New group is filled with redditors

Found the commie.

I'm tempted to agree with you, but I've learned never to underestimate the limitless retardation of my fellow man.

Your group sounds like poop.

We just pool our gold user, we are able to get the things we all need and dont have to worry about people stealing from each other and 'looting' the bodies first
>REEEE COMMIES

When all your groups suck. Maybe its because of that one player who has been part of all of them.

>gimping your party member cause you're a cheapo.
This is why you never get a date user. everyone knows you're a miser

That's kind of why I tried to leave it.

But still, depending on the difficulty of whatever game you're playing a self-sufficient ranger/rogue may barely take anything from the pool (maybe a bit for ammunition here and there) but that's it. Heavy martials may use up most of it on higher level armor if they haven't found any and the casters eventually get those spells that require multiple digits worth of gems or just flat out fortunes worth of gold.

No thank you, I'll take my cut and not be a burden on anyone other than myself.

>wanting to be responsible for myself and not be forever poor because I know my other players personally and what they would do if they had access to a pooled loot system
I'm not going to let our dwarf turn our wagon into a "mobile fortress with ballistas and shit, seriously guys it'll work" fuck you. Nor am I going to let our wizard use my gold to buy 3 of every gem for his later spells he's already planned out that require material components, fuck you. And I'm certainly not going to pay for another resurrection (fourth fucking time) at the local temple because Dave was killed yet again and the church is for some reason raising the price each time as if they hate business or something.

>This is why you never get a date user. everyone knows you're a miser
>I'm trying to literally fuck my fellow party members

chick like men that'll pay for their meals. you being anger about it doesn't change that reality

So you dont need the money. Then why take it.
What are you going to do with it.
In the end of the day, if a few pcs die and the story stops because there would be no reason these new people would be joining the group. Then the game stops and that gold just stops being.

>had a great game with my players
>A couple of them are discussing if they're going to go to the anti-fa demonstration tomorrow
>Ask them if there have been any major problems with fascists in the area
>"Well, no. It's more of a general protest against fascism"

I was pretty amused. I'm just glad politics stay out of the game.

man I knew Veeky Forums was a bunch of 'edgy' teenagers, guess I should have expected whiny man's rights activists
>Cringe

>Then why take it.
Because it's yours and you've earned it.
What he does with it is his decision.

I'd probably save/invest it until I could buy a title or hire an army and conquer some shit.

>Cringe

>you being anger about it doesn't change that reality

I never said I don't, you're the one who equated not paying for my party members stupid shit to not paying for things on a date.

Because I might need it to buy information/forgeries instead of murder-hoboing my way through every problem when I don't follow the party into the castle with no papers or manners then get searched, attacked for rude manners, and imprisoned classic Dave XDDD? Because There might be an item later down the line that will strike my fancy and I will need the money? Because we all put in the work to get it so I should get my own fair share and do whatever I damn well please with it instead of letting the more money reliant players take most of it?

>Cringe

...

The only thing that would make these threads better is if all the outed Redditors were automatically assigned permanent tripcodes.

>Because some classes take more gold in order to buy their equipment, reagents, or be as useful as others
Isn't this an argument in favor of pooling your money as a party? As you explain, different characters benefit from the resources to different extents, so it seems to make more sense to pool resources and use them on whoever benefits most.

>living in squalor because Dave the Barbarian ... needs to have potions broken onto his head as he is fighting death every turn
Dave the Barbarian is your teammate. It is in your best interest that they stay alive. If you think that different tactics would be optimal, you should talk about the issue like an adult instead of saying he should just die, despite the party having resources to prevent his untimely demise.

Then when you need the cash take it from the pool

>recruiting/accepting apps from Veeky Forums

why would you do that?

>Isn't this an argument in favor of pooling your money as a party?
If you're playing tabletop like some MMORPG shit just wanting better and better loot then yes. If you're an individual in a world that has lived their life up until that time training/fighting/etc, needing a bit of money so you go after a bounty with a few other people that you have probably never seen before, spend days if not months finding their lair, fighting through the animated dead/hear your heart pumping as you meticulously attempt to disarm a trap/tumble and dodge as magical forces are thrown in your direction while fumbling through your belt in hopes that you have maybe one more poison bolt left on you to take out this necro scum so you can live your lifestyle just a few more months until doing this all over again. Then no.

You are NOT going to let some fucking assholes take a higher share simply because they want it for better gear or abilities. You also want better gear and abilities, you may want to buy a house, or even buy your way into nobility. I mean who wants to do this shit forever? You want some plate armor? Buy your own when you have enough. You want over 2000G worth of scrolls to copy to your book? Buy your own when you have enough.

