buying weapons (money or points?)

[maidenforce19]

if you're running a heroic campaign and u wanna buy, lets say, a sword from a store. do you play with money (cause money isnt in the HERO system rulebook) or do you use points? is there a point facotr to it if the sword has multiple abilities and is very powerful? i think there shud be points involved somehow. someone help

[Thia Halmades]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

In a Heroic Level Campaign, you would use money to purchase items. That includes potions, scrolls, wands, swords, clothes, food (FOOD!) and other sundry items.

 

However, ALSO in heroic campaigns, you'll often run across the problem of money. One nitwit purchases Wealth and the whole system pretty much falls apart, since most Heroic level campaigns aren't set up for Tony Stark & Batman (who are superheroic characters). That's why many people, in lieu of allowing Wealth, use Resource Points from Dark Champions.

 

Although I may have just badly over complicated your question. Anyway.

 

I am the Lord Captain Thia Halmades. You seem new here! Have some rep! The scales in the post next the number on the right hand side are Rep. You will only start to show a Rep Score when you have made 50 regular posts.

 

There's a forum at the bottom of the list called the "Non-Gaming Discussion." That's where most of the chaos is (careful, they bite). Posts to the NGD don't count towards your post count, so if you have a six hour long conversation, and your post count hasn't changed, that's why.

 

Anyone with their Name In Italics is a moderator. Play nice and they won't bug you -- they're also players and most have been on the boards for ages. Anyone with their Name In Bold And Italicized is an employee/admin. That includes Andy M., Simon, HeroTina, Steve Long & Darren Watts (And Ben Seeman). Almost forgot Ben.

 

If you click "UserCP" in your header list, you'll see that I have given you "t3h r3ppz0rz." Welcome to the boards, enjoy your stay and... I hope I was at least of some help. I'm sorry your question didn't get answered sooner, we're usually much faster than that.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Welcome aboard, maidenforce19 (and the preceding 18 if they show up). Hope you enjoy your visit here, and that you'll stop by again.

 

The standard for heroic level campaigns is that any weapons and equipment which is commonly available to anyone in the setting can be purchased with money. While the amount of money available to Player Characters may be controlled by the Game Master according to the flow of the campaign - for example, treasure that the PCs win during their adventures - there is a mechanism in the game by which the characters may pay points to have an established level of income. It's a Perquisite (or "Perk") called, oddly enough, Money, which is described in the rulebook section on Perquisites. It's not expensive or precisely defined, though, so a GM has to decide whether to allow it and how to regulate it in his or her campaign.

 

Many GMs do charge Character Points to players who want their characters to carry exceptional items not available to the common folk, such as enchanted weapons. Items bought this way are generally considered to be an essential part of the character, so that if they're lost, stolen or destroyed the GM will allow a way for the character to recover or replace them. OTOH many such items are built using the Independent Limitation, meaning that they have no special connection to the character using them, so they can be permanently lost or destroyed. Most GMs I know would not require a character to pay his own points for an Independent item.

 

If that wasn't clear enough, please feel free to post followup questions.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Money:

 

5ER p83 (as a Perk)

 

Money In Heroic Campaigns:

 

5ER p456 (under Building And Buying Equipment)

 

The Rules do not mention prices because they would be useless to a Universal System where the cost of something is setting dependant. The Money Perk gives some guidelines for start money and how much money the Perk provides, but they are merely suggestions based on Setting.

[Manic Typist]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Here's my recommendation:

 

Explain to the players that if they are going to walk into a store and purchase a magical sword, then yes they will need money.

 

If they want to keep that sword, through thick and thin, as a part of their character's identity- they will need to pay points IN ADDITION to the money.

 

If they just want to use it for a while, and have no real sentimental attachment to it, then explain that they will be able to keep it until it is lost during the course of their adventures. Maybe you'll decide it's unbalancing, and work to remove it from them. Maybe they'll have a bad die roll, maybe they'll be sloppy- unlike with character point items, you (as GM) will do nothing to help them keep the blade.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Note: I still don't know why everyone thinks this way. In a HEROIC level campaign, you hardly ever pay points for gear. Manic is right, you CAN, but it isn't necessary. It isn't even necessarily recommended. It depends on the feel you want.

