Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Content

One of the incredible privileges of working on this project is getting to look at all our assumptions (or, as many as we’re aware of at least), everything we inherit from our history as roleplayers and ask “why do we do it this way?” “What other ways are there to do this?” And “What is the best thing for this game?”

Hey folks, Matt Colville here! The core gameplay loop appears to be settling down which means we can build out the rest of the game, which James is working on now! This includes…well, everything except fighting monsters. We think stuff like…Renown might and should matter. What about Social Station? Can you decide to start the game as a noble? Could you…become a noble later?

Renown is probably real, ‘social station’ I was just using as an example. We’ll see if it matters in this game. It’ll probably be something you can choose as an option.

But something that comes up over and over is…money. How much do you start with? What can you do with it? How much do you earn adventuring? 

This led to a patented MCDM “What Is The Purpose Of This?” meeting where James and I get into a discord call and talk about, in this instance, Wealth in RPGs. What’s it for? How do other games deal with it? How should we deal with it?

Wealth touches a lot of different things. Can you…buy a castle? Pay to have a castle built for you? Hire a retainer? Buy potions of healing. Are there magic shops in the world? So it’s another one of those features where depending on which thread you pull, it unravels in different ways.

The two main tensions we grappled with were;

Treasure hordes seem like a pretty classic part of fantasy gaming.

And

Heroes don’t really worry about gold. 

You can see the problem. 😀

Back in the 1970s, that first RPG…it didn’t model anything. There was no fiction you could point at and say “It’s like that.” You could sort of point to Conan or Fafhrd and say “Like that” but even then, it’s a pretty rough approximation. I read those original Conan stories (I liked them!) and while there’s a ton of cool stuff in there, I don’t remember Conan ever saying “I need to go on an adventure, because I need another 27 gold to afford a….”

Right? All of us can think of examples in fiction where heroes go into a store to gear up, but these are dramatic scenes. They exist to tell us something about the character, establish some tension, foreshadow something. Those movies or comics or whatever aren’t about the heroes spending money. They aren’t about the money. 

Does that mean our game just doesn't have treasure hoards? Dragons sleeping on giant piles of gold? Would people even notice if they had fun saving the world and leveling up and finding new items, but there were no giant piles of gold?

Maybe. Maybe not. 

Our game takes inspiration from heroic fiction but it is still a game. When we’re brainstorming we bounce back and forth between “are there any examples of this in fiction?” And “how do other games handle this?”

I challenged the idea that gold is really a thing at all in the heroic fiction that inspires us. James and I talked about the Lord of the Rings and he reminded me of that moment in The Hobbit where they find the Troll’s cave where there’s literally chests of gold in the back.

They don’t do anything with it though, they just hide it and agree to grab it on the way back.

But this started me thinking. I wrote my thoughts down in our Discord:

[I]n Middle Earth, money represents power. Greed. No one seems to care what The Lord Of The Rings is about but if it's about anything, it's about the idea that "Power is addictive and no one can be trusted with it."

Before he came up with the idea of the One Ring, he was already thinking about corruption. In the Hobbit it's the corrupting power of Greed. It's not just the Dwarves, almost everyone they meet in The Hobbit shows up at the end to fight over the Dragon's Horde.

Could the point of huge piles of gold in our game be to resist the urge to use it? Is our game heroic only because you fight and defeat monsters? Or might it also be about trying to avoid corruption?

I think it might be a little late in the day to add a moral dimension like this to our game. But that's too bad, because it might really elevate everything. 😄

So, that's probably a dead end, but I'm suspicious of any discussion about Literal Gold where we're not talking about power dynamics. 😄 That's the Marxist in me.

Apart from the larger question of "Do heroes get rich?" A la can there be an ethical billionaire, I wonder what wealth does to progression.

In other words; we know players look forward to Leveling Up, because they get cool new, more powerful options. 

Do they look forward to gaining more wealth? If so, why? Do we imagine players will see their wealth increase and say 'finally I can afford Foo!'?"

This is where my head is at right now. It's not obvious to me players will CARE about increasing their wealth, except in the abstract ("it's nice to have a lot of money"). Maybe they will! But when I think about what players look forward to, I don't see them getting excited because they can finally "afford" something.

Right? In other words; the fiction that inspires us does not feature heroes who track how much money they have so they can afford things. AND the game we’re imagining is not ABOUT “I don’t have enough gold for [thing], we need more loot.”