Maybe the wizard is an elf who has, relatively, an infinite amount more time than you on this world so your time is "worth" more than him in this scenario. Why not have him give him all of his share since he'll surely have much more time to get to his goal than you?

>because x is your teammate
Not forever. Again, if you are treating a character like some video game then sure, may as well go full squalor, eat and drink the bare minimum, and be as mechanical and unrealistic as possible.

Wait, people actually play games where the PCs aren't an established party with inter-personal ties to one another? Every game I've played or run, all the PCs have been a closely knit group in it together for the long haul, hence being happy to help each other out like actual comrades.

How about, when we are all friends?
We travelled to the new world together?
We sometimes argue , but we dont find our backs to the wall becauses we find them at each others instead.

But I guess I just dont game with assholes

>. It is in your best interest that they stay alive.
Not if he's a drain on resources. Maybe Charles the tactical minded paladin can do the same job for a third of the resources.

>Isn't this an argument in favor of pooling your money as a party? As you explain, different characters benefit from the resources to different extents, so it seems to make more sense to pool resources and use them on whoever benefits most.

That was what my line of thinking was. Of course, having read more from That Guy, sounds like he was playing a game of individuals who happened to be in a group, not a team that was working together.

My groups have always been willing to pool our gold together and figure out what works best for the party. Would the party best benefit buying this book of spells for the caster, new armor for the tank, a better bow for the rogue, etc.

So far, I've not run into too many problems with this philosophy. My current pathfinder game I'm kinda gimped on drawing loot equipment due to playing a Net-and-Whip Hunter while everyone else is a more standard type of class, but what works, works. If 1000 gold improves the tank more than it would improve my damage output, then that's where it ought to go for the good of the party.

>new group is filled with 4chin autists

That's not a problem, if you're not from /pol/.
The mentions of reddit per week went up by thousands when /pol/ came over during the election.

>being happy to help each other out like actual comrades

I'm happy to spot them for a reasonable amount as long as repayment will be immediately after the next task/quest, but if I had a coworker ask me to pay a 4,000 downpayment for his new car I'd tell him to go fuck himself.

Equal payment for equal work. How is this concept so alien?

Confirmed That Gay.

Wow. What an unfortunate typo. I did not mean to imply that sucks dick.

That would be rude to the dicks being sucked.

Pretty sure most parties go down under that, but to call others assholes for expecting fair compensation for their work and refusing to give others their money is what assholes do.

We can all be friends. If Dave the barbarian needs some cash for a potion I'll probably give it to him, or give him one of mine.

I might even make a habit of it since he's a bit retarded and needs them constantly and I'd rather not see a friend die.

That doesn't mean I owe him anything, or he deserves my share.

Company funds are not the same as pay.
Take some gold each spending on roleplay stuff.
Unless when you and your co-worker run a business together and all the money you make is put into your pocket then back into the company

>doesn't give others his share of the loot he's earned
>That Guy
>asshole

Yeah, you two are.

>Company funds are not the same as pay.
If your group is Incorporated, than that definitely the way to go.

My group had always divided shares, with whatever was left over going into a "slush fund" for shared expenses. If a party member was short on an item, another character would usually loan them something. The priest with the vow of poverty always gave his share to the church, or the poor.

A short relating story

>make a group on roll20
>accept four applications from a ton
>completely homebrew; very detailed world I worked on for months
>unknown to me, one of the players is a girl
>"a girl"
>push the first session three times because the "girl" has some stuff going on
>a month later we finally gather to play
>90 mins into the game "she" tells me she has to leave
>"why, what's going on?"
>"oh just a headache"
>delete the group
>block everyone

Apparently he thinks that loot should be split immediately upon receipt, and not at the end of the campaign.

That Guy is not playing as part of a team, and has no bond between his party members beyond that of coworkers, treating it solely as a job. No attachment to the group, and not seeing what helps the group helps him.

Divvying up the loot before the adventure is finished is pretty idiotic. If this was a business, the loot pool would be the company's working funds. You don't split those funds, you spend them as needed by the partners.

When the business shuts down, that's when you split the assets by shares.

Well if your having fun your doing it right.

Best game I ever played in was one where we worked for one of the other players. He got all the loot and would use it to pay all the taxes and fees and equipment for the party. He took a non-combat roll having a face type person. The joke was he was a real skinflint but he made sure everyone so covered. He got himself a few magical items. (Necklace of fireball) but most of it went on the kinght and fighter. The only time I ever saw him get 'spend' happy was when he got mugged and his wedding ring got stolen.
He would normaly wear the gm down to the brass penny, but just throw sliver bars at some local thugs to find the guys who mugged him.

