|
2 years ago ::
Oct 29, 2011 - 8:00PM
#1
|
|
|
Hypothetical.
Party is clearing a dungeon of a goblin infestation. A bundle's magic item is in room C1 on goblin chieftain corpse #1, and can be used for the rest of the mod gratis ~if~ the PCs loot that specific corpse in that rooms. The PCs did not (in this example) loot the body and find the magic item.
That's square with the rules, and leaves nothing to argue about. Here's where I was scratching my chin, though... At the end of the mod, it says, "Bundle F: Magic Item (Encounter C1, found on Goblin Chieftain Corpse #1)."
The PCs didn't find the item, and therefore can't select it as a bundle - it's still lying in the cold, dead hands of goblin chieftain #1. Do they lose out on that budle altogether?
I've never removed a bundle from the PC's options in this way, at the end of the mod. I have always wondered, though, out of a sense of versimilitude, should they even have access to that bundle? Or should this be one of those things that's always just hand-waved for the sake of LFR?
As a DM, I find it easier to just punish the players no matter what they pick, as I assume they will pick stuff that is broken. I mean, fight after fight they kill all the monsters without getting killed themselves! What sort of a game is this, anyway?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 29, 2011 - 8:35PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Oct 25, 2007
|
LFR players don't typically say things like "we loot the bodies" that are absolutely necessary in home campaigns. It has to do with the module structure, and the assumption that treasure will all be given at the end. As a result, I would never hold it against a party if they didn't say "we loot the bodies" or something else similar.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 30, 2011 - 12:18AM
#3
|
|
|
LFR players don't typically say things like "we loot the bodies" that are absolutely necessary in home campaigns. It has to do with the module structure, and the assumption that treasure will all be given at the end. As a result, I would never hold it against a party if they didn't say "we loot the bodies" or something else similar.
Agreed. However, if the final combat was in room C1 and the players never reached the final encounter for whatever reason (e.g., they had a TPK in the first encounter), then I wouldn't give the players access to the treasure bundle since they were never even in the same room with it.
Also note that in some mods there is different treasure depending on which path you choose (e.g. If you turn the McGuffin over to the King he gives you treasure bundle X, if you turn the McGuffin over to the church they give you treasure Y). I personally don't like that style of handling treasure in a mod (mostly because it encourages players to make in-game roleplaying decisions based on mechanical meta-game knowledge), but if the players give the McGuffin to the King, they shouldn't have access to treasure Y from the church.
My basic rule of thumb is that if the players would have gotten the item if they had simly said "We loot the bodies" or "We search the room" then I give them access to that treasure bundle even if they didn't explicitely say they were looting the bodies. (Since most LFR players/DMs gloss over that.) If the players didn't encounter the treasure because of the path they choose in the module or because they never participated in that combat, then I wouldn't give them access to the treasure at the end of the mod.
So in your example - if the players participated in Encounter C1 and killed the Goblin Chieftan, I would give them access to that treasure bundle regardless of whether the players explicitly say they're looting the bodies or not. If the players do not do Encunter C1 or the Chieftan escapes, then I wouldn't give them access to the bundle.
Lori Anderson
WotC Freelancer, LFR author
@LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author)
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author)
CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author)
QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author)
EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
TotalCon: http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 1:49AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2007
|
Given that multiple characters may select the same bundle at the end of the adventure, I don't think somehow failing to grab "the Orc warlord's Vicious Greatsword" should take the option of a "Vicious Weapon bundle" off the table. The bundle reward isn't necessarily the exact weapon you looted from your enemy's corspe, after all.
For example, in Elder Wisdom, you come across an old magical trap that fired crossbows. It's no longer functional, but carefully searching the area allows you to scavenge a +1 magic crossbow. At the end of the mod, however, the bundle is listed as "+1 magic weapon". Which means that a hero can walk away from the adventure with a +1 Gouge if he wanted to.
Removing that option just because they failed to find a magic crossbow seems a bit odd, in that light (not that anyone is likely to take a +1 magic weapon bundle, but that's a completely different topic).
While it's true that some mods do specify which encounter an item can be found in, I think that's more for reference, so that a DM can skip to the rewards of a mod, and know which magic items players can use for the adventure. That's how I do things, at least. Limiting choices of rewards based on not saying "I search the room" doesn't seem very fair.
A case can be made for items found in encounters the party doesn't fight, I suppose, but again, it seems unecessary to deny players a reward on those grounds alone. The only time you should deny players their rightful rewards, IMO, is if the reward is tied to an objective they failed to achieve.
