D&D 5E Barter Economy

[embee]

Ah the gold piece. The staple of the RPG economy. But why?

I mean, in an urban center, currency makes sense. But what about once you get outside of the cities?

I'm almost done with a campaign and am thinking that, for the next one, I'm going to try to switch over to a barter economy which, I would think would make more sense.

I got to thinking this because of the habit of players to go for the treasure chests full of gold and gems but then leaving any barrels of wheat or other foodstuffs that you would find in a bandit hideout (bandits gotta eat too). As it stands, I already do maintain a spreadsheet of the gems that I dole out. I don't tell players the values because none of their characters would have a reason to know how much any given gem is worth. Also, they don't get the base price. They get a percentage of the base price based on haggling and whether they are getting swindled. It's kind of a pain but I think it's ultimately worth it.

Consider the average hamlet. It's small, maybe has a few guards, but probably doesn't even have palisades to guard it. It's a farming village with some tradesfolk for all the standard stuff. A cooper to make barrels. A blacksmith to make horseshoes and nails. A chandler for the candles. A miller to make flour. I like having there being a world of "cottage" industries. Got a bag of wool? Take it down to the spinster or the weaver. Why wouldn't these villages be relying on barter?

All of the clutter that exists in hideouts and dungeons has some value to it. Probably more immediate value than gold pieces. After all, you can't eat gold pieces. You can't make it into bread or brew it into beer. All gold does is sit there, inertly, attracting raiders. I think that giving immediate value to the clutter gives the players a reason to have some hirelings, like some porters, a couple of level 1 trainees to guard the wagon, and a teamster to drive the cart.

Has anyone tried using barter instead of (or in addition to) GP in their games? I like the idea of it, especially given that GP is kind of worthless in 5e anyway.

 

[Dausuul]

If a community is so isolated and poor that it has no use for gold (and that would be a really isolated community), then what on earth does it have that the PCs would want?

 

[MarkB]

From many years of playing Skyrim, what it comes down to is weight-to-value ratios. There's no point in carting barrels, crates and sacks of ordinary produce all the way back to town if they're only going to earn you a relative pittance compared to something relatively far more valuable and less cumbersome like a jewelled necklace or a finely crafted longsword.

 

[Oofta]

A lot of activity can be done with barter, but that doesn't mean money doesn't also exist for larger purchases or just for convenience. You can only use so many chickens. In my own campaign one example is that a servant's wages may be largely paid for with a safe place to live and food. Taxes are regularly paid in goods and services not cash and so on.

But I don't think it's realistic to get rid of money altogether, it's simply too useful in a complex society. On a related note, while currency should probably be silver instead of gold, I just look at a gold piece similar in value to a $20 bill. Not an inconsequential amount for the poor, but for the middle class it's just a standard denomination. In a fantasy world, who says that alchemists can't change lead to gold, devaluing it's scarcity and value compared to the real world.

Barter is slightly less common in cities where people are less self-reliant, but it still exists.

 

[billd91]

Cash is convenient to work with. Everything else is complicated - which doesn't need to be a bad thing. Gems, jewelry, occasional objects d'art.
But if you handle large portions of hoards as barter goods that are bulky to transport, you end up with the Knights of the Dinner Table story where they recruited lots of goats to haul a dragon's hoard and you probably encourage PCs to strip the dead of everything to sell later (something bad enough in 3e when cash could be easily converted to magic power-ups). If it doesn't end up as satire, you'll probably face player ire with having to futz with logistics rather than action-adventure and story.

 

[aco175]

gold is not the historically accurate version of how trade was conducted. But, like most things D&D it is only a simplified version of old-timey days. Like glossing over plague, torture, rape and pillage for more romantic things like chivalry and people helping because they are heroes, gold is easy and players can see/know that it is worth taking.

A few games I had involved the PCs being offered a night in the barn and a cooked meal as payment for saving the farm from the ankheg. The farmer simply did not have 50gold, or even 5gold. The PCs being heroes took the job and were later rewarded with a cavern that the ankheg used under the farmer's field that had some treasure from something else. It is a worthy goal to have the players use some of this, but like most things I find that only some want this or want this to an extend to not just skim over.

I'm at the point that I just let the players convert all the hapless copper and silver to gold once they get to a town and not have to worry about finding someone to take the 1,000cp off their hands, or the weight of carrying it once they do get to town. I find it mostly not worth it like tracking food and arrows, unless needed for game purposes.

 

[embee]

From many years of playing Skyrim, what it comes down to is weight-to-value ratios. There's no point in carting barrels, crates and sacks of ordinary produce all the way back to town if they're only going to earn you a relative pittance compared to something relatively far more valuable and less cumbersome like a jewelled necklace or a finely crafted longsword.

That begs the question...

Who is going to buy the sword?

The farmer? He's a farmer. The sword doesn't help him farm. That longsword is of value to the player but not to the village. There's already an armory where there are swords if trouble strikes. The average person doesn't have one and the local lord probably doesn't want the populace to have swords either.

As it stands, I make swords and armor something that is not available for sale outside of cities. There's neither demand nor permission for it. If a PC wants a better weapon or armor, s/he can take it off a corpse or find it in a dungeon. The blacksmith is a blacksmith, not a weaponsmith and certainly not an armorer.

As to the weight-to-value, that's why I let players use hirelings. It gives something to spend gold on (services) and a reason to be in the world.

Skyrim is an okay example. However, even it needs patching to make it work (ie with mods like (surprise!) "Trade & Barter"). And remember, even in Skyrim, the alchemist won't buy a sword from you and the armorer won't buy apples from you. You need to go to the proper merchant.

Ultimately, I'm trying to think of a way to have a more robust (or at least functional) economy in the game and am trying to figure out if it can be patched with barter.

 

[aco175]

Most of the players in my games today would totally wreck local economies when they walk into towns. It is like someone won the lottery and knew they were dying next week. Anything less than gold is almost given away. Some cross all their silver off as beer, gambling, and partying expense for the the time in town. One always buys the tavern drinks as soon as they walk into the bar. Mostly leads to friends and hangers-on, but sometimes leads to alley fights. To haggle with someone over giving change being a carrot, 2 turnips, and an old brass chain from grandma in exchange for dropping 10gold for a new backpack would not happen. Most of my group would just say keep it, or maybe you can pack me a trail meal to go.

 

[Dausuul]

Who is going to buy the sword?

The farmer? He's a farmer. The sword doesn't help him farm.

That's why he takes the sword to the nearest city, sells it, and buys two dozen sacks of grain, a couple of top-quality draft horses, a flock of chickens, and a bunch of new tools. He comes back with loads of stuff and becomes the new big man in town.

Like I said, a community would have to be really isolated to have no use for gold. And again: If the community is truly and utterly cut off from civilization, such that they can't even travel to a place where gold has value, then what the heck do they have that the PCs want to trade for?

 

[iserith]

If a good portion of the game is meant to be about deciding what to carry into a dungeon and what to carry out, then having bulky treasure is good because it plays to that theme. It becomes a logistical problem for the players to solve.

But underpinning any such consideration is what you said in the last line of your original post - that gold (or wealth, really) doesn't matter in D&D 5e out of the tin. Solving for that problem is really the first step in any kind of house rules for this sort of thing. Otherwise all you're doing is trading useless gold for useless wheat (once the fighters get their plate armor and the odd spell component/spell scribing).