We absolutely think gear is part of the game, including getting, finding, better gear as you adventure. But is that the same as saying the game is about whether you can afford something? Saving up gold just so you can buy something you’ve coveted? I don’t think it is. 

We want players to be able to make things (crafting) or unlock new lore (research) and there may be a monetary component there? But again, it just seems really weird to imagine your heroes scrimping and saving and hoarding every electrum piece so they can “afford” something. That does not sound like behavior any of us expect players to exhibit.

Having agreed on this, I stepped away from the Discord and just spent some time thinking about the historic use of wealth in RPGs. I am not an expert on these things, I do not study them in an academic environment, but I’ve played a lot of games and been paid to think about game design, so I took a stab at it.

As far as I can tell (and I can hear the sound of people rushing to their keyboards to come up with exceptions and edge cases 😀) there are three basic ways in which wealth is used in RPGs.

Money. The AD&D model where many if not all things in the PHB and DMG had a monetary value associated with them (which causes ENORMOUS debates. Axe of the Dwarvish Lords? 55,000gp! That’s how much you could sell one for, does that mean therefore you could BUY one for some multiple thereof? Presumably, if there are buyers, there’s a market. Much ink was spilt trying to explain away that reasoning). We don’t think this is our game. Really, the only games I’ve ever played that used money this way were various incarnations of or responses to AD&D.

Buying The Gear That Defines Your Character. This is another popular use of money in RPGs. Lots of games I’ve played and enjoyed used money this way. These are usually skill-based games (as opposed to class-based) and your character's special abilities all come from their gear. These games usually have what is effectively a catalog in them somewhere, featuring all these cool things you can buy, each with some dope ability. All the cyberpunk games work this way. Ooh I can get bionic eyeballs! Ooh a better deck to hack with! Ooh look at this dope-ass motorcycle!

Most science fiction RPGs work like this, including Star Wars! Prices effectively act as level constraints. A Blue Star Plasma Rifle costs 935,000 credits, so you can’t afford one until you’ve adventured long enough to earn that kind of dough, which is mechanically equivalent to saying “at level 13 you can choose a….” 

Rarely do you “level up” in these kinds of games. Experience points are spent to improve skills and buy other character perks, and you earn money doing jobs (usually “contracts”) and buy cool equipment that gives your hero the kinds of special abilities magic weapons or spells, or class abilities or feats grant in a d20 Fantasy game.

I like games like this a lot! But I don’t think that’s our game. Luke never says “I just need to do one more job and I can afford….” He just sells his landspeeder to buy passage offworld and complains about it. So it’s clear the world of Star Wars cares about money, but the heroes of that 1977 movie are not mercenaries, completing contracts so they can afford a bigger ship. I think it’s true that all Star Wars RPGs assume the players want to play what are essentially Traveller characters in the world of Star Wars, rather than Fairy Tale heroes (literally a princess, a farmer, a wizard, and a scoundrel) overthrowing the Evil Empire as we see in the movie Star Wars. It might be an interesting exercise to imagine what a “Star Wars RPG” would look like if you assumed the players wanted to actually invent and play heroes like we saw in that movie, doing the things the heroes in that movie did. It would probably look a lot like FGU’s Flash Gordon & the Warriors of Mongo from (perhaps not coincidentally) 1977.

Character Perk: Rich. This is the last way I can think of that money is used in RPGs. You can, in character creation, just decide your hero is Rich. Games like this usually give you some number of points to spend on perks, and “Wealthy” or “Rich” is just another one. Most Superhero games work like this. Tony Stark doesn’t go out adventuring in order to find piles of cash so he can save up and buy another suit of Iron Man armor. He just is rich. He’s rich as soon as we meet him! In fact, it’s reasonable to say it is a defining character trait. It informs how he behaves more than having any mechanical benefit in the movies or comics. He never solves a problem by spending money.

In games like this, wealth just acts as a key to certain locks, and gives the player a lot of fun playing through the power-fantasy of having money. It’s fun to tell the Director “I buy the hotel.” For players raised exclusively in a D20 Fantasy environment, especially those editions where you could just BUY magic items? This is a pretty challenging idea. They assume IF their hero has gobs of money, they can go buy a magic carpet or a holy avenger.

But Superhero games don’t work that way. There IS no catalog of gear or items to buy. Everything cool your hero can do is a “power” that you create. And mostly the only thing to DO in superhero games? Is fight other superheroes. Much like d20 Fantasy “fighting monsters” games. 

