What people want and what makes them happy rarely coincide.

[Maj]

If the DM gives Bob the sword of sharpness he wanted, now Jim and Jake both expect that the DM will give them something too, otherwise it looks like favoritism. So yes, it does inevitably turn into an expectation list, because they will be resentful if the DM specifically ignored their request, yet gave Bob what he wanted.

Why on earth would this happen? Why on earth would the DM not get an idea for things players wanted from each of them?

Of course giving something to one player while not giving something to each of the others would be favoritism. That's why the DM talks with each player every couple of sessions to get an idea of how they like the game, what improvements can be made to the story, where they see their character going, and one or two directions their character could take for the purposes of creating cooperative and fun storylines with the players.

That resentment doesn't suddenly go away in an entirely random game.

The random rolling of treasure thing has caused far more resentment between players in our games. That's why we stopped doing it. It sucked. The players also were more apathetic about their characters, which meant the stories suffered.

[Josh_Kablack]

As long as even one person in this conversation is in favor of wishlists, it is totally on topic to talk about how shitty wishlists are. -Username17

Then can I ask you to once again re-summarize your objections to and argument against wishlists in a concise post that would be convincing to casual gamers?

Sure.

Thank you.

[Username17]

Five pages ago, I do remember asking Frank to either argue about signature weapons or random loot, and him refusing to separate the arguments.

Of course I refused, because they are intrinsically linked. The fact that signature item users who don't have intrinsic methods of gaining and/or upgrading their signature items are completely incompatible with random treasure, and every single other form of objective or quasi-objective treasure placement is a huge fucking disadvantage. And asking that fact to be ignored is a loathsome and pathetic form of special pleading.

I mean, signature weapons without intrinsic item creation is not even compatible with such basic standards as "making a dungeon and filling it with monsters and treasure so the players can explore it". Since of course, if you go left instead of right, you don't get the shadow katana (at least not on time and probably ever). It's just fucking terrible, and completely incompatible with any system of treasure droppage other than the very worst one (4e's).

Random treasure drops are not the only way to drop things. They are by definition the most fair and the least colored by favoritism, so they have that going for them. But there are other things you can do. The thing that the weapon fappers are demanding - where they get to mandate what treasures show up and therefore get to be offended if the DM thinks there is some reason for something else to show up instead - is fucking terrible. But the fact that weapon fappers are incompatible with random treasure is not a fact that is separable from discussions of random treasure or discussions of weapon fappage. And the fact that you'd even continue asking for that after that shit was explained makes you some kind of wall licker.

-Username17

[A Man In Black]

Of course I refused, because they are intrinsically linked.

No they are not. It would be perfectly reasonable to have a game that does not have slot machine loot but does not go to any effort whatsoever to humor people who want signature weapons because both ideas are retarded. I totally agree that they're incompatible; in fact, I argued with Fuchs to that effect. But not having signature weapons and not having slot machine loot would be a perfectly reasonable thing that you could do. Setting both stupid ideas on fire is perfectly compatible!

Now, defend randomly-dropped loot from its own flaws without changing the subject to signature weapons, because here I am, arguing that D&D would be better off without both signature weapons and LAGOe slot machine loot.

Random treasure drops are not the only way to drop things. They are by definition the most fair and the least colored by favoritism, so they have that going for them.

What? Complete randomness is not the most fair system. The most fair system is that everyone gets the exact same perfectly-tailored gear on exactly the same schedule, or alternately a system where nobody gets anything ever; they're both essentially the same system. Now, I'm not proposing this system because it's super boring; at that point you might as well just fold items into the base stats. But to say that any system where Adam might get Durandal while Betty gets nothing ever is a totally possible result is the "most fair" system is bullshit. The whole point of random loot is that it is exciting, not fair.

Plus, I've already mentioned how you're just replacing accusations of GM favoritism for accusations of intraparty favoritism plus suspicions of GM favoritism. That's not much of a gain!

But the fact that weapon fappers are incompatible with random treasure is not a fact that is separable from discussions of random treasure or discussions of weapon fappage.

