I'm a little surprised by the answers. I voted yes. I'm only 42, and will probably have enough money to retire when I'm 47, but my kids are 7 and 2 right now. Both have fully funded college accounts, however, I still feel a calling to provide a legacy that may endure several generations.
When I reach 54.5 I'll qualify for a pension which is roughly equal to what I currently live off of, plus IRA money plus 457 money plus rental income, plus wife's IRA, 457, and retirement plan money. So basically I'll be able to live off of one of seven sources of income, so yeah, the kids will get something unless I learn to really live it up. Technically, though, I guess you could say that from age 47 to 54.5 I'm working for the kids since I could retire any time after 47 (theoretically) and since all that extra money won't be spend by me.
Having thought a lot about this, though, I plan to make a trust so that my kids don't just get a large plop of money all of a sudden one day. Plus that would keep the money in the family in case of divorce or lawsuits, and also allow me to put some stipulations on it, like you can't be a felon and stuff like that.
All that said, I do want my kids to become at least somewhat successful before they get anything from me. I fear that just giving them a large wad of money will rob them of the sense of accomplishment of having achieved something for themselves, which is something I've seen in others who have inherited large sums of money.