So that’s the trick! Money in these games doesn’t mean anything because there are no magic items to buy, no bionic implants to purchase. If your character has Bionic Legs? That’s because you bought them with Character Points during Character Creation. That’s the ONLY way to get Bionic Legs in a superhero game!

SINCE money doesn’t unlock ANY mechanical boons…you as the Director are free to just give it away! All it does is let that player “act rich.” Enjoy the fantasy of being rich. When I ran Birthright (my favorite AD&D setting) I thought it would be fun to let the Wizard player inherit a literal fortune from their mentor at level 1. They were amazed! They assumed starting at level one with millions of gold pieces would break the game!

But there were no “magick shoppes” in my version of Birthright. His character had no ambitions that money could satisfy except, free spell components? Sure! Go crazy! 

The reality is, in games like this, the problems the heroes face cannot be solved with money in the first place. You can’t bribe Orcus, or Khan, or Darth Vader. The player enjoys a brief period where they splurge and buy an apartment in the city or whatever, hire some staff. But this lasts only a fraction of a session after which they just get to “act rich.”

Again, like Tony Stark, “wealthy” just becomes a character trait. It doesn’t mean they can just bribe the guards. The guards might not be bribable! But it lets them play a character who might try it, since money means so little to them. 

And, even for the Director, it’s fun to let the players spend a lot of money on something to show off.

Is this how money works in our game? Well…it seems like the most appropriate option! Money won’t help you defeat Ajax, though it might help you buy your way into the kinds of meetings where you could use Negotiation to get some allies! 

Will there be dragons sleeping on piles of gold in this game? I don’t think so. If so, it’s because the director thought it would be a fun way to give the heroes the “Wealthy” trait. There should be rewards for defeating monsters; XP, Magic Items, Lore, etc….

But is this a game about your hero scrimping and saving every copper piece so they can afford a cloak of elvenkind? Is that what heroes are about?

We don’t think so.

So, how does this manifest itself in the actual rules? I’m not sure, James may already have some idea, but under this model it would be a choice you make during character creation. One option from a list. Choosing “wealthy” means you don’t get to choose some other option. And it mostly just acts as a roleplaying hook for your character. It’s cosmetic. 

A character like Tony Stark actually probably uses his Fame rating more often than his Wealth perk anyway. 😀

Thanks for reading folks, until next time…

Peace, out!

Comments

justin powell

A few thoughts upon first read: 1. If wealthy is only an option to select at character creation, that prevents characters from attaining the wealthy status if they don't start with it. This also prevents wealthy characters from being downgraded to non wealthy. 2. While I don't think scraping together every copper for common armor/gear is part of the heroic fantasy, saving up for a base of operations or vehicle is quite fun, especially if it is a newly built tower or airship so you can customize for your party's needs. I understand that the player and Director can work together to design these things as quest/renown rewards, but it isn't the same feel as finally being able to custom order that amazing kit or weapon or Stronghold.

Andrew Phillips

Great read, wealth has been tricky for me as a GM, most of the time it's assumed heroes can afford whatever they're looking for as long as it's not a magic item. Party wealth levels or tying it to renown (assumed certain level of reputation leads to sponsorships) could be interesting -- at level 1 wealth you can afford (arrows, food, etc.), level 2 you can afford.. and so on to a level that you can get a keep/ship. Looking forward to seeing how you all solve this!

Stef Linson

To me, focusing material desires on components or rare resources (aka crafting materials) feels like something a lot more adventurous than just getting money. Big fan of the concepts shared here!

Cassidy

I think part of the challenge is that wealth and money is specific to the culture in which it is used. I ran a game in which armor and weapons were distributed by military rank, basic needs were met by the town and you were expected to work in one of a set of factions. Another culture that is more akin to capitalism might require a rigid wealth mechanic. My gut tells me that money=power is the right way to think about it. Does a king need to buy bread from the market? No. Neither does the 8 foot tall half-orc with a great sword casually slung over their shoulder. Neither does a thief that can grab a loaf unseen. Interested to see how this works out.