It's separable because I am proposing a game which has neither. Like I did ten pages ago.

[Fuchs]

Why on earth would the DM not get an idea for things players wanted from each of them?

Of course giving something to one player while not giving something to each of the others would be favoritism. That's why the DM talks with each player every couple of sessions to get an idea of how they like the game, what improvements can be made to the story, where they see their character going, and one or two directions their character could take for the purposes of creating cooperative and fun storylines with the players.

This in a nutshell. I really don't know how Frank and Lago think a game is being played, that players and GM never talk and GMs never should ask what can be improved. "I want more social scenes" is just as legitimate as "I want a better axe", both times the player wants something to have (more) fun.

That resentment doesn't suddenly go away in an entirely random game.

The random rolling of treasure thing has caused far more resentment between players in our games. That's why we stopped doing it. It sucked. The players also were more apathetic about their characters, which meant the stories suffered.

That too. I don't know what bizarro land people are from who advocate the loot lottery, but when it comes to the real lottery, the same people call it a tax on stupidity.

It's NOT fun being inferiour for months to the guy who lucked out on loot. No matter how fair the random die roll was, it's simply not fun. It's also not fun to be the guy who can't play the character he wants, while others luck out. Wasn't fun in earlier editions with rolled stats, isn't fun today.

Generally speaking, a game should be fun all the time, not just a few times when you roll nice. A game that actively builds on the idea that in order to have fun with treasure you also have to have "not fun" for some large period of time with treasure is stupid.

[Chamomile]

So we're now up to four increasingly respectable Denners...

If you think you and Fuchs are increasingly respectable Denners... you are a fucking joke.

I'm the most arrogant mother fucker in the world, and even I don't pretend I'm a respectable or increasingly respectable Denner.

Read what I wrote again and see if you can find out where you went wrong.

[Swordslinger]

Why on earth would this happen? Why on earth would the DM not get an idea for things players wanted from each of them?

He would. But somebody has to get their thing *first* and somebody also has to get their thing *last* and it's the DM who decides who that is.

Now, I'm not saying this will happen to every group, but it is definitely a concern in a lot of groups, and considering it's a fight that can be avoided, why not avoid it?

The random rolling of treasure thing has caused far more resentment between players in our games. That's why we stopped doing it. It sucked. The players also were more apathetic about their characters, which meant the stories suffered.

That's odd. I assume your PCs were heavily into character builds and had some specific existing character they wanted to precisely replicate?

If you had a group of people like that, I guess the next question is, why bother having treasure at all? Is there really any joy in getting stuff you knew you were going to get anyway? You can just have part of leveling up being buying stuff to put you at your projected WBL amount according to the table. That way people can precisely follow whatever build they had in mind, since they don't really seem to care much about interacting with the gameworld and just want to get the gear they want.

Though what you're describing has not been my experience at all, except in those cases where a PC becomes obsessed with cloning another character perfectly.

The majority of players I know actually like finding random items like cubes of force that they can find creative uses for as opposed to having everything planned out. Finding random stuff allows the world to have some impact on the characters and to most, that's a good thing. Maybe I'm just an old school gamer, but I find the idea of knowing exactly where my character is going to be really boring. I want to assemble a bag of random cool stuff my dude found, whether it's crystal balls or figurines of wondrous power. And even though I never envisioned my initial character running around with a horn of blasting, it becomes a welcome addition to the character. A badge that his adventures have changed him in some way as he has changed the game world.

Part of the game for me and most of the people I play with is a feeling of discovery and character growth. If the purpose is just to replicate Robin Hood in D&D, you can do that without ever playing a session and just build the character. The problem is that the character is static. He really has nowhere to go except increasing his bonuses to hit, and to me that's pretty boring. The wizard is casting vastly different spells at level 10 than at level 3, so why does the fighter end up looking exactly the same?

D&D is a game of rapid evolution and static characters just don't seem to fit well.

That being said, there's plenty of games that support relatively static characters. Shadowrun, GURPS and Mutants and Masterminds all support heavily theme based characters who don't grow much. If everyone in your group is playing static concepts, I have to wonder if they wouldn't be happier with a game like that.

