How to do a "low" economy game?

[Plane Sailing]

I agree with earlier posters. I think that a simple and quick way of getting a "low economy" game is actually to make it a "low money" game. Very few coins are minted, and they are only used between nations, kings and high nobles. Use a barter economy for everyone else, along with a few copper pieces here and there. Naturally this doesn't mean that the party can cop 40 orc axes and just swap them for a suit of chain armour at the blacksmiths, but the possibility of people swapping goods and services amongst each other is a fine one which can give a very different atmosphere.

Cheers

 

[Numion]

In game terms, a +1 sword is equivalent to a house. Maybe that makes sense, but a high level character with +5 whatevers is the economic equivalent of Bill Gates walking around wearing his fortune in a backpack. It's just not very realistic.

May I ask how you felt about handling of this thing in the Lord of the Rings? Bilbos armor was worth more than the shire according to Gandalf. To me, it didn't seem unrealistic (or maybe we should speak about suspension of disbelief, since the book is fantasy) in the book. It fit in nicely, even though the shirt had about zero backstory, IMHO of course.

 

[Whisper72]

May I ask how you felt about handling of this thing in the Lord of the Rings? Bilbos armor was worth more than the shire according to Gandalf. To me, it didn't seem unrealistic (or maybe we should speak about suspension of disbelief, since the book is fantasy) in the book. It fit in nicely, even though the shirt had about zero backstory, IMHO of course.

Well, you are correct, but OTOH, this is in a story in a book. Saying that it is worth so much has few consequences. In a game, this is another matter, as PC's suddenly think that maybe they should sell the thing and want to carry around a 150.000 gold pieces in their belt-pouch... well, you get my idea... in a game suddenly issues of 'balance' and 'what effect does it have' crop up, which play no role in a book where the author controls everything which happens...

Also, these things are apparently quite rare, as even Gimli, an important dwarf, does not have one, not even a mithril axe or dagger.... If there is only about 1 or 2 +5 armor in the whole campaign world, then it being worth so much is not a problem, if all the characters in the adventuring party are dossed out in +5 weapons and armor, it becomes something else again....

High magic and high value / treasure worlds can work fine, but it has to be internally consistent in its own way as well...

 

[Numion]

Well, you are correct, but OTOH, this is in a story in a book. Saying that it is worth so much has few consequences. In a game, this is another matter, as PC's suddenly think that maybe they should sell the thing and want to carry around a 150.000 gold pieces in their belt-pouch... well, you get my idea... in a game suddenly issues of 'balance' and 'what effect does it have' crop up, which play no role in a book where the author controls everything which happens...

I was just saying that the world that results from the D&D economy, the one where an adventurer carries around a villages 100 years income in his backpack, isn't necessarily nonsensical (as long as we consider Middle-Earth sensible world, which most do). Like people like to argue. LotR is a good example. Bilbos shirt, a zero backstory armor worth the shire. Frodo was packin' the value with that and the Sting. Dare guess whats the GP value of Anduril, or a Palantir or even the One Ring?

I agree that it might be hard to balance in a game. But, it is not outright unrealistic (in the fantasy sense) like people have argued. It feels just about right, to me. Adventurers are so far-out wealthy that the common peasants don't really understand it, like Bilbo was when he came back from his adventure. It doesn't collapse the world.

Also, these things are apparently quite rare, as even Gimli, an important dwarf, does not have one, not even a mithril axe or dagger.... If there is only about 1 or 2 +5 armor in the whole campaign world, then it being worth so much is not a problem, if all the characters in the adventuring party are dossed out in +5 weapons and armor, it becomes something else again....

Actually the rest of the party had much more valuable stuff. The One Ring, One of the Three Rings (Narya?), Anduril, Orcrist, Sting, Numenor knives .. EDIT: or were those Westernesse knives? Can't remember..

 

[mmadsen]

I think that a simple and quick way of getting a "low economy" game is actually to make it a "low money" game. Very few coins are minted, and they are only used between nations, kings and high nobles. Use a barter economy for everyone else, along with a few copper pieces here and there.

You can change the economic feel of the game tremendously by removing the assumption that the world's economy functions like a modern, monetary, capitalist economy.

You have thousands of gold coins? Good for you; you still don't have any of the magical components you need to craft that wand. Where are you going to get them? Not at the strip mall magic shop. Not by mail-order. Hmm...maybe you could hire some young ragamuffins to hunt down those griffon feathers you need...

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed by author

 

[Vlos]

Just timing in as it sounds like you have a solution, but wanted to voice additional notes. Some of these were already similarly mentioned. I have a home brew campaign (cataclysm) where all major cities were destroyed when a god tried to enter the prime (not allowed in my world).

First as Treasure, hand out non-gold/money things. Metal nugets or smelted bars. These can be used as barter for items. With the many different types of metal, when a play finds smelted bars of mithril they are very very happy.


Magic Items that are handed out. Since little to no magic has been produced since the cataclysm (about 400 years prior) most minor perishable items are gone, thus the few items they do find are worth more, thus less likely to trade or sell.


With the different coins, you say you don't want to take it too far, but one of the more enjoyable campaigns I played in was where each country had their own currency. This would be very similar to our world (pre uro) where neighboring countries had different coins. It wasn't that you couldn't use the coins of a different country, but you were taxed an exchange rate. Those of you from europe know this well and from US to canada. Only Kingdoms(banks) could trade coins at or near the true value, where the average joe always had to exchange at a lower rate.

The last is the most book keeping, but its sort of fun to play where the players enter a new town or something close to a border and they go to pay for drinks and the bar tender looks at them funny. Sort of like trying to buy gas with monopoly money. When War breaks out, the other kindoms money is worthless (unless you are a spy) in which case you just created a new campaign arc as the party tries to hide or trade their "illegal" money.