Maybe you should try the party pool sometime. With PLAYERS you trust not to fuck it over.

And adventuring parties are not the same as a company or corporation. You may not see them again after this run, you may not be in a world with resurrection magic, they may be a few years away from retirement while you're just starting. You're seriously going to give them your money simply because it would give them something they "need"? They didn't need it last time so why do they need it now? They can just do lower, or same, difficulty jobs while you live out with your hard earned gold till needing to go out again. The adventuring party is the exception in almost all settings, and unless they are controlled by some other worldly beings that know each other and have predetermined their lives, I don't find it fair game to say that someone wanting to keep their currency would be out of the norm.

>Not playing with the same group for RL years with the same Pcs.

I see your one of these westmarch one shot type players .

Splitting it on is dumb, but so is waiting all the way till the end if the campaign. Just keep it in a locked box/chest until you get to a place where you can actually spend it.

I always trust the other players. Trusting the other characters is different.

The actual best games I've played didn't have loot.

>You may not see them again after this run
There's the disconnect. You're treating each session as a stand-alone association with the other characters.

I'm pretty certain that's a very minority viewpoint. Most adventuring parties don't form for only one dungeon crawl and dissolve afterwards.

New game that's starting up, what you described is pretty much going to be my role. Of course, the "Reason for Adventure" is that my character inherits his master's trade and alchemy cart, and hired the other players to be guards on the road.

When you're in the middle of a fortress, ruin, lair, or foreign land then yeah giving according to everyones needs is best as it is clearly going to help you get to the end goal of completing the quest in the long term. But once it's done there should be no reason why the loot should not be divided equally according to what has already been taken in the past.

Just because you assume motives, imply someone's play style, and finish off with a dash of "That Guy" doesn't make it fact. Characters can be played more than once and you may or you may not end up with the same party after the fact, (as this is our fourth module with Dave's third reappearance) so when all is said and done if you were to give Damien the cleric (just to give an example) all the god damn potions during the entire second module just to have him not return in the third thus losing all said potions in the process it makes a "pool" seem rather stupid. I never said there are not situations where clearly some people would make better use of X, but for the entirety of the game to be ruled by a pooled system and then lose all that when characters do not return later on is what makes it stupid.

We're four campaigns in and I've stuck to my same character while a few others have swapped for different ones.

I'm not going to invest into other characters to see it gone later on, as you wouldn't in that world either. A small loan to buy a weapon, armor set, or items? Sure, but it has to be within a reasonable range from what we just received, and a higher cut next time complete reimbursement after the next run shouldn't be seen as outlandish. You all seem to think that this entire time other players will only take out a few gold here and there, not empty the coffers as soon as it's filled up on "necessary" items just to not stay with them later on.

And even if they did stay with them later on there are price tags or loans that a sane person simply wouldn't give to their party members.

Pretty much this.
>Is my life at stake?
If yes then I optimise for survival. If no then I optimise for financial gain which means equal shares.

For those who always keep everything in the pool, what do you do when a character dies or leaves the party? Does their family get a share? Before or after buying Dave hours new +5 battle ax? What about magic items? Does his son get his sword? Or is it better in the hands of a player character?

You don't understand user. All characters are omnipotent and know that they are being controlled, and know that there is no point to any of this, so why not give all your money to that +5 ax that will magically disappear along with Dave after the next job? I mean it's not like they'll ever reach retirement, they know their lifetime has actually only been a few days, if not just hours and will be cut relatively soon.

Seriously, you just don't understand how people or party dynamics work.

Yeah, there's the disconnect.

>When you're in the middle of a fortress, ruin, lair, or foreign land

Or when you're in the middle of a campaign.

>no reason why the loot should not be divided equally according to what has already been taken in the past.

At the end of the campaign, when the party dissolves, yes - split the assets equally.

>Characters can be played more than once and you may or you may not end up with the same party after the fact

You seem to have an oddly fluid character usage. Most people usually stick with the same character during a campaign, whereas you are expecting them to change regularly.

>then lose all that when characters do not return later on
If a character has party resources on him, then if he's left the party he should have returned those resources before cashing out his share and vamoosing.

What you're describing sounds more like a series of pick-up games with rotating players rather than a regular multi-session campaign.

>redditors

fixed for accuracy

I think it might be video gamism.
>The barbarian needs a +5 ax, if we're going to crank the difficulty up to nightmare mode
>What why would I give stuff to NPCs, they're not even quest givers

>Most people usually stick with the same character during a campaign, whereas you are expecting them to change regularly.
Because most of the players do that

>If a character has party resources on him, then if he's left the party he should have returned those resources before cashing out his share and vamoosing.
How many of those should he return? All of it? Some of it? His fair share of it maybe?