[A Man In Black]

I assume your PCs were heavily into character builds and had some specific existing character they wanted to precisely replicate?

No. Stop this shit right here. There are reasons other than "I didn't get a katana" to dislike the slot machine so stop beating up that strawman. Here is a list of nasty consequences from random loot drops, from this same page:

It's upsetting when someone gets an item and you think you could use it more effectively. It's upsetting when someone gets two items in a row and you haven't gotten any. (See how those conflict?) It's upsetting when someone gets an item and dominates the game, with everyone knowing that it's going to be a long time before anyone else gets a chance to get an item. It's upsetting when you finally get an item and it's something dumb. It's upsetting when something perfect for the GM's friend drops and you never really know for certain if it was random chance or favoritism and there's really no way to know. It's upsetting when everyone has gotten something neat that's perfect for their characters twice but nothing has dropped for you.

There is going to be friction when one person gets candy and everyone else gets a rock, or when everyone but Bob gets candy twice and Bob gets a rock twice. Five-year-olds understand this.

The majority of players I know actually like finding random items like cubes of force that they can find creative uses for as opposed to having everything planned out. Finding random stuff allows the world to have some impact on the characters and to most, that's a good thing. Maybe I'm just an old school gamer, but I find the idea of knowing exactly where my character is going to be really boring. I want to assemble a bag of random cool stuff my dude found, whether it's crystal balls or figurines of wondrous power. And even though I never envisioned my initial character running around with a horn of blasting, it becomes a welcome addition to the character. A badge that his adventures have changed him in some way as he has changed the game world.

I don't see any reason you need to have a slot machine to get these items into the game. You say "random" as though they'd need to be generated by an RNG, but they could just as easily be placed by GM whim. If you think Cubes of Force and Horns of Blasting are awesome, then just place them in your game arbitrarily; you don't need a slot machine doing that 17% of the time for it to happen.

The rest is more "signature weapons are dumb and this somehow is related to my point." Well, it's still a big old non sequitur, so knock that shit off.

[Swordslinger]

It's upsetting when someone gets an item and you think you could use it more effectively. It's upsetting when someone gets two items in a row and you haven't gotten any. (See how those conflict?) It's upsetting when someone gets an item and dominates the game, with everyone knowing that it's going to be a long time before anyone else gets a chance to get an item. It's upsetting when you finally get an item and it's something dumb. It's upsetting when something perfect for the GM's friend drops and you never really know for certain if it was random chance or favoritism and there's really no way to know. It's upsetting when everyone has gotten something neat that's perfect for their characters twice but nothing has dropped for you.

This is why treasure consists of items and coins. If someone is getting shafted by the RNG and not getting many picks of the treasure they want, they get greater picks of the money, so they can buy stuff they want later. At least, that's how it's always worked in games I've played.

As for items that make someone more powerful, that's one of the benefits of random items, is that it does let you break free of your estimated power level now and then. So long as the item is later trumped by better items at higher level, I really don't have a problem with it. Finding a +3 keen greataxe at level 3 might be something memorable for a barbarian. It's actually pretty damn boring if every single item you ever get is level appropriate.

[A Man In Black]

This is why treasure consists of items and coins. If someone is getting shafted by the RNG and not getting many picks of the treasure they want, they get greater picks of the money, so they can buy stuff they want later. At least, that's how it's always worked in games I've played.

As for items that make someone more powerful, that's one of the benefits of random items, is that it does let you break free of your estimated power level now and then. So long as the item is later trumped by better items at higher level, I really don't have a problem with it. Finding a +3 keen greataxe at level 3 might be something memorable for a barbarian. It's actually pretty damn boring if every single item you ever get is level appropriate.

That doesn't solve the problem at all. If you can't buy anything worthwhile with money, then money is just shiny rocks. If cool items are cheap enough to be worth buying but crap items sell for nothing, then money is candy and crappy items are rocks. If cool items are cheap enough to be worth buying and crap items sell for enough to matter, then what drops is entirely meaningless and people will sell the shit that drops for what they really want, rendering your slot machine moot.