Gerald Duncan

In the game I run right now, money is almost exclusively for improving amy units and strongholds. Sometimes my players seek out scribes or alchemists and trade money for expendable resources. If the RPG didn't have warfare or strongholds I would hack it in, but I may not do the same for scrolls and potions. I might instead go the route "You go to the temple and you can negotiate stuff. They might give you X stuff just because your arguments are good, and they could also give you Y stuff if you do them a favour." Even in Army units or strongholds I could imagine ways to replace money; An operations test to scrounge up the equipment to upgrade units seems like a plenty fine system, as is tying stronghold progression to adventures, eg. "This adventure took 3 weeks and then you had downtime for 2 months, so your stronghold increased in size during that time" or "You sacked the enemy keep and discovered his stockpile with which you can upgrade your stronghold." All this to say that I agree that Heroic Fantasy doesn't need money and we may be better off without it.

Schoopdoop McGoop

"What is wealth for?" fantastic question to ask and a fantastic answer.

Malty Martin

Maybe a riff off of the new rogue traders wealth system? Its far from perfect, but rather than tracking gold, they just had tiers of wealth that paired with renown with certain groups to make items and things accessible. I know you stated earlier that you are not making a dungeon crawler, but I have run plenty of super creative solutions to complex problems based on small purchases from a general store. McGiver was a hero after all. The flip side you run into is having a character in the game with magic pockets that always has the perfect item to remove tension, even if they never actually thought to get that untill the problem arose. So a different question I guess. Do we have an inventory? At least of mundane items? Just more questions for a likely already huge list :)

Jesse

Great post! For me, the primary use for wealth I can see in a trpg is in creating and bolstering a "home base" of some kind - having a place you can invest time and money into to be secure, to rest, to improve downtown options, etc ...

Dayten Rose

This EXACTLY describes those awkward conversations you have after defeating the villain of the adventure and accessing their hoard of wealth and then like... discussing if it's ethical to take some because it was stolen from the locals. It's so clear that the wealth is just there because "villains have piles of gold" is an artifact of D&D. Great read!

Kyman201

I'll chime in to echo that as of late I've kinda lost interest in games that want you to track every gold piece in the game for all kinds of services.

Evan Miller

from my recollection, a big reason the AD&D items had gold values was because how much gold you brought back was how much XP you got. since we aren't doing that it makes plenty of sense to not use that system. Wealth as a tool of roleplaying or potentially negotiating (both as a pitfall or an interest) could hold some use. In most heroic D&D games I play in when it comes to spending gold on the mundane like a place to sleep, food, etc I usually don't even track it, and as a DM I don't require my players to track it. You either roleplay being generous or being a miser or being normal. Whether you tip or not, if you haggle over little things those are roleplaying not resource management. Same with one of my players owes 10,000 gold in gambling debt to the halfling mafia, and tony two scoops gelato (my favorite halfling mafia boss I have used in multiple games) intends to collect. This is once again for use as a plot hook, or roleplaying or giving some driving reason the character adventures. The amount isn't really important the idea is that he owes a lot of money the kind you cannot repay doing a normal day job. I think for this heroic game it makes a lot of sense not to worry about precise money, but we might want to still think about if we want to use some things from strong holds and followers or kingdoms and warfare. So I would like to point our marxist friend to austrian economics. A school of economics that I learned about while getting my Econ degree, they are a rare math lite Econ group and one of the concepts they have is when discussing supply and demand rather than talking about a precise unit, the unit is how much you need to do the next thing down on your list. If we are talking of money as a resource it would go like this I have enough money to afford food next unit of money I have enough money to also get basic shelter next unit of money I can afford to upgrade my shelter next unit of money I can now do the next thing on my list of what I would do with money. My thought from this is mostly the idea of hey yeah we have enough resource to afford to hire three merc squads to help us with this battle. It could easily be represented by a point pool like we do for miniature war games to abstract it, rather than saying like in strong holds and followers that I need 500 gold a season to keep these extra troops on hand.

Sasha van Katwyk

My group has played a couple different systems, and we've found that in all of them we end up treating wealth as something one gradually gains (without really needing to be explicitly tracked) commensurate with the scope of the party's ambitions. At low level, it is fun to not be able to afford enough supplies. But as the scope of the challenges facing us goes up, we seem to naturally find ourselves agreeing what we should be able to afford. We ended up implementing a version of a treasury die out of fear we would get carried away without it, but it ended up being basically a party-wealth tracker that escalated every time we completed an adventure. Which had a cool effect that when we were updating the party sheet, we would discuss what kinds of things that were now "affordable" and the party would get excited talking about it. ("If we could buy a country estate with this treasury, then we probably have enough to bribe a noble!") It inspired the party to have new ambitions for what the next chapter in their adventure could be. And best of all, none of us when we're the GM have had to make up a price of something. That's what works for us, but I can appreciate that may be an example of exceptional table harmony that can't be presumed at other tables.

