Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

[Ragitsu]

A common criticism of most fantasy settings is that the economy is either not very well defined, or can easily be broken by Precious Resource X or Magic Spell Y.

 

Do you ever put much energy into ensuring your fantasy setting of choice (be it homebrew or already established) makes sense within the realm of goods/money changing hands in the vast scheme of things?

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

While a fascinating topic, I don't know how much it truly applies to gaming.

 

I think the extent of things for gaming should be:

 

1. Coins are heavy; carrying 10,000 gold is not feasible unless you have "bags of holding" or something, or a functional banking system with promisory notes or other non-coin currency (which needs to merely be mentioned, not necessarily well defined, for most gaming purposes.)

 

2. Magic - I would recommend simply stating "magic cannot create money or valuable materials." Otherwise, the party wizard will just summon whatever money is needed and loot becomes a moot point. Speaking of...

 

3. Loot. How important is 'loot' to your campaign? For more literary adventures, where story trumps most everything else, money doesn't much matter to the players - you can simply define it using points of wealth and "you get money, buy stuff" 'scenes.' If loot matters, you probably want to look at price lists for items and compare to 'estimates' of average income in your setting, and then hand out specific amounts of money based on those assumptions. You can, if you want, define your own currency and such, but generally the "gold - silver - copper" system works.

 

For my setting, this is what I have done:

 

Noordmar, Ulohi, Kalanth, and Feldmaar all have their own national currency. Feldmaar and Noordmar have an actual banking system with promisory notes, with Feldmaar using magical sigils to prevent counterfits (Feldmaar being a highly magical place.)

 

Most major city-states have their own currency, while the bestial races use various human monies or a simple barter system for the most part.

 

Trade between nations / city-states is generally handled by trade bars rather than coin - easier to transport in bulk.

 

I mention the currency only briefly, and tell my players that "it all breaks down in various ways to gold pieces, etc. for the purposes of buying stuff." Then I use the price list out of FH6E.

 

So then I thought a bit about the average income of people, and what that would break down to when using the Wealth perk.

 

Looking at the FH6E price list, I decided a typical peasant in Noordmar, my primary location for starting the campaign, would be about 1-2 silver coins per 20 days in my setting (in whatever currency / form that would take - this is just the generic value.) So "Wealth at Zero" as a 'perk' is 1-2 Silver per 20 day "fortnight"; each level of wealth is about a doubling of this. Using this, it would mean that a typical peasant would need to save all his wages for a year to buy a decent sword.

 

Here is an excerpt from the campaign setting 'book' I am putting together:

 

The average income for a peasant is about 1-2 “silver” per 20 days, or about 2-3 “gold” per year.

 

Typical Wages

 

• Peasant income would cover most commoner jobs; farmer, laborer, etc.

• A town guard or tradesman would make about twice as much; 2 to 4 silver per 20 days.

• Skilled tradesmen such as blacksmiths, stonemasons, etc.; 4 silver to 1 gold per 20 days.

• Caravan guards or professional soldiers could make 1 to 5 gold per 20 days (thus, 24 to 120 gold per year – about 3 to 6 points of Wealth); leadership positions, spellcasters, knowledgeable artificers or engineers, or those trained in the use of firearms (generally required to have their own weapons) would be at the higher end of this scale.

 

Each level of Wealth approximately doubles yearly income and/or starting money. Note that Yearly Income can only apply for players if they actually hold a job and perform those duties; most PC income is generated by actions that occur in the campaign.

 

Points of Wealth = Yearly Income (Starting Funds = 2x Yearly Income)

 

1 = 5 GP

2 = 10 GP

3 = 20 GP

4 = 40 GP

5 = 80 GP

6 = 150 GP

7 = 300 GP

8 = 600 GP

9 = 1250 GP

10 = 2500 GP

11 = 5000 GP

12 = 10000 GP

13 = 25000 GP

14 = 50000 GP

15 = 100000 GP

[Lucius]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

If you can find it, In The Labyrinth had a great set of rules for jobs including a table with weekly income, prerequisites, chance of GETTING the job, and a weekly roll for things that could go very right or very wrong on the job (For example, city guard: decent pay, chance to earn extra XP by breaking up brawls, but higher chance to be injured on the job.)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

PS: Palindromedary Herder

[Enforcer84]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Not too much, actually.