As for the items being trumped by better items at higher level, that's the thing about random loot. After Adam gets Durandal and Betty gets Excalibur, you never know if anything appropriate is ever going to drop for Carl. The game may end before Carl ever sees anything that isn't a rock. That's not exciting at all for Carl. Now, no GM is going to be such a heartless asshole as to leave Carl sitting out in the cold, but that goes back to my "Any random loot system is going to be an arbitrary loot system by the time the GM is done with it anyway" argument.

[PhoneLobster]

...they get greater picks of the money, so they can buy stuff they want later...

But you aren't allowed to buy speschul snowflake items.

Did you NOT get that fucking memo?

Why is it almost nothing you are saying seems remotely relevant to the rest of this thread?

As for items that make someone more powerful, that's one of the benefits of random items, is that it does let you break free of your estimated power level now and then.

That is not a benefit it is what we normal people call a "drawback".

So long as the item is later trumped by better items at higher level, I really don't have a problem with it.

I am running your next game. No, sorry, Dice have spoken, I have no choice, it was perfectly fair, Santa Claus was going to do it, but then you said you were against that.

You will be receiving a Masterwork Silver Dagger at level 1.

The guy in the seat next to you will be receiving a +19 Adamantium Vorpal Flaming Burst Subtle Katana. At level 1.

But don't worry at level 20 after two years of play HE will receive a +20 Adamantium Vorpal Flaming Burst Subtle Katana

Also. You will still be using the Masterwork Silver Dagger at level 20 and through the entire intervening time because that's the best thing you will ever get.

You will also get as much money as your character can carry to spend on more Masterwork Silver Daggers. Which are the only thing you can buy with actual money.

Don't worry though. I rolled that dagger and the katanas randomly. So since it's random AND the item was eventually made redundant you won't have any hard feelings.

I mean. The last thing I'd want to do was create any bad blood at the table by trying to non-randomly give you something even half as good as what the guy next to you has for 19 levels of a campaign.

It's actually pretty damn boring if every single item you ever get is level appropriate.

You should go and tell every happy RPG player on the planet. They don't seem to have noticed and are foolishly enjoying that sort of badwrongfun.

It's an outrage!

[Swordslinger]

That doesn't solve the problem at all. If you can't buy anything worthwhile with money, then money is just shiny rocks.

Who says you can't buy anything worthwhile?

As for the items being trumped by better items at higher level, that's the thing about random loot. After Adam gets Durandal and Betty gets Excalibur, you never know if anything appropriate is ever going to drop for Carl. The game may end before Carl ever sees anything that isn't a rock. That's not exciting at all for Carl. Now, no GM is going to be such a heartless asshole as to leave Carl sitting out in the cold, but that goes back to my "Any random loot system is going to be an arbitrary loot system by the time the GM is done with it anyway" argument.

Maybe they do end up with better weapons, but Carl ends up with the awesome armor. Maybe Carl gets the ring of elemental summoning. Part of random treasure is that the party is going to be deciding who gets items on its own. So the dude who got Excalibur probably isn't going to get the girdle of giant strength that comes along.

Remember that while the DM places the treasure, he does not decide who gets it. When you give Adam the Adamantine Fortress shield, everyone knows he got that and he's probably not going to get another awesome item for a while. And ideally it should create a pattern where one character gets something awesome, then the next awesome item shifts the balance of power again, and so forth.

And the distribution of gold and gems helps to round out people who don't get the good stuff.

[A Man In Black]

Who says you can't buy anything worthwhile?

Nobody does. Here's the whole paragraph. Try again.

That doesn't solve the problem at all. If you can't buy anything worthwhile with money, then money is just shiny rocks. If cool items are cheap enough to be worth buying but crap items sell for nothing, then money is candy and crappy items are rocks. If cool items are cheap enough to be worth buying and crap items sell for enough to matter, then what drops is entirely meaningless and people will sell the shit that drops for what they really want, rendering your slot machine moot.

The more effective and abundant money is and the easier it is to convert unwanted items to money, the less relevant the slot machine is.