Evan Miller

I guess I am also saying that the only direct use of gold in a game like this would be for if your character is running a country/fighting wars/upgrading a strong hold, and in all of those cases it is not hard to build a tool of abstraction that is not reliant on an actual amount of gold

Pedroig

In a way, seems like Wealthy or Squalid would simply be titles one "earns" and could lose. Maybe getting some sort of mechanical "perk" to go with them, like a bonus to certain interactions with certain people (Wealthy to mingle with the elite, Squalid to mix in with the urchins) Wealth in d20 Modern seemed to work well, overall. Same basic "essence" being described here multiple times.

Jan Plewa

So gold is tell, don't show ;)

Roxie

I think wealth for a character isn't necessarily part of the fantasy, but the wealth of a party definitely could be, especially if that party is some form of organization. I think a lot of the bigger picture stuff like keeps and management definitely include costs as a part of that. Specific costs? no, but costs nonetheless. Wealth feels just as important as a side objective as crafting or research. I believe, while not adding to the character, adds to the group's fantasy as something in the background!

Joe Auerbach

I really like this. It reminds me a bit of how wealth works (or is supposed to work) is many larps. You're rich. Great. That can help. You can buy neat stuff. But it doesn't solve your problems, it just flavors the way you deal with them.

MattBOrange

You answered the question pretty early on, players only care about wealth if there are cool things to buy. I would rather see a game with that big cool equipment list to drool over (didn't you say the magic items should be in the PHB?). This is something that works really well in BG3, you have a hugely customizable class system for your hero, AND there are a huge number of magic items to find while adventuring. There's also plenty of gear to buy with cash, especially consumables, but the best stuff requires exploration.

Oakwoody

In Renaissance times, wealthy patrons provided for their clients who didn't really have concern themselves with money. One could envision patronage as a device for making wealth a non-factor.

GM Seven

I like the way blades in the dark uses "coin" as a way of advancing -some- parts of your character sheet and crew sheet, buy TIME, relieve stress, and it's an end-game goal. Obviously that doesn't fit this game, but it is interesting to think about how money can by abstract things like time and mental health (via avoiding the stresses of poverty). I could see adventurers using wealth to buy abstract things like trust or respect.

Paul

I've played games where money is essentially useless and others where you are counting every copper pieces. Definitely different experiences but both have their own place.

Alex Bakker

I've always felt that wealth was really just "time". e.g. you pay for someone to do something instead of you doing it. A lot of what Matt wrote is right, but it kinda is a "products" centric view of money, instead of services. As a party, maybe the mechanic is the ability to either negotiate or outsource parts of a quest? the idea that maybe at a high level, with more wealth, you could have a retainer go gather the flowers in the forest while you try to recover the magical decanter from the tomb seems nice. Wealth could be like an active anti-slog mechanic.

Caleb Fasnacht

Wealth is such a weird trait in game design. It feels good to be rich. It can also be really fun to be poor and need to clever your way around not having money. I'm excited to see how y'all handle this in the actual rules 🥰

Roman Penna

Really interesting design space, that I feel is one of the most difficult. I like when gold or money is used to level up personally or help you level up (like the FITD games) but that's not this game and I'm excited to see where the design goes

Tyun

I’m a little worried that this wealth system seems static and binary Static in the sense that wealth is something you decide at character creation - that seems strange when “I want to get rich so I can achieve X goal” is such a common fantasy. Defeating the dragon should have *some* effect on your wealth And binary in the sense that you’re either wealthy or not - there should be *some* kind of gradation

ZealousNemesis

I feel like wealth is a totally slept on dramatic tool. Not because you want it, but because without it you lose the things that are important to you. It ratchets up the tension. If we lose this contract, we can pay our mercenaries. If we lose our mercenaries, we can’t stop Lord Saxton. In the 2011 movie Warrior, the main character’s way of life depends him winning the lucrative prize of an MMA tournament. When it gets tough, his friend and trainer drops this bomb on him: “You don’t knock him out, you lose the fight. Understand me? You don’t knock him out, you don’t have a home.” In these cases the wealth is a form of obligation. Instead of a class resource to spend on abilities, it’s an agnostic character/party resource to that unlocks tools for achieving long term ambitions. Or a means of mitigating really bad outcomes. Imagine the fight with Lord Saxton starts going really badly. The director moves Lord Saxton drops the party’s conduit. The party knows a TPK is happening. Then the party’s tactician speaks up: “Saxton! Stop!” The director looks up at the player. He continues “We’ll pay tribute and swear to not stand against you anymore”. The party and the director negotiate how much it will cost to stop the fight: about twice the upkeep of Castle Rend. The units don’t matter. They didn’t save up for this. It’s just a resource the party has at their disposal to affect the game world.

