In my last session, players looted a tomb with lots and lots of treasure. There was enough that they each took all the gold they could carry. I need to figure out how much that's worth before today's game. Please help me out. I'll post more about this campaign in the actual play forum later.
Encumbrance limits?
System?
More info, please!
It's 3.5. Strength varies player to player, ranging from 8 to 18 IIRC. I just don't know how much gold (or generic treasure if I need to take down the value) is worth per pound. If I know the baseline, I can have stores try and cheat people out of their money in town.
Quote from: beejazz;387071In my last session, players looted a tomb with lots and lots of treasure. There was enough that they each took all the gold they could carry. I need to figure out how much that's worth before today's game. Please help me out. I'll post more about this campaign in the actual play forum later.
Historical coinage is quite small. My uncle gave my dad a coin collection before he died and he had some silver coinage from different eras (Persian, Greek, and 13th century England) Basically they are about the size of a United States Dime.
250 to 200 per lb is historically accurate. The largest coins were about 1 oz (16 per pound) but not commonly used. Wikipedia has several good articles on coins of various eras and their weights. Above that you are talking precious metal in bar form.
Older editions of D&D use 10 per lb which is silly.
Quote from: estar;387078Older editions of D&D use 10 per lb which is silly.
In terms of pure weight, yes. However, older editions of D&D also said that Encumbrance is not only weight, but also volume and just ease of carrying in general. Case in point, you probably can't just cram your pockets and backpacks full of small, relatively heavy coins, since much of it would spill as soon as you started moving. You'd need purses and money bags, but those in turn also have their problems: you can't just hang an unlimited number of small heavy sacks on your belt, as anyone who wears belts regularly will tell you.
Quote from: Premier;387079In terms of pure weight, yes. However, older editions of D&D also said that Encumbrance is not only weight, but also volume and just ease of carrying in general. Case in point, you probably can't just cram your pockets and backpacks full of small, relatively heavy coins, since much of it would spill as soon as you started moving. You'd need purses and money bags, but those in turn also have their problems: you can't just hang an unlimited number of small heavy sacks on your belt, as anyone who wears belts regularly will tell you.
10 per lb of encumbrance is still silly. I played NERO LARP for over a decade and their coins are about quarter size. It is trivial to carry 100 to 200 coins which in older editions of D&D is 10 to 20 pounds. The older editions are off by a least a factor of 10 if not more.
It is my opinion it is a dick rule born of frustration to check what Gygax felt was the abuse of carrying large amount of treasure out of the dungeon. In this case it went too far on the punitive side. It not like the first time this happened in when people DM and Gygax is human like the rest of us. In this case Gygax gets it wrong.
Basically regardless what you actually use for encumbrance I find players generally don't carry more than 5 lbs worth of treasure as a rule. Any more then it starts messing up their existing item scheme and they find alternatives to getting it out.
The difference is between 50 coins and 1,250 coins. The added weight doesn't help in the really big hauls. You still need to get mules to haul the bulk of it out.
Coins in 3.5 are 1oz each.
estar is right, 10 per pound is a ridiculous limit. Part of the whole point of money is that it's supposed to be highly portable. As to the OP, why not just give as much as you're comfortable giving? If they're able take more than you're comfortable with, you're just going to "cheat" them out of it, right? Why present them with the illusion of more reward than you're actually willing to give?
Give them all there is.
Having that much gold will attract others just like them. :eek:
Having enough money is a blessing. Having too much is a curse.
=
Quote from: two_fishesAs to the OP, why not just give as much as you're comfortable giving? If they're able take more than you're comfortable with, you're just going to "cheat" them out of it, right? Why present them with the illusion of more reward than you're actually willing to give?
I'd never cheat my players out of what they've rightfully stolen, and they earned the shit out of that gold too.
The shopkeepers who hear about a party coming to town with bags and bags of gold on the other hand... they might have ridiculous prices, shell games, and bogus "investments" for the party.
Part of the reason I gave 'em a shot at such a good haul so early on is because I don't do this often, and players in my games tend to get mostly mundane loot and oil of slipperiness type items. So one exceptional haul won't hurt things so much.
Quote from: Greentongue;387093Give them all there is.
Having that much gold will attract others just like them. :eek:
Having enough money is a blessing. Having too much is a curse.
=
This was also part of the plan. Bandits and muggers and such. Enough money and a good town and an adventure takes care of itself.
Quote from: estar;38708210 per lb of encumbrance is still silly. I played NERO LARP for over a decade and their coins are about quarter size. It is trivial to carry 100 to 200 coins which in older editions of D&D is 10 to 20 pounds. The older editions are off by a least a factor of 10 if not more.
It is my opinion it is a dick rule born of frustration to check what Gygax felt was the abuse of carrying large amount of treasure out of the dungeon. In this case it went too far on the punitive side. It not like the first time this happened in when people DM and Gygax is human like the rest of us. In this case Gygax gets it wrong.
Basically regardless what you actually use for encumbrance I find players generally don't carry more than 5 lbs worth of treasure as a rule. Any more then it starts messing up their existing item scheme and they find alternatives to getting it out.
