New GM and Some Questions

[Bardwulf]

Another thing is that monsters, foes or what have you don't always need to be carrying money on them to loot. What use would darkspawn have for coin? None. They probably trade in people's tongues or something, lol.
So I try to stay very focused on where they would be finding money. Some cultists out on a street doing a mission for their order? Well they don't need to have a lot of cash on them. Most of it is in their strongbox at home I expect. Perhaps just enough to buy some food or emergency lodging or travel if it comes up. Nothing that could be considered "loot" and so on.

[shonuff]

Another thing is that monsters, foes or what have you don't always need to be carrying money on them to loot. What use would darkspawn have for coin? None. They probably trade in people's tongues or something, lol.
So I try to stay very focused on where they would be finding money. Some cultists out on a street doing a mission for their order? Well they don't need to have a lot of cash on them. Most of it is in their strongbox at home I expect. Perhaps just enough to buy some food or emergency lodging or travel if it comes up. Nothing that could be considered "loot" and so on.

There is always the opportunity for loot, though. Spiders, wolves, etc. would drag important kills to their dens with the possibility of money/trinkets. Darkspawn could easily take money when they loot the dead, as well; just because they don't have use for it doesn't mean they wouldn't take it. Your average joe on the street? S/he could just as easily have all of their money on them as at home -- a strongbox costs money itself, and most people wouldn't have much.

Most arguably moneyless adventures also have a source, a questgiver offering something for completion.

99 out of 100 quests are going to have loot of some sort somewhere along the adventure. However, adventurers are going to have more money than your average peasant, so it will be difficult to keep their money stable (and low) with just aspects that you would use for peasants.

[5trangeCase]

There is always the opportunity for loot, though. Spiders, wolves, etc. would drag important kills to their dens with the possibility of money/trinkets. Darkspawn could easily take money when they loot the dead, as well; just because they don't have use for it doesn't mean they wouldn't take it. Your average joe on the street? S/he could just as easily have all of their money on them as at home -- a strongbox costs money itself, and most people wouldn't have much.

Most arguably moneyless adventures also have a source, a questgiver offering something for completion.

99 out of 100 quests are going to have loot of some sort somewhere along the adventure. However, adventurers are going to have more money than your average peasant, so it will be difficult to keep their money stable (and low) with just aspects that you would use for peasants.

There being the "opportunity" for loot is completely meaningless. There's an opportunity for every random encounter to be against a gang of giant spiders, but you don't do that because it would be detrimental to your game. The likelihood that you would be able to loot money from wolf or spider lairs is minimal, so don't do it. Darkspawn may be able to "easily" to make money, but they don't have to. Your average joe just got pickpocketed/spent all his money at the tavern/is more poor than he looks.

I don't disagree with questgivers giving you money for completion; but even that can be dodged by taking out the middleman and have them provide the PCs with items instead.

In regards to money sinks, encourage your players to find a place where they can call home; very, very few people are comfortable with being wanderers and nomads. Get them to buy or rent property. You can then feel free to give them as much money as you want because they'll probably be motivated to get a nicer place, plus they'll have to pay their rent.

[shonuff]

There being the "opportunity" for loot is completely meaningless. There's an opportunity for every random encounter to be against a gang of giant spiders, but you don't do that because it would be detrimental to your game. The likelihood that you would be able to loot money from wolf or spider lairs is minimal, so don't do it. Darkspawn may be able to "easily" to make money, but they don't have to. Your average joe just got pickpocketed/spent all his money at the tavern/is more poor than he looks.

Except by-and-large, people play RPGs to see advancement, not maintain the status quo. Furthermore, your typical "go clear out a spider cave" quests come from quest-givers, who then distribute loot.

I don't disagree with questgivers giving you money for completion; but even that can be dodged by taking out the middleman and have them provide the PCs with items instead.

DA is low magic, so either you'll end up with too many magic items or some being pawned off.

In regards to money sinks, encourage your players to find a place where they can call home; very, very few people are comfortable with being wanderers and nomads. Get them to buy or rent property. You can then feel free to give them as much money as you want because they'll probably be motivated to get a nicer place, plus they'll have to pay their rent.

Which circles back to one of my original points -- DA is low money. Unless you go super high end, a home won't be enough of a money sink. Reconstruction of Vigil's Keep can cost 80 gold, for instance. And there isn't enough of a price guide listing to really create a feel for the economy -- ship passage (or purchase), for example.

