How much does an inn cost to buy?

[Agemegos]

I'm saying the definition of "sense" varies from person to person, from location to location, and from time period to time period. What makes sense cost-wise for a structure in 1190 is very different than what makes sense cost-wise for a structure in 1325, even if it's in exactly the same place.

These differences do exist in historical prices. The real price of grain, flour, and bread varied significantly from year to year, and a long-term trend roughly doubled the price of livestock and halved the price of worked metal goods between about 1000 and about 1400. But these variations from time to time and place to place, though economically significant in themselves, were as nothing compared with the discrepancies in the PHB price list.

I am not asking for a realistic system of price variations from time to time and from place to place. I don't want a system that randomly produces years of famine and years of plenty with realistic impacts on wages and prices of food. I just want a list of prices that doesn't imply absurdities.

The reason that I use mediaeval price ratios as examples when I can is that I think everyone assumes that most mundane items in a D&D world are produced using a quasi-mediaeval technology. Most of us assume that fields are plought by peasants with ploughs drawn by teams of horses or oxen, sown and harvested by hand, and that the grain is threshed and then ground in wind or water mills and baked in wood-fired ovens. Certainly was assume that people in a D&D world could fall back on that technology if the alternatives worked out to be more expensive. So it is that there is a certain amount of labour involved in preparing the fields, sowing, harvesting, threshing, grinding, winnowing, kneading, building a mill and oven, gathering firewood, and baking a loaf of bread. It would be possible to assume and calculate and work out what a loaf of bread ought to cost in terms of labour using mediaeval technology: but fortunately we don't have to (if records exist), because the mediaeval economy alreadyworked it out for us.

The same applies to building an inn. Digging the foundations, quarrying stone, felling and sawing timber, cutting and hauling wood, cutting rushes, digging clay etc. etc. all involves a certain amount of labour (a little of it skilled). In the end, this labour is the cost of building the inn. The mediaeval ratio of building costs to wages gives us an idea of how much labour it takes to build an inn using mediaeval techniques. If we quote a price for a building that in far off the mediaeval price of building such a building (and I mean a real price, a price in terms of labour) then if anyone looks at our system closely he or she will discover that it implies either a lot of people working very hard and producing a ridiculously small amount, or that it implies a couple of blokes throwing up a ludicrous amount of construction in laughably little time.

And people do look closely, because occasionally even epic heroes want to build a fort in a hurry, and want to know how quickly they can do it witht eh resources available. It's best not to give crazy results, don't you think?

The prices have been compiled with a little thought and care. The intent behind that compiling is what you disagree with. The prices are compiled with only PC interactions in mind. To compile prices outside of this goal would mean additional time spent on a matter that has little to no consequences for the majority of gamers.

Indeed. But I really don't see that the bizarre price ratios between, for example, chickens and meat or wages and fortress construction promote PC interaction.

I'm not calling for a system that will reflect the difference in price ratios between wheat and ironmongery in Poland and in Northern Italy, for a game about merchant ships. I am only asking that the things already listed should have sensible prices instead of stupid ones.

If it's under 10gp in cost, once past 1st level it's probably not going to matter much to any player. If it does for your group, you're playing a rare breed of D&D.

Well, Random User is playiing a rare breed of D&D then. But this thread is supposed to be about helping hiim to do so.

Besides which, I am enough of a grognard to remember a time when we generally aspired to building our our castles (or temples, or wizard's towers, or guild halls), garrisoning them, and equipping, provisioning and paying our retainers. That sort of thing works a lot better when players' attempts to work out what they can afford do not give rise to hoots of derisive laughter and garrisons with very odd diets. (The worst offender in this cas was an early edition of Chivalry & Sorcery which strongly encouraged quartermasters to feed their troops entirely on smoked salmon.)

Again, what is right? I'm not sure if I'm communicating this properly, but the price of grain itself varies massively over the entire European continent and throughout the entire medieval time period.

Sure it does. But the fact that you cannot reflect that variability in price ratios does not mean that you have to adopt a set of relative prices that make no sense under an circumstances: such as building costs five hundred times as high as were necessary under even mediaeval technology, or chickens that can be slaughtered at a profit of more than a day's wages each.

The question, "What's the price for a gallon of gas?" illustrates my point. Before you can give me a price you're going to have to ask me, "Where, over what period of time, and what was inflation like?"

I would not be able to quote a price of petrol that was right fo right whole of the century. But that doesn't mean that any price that I might list is as good as any other. For instance, supposing that I listed the wage of common labour as $1 per hour and the price of petrol as $500 a gallon: in a setting in which it was supposed that people drove around in cars as freely as we do today. That price would be ridiculous. And yet some price ratios in the PHB, (and in Chivalry & Sorcery, MERP, DragonQuest, HârnMaster and others are every bit as bad as that.