The difference is between 50 coins and 1,250 coins. The added weight doesn't help in the really big hauls. You still need to get mules to haul the bulk of it out.
I never found it to be a dick rule so much as an easy one. Nor did I percieve him as getting it 'wrong', so much as trying to make it very simple. I still use a variant years and years later (though about 20 years ago I made my smaller coins the size of half-dollars, for this very reason),
however, I totally agree that the amount a person can carry with them has a finite limit that is low enough that without aid, it shouldn't be able to break the system (depending on the economy of the area).
A really large haul requires advance planning and logistics, which I enjoy, but many players do not.
Quote from: LordVreeg;387110I never found it to be a dick rule so much as an easy one. Nor did I percieve him as getting it 'wrong', so much as trying to make it very simple.
A 100 to 1 lb is likewise simple. There no reason a DM would use the 10 to 1 lb unless he got a problem about character hauling treasure out of the dungeon. Even in the 70s research at the public library would have shown that coins were never that big.
With that being said it is not a big deal. Every DM got their "issues" lord knows I never lived down the hunting cow incident when I went too far on the realism side of things using Harnmaster.
I recount the incident here. http://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2008/10/cow-in-attic.html
In a nutshell the players went into the wilderness going from Tashal to Cornanan along the Salt Route. Harnmaster has simple rules to implementing the effect of bad weather. They got caught in days of cold rain and were going to die unless they got food and shelter. They decided to go hunting and I rolled their target prey. All they knew it was a hoofed animal. They rolled badly so it took way longer than it should and when they finally found it. It was a cow
They were not amused.
Quote from: estar;387127A 100 to 1 lb is likewise simple. There no reason a DM would use the 10 to 1 lb unless he got a problem about character hauling treasure out of the dungeon. Even in the 70s research at the public library would have shown that coins were never that big.
With that being said it is not a big deal. Every DM got their "issues" lord knows I never lived down the hunting cow incident when I went too far on the realism side of things using Harnmaster.
I recount the incident here. http://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2008/10/cow-in-attic.html
In a nutshell the players went into the wilderness going from Tashal to Cornanan along the Salt Route. Harnmaster has simple rules to implementing the effect of bad weather. They got caught in days of cold rain and were going to die unless they got food and shelter. They decided to go hunting and I rolled their target prey. All they knew it was a hoofed animal. They rolled badly so it took way longer than it should and when they finally found it. It was a cow
They were not amused.
Pcs and realistic weather rules are rarely on friendly terms. I tend to run games in temperate or colder climes...
"What do you mean, you didn't buy a tent??????"
*sigh*
3.5 Player's Handbook, page 112.
"The standard coin weighs about a third of an ounce (fifty to the pound). It is the exact size of the coin pictured in the illustration on page 168".
Don't forget the PCs may have other equipment they need to carry...e.g. 'allow 5 pounds for clothing' :) Encumberance is pg. 162: a character can push/drag up to 5x their max. load if conditions are right.
The standard coin weighs about a third of an ounce (50 to the pound) according to 3.5/Pathfinder. Of course, you can make the coins smaller and keep prices the same, making gold more valuable. Make the coins bigger and keep prices same, gold is worth less. Play around with prices also, worth changes. In other words, I would more concerned with the worth of gold vs weight INHO.
Quote from: beejazz;387094I'd never cheat my players out of what they've rightfully stolen, and they earned the shit out of that gold too.
It's not cheating to set more adventurers on them.
Let's face it, if
your party of adventurers heard, "There's this bunch of guys who just looted a tomb, they're tossing gold around and are drunk half the time," what would
your party start thinking about doing? :)
Yeah, I'm happy to take back my initial comment :) If part of the point of getting a huge pile of gold is to generate more adventure and fun, that's cool. I just react badly in general to the idea of giving something with one hand the with the full intent of snatching it away with the other, which is how I read the OP.
I read the OP as a simple enquiry about what was physically possible, or possible within the rules.
Leaving treasure behind can generate further adventures, too. You might want to go back for it, maybe someone else got there before you and now you'll have to chase them, or there were some surviving original inhabitants who are now better-prepared with traps, tactics and so on. Or maybe what you left behind turns out to be more valuable than you thought. If nothing else, the stuff you left could be covering a secret door into another level of the dungeon ;)
My only problem with lots of treasure is when the player says, "now my character retires!" Mate, if you didn't enjoy the session, just say so. No need to wuss out that way.
Quote from: beejazz;387071In my last session, players looted a tomb with lots and lots of treasure. There was enough that they each took all the gold they could carry. I need to figure out how much that's worth before today's game. Please help me out. I'll post more about this campaign in the actual play forum later.
I think the first physical limit to them would be the carrying capacity of backpacks, sacks, purses and the like. Very rarely the players think about that when outfitting their PCs, so, in order to take out all the treasure, probably they shall have to leave some or all their gear (but the weapons and armor) behind. Think of it, and check the PC sheets to find out how many carrying space can they really afford.