Maybe they do end up with better weapons, but Carl ends up with the awesome armor. Maybe Carl gets the ring of elemental summoning. Part of random treasure is that the party is going to be deciding who gets items on its own. So the dude who got Excalibur probably isn't going to get the girdle of giant strength that comes along.

Remember that while the DM places the treasure, he does not decide who gets it. When you give Adam the Adamantine Fortress shield, everyone knows he got that and he's probably not going to get another awesome item for a while. And ideally it should create a pattern where one character gets something awesome, then the next awesome item shifts the balance of power again, and so forth.

And the distribution of gold and gems helps to round out people who don't get the good stuff.

You arbitrarily added a bunch of items to obfuscate an example of the random items turning out to be junk for one person. Sometimes you will get a good mix, sometimes you won't. It's a problem when you don't. If you've got a fighter, a druid, a rogue, and a wizard, it's just not fun when the slot machine craps out a greatsword, a greataxe, a battleaxe, and a suit of full plate. There is no way the players can make that mix of loot fair.

What happens when the random items just absolutely do not favor one person, or absolutely favor one person? What happens when round-robin looting means that an item that would be perfect for Adam ends up going to Betty because it's Betty's turn? These are real sources of friction in real games that I have played in.

These problems are why 3e had wealth-by-level, so that the GM made sure to give everyone a fair share of at least somewhat-class-appropriate shinies. Now, WBL came with its own three-piece baggage set of problems, but to just handwave the reason for its creation and pretend like AD&D's time was the magical days of sweetness and light is pretty fucking weak on a board which long made a habit of shitting on shadzar from a great height for making weak arguments that ignored the problems with 2e.

[PhoneLobster]

Who says you can't buy anything worthwhile?

Frank and Lago.

Also. Every single person who has EVER advocated a similar "Magic Items as Specshul Snowflakes" strategy.

Also, even large numbers of people currently disagreeing with Frank and Lago and the Specshul Snowflakes crowd. What with the not buying anything worthwhile thing being rather a popular way of doing it.

Part of random treasure is that the party is going to be deciding who gets items on its own.

No.

Items are STILL constrained within the ROLES they fit. Even if you prevent the existence of Sword Guy you STILL have "Golf Bag of Weapons Guy" and "Wizard Guy", and if nothing but golf bag weapons drop, and that can happen for very long periods of time the players aren't deciding squat. Or if they DO decide to give golf bag weapons to Wizard Guy they made a poor choice that will not be rewarding to the Wizard Guy player.

Even if EVERYONE is an identical Golf Bag Warrior and all item drops are equally usable to all characters the items themselves will influence who gets them. Bob got the boots of flying... so when the bow of archery turns up it goes to him too. Sally got the Armour of Fire Immunity, so when the necklace of fireballs turns up she gets that too.

Sensible and optimal allocation of random items is NOT fair. By introducing SOME element of choice the PLAYERS can indeed institute SOME round robin sharing that WILL increase fairness. But they cannot account fully for the UNFAIR nature of random item generation, and it WILL still frequently screw over Wizard Guy or Paladin Guy or SOMEONE.

Senseless NON-OPTIMAL allocation of random items is STILL not fair, even if the allocation method is pure round robin or fair distribution of "points value" or whatever. Because the variable actual game play value created by the unfair random allocation is incurable by means of ANY player driven item loot division and allocation scheme.

When you give Adam the Adamantine Fortress shield, everyone knows he got that and he's probably not going to get another awesome item for a while.

Unless you roll up Adamantium Plate Armour. Or Adamanatium War Hammers or something. Because we ALL KNOW what that will result in, he will even point out that his character name is god damn Adam. Then someone might notice he is trying to form an item theme and they will throw a tantrum and walk because an Adamantium Dire Flail drops.

And ideally it should create a pattern where one character gets something awesome, then the next awesome item shifts the balance of power again, and so forth.

There is absolutely NO means by which randomized loot drops does that mechanically.

Non-randomized loot drops CAN do that mechanically. But not random ones. I mean holy crap, do you even HAVE a brain? Or did the only party brain loot drop go to the Barbarian in your household?