Your prices, although based upon a set of assumptions of time period and location, may be just as faulty for another time period and location as the D&D prices seem to you.

I think not. They will often be discrepant, of course. But only as much as price ratios actually varied. And they never varied through factors of hundreds: many of them never varied as much as a factor of two. In short any fixed prices (such as mine) must be faulty, but they need not be anything like as bad as the PHB prices.

You actually wouldn't be serving "both" markets because you'd be only serving one market (the average D&Der)+ the one market you based your prices off of (say medieval england in 1350). It will be an improvement for your particular desires in gaming, but that doesn't mean it's an improvement in gaming for anyone who wants to play outside of england in the 1350's. In fact, it may be more of a detriment for people who have your style of play (detailed world building aspects based upon history) but prefer Italy in 1210 than the simple, bad, base D&D prices we have right now.

No, that turns out not to be the case. There were difference in relative prices between Engalnd c 1350 and Italy c. 1210, but they were nothing like as big, not with in a long cooee of the magnitude of, the differences in relative prices betwen the PHB and England/Northern France c 1200.

First off, you'd absolutely have to ditch the 10/10/10 ratio of copper/silver/gold.

No I wouldn't. Because the price ratio between silver and gold is a function of their relative abundance, which has nothing much to do with technology. Any ratio is as plausible as any other.

What I am concerned about are the price ratios that as the result of people making and consuming things using certain methods.

A suitable set of circumstances could make silver one tenth of the price of gold. A suitable set of circumstances could even make silver ten times the price of gold. In that case, any price ratio can make sense.

But given that ale is made out of barley, and that it is drunk by people who work for wages, it makes no sense to list a pint of ale as costing less than the amount of barley needed to make it, or more than a labourer earns in a day.

I use mediaeval price ratios as an example, to show those readers who have no idea how much work is involved in building a wooden house (for example) how far out of whack some PHB prices are. But my problem with PHB prices is not that they are different from mediaeval prices. My problem is that they are totally whacky when compared to one another.

For example, according to the PHB you can buy a chicken for 4 cp. But you can sell 1/2 pound of meat for 30 cp, and a chicken often has two or three pounds of meat on it. Work out what the profit is of slaughtering and dressing a chicken. Compare that to PHB wages. The result is ridiculous. And that is why the price ratio between chickens and meat in the PHB is so dramatically different from the mediaeval ratio. But the difference from the mediaeval ratio is not the problem. The problem is that the PHB prices are ridiculous in themselves.

I hope my basic arguement (what time and what place) is coming though all of these paragraphs.

And I hope that my argument is coming through: that although price ratios can vary according to circumstances, no conceivable circumstances (and certainly no circumstances in which the majority of people are behaving as though they were in a quasi-mediaeval world) would produce anything like some of the price ratios in the PHB.

 

[The Gryphon]

In fact not, since I am basing my criticism on the (or rather, as jgbrowning points out, a) mediaeval price ratio of bread and a live chicken.

I don't have a retail price for a dead chicken, and indeed I don't think people bought them dead very often. But I have killed and cleaned chooks, and the labour involved is small compared with the mediaeval price of a chicken, which was more than a day's labour.

As for the price of meat, in times when the population was very small in comparison to the capacity of the land it was sometimes as cheap as wheat bread. But in extensively cultivated countries (such as required the manorial system) it was (for reasons that Adam Smith expalins in The Wealth of Nations Book I chapter ix part b) necessarily three or four times as expensive as wheaten bread. The PHB makes it about five times an historical cost in comparison to bread (and therefore about fifteen times an historical cost in comparison to labour). Butchering must be very expensive in a D&D world to turn chickens 8 times too cheap into meat fifteen times too dear.

So you're saying that based on real world economics of the time, that the 2cp chicken should cost 16cp to balance with a labourers wage of 1sp. Moving to the next item you say the 1/2 lb. of meat in the PHB should cost 2cp. As for how much meat comes from a medieval chicken, I'll use 3 lb. which I think is generous. That means I lose 4cp per chicken serving it in my inn, whereas I'd expect to make maybe 6-8cp per chicken. The math just doesn't add up.

You're also assuming facts not in evidence with your statements.

The information you've provided from the abovementioned book states that the price of meat was sometimes as cheap as bread, yet you assume the prices in the PHB must comply wholely with the manorial system of feudal government described therein, thus making the chicken cost more than a labourer earns.

Therefore the chicken which costs 16cp under your manorial system [which is probably referring to buying a chicken in a city], would cost only 4cp under another portion of the same text [which is probably referring to buying a chicken in the more isolated rural area where it's being bred]. Whereas bread will probably cost roughly the same no matter where it's made.

