Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by IggleSniggle 935 days ago
An alternative to keeping PCs poor is to make them "rich-poor." They are effectively so rich that money does not matter, but the setting is such that there is nothing they can buy that will make them better off. When they reach a town, they can always afford to do whatever they like (when it comes to coin), but they might not be able to afford the narrative consequences of their choices.

The key aspect of "keep them poor" is really just "limit the availability of upgrades." In a desolate world, there's nothing to buy. With super-hero tier PCs, even in an abundant city, there's nothing to buy that matters that doesn't also come with knock on consequences.

4 comments

This is 5E's default strategy, but I don't think it works well - it means that the PCs becoming rich will remove, rather than add, gameplay. They won't spend any time thinking about paying for necessities of life, but there won't be much else to do with gold, nor any reason to go after it.

(It's sort of like the 5E Ranger. 5E has a bunch of wilderness survival rules, spells, etc. that can be used for campaign gameplay - but one Ranger in the party makes most of them irrelevant. The Ranger player will get personal satisfaction from using those abilities for a handful of minutes per campaign, then all of it will be forgotten.)

Money in a total wasteland is completely worthless of course. But if there's people, money will at the very least let you hire people. Hirelings were a big thing in earlier editions of D&D that kinda got forgotten at some point, but there's certainly something to the idea of high-level PCs hiring people to form an army to take on the army of the evil lich-king.
I guess it kinda depends on the type of role playing the party is looking for. If you want to role play the survival then great, probably don’t use a rich-poor dynamic where survival is handled by coin. I tend to think most parties prefer to just get to the dungeoneering and not spend too much time haggling with the shopkeepers and in-keepers for affordable rates on amenities, though.
This sort of thing only works with relatively inexperienced PCs, who don't realize that 1000 GP can hire all of a typical town for a few weeks to do almost anything, no questions asked. That quantity of hirelings is a relatively effective replacement to magic items. All you have to do afterward is turn combat problems into non-combat problems, which is relatively easy if you can think outside the box.

Need to clear a dungeon? Divert the nearest river to flood it and then use some other means (magical) to clear out the water.

Need to cross a bridge guarded by trolls? The new bridge you build won't be guarded by anyone.

I like that both of your suggestions include spending money and time.

You can flood a dungeon or build a new bridge, but both will take at minimum weeks, if not months.

If the King's daughter was kidnapped by those who live in the dungeon, or if the outcome of a battle hinges on you being able to cross that bridge over a chasm, they're not going to be happy when you come to them with a three-year plan for civic improvements.

Just use a little bit of magic or a different solution if you want things to go faster. I trust a set of clever players to be able to come up with something to totally fuck up the DM's plans.

Also note that Caesar's crossing of the Rhine (a notoriously tough river to bridge) took 10 days, and several similarly amazing feats of quick river diversion have occurred in Chinese history. All without magic. If you don't care whether your works are permanent, the work can be done very quickly.

> Need to clear a dungeon? Divert the nearest river to flood it and then use some other means (magical) to clear out the water.

In a future setting (Eclipse Phase), the party was sent out to investigate rumors of a downed spaceship.

We bought a rover, bought a wagon to go behind the rover. Filled it up with the setting's equivalent of C4. The GM tried to stop us on route, we planned very far and ended up hauling the trailer by hand (the rover got destroyed by a landmine, we specified a 10m rope between the rover and the wagon full of explosives just for such an occasion, the GM had forgotten about that, we didn't, we wrote it down).

We kept lobbing explosives into the ship (low G) until bits of alien started flying out. The GM looked... a bit sad.

High lethality games encourage creative problem solving.

Best story I've heard about clearing a dungeon was a group that drove a flock of sheep into the dungeon. Later, while exploring the dungeon, they'd find tons of traps with dead sheep in them.
In practice I've found this strategy to be pretty frustrating as a player. If treasure is going to be part of the campaign, give me something to spend it on. If it isn't, don't bother -- but in a system like D&D, you need to then provide an alternate method for obtaining equipment and upgrades.
This unfortunately can kill a great deal of incentive for the player. If there's nothing to look forward to, there's no dopamine hit. While too many dopamine hits are clearly bad, the absence of a reward can lead to a very boring game. There's a balance there somewhere.