William Rood

Unless you can gain perks along the character path, or perhaps instead of gold piles you get +1 Wealth or whatever, I do not see how a gold-less system would allow those fantasies of street urchin to the king, or how you could eventually build a kingdom from nothing. I love these types of posts though, they very much help me understand game design more.

ZealousNemesis

I really agree with this. Especially the fact that unit of wealth isn’t the point. When I was a player, I wanted to affect the world around me. The strength of an organization is one way, the wealth of the party is another. Paying off a lesser faction to not show up to the boss fight feels way more badass than paying off guards to let your party pass a gate.

ZealousNemesis

I love using patronage like this. It also gives a reason for why the people in power are waiting for the players to take action. I used this as the setup for Jagged Edge Hideaway. “I am working our little goblin problem: I hired *you four* to take care of it. *I* am heading north to deal with the orc raids in the foothills. If I am not here when you get back, you may report to my steward. Now gear up and move out.”

gm_naahz

What I took from this is that you decided the MCDM RPG doesn't need money or wealth, will include a paragraph about how your type of game doesn't need money or wealth, but will still probably have some 'amount' of starting gear that is not priced but instead has some equivalent 'amount' that you are allowed to have as part of your kit. Personally, I'm much more interested in whether you are putting in too many starting classes and getting another round of combat testing to see whether the push/pull mechanics have changed and whether my group will enjoy or not enjoy your idea for tables of damage for each unique ability.

Jeff P

I would love something abstract like "wealth" that you gain in tandem with victory points or something. Once you reach a certain level of wealth, you are able to afford a new tier of equipment. No shopping or counting gold pieces. It's something we see in many games, where progress in the story and character level opens up a new shop or upgrade tier.

Murilo Trigo

The Marxism and power dynamics bit would be so radical in the best ways

Artemis

So how much money do we gotta raise to get the RPG about wealth and corruption? Cuz i really like the sound of that

Steven V. Neiman

Enough to equal the Wealthy perk. I'm not sure how much that is.

Steven V. Neiman

I've never played a ttrpg of the third category, but the one game I ever remember actively enjoying the use of money in was Blades in the Dark. It's kind of a half-step away from the first category in that money is gained and spent, but only big money. The smallest unit of money that's tracked is "about a week's wages for someone of your status", and one of the main things you'll end up spending it on is buying more downtime activities, which is explained by either paying for expensive ways to save time, or taking time off your regular job and living on savings. And in a weird way it did lead to "cool gear comes from cool adventures", because a score that puts you far enough ahead for a big crafting project will probably be a tough one, and even if the step of getting money and converting it to downtime and materials weakens the connection, the crafting system gives it another avenue to make things personal, because every invention in that game is bespoke. Of course, that approach was good for the game it was in, where you play as people desperate for cash and a bespoke crafting system isn't a death sentence to game balance. Neither of those is true of this system, so I definitely don't think it would be a good fit.

FoxTrick

I like a percentage of your horde must be spent during down time. You must live hard and fight hard. May make down time fun and lead to new ideas for adventure. I have bills and collect stuff IRL not on my character sheet.

Wright Johnson

i was surprised you didn’t mention the wealth stat approach. like you have a stat on your sheet that either tells you what your buying power is or modifies a roll to acquire a cool thing you want. it can often fall into the gear category, i suppose, but it feels different enough to me from the way you outlined that approach that i thought it was worth mentioning. i am interested to see how the idea you’re going with right now develops!

soundaxiom

I always struggled a bit with the ideas that the PCs always had access to all of their gold pieces at any given time. The party in the Hobbit left those chests behind cause they’re heavy and they didn’t have a bag of holding or magic coin purse pretty. I like the idea of the “wealthy” trait because Directors are more free to decide “you don’t have 10,000 gold pieces on your person right now, but if you give this orc your word, your people will take care of it”. I could definitely see Renown being equally important as your actual bank balance. I could see a director saying “you don’t have enough renown for the orc to trust your promise to pay them $10k gold” Maybe another unexamined assumption: Is the MCDM RPG going to have a bag of holding/magic coin purse sort of magic item that basically every party needs to keep their cash in?

