Double Ds Charter



  • Can one of y'all post the details of the Double Ds charter?

    Thanks, @TomunistParty!

    @TomunistParty said in Double Ds Charter:

    The Double D's

    Division of Treasure: 10% to communal party fund, 90% split among active party.

    Division of Items: adjudicated by need on a case by case basis, otherwise roll off.

    Disciplinary actions:
    If a party member has wronged another, committing an offense such as theft. The guilty member must pay restitution of one of his shares into the communal party fund.

    Multiple offenses will be resolved based on the general mood of the day.



  • @Mike no





  • @Mike said in Double Ds Charter:

    Can one of y'all post the details of the Double Ds charter?

    If I still have the sheet, I'll post tonight.



  • The Double D's

    Division of Treasure: 25% to communal party fund, 75% split among active party.

    Division of Items: adjudicated by need on a case by case basis, otherwise roll off.

    Disciplinary actions:
    If a party member has wronged another, committing an offense such as theft. The guilty member must pay restitution of one of his shares into the communal party fund.

    Multiple offenses will be resolved based on the general mood of the day.



  • 0_1487788896898_double-d.jpg



  • Nice!



  • @Mike

    Would you amend the 1st post to read 10% and 90% respectively with regard to treasure split?



  • @JohnY said in Double Ds Charter:

    @Mike

    Would you amend the 1st post to read 10% and 90% respectively with regard to treasure split?

    Done.



  • I agree to the amendment



  • While we are altering the charter lets work out a better way to distribute items. Right now it is far too nebulous. For example, when does the dispute for new items occur; upon discovery (limiting candidates), or upon return to camp.

    I propose 1 of 3 things.

    1. We elect a quartermaster who determines who gets what Items. He would make the decision upon the items returning to camp. While freshly discovered in the dungeon, the items will be used by the party however they choose but no one actually owns them until the quartermaster makes the call. (hirelings may find this bias)

    2. We replace the "roll off" with a "bid off." Upon returning to camp the company (and hirelings) bid GP on the item, highest bid wins the item. The bid is paid to the party fund. Those that just finished an expedition are much more likely to have loose cash on hand than those back at camp.

    3. We postpone the ownership dispute of an item until we return to camp, then we roll off company wide.However, this can lead to a situation where those that did not adventure gain the spoils, but limit a sitch where those that don't maximally benefit from an item end up with it due to circumstance.


  • Dungeon Master

    Here are recommendations. This replaces rolling off with swift case making and voting.



  • @Jackson
    This looks great.

    "there may be only two characters involved in such a dispute"

    • what if more than two characters can use/desire the item.

    "if, upon identification, the nature of its best use changes, then either: article i and ii"

    • "Best use" is too nebulous. What if it is best for the party to just sell the thing?

    -We need to announce that this preceding (lets call it the loot moot) has taken place even if there was just one unopposed player interested in the item. That way a character doesn't assume ownership because no one else refuted such claim of ownership and therefore a loot moot didn't take place, and then sessions later another character goes "wait, we didn't loot moot on that; so now its up for grabs."


  • Dungeon Master

    @TomunistParty said in Double Ds Charter:

    @Jackson
    This looks great.

    "there may be only two characters involved in such a dispute"

    • what if more than two characters can use/desire the item.

    Then characters must find reason to recuse themselves from the loot moot. Realize they have a lot of items already, only have a passing interest, general altruism, etc. The idea is that quickly get to two when the is a dispute, and then vote quickly then.

    "if, upon identification, the nature of its best use changes, then either: article i and ii"

    • "Best use" is too nebulous. What if it is best for the party to just sell the thing?

    We can't sell magic items anyway is my understanding. @mike ?

    -We need to announce that this preceding (lets call it the loot moot) has taken place even if there was just one unopposed player interested in the item. That way a character doesn't assume ownership because no one else refuted such claim of ownership and therefore a loot moot didn't take place, and then sessions later another character goes "wait, we didn't loot moot on that; so now its up for grabs."

    The loot moot (love that) is there for when a dispute arises. If none do, ownership IS assumed.



  • This is really good and happy to see this debate!

    One thing to note for @Jackson's document:

    A hireling taking a full share may offer themselves as a recipient and make a case for themselves the same as any other member, and vote in the same active party votes.

    A hireling who sees "the party votes who gets the item" and quickly realizes y'all aren't going to vote items to a hireling will see that as "no magic items for me" and that might be a penalty to hiring.

    For example, you hire a fighter, but there are always going to be 2-3 PC fighters in the party. In what situation does a hireling fighter get the vote over one of those 2-3 PCs? Slim to none.

    That's not too big of a deal, you just might not be able to hire some people who might have signed on. And, it might be prudent to not hire retainers who request a full share of treasure, along with magical items (i.e. hire people lower level than you; 0th levels at 1st level).



  • @Jackson said in Double Ds Charter:

    We can't sell magic items anyway is my understanding. @mike ?

    You could, but expect to not get even close to its "true" value. Only people who are going to buy them are extremely wealthy folks and adventuring parties, the latter being your best bet if you want to sell something. And, they are more likely to trade like Genevote did with Cade with a spell for the wand.

    Genevote now has Charm Person and Magic Missile! Woot!


  • Dungeon Master

    @Mike and a crush, don't forget.



  • @Jackson said in Double Ds Charter:

    @Mike and a crush, don't forget.

    What can she say? Genevote swoons for secretive, powerful magic-users.

    You're the one who shouldn't forget so you can leverage it in the future. :wink:



  • This section seems like it'll cause problems:

    Consumables are the property of the characters that find them, and may be used, redistributed, bartered with, etc. as they choose, without consultation with other PC’s.

    1. A whole party could find something.
    2. A single character could find a trove of potions; thieves, especially.
    3. Like other items, some consumables are far more suitable for certain classes (e.g. potion of heroism).

    I'd recommend divvying consumables in a similar way you divvy other items.


  • Dungeon Master

    @Mike Most of us are already doing this, and I think it could with as long as we don't get thieves that want to ransom every item. Call it an exercise in good will. Anyone that will abuse this will subsequently be abused​ when it comes time for voting on permanent items.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Nerd Louisville Community was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.