Second limit would be the weight of the treasure. I agree with estar, 10 coins/pound sounds idiotic to me. Coin was easily portable, so unless there's a really enormous amount of it (and if I was one of your players I would only bother with high value coin, like gold, silver and the like) they should be able to physically carry that much weight. Of course, you should use the encumbrance rules your game has. Which game was it, by the way?
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;387257I read the OP as a simple enquiry about what was physically possible, or possible within the rules.
Leaving treasure behind can generate further adventures, too. You might want to go back for it, maybe someone else got there before you and now you'll have to chase them, or there were some surviving original inhabitants who are now better-prepared with traps, tactics and so on. Or maybe what you left behind turns out to be more valuable than you thought. If nothing else, the stuff you left could be covering a secret door into another level of the dungeon ;)
My only problem with lots of treasure is when the player says, "now my character retires!" Mate, if you didn't enjoy the session, just say so. No need to wuss out that way.
If I'm running a character who wants to get rich, I'm probably going to retire him as soon as he does. Then, I'll roll up another one.
Quote from: Imperator;387280Coin was easily portable, so unless there's a really enormous amount of it (and if I was one of your players I would only bother with high value coin, like gold, silver and the like) they should be able to physically carry that much weight.
Sure, but it's a bit clumsy and noisy. I mean, who here keeps their spare change and puts in a jar or something? Then you have to take it down to the bank. $40 or $50 in sub-$1 coins is a bit jingly. I wouldn't want to be carrying it around every day. It may be only a kilogram or so, if that, but it's still a pain.
Of course adventurers are made of sterner stuff. They happily walk across hundreds of miles of untracked wilderness munching on their iron rations with stinging wounds hastily stitched by their unskilled fellows, wearing the same clothes for months on end... :)
Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;387085Coins in 3.5 are 1oz each.
No. No they are not. A coin in 3.5 D&D is 1/50th of a pound. A little less than 1/3 of an ounce. Almost exactly 9 grams. A copper piece is thus 1.0123 cubic centimeters, A silver piece is thus 0.8638 cubic cenimeters, and a gold piece is 0.4581 cubic centimeters. For comparison, a penny has a volume of 0.36 cubic centimeters.
Since 3.5 D&D usually keeps track of wealth in 1000 gp increments, it is useful to know that each one of those is 20 pounds. Also that such a pile of currency almost exactly fills a pint glass.
-Frank
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;387287Sure, but it's a bit clumsy and noisy. I mean, who here keeps their spare change and puts in a jar or something? Then you have to take it down to the bank. $40 or $50 in sub-$1 coins is a bit jingly. I wouldn't want to be carrying it around every day. It may be only a kilogram or so, if that, but it's still a pain.
Of course adventurers are made of sterner stuff. They happily walk across hundreds of miles of untracked wilderness munching on their iron rations with stinging wounds hastily stitched by their unskilled fellows, wearing the same clothes for months on end... :)
...Hence the popularity of the spellcasting classes. It's not Cosmic Power; it's Prestidigitation!
Quote from: Narf the Mouse;387282If I'm running a character who wants to get rich, I'm probably going to retire him as soon as he does. Then, I'll roll up another one.
yeah, I have some Uber roleplayers...one of them on an IRC game just took his share from an adventureand is putting a large downpayment on a specialty winery/Inn. We actually have a name for characters who totally move away from the adventure path, called 'remote characters', so named because often players will control them remotely on email, doing basic stuff, so they remain in the game as a feature of that area.
Because, as Narf mentioned, when a character's goal revolves around wealth and what they will do with it, there becomes something of a threshold as to how much is enough.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;387287Sure, but it's a bit clumsy and noisy. I mean, who here keeps their spare change and puts in a jar or something? Then you have to take it down to the bank. $40 or $50 in sub-$1 coins is a bit jingly. I wouldn't want to be carrying it around every day. It may be only a kilogram or so, if that, but it's still a pain.
Of course adventurers are made of sterner stuff. They happily walk across hundreds of miles of untracked wilderness munching on their iron rations with stinging wounds hastily stitched by their unskilled fellows, wearing the same clothes for months on end... :)
Oh of course is clumsy and noisy, but that's entirely a different problem. I'm assuming that stealth & grace are not a concern here.
Quote from: LordVreeg;387297yeah, I have some Uber roleplayers...one of them on an IRC game just took his share from an adventureand is putting a large downpayment on a specialty winery/Inn. We actually have a name for characters who totally move away from the adventure path, called 'remote characters', so named because often players will control them remotely on email, doing basic stuff, so they remain in the game as a feature of that area.
Because, as Narf mentioned, when a character's goal revolves around wealth and what they will do with it, there becomes something of a threshold as to how much is enough.
It's more that my characters aren't just vehicles for gathering loot and XP. ;)
I think the rules you want are online here:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/wealthAndMoney.htm (the weight of coins)
But I would have thought that how much weight they can heft wouldn't be the limiting factor. It'd be what they had to put the coins in: backpacks, bag, cart...?