And the distribution of gold and gems helps to round out people who don't get the good stuff.

You cannot buy anything equivalent to the "good stuff" with gold in Speshcul Snowflake world god damnit.

How. Many. Times...

[Winnah]

If a select array of items is important to a character, then that should be a function of character generation and advancement. It should not be reliant on the referee handing out gift cards.

Especially if the game supports the concepts of treasure seeking, graverobbing and looting the corpses of adversaries.

Attempting to cater to a weapon fetishist in your own game is your choice. A stupid choice, but it's your stupid choice to make. I find the notion of forcing one players sense of entitlement on the rest of the gaming group disgusting. Because not everyone is going to play a weapon fetishist. Not everyone is going to place the same demands on the group to support their concept. Some people are perfectly fine with random treasure allocation and don't need to fuck around with the metagame for their character to function. Fuck me, just google D&D random treasure generator and see how many hits you get.

Personally, I find the notion of flipping through a couple of rulebooks in order to pick and choose specific drops to be an enormous waste of time. It's far simpler to roll the dice. In my experience it is certainly fairer.

[Username17]

Now, defend randomly-dropped loot from its own flaws without changing the subject to signature weapons, because here I am, arguing that D&D would be better off without both signature weapons and LAGOe slot machine loot.

Go. Fuck. Yourself.

This thread is about people "wanting" things that will in fact make them less happy. The thread is about the fact that wishlists are bad. That people requesting "what they want" to the point that it tramples on the story, the world, and their relationship with other players is in fact self-defeating. Random Treasure drops exist only in the context of being an option that exists to counter the pro-wishlist claim that no other option is possible. The ins and outs of random treasure are not even fucking relevant to this thread, and if you want me to talk about them in depth make a different fucking thread.

Now stop shit posting and get with the fucking program. This thread is about refuting the proposition of Fuchs and Maj and other mouth breathers that if they ask for and receive everything they want that they will be happier than if they actually have to rely on effort and luck to get rewards. That's it. Every single other thing on this thread is a distraction. Including all of your posts for the last ten pages.

-Username17

[Fuchs]

Oh, how cute - Frank still thinks he knows what makes people happy. The arrogance is staggering.

Even if people did not know what they actually wanted they know what they do not want. And the loot lottery is something they do not want.

Check MMOGs, arguably the biggest gaming "lab" in existence. Random drops only gave way to quest rewards, then selectable quest rewards, then stuff you bought with tokens gotten for completing raids.

That's because by and large, people are sick of playing the loot lottery. They are sick of spending effort for naught, just because some die roll went bad. They are sick of sucking, and having to make do with shit just for rolling poorly on the loot.

If anyone actually was happy with random loot, then the games would look far different today.

They do not. Stop lieing about it.

Random Loot is not what the majority of the gamers wants. Deal with it.

Edit: Frank is often all about facts - well, the observable facts do not lie: Random Loot is something people do not want. They may not know what they really want, but they know they do not want random loot. And yes, they did try it. They tried it in 2E, they tried it in EQ, they tried it in every damn MMOG that had the random loot drops in. Perfect random loot, even - an impartial computer rolled for them. No favoritism at all.

And they realized they did not like it. That's why you have auction houses, vendor trash, and gold farmers in MMOGs. Because no one actually wants to play "random loot only". People want to get - buy, quest, earn, whatever - stuff they want without trusting luck.

[RadiantPhoenix]

That's because by and large, people are sick of playing the loot lottery. They are sick of spending effort for naught, just because some die roll went bad. They are sick of sucking, and having to make do with shit just for rolling poorly on the loot.

If this is the case, then one or more of the following problems is probably present:

• The players are only interested in the loot, rather than other aspects of the game.
• The rate at which "a cool item" (note: not necessarily a specific one, although it's probably helpful if it's something anyone can use rather than just one person) appeared under their paradigm is too low.
• The items aren't interesting enough ('just numbers') (this is a subset of the above, in which the rate is zero, because, "cool items," don't exist).
• Certain items are (perceived as) necessary.