>What you're describing sounds more like a series of pick-up games with rotating players rather than a regular multi-session campaign.
It's been a series of multi-session campaigns.

Why would you assume that people would stay after a job is done? Adventuring isn't exactly a healthy life, so why would you think the entire party will hold hands and be friends forever? Something can happen mid job that makes them leave like a paladin being unable to justify the actions being done, or just plain death. Man, that 2,000 gold that went into that armor sure seems fucking dumb now. But, for those that assume their characters are living beings with their own ambitions and goals then I didn't lose a dime. Thanks for the help until now, maybe we'll see each other later for another job and if not then live well.

>If you hate the insufferable fucks that make up the Reddit userbase you're /pol/
Well shit I guess I'm Hitler then.

Man, all I gotta say is, your experience seems to be way off the norm, if you keep treating it as a series of jobs.

But we are clearly talking about diffrent things. Like I said before you do you. IF your having fun your doing it right

But Im talking about the group that starts out level 1 together and go all the way till they die or become gods.
They don't just drain the pool because they can get a new axe. They say
"Hey guys, there is this axe I want." and then the party look at the funds and what everyone else has to see if they can afford it as a group.
In the end it works out that everyone gets better items that cost more then smaller items that they would buy by themselfs.
>will only take out a few gold here and there
Yes, because out of the two of us. Only one has used the pool system and thats how it works.

I dont see what way your are arguing.
Dave would know if he is staying with the group or not.

The party pool is for a group that need to get something done and travel together all the time. Not for drop in drop out players.

If PLAYERS on your table will treat you like that. Then thats not type type of game you should play with them.

>I think it might be video gamism.

Again, you're obviously just not thinking calmly and rationally user. Giving a fourth of your gold to Tim the wizard so he can have a surplus of gems to cast a 10+ minute spell in the middle of combat, a fourth for Dave's ax, a fourth for Damien's plate armor, a fourth for the pool, and taking a fraction of a fraction for your food and drink until the next job is just how people live and make decisions. Seriously, if you're saving any money for any reason for yourself instead of giving it to your fellow workers then you've been doing it wrong until now.

heil me!

I've noticed a LOT of SJW types that play now.

>One has a giant pet owl
>Can talk with it
>Need it to do some scouting in a dangerous area to give us a heads up
>"SCREEEE, THAT'S ANIMAL ABUSE!"

Statistically, it's highly likely, given the enormous upspike in people who give a shit about reddit since the election.

So, they are all secretly degenerate furries that keep that shit under wraps and play all normal like?

>Implying anyone with sense hasn't hated Reddit long before the last election.

>caring enough about reddit to hate it
Jesus christ.

>>Most people usually stick with the same character during a campaign, whereas you are expecting them to change regularly.
>Because most of the players do that

I been roleplaying for about 10 years now (GOD ITS BEEN THAT LONG. WHERE HAS THE TIME GONE)
with lots of different groups.
Forgeting the way the loot is done for a minute.
Players stick with one pc is the normal way of doing things unless the pc dies. There is the odd time where they start a pc and they dont enjoy it and swap him out. But this is rare and normally really early on.
I can't even think about how you would do an over arking story with swapping people out all the time.
Even when players are away they are still with the group. We tend to do the "Scroll casing" method where yes they where totally in the battle yes. I remember.

>But Im talking about the group that starts out level 1 together and go all the way till they die or become gods.
As am I. I've kept my guy since 1 and is now 11 while most others have swapped but one has also stayed till 11, and we intend to keep our two characters.

>"Hey guys, there is this axe I want." and then the party look at the funds and what everyone else has to see if they can afford it as a group.
Or instead they could ask the group to help them buy said axe and they can all make the decision to do it or not individually based on their own opinion on whether Dave has done a satisfactory job with their own purses.

>Yes, because out of the two of us. Only one has used the pool system and thats how it works.
Only one of us also has the experience with my other players and knows what won't and what will work. The dwarf, seriously, did the math on how much it would cost to pay someone to turn the wagon into a two story 8x10x12 "fort" with ballistas at the top and the cost of materials. I'm not putting a copper into that.

I don't think we are going to come to an understanding.
I like the pool system because it stops people hording the best loot for themselfs, it encourages friendship and cuts down time shopping.
Its not going to work for all people, but im glad it works for mine.

I've been playing for just under 10 years, and I've been running a campaign for three years. Every single one of the players have died and swapped characters at some point during this time and it's not hard to keep the story going when it only happens once or twice every 15 sessions or so. The rest of the group is still trying to do the main task, then they come in, become invested in the quest, and that's just about all it takes.