So increase the cost of a chicken by 4 or more when buying it in a city, easy isn't it

 

[Arnwyn]

I am only asking that the things already listed should have sensible prices instead of stupid ones.
Well, Random User is playiing a rare breed of D&D then. But this thread is supposed to be about helping hiim to do so.

And you will never get this. The PHB is written - thus anything said beyond that (such as "the prices shouldn't be this way") is moot. Further, since the PHB is written, I have a seriously hard time believing any publisher is going to release a book about d20 economics... and an even harder time believing some publisher is going to release a book about d20 economics and redo the entire equipment pricing system. That's just not going to happen.

In the end, you (and maybe random user if he's not satisfied with the answers above) really have only 2 options:
1) use the d20 system that's already been written, with all its absurdities (along with the related d20 support material);
2) come up with your own entire pricing and economic system.

That's all you got. There's no sense in arguing what "should" have been done, because it's far too late for that...

 

[Deadguy]

Arnwyn speaks wise words!

I am inclined to go with Hong's advice here; he rightly points out that D&D doesn't stand up to being thought about too much. It's a game to be experienced, not a treatise on mediaeval life and economics!

 

[kigmatzomat]

If you look at post #15 in this thread you will see that I have already posted a list of the prices of typical mediaeval furnishings. They aren't going to do the job.

I'd looked at the list before. By my quick perusal of your list, I'd guess that yes, furnishings account for about a third of a property's values, same as I suggested. So your 7200p merchant's house likely has 2400p of furnishings for a total property value of 9600p. It's hard to tell for sure since "merchant's house" doesn't give an idea of square footage, if it even has an oven, existence of a cellar, etc.

On another point you raise: if you start measuring the cost of a inn in terms of a wealth innkeeper instead of the wages of labourer, I will be free to start measuring the prices of mediaeval buildings in comparable terms, and the comparison will go right back where it was.

The cost of an inn is directly proportional to the clientele. A flop house with a pile of straw and pony keg on sawhorses will cost much less than one a bishop would willingly stop in. Assuming the innkeep expects to make similar profits to other professionals at that clientele level is reasonable.

Or in more modern terms, a hotel targeting fast food workers will cost less than one aiming for corporate executives. Furthermore, there will be a less profitable innkeep/owner for the fastfood inn. So the (earned) wealth of the innkeep should be reflected in the property values.

More succinctly: you have to spend money to make money.

*and* there's the fact that if the innkeep lives there, he doesn't keep a separate residence. If you treat the innkeep as a merchant he'd have a 9600p home, including furnishings. If you say his inn is on par with a merchant's home then there's another 9600p for a 19,000p inn.

Now go teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

Ahhh, this is why I love the internet; the comaraderie.

 

[jgbrowning]

Because the price ratio between silver and gold is a function of their relative abundance, which has nothing much to do with technology. Any ratio is as plausible as any other.

What I am concerned about are the price ratios that as the result of people making and consuming things using certain methods.

A suitable set of circumstances could make silver one tenth of the price of gold. A suitable set of circumstances could even make silver ten times the price of gold. In that case, any price ratio can make sense.

I understand your desires for more realistic pricing, but to me changing the bullion ratios to something reasonable is of much greater "realism" concern than items costing less than 5gp being a factor of ten or more off of each other. To me, more people understand the massive, glaring, error that's underlying every transaction. Although It's possible to justify this through abundance levels, it's something that grates heavier upon the average gamer than the disparities in commodity pricing. And bluntly, most gamers don't care about even this easily recognizable error because they quickly get the point that coins are just widgets, although they may never verbalize it.

I use mediaeval price ratios as an example, to show those readers who have no idea how much work is involved in building a wooden house (for example) how far out of whack some PHB prices are. But my problem with PHB prices is not that they are different from mediaeval prices. My problem is that they are totally whacky when compared to one another.

For example, according to the PHB you can buy a chicken for 4 cp. But you can sell 1/2 pound of meat for 30 cp, and a chicken often has two or three pounds of meat on it. Work out what the profit is of slaughtering and dressing a chicken. Compare that to PHB wages. The result is ridiculous. And that is why the price ratio between chickens and meat in the PHB is so dramatically different from the mediaeval ratio. But the difference from the mediaeval ratio is not the problem. The problem is that the PHB prices are ridiculous in themselves.

I think the pound of meat probably means beef. This would mean that you could get 90 pounds of meat for the same price as a 10 gp cow. That's quite a bit better.

No, that turns out not to be the case. There were difference in relative prices between Engalnd c 1350 and Italy c. 1210, but they were nothing like as big, not with in a long cooee of the magnitude of, the differences in relative prices betwen the PHB and England/Northern France c 1200.

