D&D Economics

[DMH]

Is there any sourcebook that makes a reasonable attempt at fixing this mess, by providing realistic wealth guidelines per level and making the prices of goods and services make consistent sense?

Not exactly what you are looking for, the Enchiridion of Treasures and Objects D'Art does fix the billion chickens problem (ie it looks at total cash and goods on hand in communities). It is from ST Cooley on rpgnow.

 

[Rel]

Because if the Druid charged the going rate for casting a spell of that level the increased crop yield still would not come close to paying for it, let alone be profitable. Same can be said for a wall of stone, stone shape, etc...

Except that here we get into another area where D&D economics are screwy. Because "the going rate" for casting Plant Growth is not going to be more than the value it would represent to the farmers. The farmers ARE the market for the casting of that spell in most cases.

I'm really not suggesting that every spell have its own price based on the market factors at work in the game world. I'm only pointing out that this is really a huge and complex challenge for anyone who undertakes to account for these factors.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Not exactly what you are looking for, the Enchiridion of Treasures and Objects D'Art does fix the billion chickens problem (ie it looks at total cash and goods on hand in communities). It is from ST Cooley on rpgnow.

You know, if someone hasn't mentioned the billion chickens thread, I was gonna bring it up.

There's a great thread that I have bookmarked somewhere on the economy of magic items, as per the DMG guidelines, which was really neat. It showed that for a standard magic world there really isn't a problem with the magic side of things. I'll have to look for it when I get home, otherwise someone can do a search for Economy of Magic Items or something like that.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Not this again.

How magic affect D&D economics.

For God's sake, why can't EVERYONE, even the stingy, evil, non-contributors search?

This was all hashed out in a thread not a year ago. Pages and pages of debate.

The bottom line? There are not enough casters of high enough level and the spells do not do the right things to make a big difference in the average persons life.

Cure Disease? Sorry, reinfection.
Plant Growth? It says PLANTS. Not CROPS. PLANTS. Including weeds. And yes, dandelions are useful [edible] but not every weed is useful. So you have more crops AND more weeds. And it says "potential" productivity, so droughts and plagues would still be in existence.
Fabricate/Major Creation? Sorry, there's not much demand for mass-produced armor.

Although...there should be some Core spell that could easily destroy locusts...

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

OK, let's examine the Plant Growth thing.

Usig the Jamis Buck town generator, based off the DMG info, I generated five large towns of populations 3,200-4,800. They averaged 1 cleric of 5th level or above, and 1 druid of 5th level or above each. Never more than one of each. That means that one town can manage one caster who can do Plant Growth (the Druid) and a small chance that the cleric can (I'd guess fewer than 20% of all celrics woudl have the Plant domain - probably less). The town only needs about 25 square miles of cropland to support itself, so that Druid can handle the job easily by himself. Assuming no evil clerics are countering it, and that druids are welcome in that area.

How about smaller towns, though? I generated 5 villages. 1 Druid (total) and 2 clerics (total). It starts getting dicey there, but the druids (if they are so inclined) can probably keep up the Plant Growth thing as long as they want to.

However - will they? Doing this will actually depress the value of the land - as there will be more crops sold to the same number of townspeople, and transportation is still an issue (outside of caravans equipped with Wall of Ice-powered refrigerator wagons, etc). Prices will drop. Standards of living will get worse. Famine may be avoided, but I can see the clerics and druids being very judicious on the use of this spell to regulate the agricultural output (divinations to determine the likelihood of drought, and spells only being cast to counter this).

Net effect: a 10-20% increase in yield seems plausible, but that's not going to make a massive impact on the visible game world from the PC/Player POV. Their meal costs them 5 sp instead of 6 sp per day, let's say.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Except that here we get into another area where D&D economics are screwy. Because "the going rate" for casting Plant Growth is not going to be more than the value it would represent to the farmers. The farmers ARE the market for the casting of that spell in most cases.

Well, in all likelihood, the locals are tithing 10% to that druid or cleric, and expecting things like this in return, along with the usual baptisms, funerals, etc. So the locals are paying for it, just not on a direct basis.

ANd I'd love to see someone pull up that thread on magic in the world. There was some very good stuff there. There isn't much need to rehash it though, and I'd ike to stay more focused on the OP in this thread.

This thread started off (and I'd like to keep it) about a more specific topic, that being prices for goods and services, and by extension, the D&D monetary system.

 

[Belen]

OK, one thing - it assumes you're looking at "Medieval fantasy" with the same economic eye as "Medieval History", which may not be the case. If you were doing that, you'd be on a silver standard (first).

Actually, D&D is on the silver standard. If I remember correctly, the gold standard only applies to adventures because they need the extra money to pay for things like healing and magical items.

In a previous campaign, I used a different standard and had several currencies above the current level. The "normal" coins were called pennies:

Penny
Copper
Silver= 10 copper pennies
Gold= 10 silver pennies

Marks
Silver= 10 gold pennies

Monarch
Gold= 10 silver marks

Sun
Platinum= 10 gold monarchs

Normal people used the pennies which were mostly cheaper alloys. The marks, monarchs, and suns were more pure and were adopted by the super wealthy such as nobles, high end merchants etc and applied to things such as magic items etc. This allowed for a less=more approach and made it so that the adventures did not have to carry around so MUCH coinage.

It worked out well.

 

[CarlZog]

I'm not so concerned about the effects of magic on an economy or the realities of varying coinage, etc.

What boggles me is the role of dungeon loot and the impact adventurers would have on a local economy.

My group is playing the Dungeon mag Adventure Path series right now, and it seems like we are constantly unloading hoards of crap onto the Cauldron populace. The amount of jewels, artwork, armor, weapons and other goodies we've been hauling out and trying to sell couldn't possibly be absorbed by the locals.

Our DM has been pretty good about adjusting prices to supply, but I can't help thinking local demand would been satiated on our first haul. For the sake of the game, he has -- probably wisely -- glossed over that nuance.

Likewise, I wonder where all this loot come from in the first place, how come nobody really noticed it missing, and how its removal from local circulation and into a cave failed to produce even a blip on the local economic radar.

Although some suggest ignoring these paradoxes, I find these kinds of issues to be a fascinating part of games' efforts to model imaginary worlds. For me, grappling with the problems only leads to richer campaign settings and spawns adventure ideas.

Carl

 

[LostSoul]

However - will they? Doing this will actually depress the value of the land - as there will be more crops sold to the same number of townspeople, and transportation is still an issue (outside of caravans equipped with Wall of Ice-powered refrigerator wagons, etc). Prices will drop. Standards of living will get worse.

Why will standards of living get worse? (It's been too long since econ 101.)

 

[SWBaxter]

The more I look at this issue, the more it's driving me absolutely insane.

Well, here's the problem: there are actually two major problems with D&D economics. The first is that it doesn't act much like medieval economics, which some folks would like it to do - there's too much cash and not enough barter, too much economic mobility and not enough economic dependence. The second is that it also doesn't act much like an actual economy would given various D&D tropes (such as free-flowing cash and powerful magic). The kicker, and the part that drives people insane, is that solutions to these problems are mutually exclusive; if you want a medieval-style economy, you have to accept that the standard D&D tropes are wildly out of place. If you want an economy that realistically reflects all the D&Disms, it will look almost nothing like a historical medieval economy.

You can find lots of good products that have medieval-style economies (I'll nominate Harn as my favourite). AFAICT there aren't as many that create a logical fantasy economy, but with some hunting and research you can probably get one that works. But you can't have both at once, sorry.