Criminal Underclass in the Campaign World

Generally, the heartlands of civilized states should be fairly safe places for a typical peasant. In such places, blessings on crops and other techniques could well increase crop yields and make life somewhat better. (Also, there are real world techniques for farming that could be adapted to fantasy settings. The Incas, for example, had a very effective system of mountain farming in some areas, using water effectively to help grow crops. The dwarves may have something similar in some campaigns.)

Indeed, it is probable that there would be a difference between a medieval society from our world and a society at a similar level of technology, but with arcane and divine casters. Gods of agriculture may have followers who have asked for advice on planting crops and making agriculture more efficient and less back breaking. Or minor magical aid could be used to produce some items, and reduce costs. Even an unseen servant spell would free up some labor.

The outlying areas of a civilized state may have more of a "frontier feel" and have greater dangers. This is the sort of area that would likely attract adventurers. In such places, prices may vary widely. (Think of the California gold rush.)

The key thing is to find what works in your setting and makes it enjoyable to you and your players.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

William Ronald said:
Generally, the heartlands of civilized states should be fairly safe places for a typical peasant. In such places, blessings on crops and other techniques could well increase crop yields and make life somewhat better. (Also, there are real world techniques for farming that could be adapted to fantasy settings. The Incas, for example, had a very effective system of mountain farming in some areas, using water effectively to help grow crops. The dwarves may have something similar in some campaigns.)

Indeed, it is probable that there would be a difference between a medieval society from our world and a society at a similar level of technology, but with arcane and divine casters. Gods of agriculture may have followers who have asked for advice on planting crops and making agriculture more efficient and less back breaking. Or minor magical aid could be used to produce some items, and reduce costs. Even an unseen servant spell would free up some labor.

The outlying areas of a civilized state may have more of a "frontier feel" and have greater dangers. This is the sort of area that would likely attract adventurers. In such places, prices may vary widely. (Think of the California gold rush.)

The key thing is to find what works in your setting and makes it enjoyable to you and your players.

Quite so, and I am quoting your entire post for just that reason.

The point I am attempting to make is that a monetary system that is easily managed and adaptable is a boon to the GM, and that there is no need to be saddled with one that is cumbersome.

The second point is that you address. The more advanced societies in the fantasy world would certainly be different in many ways from any historical model, be it one of the 10th or 16th century or whatever.

My suggestion that having advanced states with wealth and societies like those of the Renaissance, this including much similar technology, neither precludes more primitive states and wilderness lands not lessens the scope of adventuring. A dispassionate analysis of this must surely conclude that the addition enhances to the variety of potential adventures.

Seeking to deny the possibilities through game mechanics/rules or finding other "arguments" based on some 12th century model is specious. After all, the assumption of active deities, working magic. strange monsters, and all that is part and parcel of the fantasy world and underlying game pretty well make such objections specious when the proposed changes are far less "fantastic" than the bases in question.

Cheerio,
Gary
 

Re: Now, now, settle down

Anabstercorian said:
Now, Vaxalon, show Gary the respect he deserves as your elder. And Gary, Vaxalon is making some very insightful and valid comments that deserve your attention, and possibly further evaluation. But I can see that tensions are starting to rise and there's really no need for that. Let's all relax, and continue our debate in a calm and rational fashion.

Not to mention as someone who has written a few works that have captivated a fair number of people for going on 30 years now, eh?

:)

Gary
 

Piratecat said:
Well said. Discussion, not argument, folks. This could be really interesting, and I'm curious to see the responses.

Thanks!

Well, PC, I don't want to go too far into this, as that's really what I wrote the EVERYDAY LIFE book to do, present my arguments for, by exposition of, a fantasy milieu where there was a considerably advanced society in the developed states of the world setting. I don't think that covering 40 or 50 pages of such material hereon would be in order, eh?

As noted, I mentioned that a monetary system that I believe facilitates the GM's management of costs and prices more easily that some others do is useful.

I also suggested that active deities, and their clerical servants, would have a far greater impact on the fantasy world's states that has heretofore been set forth, and that I treated this at some length in the forthcoming book.

Then came a nay-sayer. Such vehement disputation is to my mind inappropriate, as the critic has not seen the thesis underlying my suggestions and conclusions.

