Conceptually Impaired -please help.
I have been told that I am culturally out of date, with at least one Game concept. Given my age and the years since I last played this is a perfectly legitimate assumption. I have been given to understand that the Division of treasure found by a group of adventures is divided - even when one or more of the items do not easily divide (i.e. Art work)- This division occurs instead of having items held as communal property. Once an item enters into the possession of a character it is their property and they are free to do with it whatever they wish to do. Perhaps it is my age or the fact that I have always lived in a Communal Property State, but I do not see anything wrong with a communal holding of valuables. Below, I have set-up two fictional group examples of what I see as this Standard Practice. If someone could patiently explain the benefit to this method I would be very grateful. Just understand in my heart I am fond of communal ownership of valuables by the adventuring party. I feel this allows everyone participating in the adventure to receive some of the rewards. But maybe this is really old-school thinking and I need to 'get with the times <man!>'.
1. Each character in the party takes what they can use. - Example: a party of 5 finds 1 gp, and a +1 sword. The Fighter wants and can use the +1 sword so s/he take it. (here is where things get fuzzy for me); Each member including the Fighter gets 200sp from the division of the 1gp. If this were to repeat four more times, the Fighter would have five +1 swords which s/he could use or sell, and 1gp; while the other four members of the group would only have 1gp each. This uneven division is because the fighter can use the +1 sword and thus benefits the whole party. (The really Fuzzy part) In a non-AL game where selling magic is allowed, the fighter only needs one +1 sword - two max. So, the Fighter is now free to sell the extra unneeded swords for gold. Thus increasing the Fighter's loot well above the other four characters. In the AL rules posted on this Forum (not this thread) Magic is not sellable by PCs - so the extra +1 swords are more of a burden than a benefit to the Fighter, making the Division much closer to perfectly even.
2. Art and other non-coin valuables: Here there is not a "Use" for the object. I have been told that the Standard Practice is to have all members of the party roll a 1d20 and the highest roll 'wins' the object. (Fuzzy part again) I'll use my above party of five. Over the course of cleaning out a dungeon the party uncovers several treasure stashes. At each stash, the party finds an Art Object of a value that equals or exceeds the value of the coins found. The Party roll a 1d20 to determine the winner of the Art Object, and in all Five instances player #3 does not win. The Gps, Sps, Cps, are divided evenly between the five players, and a Non-magical weapon is given to Player #4 as it is useable by that player. In this case player #3 receives only coin and therefore receives much less than any of the other four characters. If player #4 were to have been the one to receive two of the Art Objects then, they added to the coin and non-magical weapon would likely have made #4 the biggest gain. If one of the Art Objects was exceptionally valuable, then it is possible that the winner of it would have the biggest gain.
In both Example 1 and 2; I feel the (3 or 4)extra +1 Swords and all the Art Objects should have remained communal property. This Communal Property could then be sold and the coin divided between all five characters. If a player wanted their character to have one of the Art Objects as a trophy, then they should "buy" it from the group, just as if the group had sold the pieces and divided the coins. In other words, the character that gets one of the Art Objects, takes it instead of <some of> their share.
Thank you,