Skip to content

A Thought On Gold-Sinks... What Do You Think?

masterdesbaxtermasterdesbaxter Member Posts: 51
In my experience, at least, once I buy the top tier items from the Thunder-Hammer Smithy and some excellent mage robes and such from High Hedge gold becomes more or less irrelevant, short of a small budget for arrows and potions. So, what if there was a simple way to spend it? (It's not as though we can keep it for BG2, after all.) What if we could buy a house as a base of operations for our party?

Now, I don't mean this to be like a "The Sims" sort of thing. It just makes sense to me that a notable adventuring party would have a defensible safe place to store their treasures and such. Also, houses are naturally expensive.

It wouldn't be too complicated in terms of gameplay, at least. If it wouldn't be practical in programing terms, forgive me- that would be my inexperience talking. Say, though, that there would just be a simple npc spawned in some government building (Beregost or Baldur's Gate- I presume the Gate, but Beregost is plenty nice.) All he would do is have a basic dialogue about being the property manager or such, offering to sell an empty house.

The house itself wouldn't need to be anything special. All it would be would be a place to store stuff and feel that it is legitimately your place to store it. There would be no functional difference, per se, but it would feel different. Perhaps we could rest in it as well? I'm not sure how do-able that would be, but I suppose there are bigger concerns.

Perhaps we could buy the large manor home in Baldur's Gate where the ogre mages attack the party?
«1

Comments

  • masterdesbaxtermasterdesbaxter Member Posts: 51
    Another thought- this could be a spot to "drop off" NPCs that we like, but don't really want, just for the roleplaying of it. For example: we could leave Khalid and Jahiera here and instead give some love to Yeslick or Alora. We could leave Xzar and Montaron here to hold down the fort while we go off with Tiax.
  • GrumpwagonGrumpwagon Member Posts: 25
    Some gold sinks are definitely needed, and this is a good one.
  • CorvinoCorvino Member Posts: 2,269
    Indeed, it's already possible to finish BG1+ToTSC with a shedload of gold even after buying all the Thunderhammer smithy, Ulgoth's beard and High Hedge items. Something else to use it for would be a good change. A house/stronghold is one option, some new items for sale another, or maybe have a gold-sink quest like the payoff to find Imoen in BG2.
  • IchigoRXCIchigoRXC Member Posts: 1,001
    I love the idea that you coul have a base of operations with perhaps random events where your stronghold would be attacked. Maybe a training ground so the people you leave behind won't be so much lower than you once you return from doing character specific quests. Paying for upkeep and staff as well as upgrading the premises. Oh it would be glorious, but a lot of that is limited by the engine. :)
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    Maybe lots of storage space with chests/boxes, and a armory or whatnot where you can store gear you might want later but not have to tote it around with you all the time (Golden Pantaloons, anyone?). And have a sub-plot where you get robbed and have to find the thieves who robbed you. I also would love to have gold have weight, again, so your party isn't carrying 20K gold around all the time. You could do the standard 2e AD&D thing of 10/100 coins equal one pound (10 coins to the pound was 1e, but I don't remember in 2e, and I am too tired to go look right this moment). Introducing moneychangers who could change your heavy coins into gems, which are much lighter), at say a 5-10% cost, would be more realistic and easier to carry for the adventurers.
  • lordkimlordkim Member Posts: 1,063
    I like this idea :O)
  • kraedkraed Member Posts: 60
    The problem with money sinks is that they have to be genuinely rewarding in some way that makes the player actually want to sink money into them to begin with, or offer a form of convenience that isn't otherwise available and is useful.

    Having a base of operations with storage is a nice idea, but there's also not a massive amount of need for it. The Golden Pantaloons are a good example of something you don't want to drag around the whole time but.. that's really it. Maybe you want to stash all those plot scrolls you have been finding describing your bounty or something, but any equipment you aren't using you almost certainly would rather sell than stash. You could do something like the strongholds of BG2 with their own little quest chains, but they generally proved to be a bit pointless. You're travelling far too much for a permenant base in a single location to be useful (hence the pocket plane of ToB). NWN did something similar have a base where you had to buy and maintain the guards and stuff and.. it wasn't hugely interesting. If something is pulling you out of adventuring to do bookkeeping and finances then it's probably not the ideal solution. Ultimately unless there's some sort of reward out of these people probably wont sink their money into it, and if they get a reward it's making the problem worse not better.