 

Lessay your Paladin has a Holy Avenger. F'rinstance. And let's say he quested through thick & thin for it. He RP'd his arse off to come away with that thing, and it's a wicked great weapon. But he's Heroic, he's built on 75+75 and 50 xp. Do you really think he's going to have the 30 (or more) Real Points for a truly uber blade? Course not! He's "earned" it through his RP.

 

One of the common misconceptions I keep trying to snuff out is that the GM is somehow "obligated" to force balance by taking away things that aren't paid for. As a note, just because me and Manic both have 200 points, doesn't mean we're "balanced" against each other. If I'm playing a full bore Paladin, and he's playing a biology teacher, who do you think is going to win in a fight?

 

Here's another: Who do you think is going to be a better educator? He's a 200 point teacher. He's a legend in his school. He can reach any child, under any condition!! And he's worthless in a fight, but hey! He's balanced! Careful, he might write you up with his Holy Pen of Grading. Please.

 

Points /=/ Balance. They equal a measurement of possibility, at best. Don't get suckered into the whole "must pay to keep it" line.

 

And yes. I'm ranting. But it absolutely bugs me to death.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Don't get suckered into the whole "must pay to keep it" line.

 

This is something to keep to heart in a Heroic game.

 

There's no reason, obligation or need for a GM to remove an item.

 

To touch on that whole "it's starting to unbalance my game" point - what if the same item had points paid for it and was doing the same thing? The GM suddenly can't do something about the issue?

 

In both cases the GM is obligated to work with the player to bring balance back - not fall back on the old "well, you didn't pay points and it's breaking my game, so haha! it fell down a ravine. Oh well." That's bunk and I'd kill my GM were they to do that.

[Manic Typist]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

To touch on that whole "it's starting to unbalance my game" point - what if the same item had points paid for it and was doing the same thing? The GM suddenly can't do something about the issue?

 

In both cases the GM is obligated to work with the player to bring balance back - not fall back on the old "well, you didn't pay points and it's breaking my game, so haha! it fell down a ravine. Oh well." That's bunk and I'd kill my GM were they to do that.

 

If the character had points invested in the item, then the GM would be obligated to take the player off to the side, explain the situation, and try to come to some mutual conclusion.

 

If there's no points in the item, then he isn't. I'm not saying he shouldn't, I'm just saying that it's fair and reasonable (because all the players knew it was a real risk) that the item face.... increased oposition? Nothing to break the game or create the impression of "GM vs. players," just next time the villains might suddenly realize: "Hey, you know, my life might be a whole lot easier if I take that McGuffin from him, rather than just let him continually use it against me."

 

If the player hasn't paid points for it but obviously is ATTACHED to the item (from a roleplaying or personal perspective), the GM should work with the player and see what can be arranged. If the item can't be toned down, then at the very least its loss can be constructd in such a way as to be dramatic and advancing the plot (actually, it should ideally always be done this way).

[Thia Halmades]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

If there's no points in the item' date=' then he isn't. I'm not saying he shouldn't, I'm just saying that it's fair and reasonable (because all the players knew it was a real risk) that the item face.... increased oposition? Nothing to break the game or create the impression of "GM vs. players," just next time the villains might suddenly realize: "Hey, you know, my life might be a whole lot easier if I take that McGuffin from him, rather than just let him continually use it against me."[/quote']

 

This is pretty much what I'm talking about -- it's a logical fallacy, and GA brought up a great point. It doesn't matter to the player how he got the item, it matters that he has it. In d20, as my primary example as usual, or in White Wolf or any other game for that matter, it just doesn't occur to GMs to randomly take stuff away. It doesn't cross our minds. So when I got here and read people saying things like "Yeah, he didn't pay for it, so it suddenly breaks" my jaw hit the deck.

 

What does it matter? The first line of defense is always to pull the PC aside and say "Hey, this isn't working the way I intended, let's fix it." Failing that, insisting that you're going to fix it regardless is also critically important.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

If the character had points invested in the item, then the GM would be obligated to take the player off to the side, explain the situation, and try to come to some mutual conclusion.

 

If there's no points in the item, then he isn't. I'm not saying he shouldn't, I'm just saying that it's fair and reasonable (because all the players knew it was a real risk) that the item face.... increased oposition? Nothing to break the game or create the impression of "GM vs. players," just next time the villains might suddenly realize: "Hey, you know, my life might be a whole lot easier if I take that McGuffin from him, rather than just let him continually use it against me."

