Quote from: Nexus;825199Of course there could be circumstances where this might not make sense but that's ging to come up with almost any abstraction. And like others have noted is more suited for a game and premise where finances are a secondary or less concern.

Not so much disagreeing with Nexus as expanding on what they said.

Wealth Levels simplify by tracking wealth as a linear step function (or as a logarithmic step function)instead of as a semi-smooth curve. Thus any cost between Wealth levels either has no effect on the current wealth level or it is equal to an entire wealth level. Dealing with costs of multiple items also gets tricky. How many swords, guns, blasters can the character with Mid Level Wealth buy? One...no problem. Two... yeah that's cool...ten, now things get tricky. Is ten weapons equal to 1 Wealth Level? How about 100 weapons? 1000 weapons? Once you start having to answer questions like that, you might as well dump wealth levels and track smaller increments of wealth like credits, dollars, livres, or gold pieces.

That is why for me, wealth levels only work where wealth is not just a secondary concern, but simply color rather than a concern. A game where the PCs aren't typically going to be gaining wealth in game. Where Wealth Levels go wrong for me is when games include acquiring cash or other loot as an important or motivating activity. Some examples of the various situations:

• Star Trek: no need for Wealth Levels - wealth is irrelevant (post scarcity, blah blah blah).
  
• Star Wars: usually no need for Wealth Levels, though for some characters (Imperial Senator, Wealthy Noble, etc.) Wealth Levels may work like in Call of Cthuhlu- in Star Wars wealth is frequently irrelevant, exceptions being games focused on smugglers, bounty hunters or other fringe characters. and their Wealth Levels are not the best ways to handle that to my mind.
  
• Call of Cthulhu: Wealth Levels  - wealth is usually just color and a rationale for owning more than one car or a boat or plane; it is occasionally used as an explanation or excuse for how PCs can afford to travel.
  
• Honor+Intrigue: I found Wealth Levels were very awkward, not serving as a good method of tracking wealth gained from loot nor of using the acquisition or loss of wealth as a motivator, also Wealth Levels seem too fixed to fit well with making cost of living important to the characters as it was in the 17th Century for social climbers. For a different style of campaign, say something like Zorro or the Scarlet Pimpernel where wealth is a rationale for the hero having the time and money to secretly be a hero, Wealth Levels make sense (since it is more like a Supers campaign).
  
• Supers: Wealth Levels work great. Peter Parker struggles for money and Tony Stark is loaded. Adventures seldom change wealth levels. At most Peter's struggle to pay for a nice birthday present for Aunt may gives Spider Man a complication or a secondary plot activity.
  
• D&D, Sword & Sorcery generally: Wealth Levels seem to render one of the rationales and points of adventuring moot. Exceptions would be games where the PCs are more like Superheroes than they are like Conan, Fafhrd & the Gray Mouser, or Cugel the Clever.
  

Come to think of it, I have to admit that one of the reasons that finances don't come up much in our games is because someone always, if there's any possible way in the system, setting and premise, makes up the equivalent of Scrooge Mcduck, Richie Rich or Billionaire Bruce Wayne then basically takes care of everyone else.

Quote from: Nexus;825206Come to think of it, I have to admit that one of the reasons that finances don't come up much in our games is because someone always, if there's any possible way in the system, setting and premise, makes up the equivalent of Scrooge Mcduck, Richie Rich or Billionaire Bruce Wayne then basically takes care of everyone else.

Dilettante has always been a popular background when we play Call of Cthulhu for similar reasons.

Don't like it in D&D where treasure is XP and fortune and glory is the default goal.

Think it's fine in some other games (e.g., has worked fine for me when running Gold Book BRP).

Quote from: Bren;825204

• D&D, Sword & Sorcery generally: Wealth Levels seem to render one of the rationales and points of adventuring moot. Exceptions would be games where the PCs are more like Superheroes than they are like Conan, Fafhrd & the Gray Mouser, or Cugel the Clever.
  

Definitely agreed that abstract wealth doesn't work very well for D&D, especially in versions which embrace "gp = xp", but broader S&S seems like a good fit, considering how many S&S systems have a "even if you find a mountain of gold and gems this week, you'll have spent it all on wine, women, and song and be flat broke again by next week" concept as at least an optional rule, if not a core rule.

Fafhrd and Cugel are woeful gaps in my background knowledge, but I could see an abstract system working well for Conan - in the stories where he's a thief, he starts with very little; in stories where he's a king, he starts with kingly riches.  In other words, his abstract wealth level determines where he starts each story and any additional riches he picks up or expenses he incurs during the story have no lasting effect.

Quote from: nDervish;825284Definitely agreed that abstract wealth doesn't work very well for D&D, especially in versions which embrace "gp = xp", but broader S&S seems like a good fit, considering how many S&S systems have a "even if you find a mountain of gold and gems this week, you'll have spent it all on wine, women, and song and be flat broke again by next week" concept as at least an optional rule, if not a core rule.

Fafhrd and Cugel are woeful gaps in my background knowledge, but I could see an abstract system working well for Conan - in the stories where he's a thief, he starts with very little; in stories where he's a king, he starts with kingly riches.  In other words, his abstract wealth level determines where he starts each story and any additional riches he picks up or expenses he incurs during the story have no lasting effect.

This: "even if you find a mountain of gold and gems this week, you'll have spent it all on wine, women, and song and be flat broke again by next week" is a good point.

Systems that require spending the GP to get the XP is one solution. I've never used that myself. If the goal is the story driven treatment of wealth that we see in fiction, I think wealth levels is an inelegant way of handling that. I'd prefer just hand waving the changes in wealth. For example:

GM: "So time has passed for your PCs since the last adventure. Your PCs now find themselves in need of new funds. Tell us how your PC spent or squandered their old wealth or why your PC is now in need of funds."

And Fafhrd and Cugel are definitely worth checking out.

Legends of Anglerre (a Fate 3 game) had a pretty good way of handling this. Your Resources skill represents your normal level of wealth. This does tend to represent income, such as an estate or business. You can use it to buy stuff, grease wheels to a certain degree and so on.

If you find monetary wealth in an adventure then this might be a +1 treasure bundle, +2 or better. If you chose to spend the treasure then it adds it's numeric value to your Resources for a roll and is then consumed (the GM may allow you to split a +2 into two +1s and so on).

If you chose to invest the money then it would be a justification for permanently increases your Resources stat.

The rules are a little more complex than this, but that is the core.

It's worth noting that in a game like Fate having permanent ownership of a magic item would probably be represented as aspects, skills or stunts, too. It really isn't intended to model the acquisition of wealth, or the zero to hero transformation you get in DnD games. Characters are intended to start off capable and only change a little over time, both growing and receding in terms of abilities over time (e.g. You spend time focussing on your spelunking and your library studies start to suffer...).

thats why you read while you climb

Although I've played games that abstracted wealth (most notably Blue Rose), I find that in fantasy RPGs it's never satisfied me.  It's fine if you're not doing something that's serious resource-management; it's even preferable if you're dealing in more modern economics (for example, it's kind of pointless to keep precise track of wealth while playing 20th/21st-century Call of Cthulhu) but for a medieval fantasy setting the question of just how much money you have is important, especially at lower levels.