    Saying that... we all like owning our own little bit of the land. A spot to drop off NPCs would be nice at the very least.

    One of the big problems is that the party is far too powerful and resting is too easy, meaningless and you can do it in quick succession. In pen and paper the Dungeon Masters guide suggests that the average encounter should drain around 40% of the party's resources (might not remember that perfectly but it feels like the right number), but in BG the average encounter barely drains 1%. By the end of the game you're sitting on mountains of unused potions of healing, heroism etc. If we weren't allowed to rest so much and had to rely a lot more on consumables, such as healing pots, food, travel (caravans etc for fast travel), a guild tithe etc then we wouldn't be able to hoard the money in the same way. Also if encounters were harder in general we'd have to use up more supplies to get through them.

    You could give gold weight to prevent the player from amassing tons of it, but you're already immediately offering suggestions of how to circumvent this (e.g. with gems). If you're annoyed about it enough to already offer ways to get around it then it's probably going to be a pain in the arse in the game too. The problem is that the player doesn't spend their money so that's what should be rectified, rather than trying to cap how much they can actually carry.

    The suggestion of BG2 style goldsinks probably isn't the right answer. In BG2 they were more artifical roadblocks that forced you to go and experience some of the sidequests rather than an intentional way to drain some money out of you. If they didn't exist I'd imagine a lot of players would never meet Firkraag et co.
  • masterdesbaxtermasterdesbaxter Member Posts: 51
    kraed said:

    Maybe you want to stash all those plot scrolls you have been finding describing your bounty or something, but any equipment you aren't using you almost certainly would rather sell than stash.

    I'm not sure that this is true. We could sell stuff, sure, but what's the point if we can't spend it? There's so much stuff out there that even when you go through the main quest, ignoring most of the sub-quests, you'll still accumulate a whole ton of goodies. So much that even by buying an old building you'll still be in magical armor, weapons, and items up to your ears. It might just be me, but I'd rather keep some (not all, naturally) of the stuff I accumulate as "trophies". (Sounds a little grizzly, but you know what I mean!) For example, Daveorn's robes of evil Archmagi - at this point in the game I am flat-our rich, and I'd like to keep this item as a memento of the great raid on the Iron Throne's mines... just because I can.
    kraed said:

    You're traveling far too much for a permanent base in a single location to be useful (hence the pocket plane of ToB). NWN did something similar have a base where you had to buy and maintain the guards and stuff and.. it wasn't hugely interesting. If something is pulling you out of adventuring to do bookkeeping and finances then it's probably not the ideal solution. Ultimately unless there's some sort of reward out of these people probably wont sink their money into it, and if they get a reward it's making the problem worse not better.

    I agree that in the early half of the game (i.e., before Baldur's Gate) the party wanders too much for this to be necessary, were it in Beregost, say. Indeed, I doubt that it would be very affordable. However, once the party moves to Ch. 5 the story and everything in it- excepting Ch. 6, which is but a brief excursion- focuses on Baldur's Gate, so it would make sense to have a base of sorts there. (I don't intend to suggest that there should be servants, guards, bookkeeping, or any of that- we're not that important, yet! Besides, that would be a pain to implement, being far more work than necessary.) There would be a nice parallel between the party acquiring a property in the city and Rieltar's letter mentioning that the Iron Throne has just done the same.