 

If the player hasn't paid points for it but obviously is ATTACHED to the item (from a roleplaying or personal perspective), the GM should work with the player and see what can be arranged. If the item can't be toned down, then at the very least its loss can be constructd in such a way as to be dramatic and advancing the plot (actually, it should ideally always be done this way).

 

Maybe it's because I'm not a "Champions" Player, and my first years with Hero didn't involved paying for anything but skills, characteristics and magic spells.

 

But this whole line of thinking about the GM has some right and/or obligation to remove the item if no points were involved is flawed thinking in a Heroic game. Heroic games by default require no point spent on any kind of equipment. It's how Heroic works, and this does not suddenly give the GM permission to remove an item he doesn't like.

 

The GM is still, at the very least as courtesy to his players, obligated to take the player aside and work with the regarding the item in question. Just like anything paid for with points in a Superheroic game.

 

A different mode of thinking is required between Heroic and Superheroic. One isn't just the other on less points.

[Manic Typist]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Maybe it's because I'm not a "Champions" Player, and my first years with Hero didn't involved paying for anything but skills, characteristics and magic spells.

 

But this whole line of thinking about the GM has some right and/or obligation to remove the item if no points were involved is flawed thinking in a Heroic game. Heroic games by default require no point spent on any kind of equipment. It's how Heroic works, and this does not suddenly give the GM permission to remove an item he doesn't like.

 

The GM is still, at the very least as courtesy to his players, obligated to take the player aside and work with the regarding the item in question. Just like anything paid for with points in a Superheroic game.

 

A different mode of thinking is required between Heroic and Superheroic. One isn't just the other on less points.

 

GA, I've never played a champions game in my life. The only thing I've ever paid for are skills, spells, perks, etc. Oh, and powers built as foci (I.E. magical weapons, etc), which IS how Heroic works (typically). Not all kinds of equipment are free.

 

The GM doesn't have an OBLIGATION to take away items just because they aren't paid for. I haven't said that once. I'm saying he has an obligation to preserve the balance and fun of the game for everyone involved. If he suddenly realizes that an element of his game has become unbalancing (such as a magical sword), then yes he should take action. If the item has had no points paid for it, then it's realtively simple. The players and GM already have an understanding that such items are basically story elements- the PCs get to use them for "free" until such time as the situation changes, whether it be because the players are stupid (I'm going to go get drunk and wander down dark alleys!) or a more concentrated effort on the part of the GM.

 

It's never, ever "Oh, it just breaks because you haven't paid points for it." That's stupid. Again, it's best if the GM helps the player see the situation, and gets their feedback. But if they player responds with "No, I want to keep it anyway," then they had better be prepared to pay points for it, assuming the GM is willing to let them. Otherwise, it returns into the hands of the GM as a tool to advance the plot.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

If the item has had no points paid for it' date=' then it's realtively simple. The players and GM already have an understanding that such items are basically story elements- the PCs get to use them for "free" until such time as the situation changes, whether it be because the players are stupid (I'm going to go get drunk and wander down dark alleys!) or a more concentrated effort on the part of the GM.[/quote']

 

This is where our opinions diverge.

 

They aren't just story elements becuase no points are involved. They can be as much a part of the character as any point expenditure ever made.

 

It's not relatively simple just because it's "free" - it can be just as complicated as anything where points are involved.

 

There may be circumstances where the items aren't invovled in the game - but that's true of anything whether points are involved or not.

 

The item(s) may be "free" by points reconning, but they may not be "free" from other aspects such as Role Play investment, Character concept, rewards over time, whatever. I've been in games where Items come hand in hand with XP - but no "points" are spent - how are those under your "relatively simple system" ?

 

I say it's a bad attitude to have on the part of the GM when gaming with that mentality.

[Manic Typist]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

This is where our opinions diverge.

 

They aren't just story elements becuase no points are involved. They can be as much a part of the character as any point expenditure ever made.

 

It's not relatively simple just because it's "free" - it can be just as complicated as anything where points are involved.

 

There may be circumstances where the items aren't invovled in the game - but that's true of anything whether points are involved or not.

 

The item(s) may be "free" by points reconning, but they may not be "free" from other aspects such as Role Play investment, Character concept, rewards over time, whatever. I've been in games where Items come hand in hand with XP - but no "points" are spent - how are those under your "relatively simple system" ?