If you only receive a "common level 6 neck or armor" by finding an NPC's lost puppy, then failing to find said puppy (and bringing it back, alive and well), then definitely, they don't get it. On the other hand, in Lost Temple of the Fey Gods, there's a magic item that's only found if the players search the bottom of a pit trap. The mod points out that you should make attempts to ensure the pit trap opens so they can find it, but if somehow everyone was fortunate not to fall into said trap, I can't see punishing someone for not climbing into a spike-filled pit searching for trinkets!
"You can always judge a man by the quality of his enemies." -The Doctor, Remembrance of the Daleks
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 3:19AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
an old magical trap that fired crossbows
The amusing images this suggests make me assume you meant crossbow bolts, but a magical trap that fired crossbows would be awesome.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 6:17AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2007
|
The larger-picture issue is simply: "Will it enhance the fun for your players if they feel they must stop-and-loot at the end of every encounter?"
The first time a PC misses out on treasure because they didn't specifically state they were searching for it, they will specifically state that they do so every encounter for the rest of the campaign. (It's a similar reason to why Passive checks are used to locate traps . . . it removes the "always say you are searching for traps every time you move" syndrome.)
There are DMs who will disagree with that philosophy. "If you didn't find the treasure (even gp), you don't get it at the end." I think they are well within the rules for doing so. However, I would advise that those DMs:
(1) Recognize that many tables don't play that style, and a simple warning at the start of the adventure will go a long way. (i.e. "Attention players. At my table, you only get treasure that you actually find. So please be clear about when you are searching for treasure.") Especially with players who have not played with you before.
(2) Decide whether the added step of "searching for treasure in every scene" brings added-value to the game.
{Also, I agree with the previous posters that PCs only gain access to treasure for the encounters they successfully complete. If they don't reach an encounter or finish the mission, the rewards tied to that encounter should not be available.}
Dan Anderson
@EpicUthrac
Living Forgotten Realms Calimshan Writing Director
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
Meet me at TotalConfusion:
http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 7:02AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2007
|
Ah yes, crossbow bolts. Although now that you mention it, traps that fire substandard weaponry at you might be hilarious. "You walk down the hallway, when suddenly...*roll dice*...you are hit square in the chest by a bec de corbin, followed by a bohemian ear-spoon and...a jo stick!"
"You can always judge a man by the quality of his enemies." -The Doctor, Remembrance of the Daleks
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 7:08AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2004
|
My general perspective on things like this (which, by the way also extends to things like "the party would have finished the adventure, but missed an hour of adventure time because someone pulled the fire alarm and we had to evacuate the entire Indianapolis Convention Center" or "the DM forgot to provide or didn't notice a critical piece of information the PCs needed to make a choice") is that if the choice you're about to make as the DM is something that either makes you feel like you're being a jerk or is something you wouldn't want a DM to do to you, it's probably a choice that you should carefully think about before making.
In direct response to the question, unless the PCs make a conscious choice not to loot (whether it's because they don't think they have time to loot before the villain's hideout explodes or because they're respecting the ancient goblin tradition of burying fallen chieftains with their weapons), I assume the PCs loot everything valuable that isn't nailed down in every room they come across. Then they loot the nails. Then they repeat Step 1.
John du Bois
Living Forgotten Realms Writing Director, Netheril story area
Follow me on The Twitter: @JohnduBois
Follow my presence on The Intertubes: johncdubois.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 8:15AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
LFR players don't typically say things like "we loot the bodies" that are absolutely necessary in home campaigns. It has to do with the module structure, and the assumption that treasure will all be given at the end. As a result, I would never hold it against a party if they didn't say "we loot the bodies" or something else similar.
Actually, I'm sure a lot of home campaigns have evolved to realize that requiring players to say they check every imaginable location for treasure, like a bad text-based RPG, isn't fun for anyone. I certainly don't require it in my home game.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 31, 2011 - 8:18AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
In my particular play area it is generally assumed adventurers "Baldursgate the bodies" ( Baldursgating being the etymological decendant of Greyhawking which may be known to LG players and constitutes taking everything of any value, including the nails. Waterdeeping was considered, but it just felt wrong to me ) unless the adventure provides circumstances where this is not possible or the adventurers specifically say they don't bother. It works for us. So essentially: What John said, or rather "Me Too!!1!" 
To DME, or not to DME: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous powergaming, Or to take arms against a sea of Munchkins, And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;No more;
|
|
|
