The 100 gp/month Screw Job

[AxeMental]

I think you'd have to make an exception for the monk. Assume he's living like... a... well... monk. Staying at the abbey, abstaining from booze and chicks (or dudes, as the case may be), and otherwise living a monkish existence.

This is still much higher then you'd expect. Look at the average laborer pay. More like pirate prices.

[telomar]

...
Note: in OD&D this monthly upkeep fee no longer applies once the character establishes his own stronghold and "managing his investments" becomes an intended part of, rather than a distraction from, the assumed activity of the game; I can't remember if the same applies in AD&D or not, but if not, it probably should

Wasn't it assumed that when a player character got a stronghold, they would become an NPC fairly quickly, leaving the resource management to the DM?

[mjudge55]

I've been using the 100 gp/level rule in my C&C game, and I also used it in my Hackmaster game a while back. I'm not particularly consistent about it, so it's probably more like every few months.

My players HATE this rule, but I told them to stop whining and just mark it off. I don't feel like policing their rations consumption, not to mention housing, basic equipment upkeep and leisure expenses, so I feel like it works well. Some folks think the price is steep, but you don't need to look far to find examples from real life where people waste obscene amounts of money on a regular basis with nothing to show for it.

Yeah, I tend to be a pretty stingy DM.

[genghisdon]

I use it, and no, of course players don't like it, not even ones that blow $ like nothing in real life...cry me a river!

It ONLY applies when the character is out of play, and can afford such expenses. It is a tool to essentaily force players back out adventuring with some frequency. It has little use at low levels, where training costs are astronomical compared to wealth, and characters will preforce be seeking gold constantly; but does have impact on high level characters, part of which is a "use it or loose it" with regards to $ and strongholds. If one has scaled back monetary rewards then one ought also scale back the "monthly cost".

One would, could & should make exception for characters like monks, or possibly even rangers, that do not "lead a high spending, easy come, easy go, adventurer lifestyle" or have a class restriction on wealth. Several Monk & Paladin characters I have DMed had players that constantly role played dispersing wealth aquired adventuring, essentaily having a monthly cost=all money possessed, willingly. I certainly can't see adding more than basic expenses to such characters, so long as it is effectively the same or greater. Rangers that convert coin into a fortune in gems ought not be excluded, that is for certain, nor a more traditional "Noble" Paladin; in the later case, expenses seem quite justified, in addition to tithing, ect.

Bear in mind, it should not be used rashly; if a L15 Fighter lord is "off" for 2 months of game time, and his tax income & current wealth fall a bit short of his hireling, henchman, stronghold upkeep & personal mothly "cost", the DM ought not be evicting him, having his castle fall into ruin, troops desert, ect. (Note I said: a bit short). No, it is simple enough to inform said player the treasury is bare, and drastic action needs be taken. Rumour has come to the characters ear of ...

Adventure on.

[Philotomy Jurament]

I haven't had to use such a rule in my current game. The PCs have been spending gold like crazy in the little logging village they're in. It's worked out for them, though: the town elders (all of whom have benefitted from the sudden influx of gold) have taken the PCs' side in a major dispute. Unfortunately, the wealth flowing into the community has also come to the attention of the local lord, who would really like to tap into that revenue…

[Juju EyeBall]

I haven't had Unfortunately, the wealth flowing into the community has also come to the attention of the local lord, who would really like to tap into that revenue…

We have ballistas now.

[Benoist]

100 GP a MONTH?! Holy crap. That's a LOT of cash in RL equivalent, isn't it?

[Matthew]

100 GP a MONTH?! Holy crap. That's a LOT of cash in RL equivalent, isn't it?

Per level... I recently figured it as about £5,000 (1 GP = £50).

[Benoist]

100 GP a MONTH?! Holy crap. That's a LOT of cash in RL equivalent, isn't it?

Per level... I recently figured it as about £5,000 (1 GP = £50).

So... if my character's say... 10th level, he'll basically spend 1,000 GP a month, i.e. 50,000 pounds, $72,000 US, just on his personal time?

What the heck is he doing with this money?!

[Juju EyeBall]

100 GP a MONTH?! Holy crap. That's a LOT of cash in RL equivalent, isn't it?

What the heck is he doing with this money?!

[Benoist]

Man, these have to be top notch escorts, willing to do "job" all the way, if you see what I mean.

[AxeMental]

Make cost of level advancement higher (we use 1 GP per EAP no matter the level), removing curses, appraising magic, buying 1 shot magic items (cure potions being the most affordable); silver and iron weapons, superior "fill in the blank", wagons, horses, etc. etc. etc.. our players eat up money like there's no tomorrow with out any need to resort to 100 GP a month rule (a nice abstraction but too controlling IMHO). Keep in mind too, this price of 100 GP might be a reflection of living in or near D&D equiv. gold rush towns flush with money.

[Flambeaux]

100 GP a MONTH?! Holy crap. That's a LOT of cash in RL equivalent, isn't it?

Per level... I recently figured it as about £5,000 (1 GP = £50).

So... if my character's say... 10th level, he'll basically spend 1,000 GP a month, i.e. 50,000 pounds, $72,000 US, just on his personal time?

What the heck is he doing with this money?!

Cocaine and yerba mate

[Benoist]

Good point, Flambeaux. Forgot about those.

[BlackBat242]

I don't use it, and only one DM I've played with ever has.

Like the fact we don't give out XP for gold (very few DMs in my 27 1'2 years of playing ever have), we simply put a reasonable amount of treasure in the adventure... so there is no reason to then artificially take it back.

If you want something (food, lodging, etc) you pay for it and it is accounted for at that time, etc.

It works out better than "give extra GP to cover the arbitrary expenses that are there to relieve the players of their excess GP, which is there to cover the arbitrary expenses..." feedback loop!

XP is earned by actions other than lifting treasure, and training costs are negotiated between the PC and the prospective trainer on an individual basis.


So that's not "BTB"... sue me.