 

I say it's a bad attitude to have on the part of the GM when gaming with that mentality.

 

I'm sorry, I actually don't understand you. I have a head cold, so that is probably most of the problem. Can you please elaborate? Some examples for your points?

 

I suspect, but am not sure, that we are talking past each other. I think your "items that aren't part of the game" and what I am talking about are the same thing. I'm not talking about significant items, just unbalancing ones. The stuff that players pick up casually, from stores or fallen foes, just because they are useful (from a mechanical, goal achieving, not roleplaying perspective).

 

If there is a heavy emotional or RP investment, then it's covered by my "simple system" in that the GM needs to talk to the players about the problem and come up with a solution (which might include the loss of said item, but with the players helping make it a fun and meaningful event!).

 

However, ultimately, if a player wants a GUARANTEE of keeping something (in which the GM gives them opportunities to regain something lost, or additonal rolls etc to prevent losing it in the first place).... they need to pay points for it. The book had always made this sound pretty standard to me, and it makes sense.

 

Edit: if I were to give out magic item in addition to XP, I would either do it rarely and only for significant events, or reduce XP given out in general.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

I'm sorry, I actually don't understand you. I have a head cold, so that is probably most of the problem. Can you please elaborate? Some examples for your points?

 

I suspect, but am not sure, that we are talking past each other. I think your "items that aren't part of the game" and what I am talking about are the same thing. I'm not talking about significant items, just unbalancing ones. The stuff that players pick up casually, from stores or fallen foes, just because they are useful (from a mechanical, goal achieving, not roleplaying perspective).

 

If there is a heavy emotional or RP investment, then it's covered by my "simple system" in that the GM needs to talk to the players about the problem and come up with a solution (which might include the loss of said item, but with the players helping make it a fun and meaningful event!).

 

However, ultimately, if a player wants a GUARANTEE of keeping something (in which the GM gives them opportunities to regain something lost, or additonal rolls etc to prevent losing it in the first place).... they need to pay points for it. The book had always made this sound pretty standard to me, and it makes sense.

 

Edit: if I were to give out magic item in addition to XP, I would either do it rarely and only for significant events, or reduce XP given out in general.

 

Any Item In Play.

 

And where does it say anything about "garauntee" ?

 

I couldn't find it. It does say "typically" leading one to believe that a Player can spend points on Equipment for their character - but it's not required to "keep" the item - unbalacing or otherwise.

 

p338-339 of Fantasy Hero does go into unbalacing items in a FH game (I haven't checked but I'd assume the other Heroic Genre books have something similar). It states simply removing the item is the last ditch effort to use. But then - it mentions spells (where Points are paid) in the same breath, which leads one to believe it's merely some good bits of all around GM advice to follow to keep the game balanced and people happy.

 

At any point, IMO, that a GM says or thinks "well, it's unbalancing but the player didn't spend points on it, so it's OK for me to remove it at the next convenient point." has failed his players at some level. (now a Fumble Roll is another thing entirely... that's just bad luck )

[TheRealVector]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

This is something to keep to heart in a Heroic game.

 

There's no reason, obligation or need for a GM to remove an item.

 

To touch on that whole "it's starting to unbalance my game" point - what if the same item had points paid for it and was doing the same thing? The GM suddenly can't do something about the issue?

 

In both cases the GM is obligated to work with the player to bring balance back - not fall back on the old "well, you didn't pay points and it's breaking my game, so haha! it fell down a ravine. Oh well." That's bunk and I'd kill my GM were they to do that.

 

But Ghost-Angel, adopting your attitude would be one less tactic in my arsenal of player misery!

 

If I start letting players keep the very things I placed in the game world as rewards I'll have to start working harder; thinking through my plots, updating npc threats, customizing pre-generated scenarios for my players etcetera.

[Manic Typist]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Any Item In Play.

 

And where does it say anything about "garauntee" ?

 

I couldn't find it. It does say "typically" leading one to believe that a Player can spend points on Equipment for their character - but it's not required to "keep" the item - unbalacing or otherwise.

 

p338-339 of Fantasy Hero does go into unbalacing items in a FH game (I haven't checked but I'd assume the other Heroic Genre books have something similar). It states simply removing the item is the last ditch effort to use. But then - it mentions spells (where Points are paid) in the same breath, which leads one to believe it's merely some good bits of all around GM advice to follow to keep the game balanced and people happy.