You could say that a GM has license to create those superlatives, and I would agree with you, but it still feels the world is fairly undeveloped if some things like that are not included.

[Lynata]

I guess income and spending are a really tricky thing to balance, and it comes down to each group's unique way of spending it that the GM has to find ways adapting to. The nature and "condition" of the enemies faced by the party are, of course, one of the easiest ways of dealing with this. In terms of fighting style and threat level, there is little difference between a rag-tag band of highwaymen and a mercenary team - but whilst the latter will only have a few copper in their purses, the latter might have five times the amount of money. Not to mention that they'll have real swords rather than just wooden clubs!

Looting equipment is probably even more difficult than the question of how many coins the opponents have in their pockets, though. That being said, a clever GM will find ways to "slow down" this path of gaining money by limiting both the amount of gear a character can carry around (so nobody gets the idea of carrying 10 swords on his back), as well as potential buyers for it, or even how much a buyer is willing to spend, all depending on who the party meets or at which village they stop. Needless to say, a bunch of Dalish will be interested in other things than humans or dwarves, and vice versa. And good luck selling darkspawn weapons. Worst case you'll face a bunch of templars or an angry mob for supposedly spreading the taint.

In terms of moneysinks, I like jgladeb's idea about armor losing its efficiency - although it seems a bit random for my taste. Whilst easy to keep track off, it doesn't take into account the number or intensity of battles, much less how much individual characters were hit, if at all. As a rogue or archer who has never been hit, I'd probably feel a bit miffed at having to spend money because my leather armor suddenly starts falling apart from "travel damage". That said, it is difficult to come up with useful alternatives to this solution. The only things that spring to my mind right away would be to either record the amount and/or strength of hits and have the AR go down after a certain threshold has been reached (some sort of "Armor Health" if you will), or by reducing the AR each time a single attack has triggered some sort of condition - such as showing a certain combination of dice, possibly modified by the Piercing quality of some weapons, spells, or stunts...

I don't really believe in the idea of letting the heroes buy a home, unless one's campaign is actually somewhat limited in regional scope - such as Kirkwall in DA2 - or if you have long downtimes between individual quests in an ongoing campaign; downtime that the characters can spend in such a domicile. Otherwise, the heroes won't be very attached to a home, if they have any interest of owning one in the first place.

Another idea - aside from the most obvious of upgrading one's equipment (warhorses and barding are expensive!) - might be hiring underlings. This can range from one or two servants or squires who assist with setting up camp and help you don your armor or cook for you all the way to a small army, with which you take to the field a la the final battle in DA:O. The latter is a concept that worked well in the computer game Mount & Blade, that has you start as a homeless individual who, given time, may end up having his/her own keep, villages to tax, and armies to lead.

Last but not least, consider the characters' backgrounds and what they mean, and remind the players of this if need be. Chantry clerics and templars will have little use for money and will probably donate most of it to the organization dominating their life. The families of noble characters on the other hand are obliged to raise and fund armies if requested by the king, so keep this in mind the next time your campaign has the noble's own land in turmoil due to an upcoming Blight, civilian unrest, or war with a neighboring nation (easiest for dwarven characters, since Orzammar is always at war). Circle mages will likely spend most of their money for keeping up the expensive lifestyle they are used to from the tower. Dalish elves may have an obligation to their clan, necessitating the purchase of exotic (and expensive) goods for the good of his or her people rather than own gain. The list goes on.

[shonuff]

Looting equipment -- In a PnP RPG, I would say this is probably a no-go, for the most part. And at most, the value would be 1/2 or 1/4 of the list.

Armor efficiency loss -- I wouldn't use. It would become a little problematic once magic weapons/armor came into play.

Home/base is a necessity IMO. For nothing else, the poison-making sets mentioned in Set 2 are supposed to be very fragile and not so transportable. However, a nice home in a city would most likely not be more than a dozen gold or so, and the more expensive keeps/manors wouldn't be purchaseable IMO.

Warhorses so far haven't been given a list price, which is problematic. You could take a riding horse and upgrade it via the quality scale, but that is a little messy. I think GR should have included a warhorse in the mounts listing, but that might just be me. Barding, IIRC, isn't listed either, but would be fairly expensive... of course, I wouldn't put it higher than a suit of heavy plate.

Underlings are a mixed bag. IMO, they're too much of a hassle to figure out the exact cost, and then there is the added problem of what exactly happens to them during an adventure.