    Finally, speaking of gems, that would be a fine thing to build a treasure trove of too. They really aren't worth selling, for the most part, and... well, I like sparkly things. The whole weighing down of gold/ gold for pounds of gold just seems superfluous to me, and kind of silly at that. This isn't necessarily about a reward. It's about the role playing of it, and that's where the fun of the game is- for me, at least!
  • GrumpwagonGrumpwagon Member Posts: 25
    If a BG1 stronghold is granted, somewhere in or near Baldur's Gate itself would likely be the best place for it. And should they take a BGT approach to BG2EE and allow us to go back to BG1 content during BG2, this could open up a lot of possibilities for high level DLC. The series is called "Baldur's Gate" after all, but you're never anywhere near that city after the first game -- something that always bugged me. It should have just been called "The Bhaalspawn Saga" from game one. This could fix that and the gold sink issues in one stroke.
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    Some gold sinks could be acquired simply by limiting resting in the wild to maybe only grant regenerated spells and healing at most to 1/4 hp, Lowering gold values on items/drops, make item variety and strength vary so you don't find upgrades like the +2 longsword in 5 minutes of playing.

    In addition maybe make it so there is a cap on how much gold can be carried at one time to maybe 3,000-5,000 that way players aren't carrying a wagon's load of gold at all times. With this allowing players to place gold like items would give an incentive to store it away, store items, etc.

    And finally put a cap on how much gold vendors have it isn't right that they carry an unlimited amount of gold when at most they would carry very little of it.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @FrozenDervish In my games, I have my characters carry the gold either as platinum pieces (5gp=1pp), which can cause problems in small towns (where they may never see an actual gold piece, but more copper, silver and electrum- mostly, they rely on barter with the odd coins) or gems, with a smattering of "smaller change" for places like these. Jewelry is another good way to carry wealth in P&P games. The one thing I didn't like in the BG games is the lack of smaller coins- everything is subsumed into gold, even in really small towns and the like. When you may make 20 gp a year, you are not going to be spending actual gold pieces... But again, that made it easier for the computer game. I just don't like the fact that you can't convert gold into gems (you can do it the other way around by selling gems, but not vice-versa AFAIK), and that jewelry of similar types can't stack- you can carry 20 silver necklaces, but each takes up its own space rather than just allowing you to go "30 silver necklaces in this stack, 10 pearl necklaces here, 15 gold necklaces here..." etc. etc. Gems can stack, why not jewelry?
  • ArndasArndas Member Posts: 42
    I hoarded all my gold and jewels pretty much until Scar's final quest...I accumulated over 350,000 gold. However, there was nothing to do with it. I finished every side quest and I had all the equipment I needed. I agree that there should be something useful (or not) to spend all the money on.
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    @LadyRhian Well the different currency types would be nice, but the game was made to be easily understood. Jewelry unstackability has more to do with magical jewelry more than anything as each jewelry type is its own type rather than splitting the type into nonmagical and magical jewelry allowing stacking, but also doing that would take away further from identifying magical jewelry.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @Frozen Dervish True. Maybe only make them stackable after they are identified?
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    That would be neat but I don't know if it would be an easy change.
  • KukarachaKukaracha Member Posts: 256
    Kraed had very good points here. Past a certain stage, money is too easy to come by. Resting makes potions and scrolls unnecessary if you're patient enough, gear isn't as necessary and you can just save and save for ages instead of haivng to buy intermediate weapons to deal with your ennemies.

    My ideal fix would still be some real-estate, as others have suggested, with some small quests that go with it. Even better : another sidequest that you need to pay for - in the game. Bribing an official or whatever... something to dump that gold on. It is otherwise useless. I always felt a bit lost when I would not know what to do with all that money... oh my, first-world problems.
  • agrisagris Member Posts: 581
    edited July 2012
    It should be recognized that any such sink would need to be on the level of trivial to implement, and not be considered as modifying the base game content within the scope of the contractual agreement between Beamdog and WotC.

    That being said:
    1) NPCs that take a share of the gold / gems: this is straight from PnP. It wouldn't be recoverable, just a general X% tax on all looted gold, random percent chance of gems dissappearing on looting due to one of the NPCs taking their share. Not recoverable, short of killing the NPC. Would not affect NPC inventory at all.

    2) Potions. Make good potions expensive. Don't let them drop from NPCs commonly. Not the 8 hp deals, but the good 27+ HP stuff. 5k a potion? implementation would require consideration of when the potion appears, the mean wealth of the player at the time to balance the cost, and the lifetime viability of the potion (obviously 27 hp potions are useful to the very end of the game, so would want to balance the cost with respect to the wealth of a player near the end of the game).

