipates players selling magic items (perhaps to pay for those ridiculous training expenses).
ReplyDeleteA while back, I examined the difference between how B2 would dole out XP under various old school games, including AD&D, to give you a flavor:
Munchkins of the Old School Revealed
Note, that's not counting the XP players could be getting if they turned around and sold many of those magic items, which typically yield much more gold XP than if they kept it in the first place - AD&D players should be able to level 2.5 to 3x faster than the other old school games. AD&D is all about power-leveling (actually, powering up everything, across the board).
Please don't mind the occasional anti-AD&D tone I tend to engender, though, it really is a great game and it's more of a bi-polar love/hate thing for me. :)
All about power-awesomeing, I think you mean.
ReplyDeleteThose are good points. I've noticed the LL games I've ran had a much slower leveling curve. In general.
In the end, it's really up to the Dungeon Master and how much treasure he scatters about.
And sorry for the comment spam, just forgot this. It seems that it's a lot more likely in AD&D rather than other versions that you will have many henchmen cutting into that big experience point pie, making the higher totals balance out.
ReplyDeleteOr just use the 1xp for each 1gp spent in carousing, gambling, drinking etc., that way, you get the money out of PC's hands. Then use Jeff Reint's Carousing Table. And forego the training costs.
ReplyDeleteOr, you could give out more treasure.
ReplyDeleteThat is what I attempted to say to do with this post. I must not have been clear, and I apologize for that.
I think it's somewhat spurious reasoning to use a game manual written in 1977, and then a supplement written thirty years later to determine the amount of gold the DMG intends.
You're correct. I had thought his table was more similar to the one on page 171 of the DMG than it actually is.
Those 100 rooms, using the standard set forth in the DMG (not Kellri's guide) should contain 20 rooms with treasure around 1600 gp each.
1,600gp is still not enough for a character to level off of treasure alone. Remember that you're supposed to divide that between 6-8 people. It also doesn't match up with the amount of treasure found in Hommlet.
There is nowhere in 1st edition where it suggests greater than a 1xp to 1gp ratio, and explicitly says you should tie it into the difficulty in acquiring the treasure.
True, and I'm embarrassed to say I forgot about that. Isn't it based on the level of the dungeon?
I'm confused by this whole series, which sets forth a ?strawman? (hey, 5xp per 1gp doesn't give right treasure values) and proves it.
Actually my initial point was that BTB it gives out too few treasure to keep up with the pace you note later on having seen that from experience. I then attempted to provide two solutions. I like the idea of 5xp to 1gp.
I stock my dungeons...
ReplyDeleteI like the sound of that method. Are you using the treasure per individuals results for 12 Hobgoblins, or just giving them treasure as though it was their lair? The reason I total it up and redivide it is that i have a hard time seeing 12 hobgoblins carrying around the kind of results intended for an entire hobgoblin lair. YMMV.
AD&D gives out significantly more XP for killing monsters than regular D&D
ReplyDeleteI've found that it isn't enough to compensate.
D&D gives out XP for magic items
I did overlook that.
AD&D anticipates players selling magic items
Does it specifically say that you gain experience from doing so? I would rule that it doesn't yield xp unless it states otherwise. XP for monetary treasure for me has only counted actual coins and gems. I usually give them xp for gems based on their value, but have it sell for much less unless they have a very high charisma and a mundane skill that is related.
a bi-polar love/hate thing for me
I feel you there. I'm wrestling with it right now because I want to love it, but many times in the prep for my Greyhawk game I've yearned to return to LL + AEC. Theres just something about those hardcovers that keeps me coming back to them.
Those are good points. I've noticed the LL games I've ran had a much slower leveling curve. In general.
ReplyDeleteThat may have been the problem. I was using some goulash of the two in my last campaign and I may not have compensated.
And sorry for the comment spam,
ReplyDeleteDon't worry about it. ;)
Or just use the 1xp for each 1gp spent in carousing, gambling, drinking etc., that way, you get the money out of PC's hands. Then use Jeff Reint's Carousing Table. And forego the training costs.
ReplyDeleteI attempted to use this in the Nightwick game, but the players were usually too sort on cash and/or timid to try their luck. I'm using training costs this time because my co-DM is a much more by the book sorta fella.
I took a quick look - DMG pg 121 has a note that if the PC's sell the item, they get the full gold value for XP. In general, you find AD&D modules are a little more magic heavy, and that raises an interesting choice for players after each adventure - sell items for more XP (and training funds) or keep them...
ReplyDeleteJust a note to point out that 1600 gp (at 1:1 gp:xp) in 20 rooms is 32000 xp. I got that number by taking 2000 xp (needed to level) multiplying it by the number of people in the party (4) and then mutiplying that by 4 to account for upkeep, party losses, henchmen, and lost and missed treasure.
ReplyDeleteIsn't that then enough to level the party? If you're doing it 5gp:1ep, then I would put 2000*5*4*4, 160000/20 rooms or 8000gp per room. (which for AD&D is just a magic item and some gold, or a few gems usually.)
I'm sensing a post about this being I've had this disscussion 3 times this week. :-)
@Beedo: I'm not sure if this is 1e or a hackmaster update, but doesn't the player who keeps the item get 1/5 or 1/10 of it's value in XP for five or ten weeks respectively?
ReplyDeleteEither way, that's the way I run it.
@Evan: I usually handle individual treasure as 'bonus' not included in the calculations. The only risk areas are creatures like ghouls who have a lot of scrolls, and bandits who carry a crap ton of gems (usually mitigated by the fact that they appear in groups of 20-200).
ReplyDeleteTreasure for rooms is either hidden so that the current occupants don't know about it, lair treasure for monsters, or items of value that are too difficult to move, so they end up being ignored.
Just a note to point out that 1600 gp (at 1:1 gp:xp) in 20 rooms is 32000 xp.
ReplyDeleteOH! I see what you mean now. Yeah, that's perfectly fine.