I noticed that in rpg's only dnd has standarized rewards in the form of monster xp and treasure types. Treasure types for monster include ofcourse actual items valued in gp and magic items. This is true even in od&d. Even dnd emulating games like Dungeon fantasy (GURPS) and Classic fantasy (Mythras) dont have that, though Mythras does have treasure tables for Monsters.
Do any other games have this?
Do you like this stadarization of rewards?
Personally I like having standard rewards, even if 3rd and 4th edition maybe went too far with Wealth by level. Now I am having trouble describing why I like this and its not like I have ever completely followed these stadarized rewards, but I think they give me a sense of context and scale of the game, while other games are in a sense too fluid for my taste.
Quote from: Malfi;1036142Do any other games have this?
Some D&D-like games do.
Quote from: Malfi;1036142Do you like this stadarization of rewards?
I usually dislike standard treasure because it contradicts my desire for things to make sense. I want things to be how they are in a game world for some sort of self-consistent reason, and I don't think it makes sense that all creatures of a type would always have a certain range of valuables to take. That is, it seems to me that how much loot something has would depend on its history in its location and vary widely by circumstances, and not be a standardized prize for looters based mainly on what it is.
That said, I don't mind some guidelines, as long as the GM has clearly in mind that it would really mostly vary entirely based on the history of the individual.
Quote from: Skarg;1036157Some D&D-like games do.
The only ones I know of are pathfinder and osr clones.
Quote from: Skarg;1036157I usually dislike standard treasure because it contradicts my desire for things to make sense. I want things to be how they are in a game world for some sort of self-consistent reason, and I don't think it makes sense that all creatures of a type would always have a certain range of valuables to take. That is, it seems to me that how much loot something has would depend on its history in its location and vary widely by circumstances, and not be a standardized prize for looters based mainly on what it is.
That said, I don't mind some guidelines, as long as the GM has clearly in mind that it would really mostly vary entirely based on the history of the individual.
I guess it makes some sense that more powerful creatures will have better treasure. Also the guidelines give me some sense of what exists/fits in the world. I agree with the rest though.
Quote from: Malfi;1036142Do any other games have this?
If you include computer games, there are tons of games where the dominant advancement metric is xp for opponents defeated. Plenty of games like GURPS, Hero System/Champions, WEG Star Wars, and the White Wolf/Storyteller system have a pretty broad system in theory that mostly ends up being something along the lines of "you get one point if you show up for the session, two if you 'do well.'"
QuoteDo you like this stadarization[sic] of rewards?
Regarding xp:
GM fiat rewards would tend to incentivize playing to how the GM thinks the game should go, having a pre-defined metric is an I find it is an elegant solution to that problem. The downside is that pre-defined metrics work best in purpose-driven games (old school D&D are
'about' going into dungeons and pulling out treasure, so rewarding xp for gold dragged out of dungeon makes sense, modern D&D is
'about' defeating monsters, so a combat xp reward makes sense). Neither really allows for something like the LotR story of Frodo and Sam, where they are ignoring any potential treasure and trying to avoid combat so as to instead complete a specific mission
Regarding treasure tables and the like:
The non-magic item part of the treasure table is just an introduction of variety (two opponents with the same treasure types will still end up with different gp-value of treasure, bearing different encumbrances based on wealth-density). Other than verisimilitude, variety just is (it'll all even out in the end over many sessions anyways). The magic item part is... well, no different than other games (in Traveller if you defeat pirates, you get their stuff, unless it got destroyed in the fight). Again, randomness just is, it's neither positive nor negative excepting verisimilitude.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1036250If you include computer games, there are tons of games where the dominant advancement metric is xp for opponents defeated. Plenty of games like GURPS, Hero System/Champions, WEG Star Wars, and the White Wolf/Storyteller system have a pretty broad system in theory that mostly ends up being something along the lines of "you get one point if you show up for the session, two if you 'do well.'"
I am not talking about computer games. Though this is a very interesting subject especially how much common tropes in video games taken from dnd have in turn
made dndish things like hit points widely acceptable and popular.
The other systems you describe have a very different system, than the one I am talking about. Granted you could call it standarized in a sense, so maybe my choice of words is wrong.
Maybe standarized rewards gained from specific results in the game would be more precise?