In any event, I do not intend to quarrel or even quibble :D

Cheerio,
Gary
 

Col_Pladoh said:
One thing that puzzles me, and this is related to "The Silly Economics of D&D" thread, is the reviewers stated confusion over the monetary system I set forth in the book. To me it seems easy and simple to employ, viable in virtually any FRPG system. By giving one-ounce coins of copper, silver, and gold values in US dollars, most prices are easily dealt with. Of course special things, and certainly magical ones, will need to have tables for values, but even that seems to be more intuitively established when coming from a known base, the dollar of today. SO where have I gne wrong?

Cheers,
Gary

Well, from a systemic viewpoint, your solution is very elegant. Everyone playing today in america understands the value of our money system and its appropriate purchasing powers. But, as others have mentioned, our purchasing power is based upon a mondern economy, not an agrarian one. In order to not restate what others have said let me do a quick rundown of how i think the system you propose is not an accurate solution, though it may be a useable and elegant one.

1. the buying power of the system you propose changes. a $ in 1980 is different than a $ in 2002. Unless you plan to revamp your prices every decade or two there is one flaw.

2. the relative value of a $ vrs. any other currancy in the world.. ie. euro, yen, rupee, baht.. etc can change even more dramatically. and i think this game transcends the US border enough now to justifiy not having a purchasing system based upon dollars.

3. What we have as social classes is very very different than what the social classes were like during the medieval period. This point is my main sticker... honestly we are all filthy stinking rich compared to most of the world.

3a. The things we consider as necessary are really most often luxuries. ie... car, tv, radio, air conditioning, books, education, computers, more than two sets of clothing, shoes, health care, carpet, refrigerated food, electricity.. etc are all really luxuries. anything that does more than protect us from the elements and each other, feed and water us, and provide us solace in times of trouble (religion) is a luxury.

4. Our food production is stable and fairly predictable, preventing massive fluctuations of grain price that was common during the medieval period. All other item's worth during the medieval period fluctuated around similiar difficulties. It was possible to have a villiage starving not more than 20 miles from a surplus of grain in another villiage.

5. Pricing something as simple as bread at 1$ is tremendously problamatic. It is a good rough price for developed countries, but it is obviously incorrect for others. I understand you are trying to say that relatively the price is similiar, but i even dissagree with that. The % of an average american's income that that 1$ loaf of bread consumes is drastically less then the % a similiar item consumes of a socio-economicly similiar class in the middle ages. At different times, grain was anywhere from 4s a quarter (8 bushels, roughly 480lbs depending on grain humidity) to 14s a quarter in the period 1208-1308 in england. an average construction labourer during that period earned roughly 2d a day. (thats 12d(penny)=1s(shilling) conversion rate.) a quarter of wheat can be ground down to make (after all taxes, ie miller's fee, lords 13th of all ground grain) roughly 350 1lbs loaves of bread. After giving the baker his due you'll end up with around 340 1lbs loaves of bread. Each day a laborer with 2d (laborers were actually well paid, but their job stability was low) would need around 2500 calories, (its hard work) so he'd need about 2lbs of bread to make his intake daily. so for a month the guy earns 52d and he must spend 8-9d a month on bread alone in the good year and 28d-31d on the bad year. As you can see the guy is spending 16% to 57% of his income on bread. And this is assuming the guy works the entire year, most construction stopped during the winter.

6. I fully understand the difficulty in trying to price items. im currently working on a product and i've been pulling out my hair trying to figure out the prices of stuff in D&D terms. but those terms have been simplified to promote the core of the game (adventurers) to the detriment of everything else. A nice decimal exchange rate is great for players, but it is far from reality where a single small gold coin was worth 60 or so silvers.

Anyway, thanks for listening. I understand your desire to represent $ in a medieval world, but i just dont think it is possible and i think it is detrimental because i believe it fosters a continued basic misunderstanding of wants/needs that we have today vrs. what occured in medieval times. But again, im not saying its not elegant... :)


joe b.

edit: i got my info from "building in england down to 1540" by salzman.. its an amazing book.. if you can find it get it. I also got some info from "the great wave" by fischer. its another good book, better for the medieval period than the latter period as the author has some bias.. but its a good read anyway, price fluctuations etc. [scholor mode OFF] :D
 
Last edited:

Re: Re: Now, now, settle down

Col_Pladoh said:


Not to mention as someone who has written a few works that have captivated a fair number of people for going on 30 years now, eh?

