Friday, August 10, 2012

OD&D treasure type values

I've been following a thread on the odd75 forum about OD&D treasure types, their max/average values, and their meanings in terms of contents and associated monsters. There's a little disagreement over something as basic as the relative total values of the different treasure types.

I've done some work on OD&D treasure type values before. The average and relative values should be pretty accurate, unless I've screwed up something. Download the Python script if you want a look at how I got these figures.

ODnD Treasure Type Values (All values show in gold pieces)
Type    Copper  Silver  Gold    Gems    Jewelry   Total
----------------------------------------------------------
A Wtr   0       0       10,477  8,863   70,948    90,289
H       67      2,575   26,119  10,392  36,520    75,675
A Dsrt  9       62      1,072   5,196   42,760    49,101
A Land  17      104     2,409   4,361   34,434    41,327
G       0       0       18,688  1,145   4,697     24,531
I       0       0       0       1,816   15,531    17,348
F       0       117     3,017   1,118   8,797     13,051
D       8       101     2,092   557     4,517     7,276
B       45      90      497     365     3,035     4,034
E       5       190     1,175   261     1,840     3,473
C       27      74      0       243     2,226     2,571
(Values averaged from 6,000 rolls.)

ODnD Treasure Type Values: Minimum > 0 / Average / Maximum
----------------------------------------------------------
A Land  20 gp  42,445 gp  163,300 gp
A Dsrt  20 gp  47,392 gp  218,970 gp
A Wtr  4,140 gp 91,305 gp  656,230 gp
B   10 gp  3,928 gp  45,500 gp
C   10 gp  2,430 gp  28,800 gp
D   10 gp  7,383 gp  112,800 gp
E   10 gp  3,259 gp  55,200 gp
F   60 gp  12,915 gp  116,200 gp
G   220 gp  24,494 gp  80,210 gp
H   10 gp  76,515 gp  213,680 gp
I   100 gp  17,109 gp  95,310 gp
(Actual values from 6,000 rolls.)

Incidentally, the average gem is worth about 419 gp. The average piece of jewelry is worth about 3410 gp.

2 comments:

  1. Very interesting. Thanks for running these numbers and putting them up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is great work. Thanks for posting it. I don't have time right now to really digest it, but I'm sure I'll come back here in the future.

    ReplyDelete