 

At any point, IMO, that a GM says or thinks "well, it's unbalancing but the player didn't spend points on it, so it's OK for me to remove it at the next convenient point." has failed his players at some level. (now a Fumble Roll is another thing entirely... that's just bad luck )

 

And just like the spells, the GM needs to act to check unbalancing forces. So, if it was a spell, he would need to work with a PC to figure out a way to reduce the problem, possibly even by finding a dramatically and logically appropriate way to "lose" the spell.

 

Actually, if the GM DOESN'T do that, then I think he has failed the players. I'm not talking about GM Fiat here, I'm talking about creating opportunities for roleplay and plot development. So, I would cease to give secret pluses to characters trying to hold onto a sword hilt while hanging onto the mainsail of ship in the middle of a sword (if the blade was unbalancing in the story aspect, not weight distribution!). I might have a few more mooks become slightly more intelligent and go for a couple of Disarms (they might or might not roll well). If they get captured and stripped of their gear, then the blade might be kept seperately or lost entirely. Or end up on the hip of a very dangerous person...... such as their nemisis?

 

I agree it's a last resort, but I contend that it's perfectly legitimate! The player didn't pay points for it, so the "contract" of the game is NOT violated. If you pay points for it, it's yours (barring you doing something unbelievably stupid). If you didn't, it's yours as long as you can hold onto it. If you don't and it's unbalancing, expect it to be harder to hold onto it. If you put in significant time and effort and roleplay into it, you (and the GM) should be more than able to work something out so that play balance is preserved and yet the player is still happy. If you don't care about it (treat it like a tool that you don't pay any real attention to), then it's loss will just be window dressing to the rest of the scene.

 

And finally, I further contend that if the player refuses to come to some sort of middle ground, the GM has the right and even duty to make it inevitable that the item in question is removed from play to perserve the game for EVERYONE (the other players, the GM, and the stubborn player included).

 

I'm not talking about stripping players of hard earned equipment. I'm talking about preserving game balance against unbalancing forces that the players aren't really attached to.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

But Ghost-Angel, adopting your attitude would be one less tactic in my arsenal of player misery!

 

If I start letting players keep the very things I placed in the game world as rewards I'll have to start working harder; thinking through my plots, updating npc threats, customizing pre-generated scenarios for my players etcetera.

 

zing!

 

....

 

On the flipside of this coin - there is a certain level of repsonsibility on the players heads not to turn the game into Loot And Burn, or to work with the GM in cases where things are breaking the game.

[TheRealVector]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

zing!

 

....

 

On the flipside of this coin - there is a certain level of repsonsibility on the players heads not to turn the game into Loot And Burn, or to work with the GM in cases where things are breaking the game.

 

I certainly agree...unless the players and the GM actually want a game of "loot and burn".

 

Not my kinda game, but many people in the roleplaying hobby are very quick to look look down their noses at such people as not only poor roleplayers but actually bad people. It's the unspoken assumption of half the posts on these boards.

 

No skin off my nose, but I do find it endlessly amusing.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

And just like the spells, the GM needs to act to check unbalancing forces. So, if it was a spell, he would need to work with a PC to figure out a way to reduce the problem, possibly even by finding a dramatically and logically appropriate way to "lose" the spell.

 

Actually, if the GM DOESN'T do that, then I think he has failed the players. I'm not talking about GM Fiat here, I'm talking about creating opportunities for roleplay and plot development. So, I would cease to give secret pluses to characters trying to hold onto a sword hilt while hanging onto the mainsail of ship in the middle of a sword (if the blade was unbalancing in the story aspect, not weight distribution!). I might have a few more mooks become slightly more intelligent and go for a couple of Disarms (they might or might not roll well). If they get captured and stripped of their gear, then the blade might be kept seperately or lost entirely. Or end up on the hip of a very dangerous person...... such as their nemisis?

 

I agree it's a last resort, but I contend that it's perfectly legitimate! The player didn't pay points for it, so the "contract" of the game is NOT violated. If you pay points for it, it's yours (barring you doing something unbelievably stupid). If you didn't, it's yours as long as you can hold onto it. If you don't and it's unbalancing, expect it to be harder to hold onto it. If you put in significant time and effort and roleplay into it, you (and the GM) should be more than able to work something out so that play balance is preserved and yet the player is still happy. If you don't care about it (treat it like a tool that you don't pay any real attention to), then it's loss will just be window dressing to the rest of the scene.

