An problem with gold...?

Hey there, my friends and me are starting a new campaign and in several attempts that we played for some games people managed to get alot of gold within a short time.
Usally because of multiplayer scenarios with alot of wyrdstones as example our Vampire player won in one round nearly 130 gold with a good roll. And of course other examples but that was the latest...

Now someone suggested we double the prices of all items, which i find stupid. Though i dont have any idea what to do else, i could rewrite the table for how much gold you get per wyrdstone, or i could change the scenario stone amount. Least wouldnt do much against a lucky roll.
Maybe doubling ist to much and just increasing the cost by 50% would be enough.

But still i dislike the idea, even when i can understand it. Being able to buy 5 Helmets and several Light Armour or Lucky Charms within one round is to much.

What do you guys think about this?

I find myself constantly needing more gold so I don't think it's an issue. One game you win 130gc, another your hero that costs 50 and has equipment for 100 dies. In the long run of course, your gold should increase so you can buy some cool equipment.

I never experienced that I had too much gold, either. If you get that lucky, good for you, but usually, with replacing a dead warrior or two, paying upkeep for a hired sword and trying to somehow get your hands on at least some of the fancy equipment, I think that even a 100 gold can disappear quite quickly. Usually, it should balance out on the long run (take a game where you sell 2 wyrdstone, have a large warband, need to pay upkeep and have a well-equipped fighter die... it might easily drain you cash stock or cost you for several games to replace).

Maybe its just our style of playing mordheim... usally we take care of our heroes and dont try to be reckless with them. When we loose some henchmen and max2 heroes we usally route already. So we have atleast 3-4 heroes to search for Wyrdstones.
Also we dont really equip our henchmen well, so theyre kinda cheap to rebuy.

But anyway you guys have any additional solutions? Iam sure you dont share the problem of the people in our group, neither do I but maybe you can think of something else.

I do think its a style of play issue.
If for example you usually play only multiplayer games the rewards for winning those games are likely to be set higher than would usually be the case in a two player game. If one warband consistently wins such scenarios, I could see a problem develop.

Depending on the number of players you have perhaps you could limit the number of multi-player games and play more 2 player games. That way the rewards for winning are spread around to more players.

If you must play lots of multi-player games, I'd suggest ganging up on the successful warband to increase their casualties and decrease their chance of winning every time.

Thank you Von Kurst, exactly thats how i see it. But i guess before we use these rules i would make some test games with 2-3 1on1 and then a multiplayer game. And then see how the flow of the game goes.
Though i can imagine that the warband that was lucky will kinda snowball themself up even more in a 1on1 with a weaker warband.

I guess i just need to talk this out and see how they react, thanks to you already who mentioned stuff and pointed other stuff out i use that in my arguments.

Well, make sure that you're using the "Sell Wyrdstone" table correct, to get 130 gold you need to sell 8 pieces, and that is pretty hard to find unless you play the "Wyrdstone Hunt" scenario every time.

Perhaps you reduce the motivation to rout voluntary, if you get one dice for exploration less, if you retreat voluntary. Perhaps the players fight harder for there money and against strong warbands you should gang up.

We often play multiplayer games with 1v2 or 2v2 to speed things up and to balance powerfull warbands.

You can also get stones from some things like Treasure Hunt and I believe Lost Prince?

It may come down to the scenarios that you are playing. My old gaming group has printed out and bound the Mordheimer master scenario list. That group plays less often and plays for fun so when we play we generally look for 'juicy' scenarios to play. Unfortunately this generally means that the reward is greater so we have a lot of gold after only a few games. That is a bit of fun for that casual style gaming but I wouldn't want to play like that all of the time.

Perhaps you could look at playing some plain skirmish type scenarios where the only reward is exploration at the end of the battle. I think that you'd quickly find that even the 130 gold found by the vampire would not go very far when 'rich' battles are spread between 'poor' battles.




My three year old looking over my shoulder again:

I would say you just need to modify the scenarios so lots more random things are trying to kill you!!! Always fun! Perhaps this:
Roll a D6 at beginning of each 'Evironment' turn (basically what I suggest is to add a GM's turn or a random events turn so animals, monsters and such that are not part of a warband have their own turn, makes keeping track easier)
1-2 Nothing Happens
3-4 - Brains... D3 Zombie appear in a random building! They will try to eat the nearest model's brains and so on.
5 - Hey Boss, what's that? A Squig jumps out and immediately charges a random model on the table, Leaders are safe from this charge since they got a warning! The Squig
6 - WAAAGH! 1 Orc Boy (with Axe and Shield) and D3 Goblins (with Spear, Shortbow, Dagger, or Shields whatever you have on hand) show up along a random table edge and proceed to try to smash some faces in!

If a hero takes out 1 or more of these generated models he earns 1 exp, but he does not each one for EACH he takes out. If a model takes out the Orc Boy they gain D6 GC at the end of the battle.

Random events make games more fun, and more dangerous. I encourage them! This is just something I came up with as fast as I could write it so modify it for what models you have lying around! (Angry Mobs, Escaped Swabbies, Ungors on Absinth, you name it!) My Southlands setting project will be including similar lists and rules for wild animals and dangerous plants!

Ya these are good suggestions, i dont really like the idea of increasing prices or decreasing gold per battle but your solution sounds nice. Iam quite happy to hear many suggestions and different ways to solve it coming from different people. Iam sure i can convince them from doubling prices.

A different question now... do you guys have any other good Multiplayer Scenarios except the Chaos on the Streets one?

@Balrog ya that is an great idea, i was thinking of using the random encounter table. And ofcourse using different scenarios then just the Chaos on the Street ones.

The Sartosa expansion has some fun multiplayer scenarios, or you guys can take turns making up your own!

Kajiya wrote:

Though i can imagine that the warband that was lucky will kinda snowball themself up even more in a 1on1 with a weaker warband.

To me the value of 1 on 1 games is not that the 'strong' warband my lose more often, it is that the weaker warbands get the opportunity to play against each other and thereby gain the fruits of victories.

We generally start a night with random opponents (if we have more than 4 players). After the first round winners play winners and losers play losers. If we play only one big game it means one player wins (since we don't allow alliances to win) and everybody else loses. Allowing alliances to win is a different topic but we haven't had that work out well either since the losers of those games really feel ganged up on.

In the end my worries was not ment to be...

Since we add alot of new things to the campaign, by which i mean alot to spend gold on, they are statisfied with the amount of gold you can get for an win. Also they agreed to most of my arguments with to many multiplayer games (which wont happen as often with our campaign map and movable warbands)

Now i just need to adjust some more stuff on the campaign and look for some intresting new missions that are aviable.
Thanks so far guys~