Eran Arbel

In my last game, as soon as my PCs went into double digit levels, I didn't really care how much money they had and how they spend it. I tossed around numbers and let them do the math. Going forward, I'm only going to look at it as the gatekeeper for better gear. That's what I saw players care about. Especially in the Adventurers' League. Some people took Hand Crossbow as starting equipment only because it was expensive and you could sell it to get more stuff. The Paladin was saving every gold piece to get that proper Plate. I also like gear with properties. But we don't care to manage every coin so I'm thinking about wealth levels or something like how Blades does it. Daggerheart also has an interesting way of managing it. I like just the idea of characters starting out having to camp outside because they can't afford the inn but once they advance enough, they can afford the royal suite. You could look at it like Beggar => Lower Class => Well Off => Affluent => Wealthy => Rich => King(?) and then say "The guard can be bribed but you can't give them that amount unless you're affluent or better.

ZealousNemesis

That’s a really good question. Although, the more I think about it, Bag of Holding seems like an explicit hand wave to bypass the worst parts of inventory management for the party. Given MCDM’s approach to gear and inventory, I don’t think there will be anything like that.

Arthur G. Carlyle, PhD

I love this idea. I've played games in the past that utilise it, and some of my favourite memories are from the possibilities for role-playing it provides.

Lydia Steine Bendiksen

By having research and crafting built into the system, as well as a separate renowned system, you effectively remove the need for the universality we tend to associate with money. Money implies all things are comparable; you *can* trade apples for oranges, at a rate determined by their relative value, but that doesn't mean eating 2.5 apples is as satisfying as eating one orange? Maybe you're allergic! I think sidelining money is a wise decision, even if I suspect it may be unpopular.

Lydia Steine Bendiksen

One way to give money a detectable and heroic function is to do like Robin Hood and give it to the needy. What I mean is that assuming there is some kind of town, or settlement or whatever that the heroes return to to rest, reserch, and level up, the common folk there may become more empowered by the wealth the heroes accumulate. "The dragons I've slain sat upon golden treasures, and yet I am poor... because I am a river to my people!" The heroes don't even need to actually transport the wealth, they can clear out the monster infested tower, and then return to the village like "there is enough gold in that tower to ensure no urchin goes hungry, see that it is done" and next time they come into town they're flocked by cheering kids. Not the power fantasy of wealth, but the heroic fantasy of wealth; solving other peoples problems because you don't need it!

Daniel Dias

Just wanted to say that I love the way you guys write. It clearly shows your personality and I even hear your voices on my head (maybe should get that checked out). I can clearly hear Matt saying: Maybe. Maybe not

Daniel Dias

From hearing they at the streams I actually thought we would get something like that. If you have wealth 5+ you can buy a ship, a castle? You need wealth 7+. You just found a huge hoard, add 2 to your wealth total. So something that still allows for growth throughout the adventure and not just the binary rich or poor

Dave

I mean you can always just replace XP with gold entirely- you want to get better at fighting monsters, you need better gear, elite training from established masters, access to power sources or reagents or ancient tomes, the ear of local nobles who can bestow titles and privileges, hirelings to keep your gear in good shape, etc. It's not scrimping for a cloak of elvenkind, it's "I'm *this close* to level 5, let's do one more fight!" Nothing y'all haven't thought of I'm sure, but it was the first thing that popped into my mind.

Dave

Love this. Or you come back and it's obvious the mayor has hoarded it all and needs to be taken down a peg. Either way, DRAMA.

Tamara

I don’t think gold as XP works with the game’s intent either. It works in more dungeon crawl-y scenarios, where it encourages looting, but I don’t think that’s necessarily the right kind of behavior for the game. Plus I can see how it could end up being a bit restrictive, if progression is tied to money, there’s always gotta be a monetary reward for adventuring.

Dave

Sure. Then you have to figure out why the characters are fighting monsters, aside from "players think fighting monsters is fun". Fighting monsters is dangerous and stupid, so sane people would need a good reason to do it- and not just do it, but seek it out. It's one thing to defend your home, it's quite another to go looking for trouble. Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser sought out trouble because their patron sent them on missions. Conan was often after (gasp) treasure. Corum generally only fought when he had no choice. So why the heck would our heroes go pit themselves against creatures that could easily kill them if not for some kind of personal gain? The traditional way of getting stronger requires BOTH leveling via XP and buying better gear with cash, so if you're gonna drop one of those, you should replace it with something equally compelling. Not saying it's that difficult to justify in a fantasy scenario, just that in the absence of loot, there needs to be something.

