Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 6125955" data-attributes="member: 58197">Over on <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?336421-New-Q-amp-A-Starting-Gold-Paragon-and-Prestige-Paths-and-bounded-accuracy-vs-Feats" target="_blank">this thread</a>, we had some discussion about silver standard versus gold standard. A while ago, there was talk from the designers about perhaps moving D&DN to a silver standard, but we haven't heard anything about that in some time, and the playtest packets have pretty consistently followed 3E conventions for pricing. So I thought it'd be interesting to spin off a new thread on this topic... with, of course, a poll.To clarify a bit, when I say "gold standard" here, I mean what has typically been the case in D&D: Most "interesting" prices, which is to say, prices that players still have to think about once they have an adventure or two under their belts, are denominated in gold pieces. A "silver standard" would move all prices one step down the scale, so a thing that previously cost 10 gold pieces would now cost 10 silver pieces; silver would be the customary currency, with gold occupying the role that platinum does now, a rare form of wealth seldom seen in everyday transactions.The other question is how big the tiers between currencies ought to be. D&D has mostly assumed a 10-to-1 conversion, so there are ten silver pieces to the gold piece. However, 4E introduced an interesting twist: Above the gold piece, tiers were 100-to-1, so you had a hundred gold to the platinum and a hundred platinum to the astral diamond. This was presumably done out of necessity, because 4E items got really expensive at the high levels and PCs would have needed wagonloads of gold pieces to pay for a healing potion. But that doesn't mean it's a bad idea! There's something to be said for a sharper distinction between currencies, and this could be brought down and applied to silver/gold as well. It would be especially useful in stocking hoards--a higher ratio means you can have monster lairs strewn with enormous heaps of copper and silver pieces, without wrecking the game economy. On the other hand, people are pretty used to 10-to-1 by now, and you'd risk causing a lot of confusion.(Historically in the real world, 20-to-1 seems to have been about the going rate, but that seems like more complexity than it's worth. They tried it in AD&D and dropped it by Second Edition. Feel free to make the case for it though!)What do you think? Gold standard as it's traditionally been done, or silver standard? 10 silver to the gold, or 100? Or something else entirely?</blockquote>

Verification