EDIT: Also, in the only MMORPG I really played (EVE Online), the best equipment totally was randomly dropped. Most people were happy with using weaker items that were much, much more available.

[hogarth]

Oh, how cute - Frank still thinks he knows what makes people happy.

I think it's hilarious when his arguments boil down to "STOP WANTING STUFF!!" It's almost Buddhist, in a neckbeard-y way.

[Fuchs]

That's because by and large, people are sick of playing the loot lottery. They are sick of spending effort for naught, just because some die roll went bad. They are sick of sucking, and having to make do with shit just for rolling poorly on the loot.

If this is the case, then one or more of the following problems is probably present:

• The players are only interested in the loot, rather than other aspects of the game.
• The rate at which "a cool item" (note: not necessarily a specific one, although it's probably helpful if it's something anyone can use rather than just one person) appeared under their paradigm is too low.
• The items aren't interesting enough ('just numbers') (this is a subset of the above, in which the rate is zero, because, "cool items," don't exist).
• Certain items are (perceived as) necessary.

EDIT: Also, in the only MMORPG I really played (EVE Online), the best equipment totally was randomly dropped. Most people were happy with using weaker items that were much, much more available.

Can you buy that loot from other players in Eve? If yes, then it's not random loot only. It's "You can buy loot with money you get from selling loot". Which runs counter to Franks "You cannot buy anything, RANDOM LOOT ONLY!!!" vision.

As far as the other points go: We are talking loot here. Just because you hate the loot system doesn't mean you only care about the loot system. You can like a game's combat and quest system, and still hate the loot system.

People have different ideas of what is a cool and interesting item. Some even in MMOGs won't care for the lightning axe since it looks butt-ugly. But they'll love the flaming mace. Or the helmet that will allow you to cast a weak illusionary pet. With random drops they might never get what they think is cool.

Needed stuff is just that - needed. If you want to play a warrior you need warrior stuff. If it never drops you are boned. That's not "Perceived as neccessary", that's actual need to play your role. "You looted two one-handed swords, go DPS!" won't cut it if you want to be a tank - and even less if your guild wants you to tank, and you have all the tank gear but a good shield.

[Swordslinger]

Random Loot is not what the majority of the gamers wants. Deal with it.

The point isn't that they want it. It's that it may end up making them happier than what they want.

[virgil]

That's because by and large, people are sick of playing the loot lottery. They are sick of spending effort for naught, just because some die roll went bad. They are sick of sucking, and having to make do with shit just for rolling poorly on the loot.

If this is the case, then one or more of the following problems is probably present:

• The players are only interested in the loot, rather than other aspects of the game.
• The rate at which "a cool item" (note: not necessarily a specific one, although it's probably helpful if it's something anyone can use rather than just one person) appeared under their paradigm is too low.
• The items aren't interesting enough ('just numbers') (this is a subset of the above, in which the rate is zero, because, "cool items," don't exist).
• Certain items are (perceived as) necessary.

That is an element I can anecdotally attest to for WoW. Random loot was undesirable because items are largely class specific in design, and there are eight classes. In addition, until the highest level, quest rewards were better than anything dropped randomly; and people would actually research and perform those quests for the loot they want. At the highest levels, the overwhelmingly majority of play was *just* for loot optimization.

Keep in mind another thing, MMOs moved away from random loot, yes. But MMOs are also designed to pad out gameplay and be addictive. Their entire magic item paradigm works with different goals from tabletops.

[Fuchs]

Random Loot is not what the majority of the gamers wants. Deal with it.

The point isn't that they want it. It's that it may end up making them happier than what they want.

Are you dense? Wait, yes you are.

They tried it. For years. And now they know it makes them not happy. It was so damn clear that the games changed to make them more fun - or "less non-fun".

[Maj]

He would. But somebody has to get their thing *first* and somebody also has to get their thing *last* and it's the DM who decides who that is.