 

I'm more inclined to fiddle with currency exchange rates between countries but only for background. It would never (ok rarely) come into play in the actual game, unless my players really, really were interested in economics.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

About as much as any other aspect of the fantasy world, I'd say. For example:

 

- with all those long-lived races, why aren't there numerous characters of other races vastly more skilled and experienced than the humans?

 

- how can giants be that tall? Cube square law and all that

 

- what use are castles in a world with dragons and flying wizards?

 

- why do wizards waste so much time making magical weapons and armor they can't use?

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

- why do wizards waste so much time making magical weapons and armor they can't use?

 

Money and/or to support a cause/causes they believe in?

[Lucius]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

I don't think it calls for a dissertation, but it is certainly possible to give too LITTLE attention to making the economics make sense.

 

Take Trin'Dar for example. They're overhauling this part of it, but the creator likes having lots of "denominations." If you go through and figure out what the smaller units of currency can buy and then look at the ever-ascending tower of values, it was obvious that a single "Black Mithral Coin" can buy the whole continent (and get you change back.)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

how much for a palindromedary?

[L. Marcus]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

how much for a palindromedary?

Today's special offer at the Bizarre Bazaar -- free with every purchase!

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

A common criticism of most fantasy settings is that the economy is either not very well defined, or can easily be broken by Precious Resource X or Magic Spell Y.

 

Do you ever put much energy into ensuring your fantasy setting of choice (be it homebrew or already established) makes sense within the realm of goods/money changing hands in the vast scheme of things?

 

Not really. Economies are very complicated things, and making one that would be completely internally consistent, especially considering adding magic to the mix, would qualify as 'too much work for too little return' in my personal book. I'm not even willing to fart around with exchange rates of coins between different countries.

[Old Man]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

- why do wizards waste so much time making magical weapons and armor they can't use?

 

Who says they can't use them?

[Gent]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

- why do wizards waste so much time making magical weapons and armor they can't use?

One reason would be to arm minions, if they are the sort of wizard who has warrior minions.

[ClassifiedTSBBR]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Not really. Economies are very complicated things' date=' and making one that would be completely internally consistent, especially considering adding magic to the mix, would qualify as 'too much work for too little return' in my personal book. I'm not even willing to fart around with exchange rates of coins between different countries. [/quote']

 

I sort of agree, one of the reasons my current attempt to design a fantasy setting (or reasonable chunk thereof) keeps stalling, is I keep getting sidetracked trying to work out how magic would affect things like Food Production (fertiliser spells, weather prediction, etcetera) & Storage, Mining (zombie & golem miners?) & Manufacturing (magical fire for smelters/forges/etcetera), Transport (zombies & golems rowing galleys, carrying palanquins, towing carts, etcetera), & Health (improved hygiene, curing diseases, mitigation of crippling injuries, etcetera).

[Vondy]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

It think world designers need to put enough effort into the economics for the world to have verisimilitude, but not try to develop detailed economic models. Also, the impact of massive troves everywhere needs to be considered. As a rule, PCs would be flooding the economy and causing problems if they were to accumulate the kinds of hoards a lot of games seem to assume they will. There has to be rewards, goals, and methods for growth for the group other than just filthy lucre.

[Markdoc]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Sure, of course. I don't agonise over it, but when placing people/villages/cities/castles, in-game there has to be a reason for them to be there and that usually entails some sort of economic consequences. When designing cultures and societies, I usually start with magic and politics but economics is not far behind. These things are not doe purely for geek credits, but because understanding things like where the trade routes are, who has the money and how much, what sorts of things are valuable, etc not only aids verisimilitude and depth, but makes it harder for the GM to be thrown off stride, by players' queries and acts as a valuable series of plot hooks in its own right.

