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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fireinthedust" data-source="post: 5881453" data-attributes="member: 51930">First:  I really like your economic model!   Sounds like a well-thought out structure.Second:  to answer your initial question about the village:I don't think this would work.  Small farmsteads would work for it, say 30 people each farm.  The farm would be run like a small business, and they need 30 people to get enough food, less would not make enough, more would eat too much.  A village might be where the go to trade for things.    Historically this is how it was outside of cities like Rome.  And really, 30 is the size of a big family: parents, kids, and their kids.  Plus, y'know, no birth control.  Lots of kids and lots of disease, you'll have an average of 30 people to a farm.Your population of 300+ just seems big, imho, for a simple barter if it's just one community.  That many people and there would be different set ups (a blacksmith, leather worker, carpenter, weaver, etc.) and they might start using coins to keep track.  It's just big enough.Also: I don't think the 50% reduction is necessary.  Think of it this way: if you take 50% from everyone individually, where is it going?  It's not vanishing, it's somewhere; and merely having a socialistic outlook wouldn't make it disappear.  You're basically saying what you do for one you do for everyone.  Giving away doesn't decrease the total value because it's the total value for the entire Village's amount of work.  The money would be the return on that investment, which the entire village would make, not just a few individuals.Rather, for that setting try having a steady rate of income:  everyone pitches in whatever they're going to pitch in, BUT they divide the spoils equally.  If you're going to roll, roll once for everyone in the village and that's the average amount for the week: the group got a bad sale.You could also have a larger lump amount rolled, then divide that among members of the community by shares/rank.  A chieftain would have a big share, others would have only one.But I'm not sure how Robert E Howard devised the Cimmerian social structure.  So far Conan's been outside Cimmeria, and only a poem has given a hint.ALSO:  I would think that without constant fighting the tribe would be considered soft, weak, possibly too close to becoming civilized.  If it's been decades without raiding, they may be more likely to use coins, as they're no longer a tribe of warriors in the same way.  Know what I mean?  The whole trap of civilization.  Heh, may be getting close to time the group had visits from a sorcerer who wants to trade, then settle nearby...</blockquote>

Verification