There's been a long and strongly stated arguement than magic wouldn't create something resembling England/Nothern France. Personaly, I agree, if for no other reason than no other place in the world at the time really resembled England/Norther France without magic. If you want to make a medievalesque D&D world (which I did) I don't think that figuring out the pricing discrepancies for items that players rarely, if ever, come in contact with is very important when compared with the many other aspects of the culture and how to integrate them with d20. And unlike other "flavor" aspects, pricing does serve a mechanical purpose within the game beyond measuring value.

And I hope that my argument is coming through: that although price ratios can vary according to circumstances, no conceivable circumstances (and certainly no circumstances in which the majority of people are behaving as though they were in a quasi-mediaeval world) would produce anything like some of the price ratios in the PHB.

I think you've stated your argument clearly and have more agreement than disagreement. We just disagree on several larger aspects. Primarily, I think that's any change on prices for things less than 5 gp isn't of any importance because such precision isn't needed to play the game. It may be needed to play a particular type of game, but generally isn't needed. Anytime a real number is needed, it's only becase a player's involved, other than that, GM fiat designed to promote plot and increase tension/fun for the players always works better.

Although I'm completely with you about appreciating a more internally consistant effort in D&D pricing, to me, the problems in pricing that involve players are the important ones. In this equation, game balance issues are more important than real-life believeability and will always win over. I think that attempts to rationalize the fiscal system would probably create more difficulties than benefits because, to me and the vast majority of gamers, orders of maginitude errors for things less than 5gp aren't of any concern to begin with. Messing with familiar price structures, however, is concerning.

joe b.

 

[S'mon]

Messing with familiar price structures, however, is concerning.

joe b.

This is why I would prefer to keep the 3e DMG hireling costs, which remain similar to those of previous editions, and alter the 3e DMG Building costs, which are vastly inflated (ca x10 or more) from previous editions. One thing I think we're all agreed on is that you can't plausibly have both as being true in the same D&D quasi-medieval society.

As for PHB costs, I use the costs for adventuring gear like swords all the time, but for chickens, beer etc I'd mostly tend to ignore them when designing a society. Obviously a 1sp/day labourer doesn't spend 5cp on a flagon of beer. Maybe he spends 4cp on a chicken.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

prices

I always assume that the prices for food and lodging in the PHB are 'foreigner' prices -- IE the price that an unknown traveller (presumed rich) outside of his home area pays. I travel a lot in Asia, and believe me unless you're a really good bargainer you're going to pay 2 to 10 times the going 'local' rate for food and lodging.

Divide all the food, lodging costs by 10 to reflect what the peasant pays in his own village and things make a bit more sense. The PHB prices represent the gouging of rich foreigners because 'they can afford it'.

Ken

 

[Agemegos]

Therefore the chicken which costs 16cp under your manorial system [which is probably referring to buying a chicken in a city], would cost only 4cp under another portion of the same text [which is probably referring to buying a chicken in the more isolated rural area where it's being bred].

Actually, not all the figures are from the same text. You have to rabbit around a bit looking for records of prices.

So increase the cost of a chicken by 4 or more when buying it in a city, easy isn't it

I actually have some figures on the difference in prices for livestock between breeding areas (Leicestershire) and London. I think the pattern is interesting (the difference is smallest for cattle, rather larger for sheep, higher again for pigs, and highest for poultry). But I really didn't think that players wanted that sort of detail in their D&D game.

As for the fact that a live chicken is worth more than its weight in meat, I will point out two things. First, that the chicken I found a price for was noted as being 'a good layer'. Second, that the relative costs of different meats tends to vary somewhat according to circumstances. When beef and mutton are raised on open ranges they are cheap meats and poultry is a luxury food. If poultry were selling as a 40% premium over mutton, or if a cockerel or 'old boiler' were cheaper than a 'good layer' the prices I quoted would make perfect sense.

Anyway, you are correct in noting that it would not be good sense to slaughter a good egg-laying hen worth 1.6 sp to sell her meat for 1.2 sp. Will you acknowledge that on the other hand there is something whacky about a market in which you can buy a hen for 2 cp, slaughter her, and sell the meat for 18 sp? That's 17.8 sp profit for an operation that I assure you can be done with little skill and in few minutes.

 

[Agemegos]

I always assume that the prices for food and lodging in the PHB are 'foreigner' prices -- IE the price that an unknown traveller (presumed rich) outside of his home area pays. I travel a lot in Asia, and believe me unless you're a really good bargainer you're going to pay 2 to 10 times the going 'local' rate for food and lodging.

That has been suggested before. I don't think that it accounts for the fact that some of the prices are way too cheap.