 

When I play in games where economies or societies don't seem to make any sort of sense, that doesn't mean I can't enjoy them; it just means we're in a kill-them-take-their-stuff kind of of game and I play it on those terms.

 

cheers, Mark

[sinanju]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

It think world designers need to put enough effort into the economics for the world to have verisimilitude' date=' but not try to develop detailed economic models. Also, the impact of massive troves everywhere needs to be considered. As a rule, PCs would be flooding the economy and causing problems if they were to accumulate the kinds of hoards a lot of games seem to assume they will. There has to be rewards, goals, and methods for growth for the group other than just filthy lucre.[/quote']

 

Yeah, most fantasy worlds would probably resemble gold rush California. Sure, you've got a wagonload of gold. But so do several other people, and all that gold chasing a limited quantity of goods means constant and rapid inflation. The people REALLY getting rich are the merchants providing goods and services to the adventurers at wildly inflated prices.

 

Were I to run a fantasy campaign, I'd vastly downsize the economy. Most people (i.e., peasants) would do most of their trading as barter, and consider themselves well off if they had a pocketful of coppers. Prices for the PCs (for weapons, armor, gear, etc.) would be similarly low, compared to a lot of fantasy game backgrounds. Treasure hordes would be correspondingly smaller--a small chest (the size of a breadbox) of silver, gold and jewels would be a fabulous find, and make you quite wealthy in that environment. But it's not going to be a wagonload of gold.

 

I'd also have few areas of wilderness except on frontiers outside of settled areas. Everywhere else would be (thinly) populated, with lots of tiny hamlets and villages and farmland, save for the occasional city. Any "wilderness" in settled areas is likely to be either undesirable land (lots of rocky hills or otherwise mostly useless land) or crown-owned forests, and poaching (or simply being found there without permission) would be a major problem. Outside of major trade routes and moderately large villages, it would be, "Inn? What inn?" Travelers would have to barter/pay for shelter in someone's home or barn.

[Vondy]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Outside of major trade routes and moderately large villages' date=' it would be, "Inn? What inn?" Travelers would have to barter/pay for shelter in someone's home or barn.[/quote']

 

So, you all meet in the villein's barn. That's when a mysterious man in cloak and cowl with an ornately carved rune-staff pushes his way through the goats and sheep. As you look up from the goodwife's small beer and pottage you traded for he addresses you in a deep, enigmatic voice.

 

"I have need of your services good adventurers," he says...

 

[dmjalund]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

And how does all this affect what you will find in a dragon hoard?

[Lucius]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/86023-Huge-treasure-found-in-Indian-temple

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Meeting with Sheelba, Ningauble, and a palindromedary, to discuss the latest incursion of the Devourers

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

I sort of agree' date=' one of the reasons my current attempt to design a fantasy setting (or reasonable chunk thereof) keeps stalling, is I keep getting sidetracked trying to work out how magic would affect things like Food Production (fertiliser spells, weather prediction, etcetera) & Storage, Mining (zombie & golem miners?) & Manufacturing (magical fire for smelters/forges/etcetera), Transport (zombies & golems rowing galleys, carrying palanquins, towing carts, etcetera), & Health (improved hygiene, curing diseases, mitigation of crippling injuries, etcetera).[/quote']

 

I highly recommend looking at the Eberron setting for D&D. It does a very good job of showing one way that society might develop in a world where magic is logically used for sociological development. For example, in their last big war, one country did use undead soldiers (after a famine weakened them, and they didn't have a lot of choice), and every nation made some use of golem troopers.

[sinanju]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

And how does all this affect what you will find in a dragon hoard?

 

Well, there's a lot less treasure just lying around for the dragon to find and confiscate in the first place. Unless he's been building the horde for centuries, it's extremely unlikely to look like the treasure room in The Mummy. His "hoard" is more likely to consist of lots of bones, and the armor and weapons (and any magical items) of the previous few decades or centuries worth of would-be dragonslayers.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

And magic "tricks" don't factor in?