 

And finally, I further contend that if the player refuses to come to some sort of middle ground, the GM has the right and even duty to make it inevitable that the item in question is removed from play to perserve the game for EVERYONE (the other players, the GM, and the stubborn player included).

 

I'm not talking about stripping players of hard earned equipment. I'm talking about preserving game balance against unbalancing forces that the players aren't really attached to.

 

What happens if points are used to pay for the item? What then? You can't remove the unbalancing item so easily simply because points came into play? But it's unbalacing, breaking the game... it needs to be removed.

 

Your scenario above, only the player paid points for the sword. But it's unbalancing... what now?

 

I contend the "contract" holds true and solid for any equipment in a Heroic game regardless of points are not being used. By removing the weapon simply because points aren't invovled DOES violate the "contract" - Heroic Games Do Not Expect Points To Be Used For Equipment; Therefore The "Contract" Is There Regardless.

 

In a Heroic Campaign the GM is under the same obligation regarding Equipment that he is under for Points Paid in a Superheroic Game.

[casualplayer]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

A thing to remember about exceptional gear is that they come bundled with a few disadvantages like Distinctive Features: Tempting target for thieves and Watched/Hunted: Previous owner/covetous bystander. It usually evens out, more or less, if you are sweating the points involved.

 

It's a bad precedent to let characters pick up the real goodies at MedievalMart rather than bleeding and sweating to get them. The things you value have stories involved.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

In my view, the item you did not pay points for has the "independent" limitation. It can be taken away, broken or lost, in which case it won't come back. Items you paid for, and did not apply the Independent limitation to, are replacable fairly readily if lost/broken.

 

That's not tp say the GM should go out of his way to strip players of their treasures, but at the same time, he's not obligated to let that Paladin easily locate a replacement Holy Avenger if this one gets lost in a bottomless pit.

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

In my view, the item you did not pay points for has the "independent" limitation. It can be taken away, broken or lost, in which case it won't come back. Items you paid for, and did not apply the Independent limitation to, are replacable fairly readily if lost/broken.

 

That's not tp say the GM should go out of his way to strip players of their treasures, but at the same time, he's not obligated to let that Paladin easily locate a replacement Holy Avenger if this one gets lost in a bottomless pit.

 

Replacement is a whole different matter.

 

If an item is lost, for whatever reason in whatever way, in a Heroic game there's no obligation on the part of the GM to replace it.

[Manic Typist]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Replacement is a whole different matter.

 

If an item is lost, for whatever reason in whatever way, in a Heroic game there's no obligation on the part of the GM to replace it.

 

 

Unless they paid points for it. Then there is (unless it was lost in a particularly stupid fashion).

 

In response to your other post, if the player paid points for it- then the GM needs to find someway of reducing the problem while keeping the player happy. If that somehow proves impossible (an EXTREME scenario), then the points would need to be refunded.

 

Points don't need to be paid for equipment normally, but the rules also state that players should pay points for particularly powerful item (essentially, magical or especially unique). Run of the mill- no points.

[casualplayer]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

I think you guys may be looking at things from the wrong angle; the GM should only allow characters to spend points on things they would want the character to be able to replace. Everything else should have an implied "it's yours for as long as you can hold on to it." Someone way back in the barbaric, pre-game era someone bought the item with points, Independant to conserve hard-won XP, and then died of old age or an allergic reaction to swordmetal. Your character is just the latest in a long series of wielders, and certainly isn't the last.

 

I mean, does anyone think Frodo spent points on the One Ring? Does anyone think he should have had to? Does anyone think he should have recouped those points after the Ring took a dip in lava?

[ghost-angel]

Re: buying weapons (money or points?)

 

Points don't need to be paid for equipment normally' date=' but the rules also state that players should pay points for particularly powerful item (essentially, magical or especially unique). Run of the mill- no points.[/quote']

 

I never saw that written in the rules. Page?

 

In my opionion the GM has two options when he gets to fantastical items (unique, magical, non-ordinary):

 

Treat it like normal equipment (no points need to be paid)

Require everyone to pay points for these items (turning the game into a variation on Superheroic IMO).

 

In either case it's up to the GM to control the number and power level of these items in his game.