Poison-making is a nice money sink for some (albeit not all) characters, and potion-making/herbalism could be. I think GR might have gone a little too far by making rare weapons/armor/materials a little too rare. If they are quest only, then money doesn't really come into play.

I've said it before in other threads. IMO, AGE needs an expanded inventory list. Spyglasses, alchemy sets, shovels, soap, mess kits, bedrolls, fishing tackle, etc. As is, GR assumes that every character is going to eat either dried rations or in an inn -- what about hunting? You can do that with a bow or traps, but then a pot and carving knife are important.

And it's really difficult to pin down prices, IMO, when a backpack is 9 sp, a belt pouch is 1 sp, but a water skin is 40 cp, and they're all similar in function and not too different in size. And belt pouches vs. waterskins is a definite head-scratcher to me.

[Lynata]

Isn't looting equipment the most obvious way of making money, though? Stuff like platemail will be "somewhat difficult" to move, of course, but when a character can pick between a purse with 67 copper and the slain foe's sword, it would be weird to not at least consider taking the latter. Even when you sell it for 1/4 its original cost, that's still a neat sum. And equipment is getting scavenged and repurposed all the time in the setting, so unless the character feels he or she is "above such behavior" (be it due to honor, religious beliefs or simple superstition), ...

Now, my group didn't really run into this problem yet and maybe never will - but speaking in purely hypothetical terms, how would you deal with it? Say, when you have a character whose commoner background makes it plausible for him or her to pick any and all corpses for vendible items, like most types of rogues? Or is this something that should be dealt with between the players in some sort of OOC-agreement to keep the game from getting bogged down by these acts or, perhaps even worse, prevent single characters from growing filthy rich way too fast?

Home bases I'm still sceptical about. How often would you actually be able to visit and use them? Any of you had experiences with this in your campaigns?

And yeah, underlings are a mixed bag - but for all the trouble they can be, they also come with a lot of potential. Depending on the type of minions, the campaign could easily be modified to include them or even make them a necessity. In fact, the upcoming Set 3 of the DARPG will apparently offer various characters the ability to gain NPC minions already (*dreams* "Knight-Captain Niamh" ... yeah, I'd like that ), so we might as well start thinking what to do with them now. Clever GM's will probably find ways to encourage separation between the "core party" of PCs and their NPC companions, such as sending your little army to fight in the background whereas the heroes dedicate themselves to some special task like assaulting the enemy commander or penetrating the fortress.
All of this is pretty much high-level gaming stuff that should happen late in a campaign, but then again, PCs shouldn't be able to raise an army early on, anyways.
I know some other systems offer mass-combat rules for strategic warfare, but I don't think this is the level of complexity this P&P is intended for. Might be worth checking some stuff out just for inspirational purposes, tho.

Minor NPCs (civilians) like a cook or a squire can easily accompany the party in their midst, camping with them and taking care of menial tasks like collecting firewood. They won't accompany you into combat - and if they do, they'll be so bad that they won't make much of a difference. This type of NPC would be furniture much like the tent people are sleeping in. That being said, rescueing them if they've been taken by bandits/slavers/giant spiders might well be a sideplot all by itself.

As for the cost, I have a feeling that the Dragon Age RPG doesn't provide us with an extensive list on purpose. The game embraces simplicity, and besides, there will always be something missing. So they've given us a list of examples as a basis and we are free to come up with ad-hoc prices for anything else. Don't be too worried that something might possibly seem too low or high; Thedas doesn't have a global economy yet, so prices should vary a lot depending on what you want to buy where.
And personally, I think this kind of tinkering with rules can be pretty fun, but of course it comes down to preferences. If nothing else, it allows (or "forces", if you will) the community to come up with and exchange lots of cool ideas, in turn making it more active by placing each participant into the role of a co-creator. You have this potential for creativity in just about any P&P, of course, but necessity breeds it even better!

[Bardwulf]

Well, on the subject of a price list, that serves as a constant frustration to me trying to GM this. It amounts to a lot of extra work I shouldn't need to do with a chilled out game that this is.

Isn't there some way we can get an authoritative list of prices used in the computer games? Then just use that? I've checked wiki type things and found nothing pricing items, other than weapons and armour really. Don't know if anyone else found a goldmine for this?

