Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="darkrose50" data-source="post: 4405987" data-attributes="member: 70793">I think the economic rules are sad, and pathetic. I am not trying to defend them in any way. The economic rules failed horribly (from a gamist, and simulationist standpoint). From a simulationist stanpoint they failed by restricting any concept that involves being good at making money. A 3 charisma 0 diplomacy character is just as good at buying and selling as a 20 charisma +15 diplomacy character. From a gamist standpoint there is not a stable wealth by level model (different groups gain magical items in dramatically different ways . . . this will screw up things like RPGA tournaments).  Anything from spending trade value on a pint of ale to a fully decked out fortress would decrease the power of the player character. Being a cheap hermit living in the forest eating worms will make you more powerful than living it up like Conan. Once trade value is used, it is gone forever (unless it was spent on an art object for 100% retention, or magical item for 20% retention).  Parcels are the only way to make money in the rules as written. One cannot simply say house rule it to cover up flaws in rules design. I pay for rules that do not need house ruling in order to play someone who likes wealth (pretty damn common personality trait).  Trade value is equipment points intended to be used on either magical items, or rituals. Spending trade value on anything else will lower your power, as trade value earned is finite.  The games economics are horribly designed. The only way to gain trade value is to level up, and if you spend your finite trade value on anything but magical items or rituals, than your power suffers.  Introducing such an item breaks the parcel rules / guidelines. This sentence reads to me as a treasure specific “it is okay to make a house-rule” example. I know I can house rule stuff. I remember reading a quote from a preview where it was mentioned that a character would not be able to sell his or her gear and buy a magical item higher than 4-level than the character level.   Doing so would not be following the rules as written. The intent of this post is to brainstorm for ideas on how to come up with economic rules with more verisimilitude (appearance of being real), and more fun.   Treasure is finite in the rules as written. Pointing out that one can house rule something is not an excuse for having bad rules.   I was trying for a ridicules example. Replace magical shaving blade with whatever you want. The point stands. There are two ways to get stuff “a wish-list”, and “suck-it-up this is what you get”. The wish-list route gains more power, than the suck-it-up route. We do not have a reason for this in the rules as written. I can only guess why this is so. This makes creating professional adventures harder than it should have been (RPGA tournament adventures for example).     I specifically explicitly wrote I was not going for real world anything. Again you say just house rule it. One can houserule anything. I did not pay money for a game with bad rules so I could house rule them. House ruling is not a defense for bad rules.  A player character should be able to get more than 20% of the crafting value of a magical item given enough time, the right skills, the right attributes, and the right connections. One could use an agent, or go to an auction house to sell an item. In the rules as written the only way to sell an item is to a traveling merchant for 20% of its crafting cost.  Earning money outside of the parcel system, or by merit of skill, planning, time, and effort is interacting with the economy in a meaningful manor. I am working on a system where money and power is separated.   A treasure hunter worth his grit would not sell his or her treasure for 20% of the crafting cost. Doing so is ambivalent at best, and incompetent at worst. I would certainly call anyone selling a house at 20% of its peer reviewed apprised value an idiot. He or she would figure out a way to sell the treasure for more (agents, auction houses, word of mouth). Thieves-in-the-night or con-men can not, should not earn more treasure than anyone else as the parcel system is intended to be divided among the party.  I hope for a book someday from WotC.  Doing exactly this sort of thing should be an option. At any rate player characters in a normal dungeon crawl game should have the option to not be ambivalent, or idiots about selling items for 20% of there crafting cost, and should be able to get more if so inclined.   I will post it shortly.</blockquote>

Verification