:)

Gary


OK, so let me get this straight, just because you are an enertaining published author who started a thread to pimp one of his books, this means you your words are obviously more meaning than those of someone else's?

Sure, I agree you deserve some respect for your role in first establishing the game as it is but that doesn't mean your words on some area, in this case fantasy economics, that is unrelated to the foundations of that particular game have any more weight than those of anyone else's.
 

Re: Re: Re: Now, now, settle down

Tuerny said:
OK, so let me get this straight, just because you are an enertaining published author who started a thread to pimp one of his books, this means you your words are obviously more meaning than those of someone else's?

Sure, I agree you deserve some respect for your role in first establishing the game as it is but that doesn't mean your words on some area, in this case fantasy economics, that is unrelated to the foundations of that particular game have any more weight than those of anyone else's.

Actually I, and im sure many others, take gary's words with much more consideration than we take others. When discussing role-playing primarily (game design) and how to fit certain aspects of real-life into a game (economics), i believe that his words have a lot more importance than the average netizen.

while you may disagree, and you have that right, disagreement and civility can be displayed to someone who just might, just might mind you, know a bit about what he speaks.

joe b.

who if you'll note, disagreed with everything gary said, but did so in a manner to promote civility.
 

I don't have a problem with what he said or even how he said it.

What I have issue with is that he came here looking for feedback on the economic system provided in his book and when someone disagreed with the stances he took on it he basically said "I am not arguing with you about this. All of my arguments are in my book and I am not going to repeat them here"

If he did not want to discuss the matter than why bring it up?

Then, when someone rebuked both Gary and Vaxalon on the matter (which I thought he did in a relatively balanced matter) he dismissed what the other poster was saying by highlighting that he was a published designer.

You are correct in saying that you should try to have respect to someone who just might know something about what he speaks. Gary, however, was not doing that even when Vaxalon was making some relatively valid points. If he wants to have respectful responses he should treat others with respect, even if they do not share his stature as a game designer.
 

LOL!

someone on this list who wouldn't even be here save for my fanciful flights surely is touchy about being called on the caropet for what can likened to shooting his mouth off from a pretty pathetic set of credentials. That wasn't really what I was saying. of course, when I mentioned the matter of published work and millions of fans.

I started a thread to ask about why comeone couldn't grasp a pretty straight forward monetary system. All of the objections posted here have been fauuous in that regard. They object to this and that, but the system per se is not addressed.

There are assumptions and nuiances to it, but in all, it is a simple precious metals to dollars (called whatever you like in the game) system.

Now as to a suggestion that it is detrimental because it changes the mindset of players from that of the fantasy world to a modern one, please! The desires of humanking have not changed much over recorded history, onlt the items desired have become more numerous and complex.

Rather than post further, because it seems counter-productive to intelligent discussion to continue here, I'll simply ask that this thread be ended. When the book is published next year I'll happily answer any criticisms here or on other forums:)

Cheerio,
Gary
 

Col_Pladoh said:
LOL!

someone on this list who wouldn't even be here save for my fanciful flights surely is touchy about being called on the caropet for what can likened to shooting his mouth off from a pretty pathetic set of credentials.


Excuse me, how was I being touchy about being "called to the carpet"?

I wasn't part of the group was arguing with you about the contents of your economic system. I was just pointing out how disappointed I was in the arrogance you were expressing on this thread.

quote from the first post:

Col_Pladoh said:
What I'd really like feedback on is if this interests DMs, and what those who have seen the work think of my treatment of the subject. Rest assured that cons are as meaningful to me as pros in this regard

Col_Pladoh said:

I started a thread to ask about why comeone couldn't grasp a pretty straight forward monetary system. All of the objections posted here have been fauuous in that regard. They object to this and that, but the system per se is not addressed.


You seem to be contradicting yourself here.

If you don't really want people's opinions you shouldn't ask for them.
 

Remove ads

Top