Keeping a party hungry makes things better for them. That is why Joss Whedon's Firefly was so good. They were in a sci-fi world but living on the edge of depravity, having to take any job they could. Heck, the same was the case with the classic anime 'Cowboy Bebop'. That stuff has really inspired me in my Gamesmastery. Shame we're not in space ships

One thing that keeps annoying me is that NPC's offer to pay lodging and such for the party. It's right there in the modules. Mind you, Bann Nicola and such aren't paying you directly at least. Those freebies of living expenses are their only pay. The quest is its own reward after that.

[Loswaith]

...
But, IMO, there should (almost) always be some loot. It lets you keep the PCs paying for incidentals, or it gives the PCs a sense of accomplishment beyond XP or magic. And just because the monster isn't interested in treasure doesn't mean that it won't be around.

I guess thats where we differ a bit, as I dont agree that there should almost always be some loot. To me loot will only be there if it makes sence to be there (or the PCs can logically invent loot given the situation).

...
There is always the opportunity for loot, though. Spiders, wolves, etc. would drag important kills to their dens with the possibility of money/trinkets. Darkspawn could easily take money when they loot the dead, as well; just because they don't have use for it doesn't mean they wouldn't take it. ...

Keep in mind though the majority of what spiders, wolves, and so forth would carry off is going to be just normal animals (thus no incendental loot) and rarely would they attack people directly for food (spiders will actually eat anthing caught in their webs, assuming the creatures isnt large enough to escape). Blight tainted ones are likely to vary from that though.
I also cant realy see any reason why darkspawn would loot valuables, sure the occasional shiny trinket that takes their interest, or prehaps a fancy weapon or armour piece. Individual might seems to be what determines the heirachy of darkspawan rather than trinkets (but thats a side discussion too).

...
And it's really difficult to pin down prices, IMO, when a backpack is 9 sp, a belt pouch is 1 sp, but a water skin is 40 cp, and they're all similar in function and not too different in size. And belt pouches vs. waterskins is a definite head-scratcher to me.

Keep in mind that waterskins arent generally made of leather but typically animal baldders (being already watertight), which would account for price difference.

...
Home bases I'm still sceptical about. How often would you actually be able to visit and use them? Any of you had experiences with this in your campaigns?
...

A fair amount of games our group has have some kind of centeral town of opperations. Pending on how likely we are to spend time there this varies from longterm Inn lodgings to renting a house (setting plays a part too), though we have yet to actually buy anything. Other than that the occasional keep we take over and restore (maybe happened 2-3 times for our group over many years of playing), though thats often a part of the desired campaign too.
It is good to have as it ties you into the region assuming you dont wander around allot. It works quite well for us as likely the majority of out campaigns revolve around being in one area and not moving around a whole lot outside of that area, though we may be away for days pending on the requirements of of the current adventure.

[shonuff]

Isn't looting equipment the most obvious way of making money, though? Stuff like platemail will be "somewhat difficult" to move, of course, but when a character can pick between a purse with 67 copper and the slain foe's sword, it would be weird to not at least consider taking the latter. Even when you sell it for 1/4 its original cost, that's still a neat sum. And equipment is getting scavenged and repurposed all the time in the setting, so unless the character feels he or she is "above such behavior" (be it due to honor, religious beliefs or simple superstition), ...

It makes sense in a CRPG, but I don't think that salvaged combat gear would be worth it. From a dead foe, I would think the value would plummet. Think of the damage the armor/weapons would have taken that would need to be repaired. Personally, I wouldn't want to have to figure out the value of individual pieces.

Home bases I'm still sceptical about. How often would you actually be able to visit and use them? Any of you had experiences with this in your campaigns?

I've always had permament bases (along with necessary temporary ones). From caves to cloud temples to a salvage vessel. IMO, PCs need a place to call home.

Minor NPCs (civilians) like a cook or a squire can easily accompany the party in their midst, camping with them and taking care of menial tasks like collecting firewood. They won't accompany you into combat - and if they do, they'll be so bad that they won't make much of a difference. This type of NPC would be furniture much like the tent people are sleeping in. That being said, rescueing them if they've been taken by bandits/slavers/giant spiders might well be a sideplot all by itself.

Maybe, but I don't see most NPCs being the travelling kind.

As for the cost, I have a feeling that the Dragon Age RPG doesn't provide us with an extensive list on purpose. The game embraces simplicity, and besides, there will always be something missing. So they've given us a list of examples as a basis and we are free to come up with ad-hoc prices for anything else. Don't be too worried that something might possibly seem too low or high; Thedas doesn't have a global economy yet, so prices should vary a lot depending on what you want to buy where.
And personally, I think this kind of tinkering with rules can be pretty fun, but of course it comes down to preferences. If nothing else, it allows (or "forces", if you will) the community to come up with and exchange lots of cool ideas, in turn making it more active by placing each participant into the role of a co-creator. You have this potential for creativity in just about any P&P, of course, but necessity breeds it even better!