Jon de Nor

Reading this I really want to have another stab at abstracting money in my current (5e) campaign. I tried to design something akin to the treasure die Matt experimented with in The Chain, but never got that to satisfactory state. Using "tiers" of wealth sounds promising, though. I'm need to do some pondering....

BasCB

I think it might also be part of the Renown/Standing in the world thing you get more or less as a reward for doing stuff. Like, how would an early medieval knight get to BE a knight - by providing service to the King and doing more of that might get them some patch of land and a castle to defend it (as well as obligations towards the king). A Thief might become wealthy, but really it would probably be just the means to operate their shadowy organisation and gather information within their network. Now, getting Wealth would also open up the way to get that network, or get the favour of a king who is short for cash to pay off the Witch holding his son hostage to be given a knighthood in return, the real result would still be to give the player the means to get information, influence the world and get access to retainers and research.

BasCB

Good point, yeah. One doesn't have to earn money to be able to live a rich life, earning a reputation to produce art, execute wars, defeat foes, extract information or artefacts and be there as a last resort when one's loved ones are in a pickle could easily give heroes the same lifestyle and ability to get stuff from a patron.

Silent_E

This reminds me a lot of Call of Cthulhu's 'Credit' stat. It's a number that represents your characters' spending power: What they can afford to spend money on without impacting their lifestyle, essentially. It works a lot like you've described in the post: A key to a lock, something that allows the character to roleplay wealth without creating a situation where the player must "go shopping" to get powerful and use what they've gained. A high credit stat can get you into an auction house, or convince the old antique dealer that you are actually a potential customer, or secure you an audience with some important figure. Hell, it even has a solution to the "what does the loot do". It boosts the entire party's credit stat, and the possibility of doing something big at the cost of losing a point or two in your credit stat is also a possibility.

ChatN

Yeah. Vampire the Masquerade and those World of Darkness RPGs had a tiered wealth stat you could influence. Like lvl1 you had barely any money to scrape and Lvl 5 they were mega rich. I think a system like that makes way more sense than actual gold piece per gold piece accounting.

Connel Bjorkstrand

Personally I think gold as XP tends to push characters towards all being selfish or greed focused... IMO the least interesting reason you can go after crazy aberrations or dragons is for the chance to get rich. Seems like one would be better off risking gambling or a business venture. If it's not at all tied to gold there can be many reasons... heroic characters may do it purely to save their town or some area threatened by the monsters, or to get some alchemical component for research, to fulfill a mission from their god, so many ways they can be motivated, and maybe not even all party members share the same motivation... Most of the party could be doing it for various heroic purposes but maybe an edgier character IS tagging along out of greed seeking the spoils of failed adventurers. Now it's an option rather than THE option. I've always found it a bit ridiculous in campaigns where everything leads to loot like this. An abandoned crypt or dragons horde? Sure. An owlbear's cave that randomly has a bunch of gold and magic items in it? Harder for me to suspend my disbelief on that... not every monster is a magpie collecting shiny coins (and I think that's ok).

Dave

There are all kinds of reasons to go after big monsters... once. Pretty much all the reasons to do it *as a lifestyle* are either greedy or crazy.

Tamara

That’s an assumption that doesn’t really pans out in my games, personally, though I suppose it depends on your definition of crazy. Like, is Superman crazy for doing what he does? Or is he just a really good guy? Granted superheroes are not everyone’s main genre touchstone, but for heroic fantasy, I think I end up with a lot more characters who do what they do because they want to make the world a better place, rather than only being in it for the money. I don’t disagree with the loot thing, I think that the loot progression in this game is more likely to be tied to crafting or research. If not, straight up magic items work well enough as rewards imo.

Dave

Superman is invulnerable, so it's not really the same thing. But taking your point, for many non-invulnerable heroes... yeah, it is crazy. They wear brightly colored pajamas in public and fight people who, at worst, have guns. Superheroes are definitionally insane. I guess if wherever you live keeps being threatened by monster invasions it's reasonable to fight monsters on the regular. But going out into the wilderness seeking them has strong Bored Rich People energy to me. Look, I love a good monster fight, don't get me wrong, and I'm willing to bend plausibility, or even just handwave it, if that's the game we're playing. But it seems like they want to come up with some lore that at least passes the scratch test.