    Edit: and is any of this even necessary? most of us are veteran players. will the first time player really suffer from excessive GP? you might forget what it's like to not know when X armor is going to drop... often times a new player will spend 5200 gp on a set of full plate, only to acquire it during the very next quest. I only noticed the glut of money after several playthroughs.
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    Beamdog just needs to add more +2 weapons with cool effects for extravagant prices to some of the shops. Dagger of Venom +2, anybody?

    Have a +2 item with a good ability of every weapon and armor proficiency type. This solves two issues, the fact that most of the weapons in BG1 are terribly boring, and it provides a gold sink.
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    Maybe some summoning items would be neat to have.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @agris @Schneidend The problem is that, even in P&P AD&D, potions are very cheap. 200 gp for a healing potion. 500 gp for a potion of extra-healing. I found it rather amusing at the end of BG1, when you are in the Candlekeep Catacombs, the one guard is peeved that you used his antidote on a cow! I know it's done for terms of game balance, but perhaps make healing potions harder to buy and drop less so that you have to travel far to get them. That makes priestly healing more valuable, and make temple services more expensive.
  • agrisagris Member Posts: 581
    @LadyRhian

    That's not a bad idea. Whether you increase the cost of potions or restrict their availability, it has the same result: limiting player usage of potions. Certain game elements would need to be retooled in light of such a change. Perhaps you've got a point, forcing the player to rely more on temple services rather than potions would be a good gold sink... again though, are any of us even sure if Beamdog can alter this content? I'm not sure WotC would approve it.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @agris That's true, too. And you'd be forced to turn your party clerics into healing dispensing machines, which isn't ideal (even if you generally do this anyway).
  • GrumpwagonGrumpwagon Member Posts: 25
    @agris

    I like the NPC tax idea, not so much the potion price increase. The question is, will NPC's abandon you if you have 0 gold? I'd vote no; they understand when times are tough, and they have a better chance of earning coin with a company of adventurers versus going solo. Also if their inventories are unaffected, perhaps their total earned income could be kept track of internally and would be dropped if you kill them -- something for the much unloved evil play-style. I can only see this being implemented, however, if more is done to improve internal party combat mechanics which is a request on its own.

    @agris @LadyRhian et al

    The reasoning behind making potions more expensive is good but will be lost on new players who might suffer greatly for it. I think it would be more reasonable to make this a higher difficulty option. To sidetrack from gold sinks a bit, I do think potions are a) too easily obtained and hoarded b) can too often be used en masse to muscle through tough fights and c) because of a and b and they are one-time-use only, saving and loading tactics are indirectly supported against using consumables. I'm going to make a separate request for fixing this.

    @Schneidend @FrozenDervish

    More cool and expensive buy-able loot is cool, but will change the relatively low-power flavor of the game, that some like and adds to the experience for new players. I'd be surprised if we don't see this in some form with the new content, and it will probably help towards creating a gold sink, but it shouldn't be the main method for dumping gold.
  • JarlJarl Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 101
    edited July 2012
    Such a request is something for a user-made mod, it think, because the amount of gold is a very variable thing, depending on how many and which mods are installed.
    So, this is a years old problem of the Big World Project...

    I agree with Grumpwagon that too many expensive magical items would destroy the flavor of the game. In BG1 a simple Plate Mail was something special, difficult to find and expensive enough. So, that was, what made the atmosphere. Being lost somewhere at the wilderness frontier with nothing but a chain mail and a longsword. (More expensive stuff can also be installed by several mods, if you want)

    One suggestion: Though it's very late in the game and may not solve this problem, but i think the player should loose his money when arrested by Angelo Dosan. What do you think?
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190

    @agris


    More cool and expensive buy-able loot is cool, but will change the relatively low-power flavor of the game, that some like and adds to the experience for new players. I'd be surprised if we don't see this in some form with the new content, and it will probably help towards creating a gold sink, but it shouldn't be the main method for dumping gold.