Um... Why? Is this like a firstborn twin thing where you're seriously concerned about the five minute difference in which one player gets the first description of stuff and everyone else has to wait their turn? When the elf king passes out goodies because the adventurers have been good little boys and girls heroes, there's barely enough time between characters for the players to update their character sheets. I don't have a problem with that.

I assume your PCs were heavily into character builds and had some specific existing character they wanted to precisely replicate?

Actually, the greatest roleplaying triumph of our group was Splorknar the Barbarian (If he was based on a real character, I haven't read that book). His player threw him together because he was easy to write up, and there wasn't a lot of characterization put into him - Splorknar was stupid, and determined to solve every problem by clubbing them with a tree.

But during the course of the game, Splorknar had to face the angst-filled question of whether he was just another barbarian worshipping the [local] god of destruction and smashing things, or whether he wanted to be considered a hero. And the drama of finding an item that made him more intelligent was so awesome. The player really got into being in-character - it was amazing.

If you had a group of people like that, I guess the next question is, why bother having treasure at all? Is there really any joy in getting stuff you knew you were going to get anyway?

I'm just gonna quote myself back on page 33 for this part and clarify that randomly rolling for items that players have a vested interest in - like weapons and armor - was the destructive part.

Most of the players in our games have one or two items that they put on their wishlist* and the rest is left to random treasure tables for serendipity - because sometimes you do roll up something better than fodder for ye olde magick shoppe.



*After all the discussion on wishlists, I have no clue what it actually means, so I'm using it in the sense of "I'd like a breastplate" without the details of what enchantments are on it, or "I'd like a mithral sword" without preference as to type of sword. Occasionally, there's a wishlist with an enchantment on it for something already owned: "I'd like my sword to be flaming/keen/defending/whatever."

In the case of Splorknar, the player rather liked his character wielding a tree (greatclub), and so the DM agreed that the tree could become a signature weapon. I don't even remember how it got to be an icy-burst tree (doubtless the story was great, but we were probably still laughing at the fact that it was masterwork), but that enchantment was not the request of the player. He just wanted the tree to upgrade.

The player wasn't totally sold on the enchantment until he horribly critted on an enemy and did at least twice their hitpoints in damage. "Snow!" became the cry at the game table and it stuck.

That way people can precisely follow whatever build they had in mind, since they don't really seem to care much about interacting with the gameworld and just want to get the gear they want.

Why on earth is there an assumption that there's no interaction with the game world when you ask for something? Maybe a player wants something for their character precisely because of interaction with the game world. Everything the characters got in our games had an in-game justification. There was not a single time [after character creation] when a player talked to the DM about their character and, ironically, just magically got some new toy for their character.

And for the record, our group stopped writing full-length classes and moved towards a more point-buy version of D&D because we didn't want to "precisely follow whatever build [we] had in mind."

So stow your pre-conceptions of our games because you're clearly very much off the mark.

[Username17]

That's odd. I assume your PCs were heavily into character builds and had some specific existing character they wanted to precisely replicate?

You're talking with Maj. She's a friendly person and all, but it's really important for you to understand that she actually doesn't play by "rules" and is pretty shaky on the whole "game" part of "role playing game". It's time to drag up the actual past. Not nine posts ago, but nine years ago. It's time once again to go back to Why Monks.

Because those of us who were there learned something that day. We learned that actually talking to Maj about mechanics was completely fucking pointless because the actual D&D games she played in were so ludicrously hug boxy and monty hall that they defied characterization. You really do need to go read about her actual character, because it is fucking hilarious.

The DM (who is also her husband) lets her start with multiple 18s, drops ludicrously overleveled equipment on her, and even lets her acquire divine ranks somehow. Her DM breaks the rules and the guidelines every which way to drop incomprehensible wish fulfillment bullshit on her character. And the punchline is: to this day she doesn't actually understand that her character did not accomplish or earn anything by having the DM shower her with favors.

Speaking to Maj about the shallowness of greed in an imaginary setting is like shouting at the ocean. She plays with all the cheat codes on. All of them. Even the ones that just turn your space marine into a pretty princess. And then... this is the best part... having turned on all of the cheat codes, she brags about her accomplishments anyway.

-Username17