But even outside that campaign we've always played with harder rules and usually have major and permanent penalties if you're (successfully) resurrected, and after these last few modules while I'm getting other things ready I'm remembering why (Dave getting into video game mentality when death has no real consequence).

But during this entire time there has never been once where someone brought up on how they thought a loot pool would be the best way of doing things. We all know that if one of us would have unfettered access to the chest it would always be empty, and if someone would have a key to make sure it was empty they would be dead and the chest gone as well. With the individuals within our group have their own loot and their own purses to worry about there has never been a single problem when it came to divvying it out equally and fairly.

My party built a cart like that. It lasted a while until a party member picked it up and threw it like a shotput at an enemy.

>Ten years
Nice. I've been playing with the same group for 23 years now.

Thats cool man. I moved away so I had to pick up a new group. I got lucky, alot of the people who are in this group where part of the industry. Some worked for smaller companys. One for a dice and mini producer. One for wotc and someone who just got a kickstarter published.
Its a really good environment, it makes me feel good when people want to play in my games when they are all such big names.

Im shitting bricks for when I demo my own system.

He's right

Difference between non-reddit and reddit gaming groups
non-reddit
>bunch of guys hsving fun, drinking beers, having pizza, sharing big titty pics etc
Reddit
>bunch of fags sharing interracial cuck porn and black dick pics
>calling each other racist over anything
>discussing communism

That sounds like the sort of friendly, team-focused roleplaying that ensures that Rogues and the like don't have their spotlight space taken away and given to a class feature. Good job, owl guy, good job.

If it's Roll20, that is entirely plausible

I have never shared porn with someone I know.

Of course, anyone with a lick of sense realizes that said upspike in people who give a shit is a direct result of /pol/ being invaded by Reddit due to CTR and other such programs.

Yes, when they make themselves more obnoxious and more apparent, people are going to complain more.

Nobody cares if reddit invades /pol/ or if /pol/ invades reddit.
All I care about is that /pol/ is invading Veeky Forums, and they bring their whineyness about reddit along with them.

Nobody single-boards. /pol/ comes here, and Veeky Forums goes there. Veeky Forums also goes to /k/, /out/, /mlp/, and Veeky Forums, and they all come back here in turn.

None of these boards are a single person, and Reddit is a plague on the entire site, not just /pol/.

Why are you keeping up on the goings ons of /pol/ AND reddit?

Reddit invading Veeky Forums is a bigger problem. There are people that just post here to start trouble and arguments that don't even like the games and settings in the threads.

As it stands from Veeky Forums posters, /pol/ is the threat and reddit are some guys /pol/ bitches about when it comes over to do to us what it did to /x/.

>and Veeky Forums goes there
why on god's green earth would I got to /pol/?

Reddit is a third party site, /pol/ is not. You redditard.

>There are people that just post here to start trouble and arguments that don't even like the games and settings in the threads.
So, /pol/.

No, people like you. That bring up /pol/ in everythread.

/pol/ are the guys invading us, like they did to /x/.
Reddit are some guys /pol/ bitches about when they invade us.
They call reddit on literally everyone who doesn't like their frog memes, their cuckspam, and their CONSTANT NEVERENDING bitching about reddit.
Before the election, each of these things was scarce as fuck.

>We don't bring up reddit all the time
>we just literally made a thread about how much we hate that them because they're engaging us in our stupid identity wars
/pol/ are bad liars, huh.

I see way, way, way, way more invasion parties from /pol/ than from reddit, /pol/.
Maybe if reddit actually did anything here, I'd care, but as it stands it is exclusively /pol/ invading right now. Maybe a bit of /b/ and /r9k/.

There's no good reason to go to /pol/, honestly.

It's hard to avoid either when you dabble in every board. And when you've been here a while, the differences make themselves apparent.

I don't use Reddit, but when you see more and more people who denigrate online freedom and anonymity, it isn't hard to figure out from whence they came.

/pol/ at worst is racist, and there have always been racists on Veeky Forums.

>I don't use reddit, I just know what they are doing at all times because I have some kind of E-boner for them and must loudly declare how much I hate them every moment

>I just know what they are doing at all times
You're projecting a bit much.

Nobody cares that /pol/ is racist.
I do, however, care that they try to bring in off-board memes like reddit spam, frogspam, and cuckspam. All of which we didn't have a problem with before the election.

I especially take offense that all these new /pol/fags are SO NEW they don't even remember that Veeky Forums solved the cuck problem fucking years ago.

If you can't even remember the solution to the cuck problem, who the fuck -are- you?