    This is why I suggest keeping such high cost items that are worth buying in line with the power levels of the Dagger of Venom +2 and Spider's Bane +2 (which, granted, you don't buy - which contributes to having insane amounts of gold), a +1 or even +2 item with a really nice ability. I don't see how this would disrupt the desperate nature of the early levels, because unless you have Charisma 18 you probably aren't even close to the kind of money you'd need to buy the Dagger of Venom without breaking the bank entirely. Its base cost was, what, 10k? 20k? The average player isn't going to have that their first time strolling into Beregost, tired and hungry and freshly orphaned.

    Of course, I don't suggest this entirely selflessly. My favorite weapons are two-handed swords, and having to go find a vanilla +1 instead of being able to spend a few thousand gold on one has always irked me. The earliest instance of a vanilla +1 is found on an ogre in a remote area map I never remember the location of, and Spider's Bane is several levels and chapters away. I'd like to be able to play more organically than look up a walkthrough to find that ogre, and giving the Thunderhammer Smithy some cool loot for other weapon types would solve that.
  • GrumpwagonGrumpwagon Member Posts: 25
    edited July 2012
    @Jarl Yeah, hopefully mods will alleviate the more power-hungry players this way. The most important thing to consider here is the first-time player's experience.

    Another thought for a gold sink occurs: What if potions were charged items instead of stackable and could be refilled? Healing potions and otherwise, that is, all with variable "refill" values. Things like potions of heroism or other rarer potions would be extremely expensive.

    I'm not sure if charged items disappear after using their last charge. If so, make this not happen for the sake of the previous request working better and also it's lame.
  • KukarachaKukaracha Member Posts: 256
    @LadyRhian I disagree with making potions more expensive as long as the resting mechanism remains unchanged. It would just encourage players to sleep, sleep and sleep.
    If anything, players should actually be forced to rely on paid services in temples and taverns.

    However, NPC taxes are a great find. Everyone gets their share! Losing your money at a random moment seems however like a bad idea : wouldn't you be able to drop it / hide it somewhere?

    One thing that I would suggest is making selling price much lower, with a small bonus with high charisma and a strong penalty with a low value. I remember that I would always loot whatever had a good price (morning stars, armor, throwing daggers) and carry it back home. Some things had pretty neat prices. But you can simply imagine that the equipment you loot is often damaged by the fight. Harden merchants and gold income will be lower.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @Kukaracha I think the game (P&P and computer) assumes you are going to be overcharged as an adventurer anyway. Except for maybe where you live/are born (assuming you live in a small enough place that people are going to know you on sight- maybe in one section of a town if you live in a big city, prices are lower there for you when you are starting out. Elsewhere, they don't know you from Adam and charge the usual (inflated) prices.). Probably not in Baldur's Gate. I can't see, say, Sorcerous Sundries, charging less just because you used to live nearby and they know you there. But maybe prices are less in Candlekeep because you lived your whole life there (and Winslow certainly knows you well enough to jest with you about paying full price!) So, prices are artificially low in Candlekeep at the start (enabling you to buy more/better stuff), but after that, they go up. Help a place/region (like the mines at Nashkel) and the prices go down for you (maybe not ultra-significantly, but they do go down a bit) because the people of the town are grateful. And wouldn't it be great if, as part of the gossip at inns, you could hear about your own deeds from people? "A bunch of Adventurers freed the miners from the Nashkel mines and solved the iron problem. Wish they could come here and ease our troubles!" etc.

    Anyhow, I support the idea of draining excess funds from the party by making them pay to become a kit they want. No kits at the start, but you have to find trainers, manuals or magic books (all of which cost $$$) to become a certain class. Or you need to bribe people to tell you where to find a trainer for a certain kit. That could be one way to handle kits and too much money.
  • lansounetlansounet Member Posts: 1,182
    @Jarl I like the Angelo idea. There was a similar idea discussed for a SCS component about being stripped of everything when arrested in Candlekeep, the monk that helps you would give the player some basic equipment (similar to what you find in Irenicus' dungeon) and your stuff would be carried by he party at the end of catacombs. Don't know if DavidW has been considering it or working on it already.
Sign In or Register to comment.