The problem that I have is that there is so little about the economy that the GM is basically forced to make everything up. Granted, there is some level of fun in that. However, it leads to inconsistency of play. While a more detailed equipment guide wouldn't cover everything, it would lessen the work on the GM considerably.

[shonuff]

Well, on the subject of a price list, that serves as a constant frustration to me trying to GM this. It amounts to a lot of extra work I shouldn't need to do with a chilled out game that this is.

Isn't there some way we can get an authoritative list of prices used in the computer games? Then just use that? I've checked wiki type things and found nothing pricing items, other than weapons and armour really. Don't know if anyone else found a goldmine for this?

Some things transfer, but others don't. The lower lyrium potions, IIRC, were very cheap. And some backpacks were 7 GP. Many magic upper tier weapons and armor were like a gold or two.

Keeping a party hungry makes things better for them. That is why Joss Whedon's Firefly was so good. They were in a sci-fi world but living on the edge of depravity, having to take any job they could. Heck, the same was the case with the classic anime 'Cowboy Bebop'. That stuff has really inspired me in my Gamesmastery. Shame we're not in space ships

IMO, that just doesn't work in DA. The rewards in DA are greater and the costs are far less. While you could take away a character's weapons and force them to buy new ones, that becomes less of an option once the PCs start getting irreplaceable gear. DA (IMO) needs an epic story, whereas Firefly is more about the day-by-day.

[shonuff]

I guess thats where we differ a bit, as I dont agree that there should almost always be some loot. To me loot will only be there if it makes sence to be there (or the PCs can logically invent loot given the situation).

Maybe, but I can't see PCs entering wolf cave or spider den or what have you without some reason for doing so. Typically, they are either doing it because they need something in the cave, or someone else needs them to do it. And if someone else needs them to do it, there will typically be a reward. For me, loot can be given in the adventure or as a turn-in reward. A PC finds a magic sword on a desiccated spider meal, or the wolf den is blocking the path to an artifact, or the farmer gives the PCs 10 SP for killing a bear. IMO, there is no difference -- it's all loot.

I also cant realy see any reason why darkspawn would loot valuables, sure the occasional shiny trinket that takes their interest, or prehaps a fancy weapon or armour piece. Individual might seems to be what determines the heirachy of darkspawan rather than trinkets (but thats a side discussion too).

Darkspawn would take weapons and armor, as they don't have smiths of their own. Whether or not they would take anything else is unknown, especially while the archdemons are calling them.

Keep in mind that waterskins arent generally made of leather but typically animal baldders (being already watertight), which would account for price difference.

True, but typically a waterskin wasn't just the bladder. It was covered in something (either leather or canvas). Also, I'm not sure of this, but I would imagine that there would have to be some sort of curing for a bladder.

[Lynata]

It makes sense in a CRPG, but I don't think that salvaged combat gear would be worth it. From a dead foe, I would think the value would plummet. Think of the damage the armor/weapons would have taken that would need to be repaired. Personally, I wouldn't want to have to figure out the value of individual pieces.

I think it makes sense from a realism PoV in any case - also see here: http://www.historum.com/war-military-hi ... attle.html

You raise a valid point concerning the quality and value of looted/damaged gear, though I think it'd be comparatively easy to come up with a rule of thumb: Any looted armour has -1 AR due to battle damage, and would only be worth 1/4 of its original value. Also, unless you roll a 6 on a 1d6 it doesn't quite fit you and you receive a -1 Dex penalty on top of it. Weapons are probably a bit trickier. A (relatively) newly forged sword ain't gonna show much damage just because its owner was slain. Maybe no attribute penalties, but still 1/2 value due to showing signs of use?

I'm playing devil's advocate here - this is something where my love for realism clashes with what I perceive as a potential issue in terms of income.

On a sidenote, from the discussion in that link:
"If I remember rightly battlefields were the main supplier of teeth to make dentures. A man could be rich with just a steady stomach and a big pair of pliers."


I vaguely recall having watched a scene like that in a Jeanne d'Arc movie, too.

IMO, PCs need a place to call home.

