Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 3627519" data-attributes="member: 7240">Before the 1300s, people believed that commodities had fixed "real" objective values that were always at the same ratio to one another regardless of supply or demand. X number of ounces of pepper always equaled Y number of ounces of gold, regardless of the amount of gold or pepper in the world or at the location of the transaction. Governments would appoint scientists and philosophers to conduct investigations to figure out what the proper ratios were. When merchants made profits, this was understood as them charging people for the cost of transporting or storing goods not as the cost of the good changing because it was now in a location where there was greater demand or less supply. That's why charging interest or upping prices during shortages was understood as morally wrong -- it wasn't because gouging people was bad but because it entailed misrepresenting the true, objective value of the commodity. After all, how could gold today be worth more than the same amount of gold next year (the basic premise of lending today). Aristotle was the thinker who spelled out this view of trade most authoritatively. And given that he was also the most eloquent and comprehensive authority on the four-element theory, I tend to use his versions of the physical and social sciences as the D&D default. Althought they're not a perfect match to the D&D rules by any means, they are a closer match than Adam Smith's economics or Newton's physics.It took the Fransciscans' theological innovations to break out of this idea during the 14th century. I hope that's what you wanted me to expand on. The rules part seems pretty self-explanatory.</blockquote>

Verification