If you create a spreadsheet of the coins and their values its fairly easy for the party to pay for things, just leave a column on the left side for the amount of each coins they have.

Different types of coins (I sure other players could come up with some cool ones as well):

Dwarves like solid tangible coins of different metals, often in the shape of small bars (ingots), marbles, squares. The different metals and shapes can equate to different values.

Elves like finer things. They may even have a marker system, where a stick is marked with a magical glyph, all marks are recorded to prevent counterfit. They would be used like debit cards.

Gnomes have a counting machine with special machines which deduct from the "credit/debit cards". Not many non-gnomish cultures would use these.

Humans, probably your standard coins (what everything else is computed against). Though different kindoms would have differnt types.

again just some random thoughts.

 

[kigmatzomat]

I use the "default" setting and never really had problems attaining the "cash-poor" feel at lower levels.

The trick at lower levels is to use the DMG system for determining the *value* of the encounter and then equipping it rationally. Most loot was in the form of gear (it was 3rd level before they had horses) with coin being thin and typically small denominations. Bows are *expensive* as are weapons and armors.

Heck, that goes for high levels too. I never give out 4d10x100pp. Ever. If there's 10,000gp worth of stuff then I'll have something like 20pp, 20gp, 50sp, 50cp and a 9700-something gp of gems, jewelry, or useful gear (masterwork strength bow+4). Most creatures won't keep large hoards of coin because it's too hard to manage or loses its luster due to it's commonness. Dragons are about the only thing that will have thousands of coins.

On the day to day level, most stuff will be in silvers. Don't say "half-a-gold," say "5 silver." Beer's a copper, wine's two, and dinner's a silver. Heck, gold should be a *hassle* since you can't get change. It's like buying a beer with a $100 bill at a dive bar. "Ummm, we can't make change for anything bigger than a $50." Platinum should be equally silly since you're waiving a $1,000 bill around. (Check how much beer & bread you can buy with 1pp. In my neck of the woods, it's about $1,000 worth of beer) Oh yeah, have money changers *charge.* Find a platinum, get 9gp back, or 4gp, 45sp and 50cp if you want to spend most of it on normal town items. Use of gold and especially plat is a big "rob me" sign. A rogue who nicks a single plat, by the RAW, now has about 3 months worth of city living (~1sp/day for unskilled workers).

Like people have pointed out, peasants don't live like most americans. I try to think about the US stereotype of Mexico. I have no personal experience in Mexico, but anecdotal information says that everything we have in the US is available there but the average wages are less like $25,000/year and more like $2500/year. Food, drink, basic clothing, and shelter are cheap but the pay is crap. Peasants are aware of the wonders of the world (TV, cutting edge medicine, the internet) but rarely have any for themselves. The slightest windfall can take you over the edge from peasant to adventurer.

So adventurers are loaded with coin and are used to living a 'luxurious' life. They also get shot, eaten, mauled, enchanted, beaten, burned, flash-frozen, and generally tormented. Fair 'nuff. Otherwise why, *in character* should most of them be adventuring? "See the world" only goes so far when most of the world you see is the pointy bits. And the love of violence can let you be a bouncer at a bar and bust enough heads to keep that itch filled by something other than three feet of steel.

I think if you change your treasure handling you can get what you want without massive rules changes.

 

[der_kluge]

May I ask how you felt about handling of this thing in the Lord of the Rings? Bilbos armor was worth more than the shire according to Gandalf. To me, it didn't seem unrealistic (or maybe we should speak about suspension of disbelief, since the book is fantasy) in the book. It fit in nicely, even though the shirt had about zero backstory, IMHO of course.

I didn't think that was terribly absurd, because they didn't purchase it. Sure, if placed on the open market, it might fetch an absurd amount of money (even if it was hobbit-sized). But, in the Lord of the rings movie, who had the cash to pay for such a thing, except perhaps Sauron?

The armor was given to Bilbo from the dwarves, IIRC.

Eventually the armor *would* have a history. Now it was worn by Frodo when returning the one ring, and eventually would have more story added to it post-RoTK, presumably. The thing is nigh indestructible, so should theoretically go on to have a long, rich history as the centuries unfold.

Obviously, things newly created wouldn't have much of a history.

 

[der_kluge]

One curious thing about LoTR that would be different in a D&D setting is this:

LOTR:
DM: "You see several orcs"
Aragorn: "I charge at them with my sword!"
Legolas: "I fire my bow and then close with my daggers when they are close"
*lots of rolling*
DM: "Great, you've mightily slain all the orcs."
Aragorn: "Superb work guys, now let's move along, we need to find the hobbits"
Legolas: "agreed"

D&D:
DM: "You see several orcs"
Aragorn: "I charge at them with my sword!"
Legolas: "I fire my bow and then close with my daggers when they are close"
*lots of rolling*
DM: "Great, you've mightily slain all the orcs."
PCs: (in unison) "WE LOOT THE ORCS, WHAT DO WE FIND?!"

If LoTR were like D&D, the fellowship of the ring would have been walking around with bags of holding full of copper and silver coins, because every orc (whether it made any sense or not) would have had an average of 2-3 gp per orc.

By the middle of Return of the King, the party would have been twinked out with magic items, and they'd have been looking to buy potions/scrolls/minor magic items at each city, and possibly even trading items between each other. "Legolas, I've got a +2 dagger that you can use instead of those +1 daggers you've been using. You can have it if you want it, I'm not using it."

That's the fundamental difference.

After the final battle, they probably did loot the orcs, but the result would have been several thousand of them cheap-ass swords and armor, that the humans would have promptly melted down and made into useful household goods. Only the bandits/mercenaries would have had coinage, and even then probably not very much.