How to do a "low" economy game?

[Sargon the Kassadian]

QUOTE(numion) "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."

The reason the items were so valuable was because they were made 100s or 1000s of years ago, when magic and epic heroes were way more common. The items are the DND equivalent of artifacts in their value to heroes. They were forged by the kings and elves of old. In essence, the LotR series is low magic and pretty low economy, It just happens that the heroes have amazing items.

 

[Numion]

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?!"

Actually it didn't go like that - they had to stop for Boromirs funeral. They looted his vanquished enemies helmets and loaded them on the boat. If the orcs had had anything valuable, they would've taken them. One of the themes of LotR is ownership by slaying the previous owner. Thats how the one ring changed owners.

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.

And what about the prelude for LotR, the Hobbit? They looted the trolls cave, they looted the one ring, they looted Smaugs lair .. nope, no looting in the Middle-Earth, they were too busy being heroic

Of course if you put it in meta-speak about plusses of the swords it's gonna sound different - but the effect remains. At the end of the LotR they were packed with elven magic gifts, armor from Rohan and Gondor, Westernesse blades (looted from the grave), Anduril .. not to mention the Hobbit. Bilbo obviously took part in a monty haul campaign way too high EL for his level, winning by deus ex machina. He did bring back a mule-load of money.

The fundamental difference is that the characters weren't driven by gold. And if your players (and therefore PCs) are, it's also good to ask whether low-money campaign really will fit them.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Personally, I don't see this as causing a really big problem, so long as treasure is capped across the board. So what if you can only afford a chain shirt, if all the average warrior has is leather? Really powerful monsters should be rare, and their CR altered to reflect the increased challenge they present if they require specialized tools to defeat.

This is pretty simplistic. What if you're dealing with a monster with no magical abilities, no DR, not even extraordinary abilities? Like a giant? You know the giant's attack bonus is balanced (sometimes loosely) on the assumption that the party has magical armor? You're going to have to either nerf the giant's attack bonus or boost party AC. Now do this across the board. Do the same things for saving throws - lots of monsters only have poison as a special attack, but the save DCs would be too high against players that don't have a cloak of resistance. Now, monster ACs being generally weak, I can't argue too much against just tossing out magical weapons though.

The fundamental difference is that the characters weren't driven by gold. And if your players (and therefore PCs) are, it's also good to ask whether low-money campaign really will fit them.

This doesn't necessarily mean the players are motivated by loot. It could simply mean that, without the loot, they'll be weak. That's the way the game is designed.

I hate having to go through the loot when it's found, but I have too, otherwise my character gets smacked down - just like in Diablo, Baldur's Gate and Angband.

 

[jevick treehewer]

New Here

I have just returned to roleplaying after about 10 years away from it (just found a group in area that plays). I'm starting the campaign at 8th level but I am severly limiting starting magic. I allowed 3 rolls on the minor column in the DMG for armor, weapon, and misc. I then allowed them to buy one additional item at 200% cost. To compensate for the lack of magic in possesion of the characters I allowed them to role their stats by adding a d8 to ten but they only got to make one set of stats. Let me know if I am crazy or not. Thank you.

 

[the Jester]

If you simply reduce the cost of mundane items and seriously increase the purchasing power of gold (f'rinstance I once ran a campaign where the definition of a gold piece was 'enough money to feed a peasant for a year' but left the price of weapons, armor, etc the same; this means that a few coppers will buy you a room and food and drink for the night in a place with average prices) you're off to a good start. Here's where I'd go from there...

Don't have magic item salesmen except in rare circumstances. And keep the cost of item creation and scribing spells at full 'normal' price, thus ensuring that even minor items are difficult to make and worth keeping (not to mention hard to sell, except to the very rich).

Drastically reduce the amount of treasure from standard- I'd say to something like 1% of the amount listed if you use my 'feed for a year' gp. This is still enough to keep the pcs fed and with a roof over their heads in the local inn, but it's little enough to give them good reasons for adventuring and to keep their equipment level at a more mundane level.

Because less gear means the pcs are less powerful, recognize that they may not always be up for a challenge of CR equal to their level. This gives you a choice: use equal-CR challenges and run a deadlier game, use lower-CR challenges and slow advancement, or tweak CRs or the way you hand out xps to accomodate the change in pc power levels. Personally, I recommend using more mundane monsters with lower CRs, but I feel that 3ed advances levels much too quickly, so I have a certain predjudice here.

Another issue raised by PsiSevered Head is that wizards need tons of money to 'keep up.' Not so- they simply won't have nearly the variety of spells that they would in a standard economy game. They'll still get two spells per level for free, and you might even want to increase it to three (just to give 'em an edge against the sorcerer).

Anyway, just a few thoughts- haven't read most of the thread, so some of these may be repeats of what's already been stated. But I ran a game (2e) for several years with the 'food for a year' gold piece, and it was great.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Another issue raised by PsiSevered Head is that wizards need tons of money to 'keep up.'

Hmm... I think someone else raised that point.

 

[the Jester]

Hmm... I think someone else raised that point.

Ooops... Well, must just be cause I like your name? Er, nothing. Go to sleep. [whistles innocently]

 

[der_kluge]

I have just returned to roleplaying after about 10 years away from it (just found a group in area that plays). I'm starting the campaign at 8th level but I am severly limiting starting magic. I allowed 3 rolls on the minor column in the DMG for armor, weapon, and misc. I then allowed them to buy one additional item at 200% cost. To compensate for the lack of magic in possesion of the characters I allowed them to role their stats by adding a d8 to ten but they only got to make one set of stats. Let me know if I am crazy or not. Thank you.

First, welcome to ENWorld, Jevick Treehewer.

Secondly, I think that's probably a fair approach if it accomplishes what you're looking for. I'm a bit curious why you've decided to start at 8th level? Most people I know feel like they can develop a more detailed character starting at a low level, versus high.

thirdly, the stat rolling method should really be independent of the magic item power. I mean, even in a low magic world you could have really great stats. I don't think I've ever heard of the 10+1d8 method, but it would certainly work. Although, my wife couldn't be rolled, since she has a 7 strength, and a constitution of about 6. I prefer 3d6 to be the best hard-core method. 4d6 - keep the best three is also a solid method, but tends to average around 13 per score. 3d6 averages 10.5 per score.