[Markdoc]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

And magic "tricks" don't factor in?

 

I think magic tricks should definitely figure in: but you also need to think about how you want to apply them. Magic-users generally require both a decent amount of XP to be terribly useful and also - if they are being terribly useful - are going to require decent feeding, housing, pay, etc. So it's unlikely that a pack of goat-herders will have powerful mage or that a wizard will spend his time making sure the local peasants get good crops: his time is almost certainly worth more than 4 cartloads of potatoes. If it does happen in game, that even modest villages will have a goodwife or hedge wizard who can mess with the weather, cure ills and mend wounds, then by definition that GM has decided that his game is a high magic one, where pretty much everything will be affected by magic.

 

Not a bad thing, just a different kind of game.

 

I'd expect that to have a major effect on economics (and more than economics): such a world wouldn't resemble medieval Europe much, if at all. And the logical consequences extend in all directions: any mage powerful enough to mend a dagger wound is theoretically powerful enough to stop aging or conjure his food out of the air ... or send a message across the country faster than the fastest physical message system.

 

In my current game, for example, I deliberately limited magic so that it can be powerful - but it's hard to use in combat and hard to make long-lasting magics. So mages co-exist alongside armies of soldiers, and trade carries on much as it would in a medieval world - with some exceptions. For example, the Lord of the Thorn, has a magic map that shows all ships in his domain. He has little trouble with pirates or smugglers ...

 

cheers, Mark

[Clonus]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

A common criticism of most fantasy settings is that the economy is either not very well defined, or can easily be broken by Precious Resource X or Magic Spell Y.

 

Do you ever put much energy into ensuring your fantasy setting of choice (be it homebrew or already established) makes sense within the realm of goods/money changing hands in the vast scheme of things?

 

Much energy, no. But I have warned people that it was well known that the Gurps Magic spell "Earth to Metal" if cast repeatedly for commercial purposes, would lead to a catastrophic backlash at the first fumble and this was how the Old Empire fell.

[ClassifiedTSBBR]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

So... what... you're thinking that 1st critical fail would produce a couple of tons of U-235 or something?

[Tasha]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

I think magic tricks should definitely figure in: but you also need to think about how you want to apply them. Magic-users generally require both a decent amount of XP to be terribly useful and also - if they are being terribly useful - are going to require decent feeding' date=' housing, pay, etc. So it's unlikely that a pack of goat-herders will have powerful mage or that a wizard will spend his time making sure the local peasants get good crops: his time is almost certainly worth more than 4 cartloads of potatoes. If it [b']does[/b] happen in game, that even modest villages will have a goodwife or hedge wizard who can mess with the weather, cure ills and mend wounds, then by definition that GM has decided that his game is a high magic one, where pretty much everything will be affected by magic.

 

Not a bad thing, just a different kind of game.

 

I'd expect that to have a major effect on economics (and more than economics): such a world wouldn't resemble medieval Europe much, if at all. And the logical consequences extend in all directions: any mage powerful enough to mend a dagger wound is theoretically powerful enough to stop aging or conjure his food out of the air ... or send a message across the country faster than the fastest physical message system.

 

In my current game, for example, I deliberately limited magic so that it can be powerful - but it's hard to use in combat and hard to make long-lasting magics. So mages co-exist alongside armies of soldiers, and trade carries on much as it would in a medieval world - with some exceptions. For example, the Lord of the Thorn, has a magic map that shows all ships in his domain. He has little trouble with pirates or smugglers ...

 

cheers, Mark

 

Of course, Mages won't spend the time. How about Priests? It would be quite natural for a Priest to Heal and perhaps help out the weather, crop yields etc. They would do it for "free" as that would promote their god(ess) and encourage regular worship. Now not all gods are concerned about the same things, but you would probably find the gods that cover the concerns of farmers near the farmers, the gods that are about mercantilism near markets etc. I think it's easy to forget or dismiss divine Magics. I am sure that the gods would want to show their worshippers that Gods are worthy of being followed.