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1036250Regarding treasure tables and the like:
The non-magic item part of the treasure table is just an introduction of variety (two opponents with the same treasure types will still end up with different gp-value of treasure, bearing different encumbrances based on wealth-density). Other than verisimilitude, variety just is (it'll all even out in the end over many sessions anyways). The magic item part is... well, no different than other games (in Traveller if you defeat pirates, you get their stuff, unless it got destroyed in the fight). Again, randomness just is, it's neither positive nor negative excepting verisimilitude.
Its not just variety though, since certain creatures, usually the stronger ones have a higher chance of having better treasure.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1036250If you include computer games, there are tons of games where the dominant advancement metric is xp for opponents defeated. Plenty of games like GURPS, Hero System/Champions, WEG Star Wars, and the White Wolf/Storyteller system have a pretty broad system in theory that mostly ends up being something along the lines of "you get one point if you show up for the session, two if you 'do well.'"
I am not talking about computer games. Though this is a very interesting subject especially how much common tropes in video games taken from dnd have in turn
made dndish things like hit points widely acceptable and popular.
The other systems you describe have a very different system, than the one I am talking about. Granted you could call it standarized in a sense, so maybe my choice of words is wrong.
Maybe standarized rewards gained from specific in-game results would be more precise?
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1036250Regarding treasure tables and the like:
The non-magic item part of the treasure table is just an introduction of variety (two opponents with the same treasure types will still end up with different gp-value of treasure, bearing different encumbrances based on wealth-density). Other than verisimilitude, variety just is (it'll all even out in the end over many sessions anyways). The magic item part is... well, no different than other games (in Traveller if you defeat pirates, you get their stuff, unless it got destroyed in the fight). Again, randomness just is, it's neither positive nor negative excepting verisimilitude.
Its not just variety though, since certain creatures, usually the stronger ones have a higher chance of having better treasure.
I like random treasre tables because they make the world feel more independent.
If a PC gets lucky, they might just find a small gem on a kobold. Or they might find a half eaten rat. Either way, fate decides, rather than the GM.
Quote from: Psikerlord;1036584I like random treasre tables because they make the world feel more independent.
If a PC gets lucky, they might just find a small gem on a kobold. Or they might find a half eaten rat. Either way, fate decides, rather than the GM.
I use both, just like the rulebooks say!
I'll place some picked treasure, some random treasure and some semi-random (ex. this guy has a potion, I don't care exactly which one)
D&D is about the only system that I can recall having a treasure type assigned to encounters.
Note that usually the treasure was meant for a lair and you only got pocket change if even that from wandering monsters. Varied on a case by case basis.
Several though have suggestions for stuff to find on encounters. But D&D is possibly the only one to extensively assign certain spreads of treasure types to individual types of monsters.
Personally I like that as it gives a DM a base idea of what a monster might have. Most other RPGs require the DM to wing it.
And on an interesting note. In Dragon Storm the players had a chance to determine what was found. If you had an item card then after an encounter you could ask the GM if you found that item? If the GM said yes then you could add it to your inventory.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1036587I use both, just like the rulebooks say!
I'll place some picked treasure, some random treasure and some semi-random (ex. this guy has a potion, I don't care exactly which one)
yes true me too
Quote from: Omega;1036614And on an interesting note. In Dragon Storm the players had a chance to determine what was found. If you had an item card then after an encounter you could ask the GM if you found that item? If the GM said yes then you could add it to your inventory.
Oh that is very interesting! I'm gonna have to check that out
Quote from: Malfi;1036142I noticed that in rpg's only dnd has standarized rewards in the form of monster xp and treasure types. Treasure types for monster include ofcourse actual items valued in gp and magic items. This is true even in od&d. Even dnd emulating games like Dungeon fantasy (GURPS) and Classic fantasy (Mythras) dont have that, though Mythras does have treasure tables for Monsters.
Do any other games have this?
Do you like this stadarization of rewards?
Personally I like having standard rewards, even if 3rd and 4th edition maybe went too far with Wealth by level. Now I am having trouble describing why I like this and its not like I have ever completely followed these stadarized rewards, but I think they give me a sense of context and scale of the game, while other games are in a sense too fluid for my taste.
Well, Lion & Dragon doesn't have any kind of standardized rewards, as such. Characters don't gain the same bonuses when they level up. They don't get xp for killing monsters or obtaining treasure, just for 'completed adventures' regardless of the threat level. Treasure is mostly random.