And I do like the thought of it - right now, we're way too mobile, though. But it might be worth discussing this with the whole group; gauge people's feelings etc. I'm sure our GM would be willing to accomodate any consensus in this matter, at least once our current task is finished. Certain roles in the party (Circle Mage, Templar) make more sense with a permanent base reflecting their affiliation, anyways, especially if we ever start exploring the possibility of gaining more influence in the respective organizations.

Maybe, but I don't see most NPCs being the travelling kind.

Ah, that depends on the NPCs origin! In essence, there should be little difference in potential for mobility between PCs and NPCs, if they are of a fitting type or their backstory accounts for it. Whilst I'm sure the majority of the populace is as you say not inclined to move around much, there will always be people who are either eager for adventure or simply need the coin. The kind of people that would otherwise form baggage trains, bandit groups or mercenary companies.

[shonuff]

You raise a valid point concerning the quality and value of looted/damaged gear, though I think it'd be comparatively easy to come up with a rule of thumb: Any looted armour has -1 AR due to battle damage, and would only be worth 1/4 of its original value. Also, unless you roll a 6 on a 1d6 it doesn't quite fit you and you receive a -1 Dex penalty on top of it. Weapons are probably a bit trickier. A (relatively) newly forged sword ain't gonna show much damage just because its owner was slain. Maybe no attribute penalties, but still 1/2 value due to showing signs of use?

I would use something like the following:
Brand new -- 1/2
Minor use -- 1/4
Heavy wear -- 1/10
Broken -- 1/20

Broken swords from battlefields would have some value, as scrap if nothing else, but I wouldn't want my campaign to devolve into months of ferrying broken weapons from a battlefield for a few silver.

On a sidenote, from the discussion in that link:
"If I remember rightly battlefields were the main supplier of teeth to make dentures. A man could be rich with just a steady stomach and a big pair of pliers."


I vaguely recall having watched a scene like that in a Jeanne d'Arc movie, too.

I would think that would be the primary method of looting... small and easily transportable. Spider-bits would be good for alchemists; tainted flesh would probably be useful for academics; and so on.

And I do like the thought of it - right now, we're way too mobile, though. But it might be worth discussing this with the whole group; gauge people's feelings etc. I'm sure our GM would be willing to accomodate any consensus in this matter, at least once our current task is finished. Certain roles in the party (Circle Mage, Templar) make more sense with a permanent base reflecting their affiliation, anyways, especially if we ever start exploring the possibility of gaining more influence in the respective organizations.

If nothing else, at upper levels PCs will need a base in order to store valuables/personals. A chevalier, for example, would almost always need to be a landed character. Otherwise, you will get into one too many "stable boy stole the warhorse" quests.

Ah, that depends on the NPCs origin! In essence, there should be little difference in potential for mobility between PCs and NPCs, if they are of a fitting type or their backstory accounts for it. Whilst I'm sure the majority of the populace is as you say not inclined to move around much, there will always be people who are either eager for adventure or simply need the coin. The kind of people that would otherwise form baggage trains, bandit groups or mercenary companies.

Possibly. Just (IMO) too much hassle. Also, you have to factor in that the society itself is (probably) not too mobile, while PCs are entirely too mobile. Cooks and squires probably won't go into the Deep Roads, for instance, and once you go in you won't necessarily come out the same hole. Backtracking to find a favored cook seems like a problem to me. Hirelings of a lesser duration wouldn't go very far from home, because otherwise they'd have to travel back... alone.

It also turns a night's ambush into a chaotic fray where the GM has to worry about the stable boy, the cook, etc.

For my money, hirelings should stay at the castle. While realism would certainly allow them to tag along, IMO, the problems would outweigh the benefits. Of course, your mileage may vary.

[Bardwulf]

Anybody's characters spending money on whores? They can get kinda pricey at the higher end.

[jgladeb]

Player - "I rolled doubles!"
GM - "Success! What's the number on your dragon die?"
Player - "Three."
GM - "Cool. Let's see here... a three. Congrats! Rolan has successfully contracted herpes."
Player - "Yay....? Err, wait, what?!"
GM - "That'll be 5 silvers. Anyone else have something stupid to do instead of the adventure I prepared?"

I'm kidding of course. I thought it was a little funny...

[Ghostdanser]

GM - "Cool. Let's see here... a three. Congrats! Rolan has successfully contracted herpes."

It beats rolling a six...that'll get you gonoherpesyphilaids...and you thought taint was bad...

[shonuff]

Eh. Rejuvenate would take care of it.