In Game Economy

[tazoulti]

To help the game running side, the bank could be "open for business" only during Logistics, and that way, the information about the players funds is recorded and maintained all at the same time. Yes, it's an additional step for Logistics, but it's better than a bank PCs could use all day (which would happen, thus effectively taking out at least one person with access to player files for the weekend and that's no fun for anyone).

I like this idea, particularly about only being open during Logistics. And I'd extend it a little to NPC merchants who sell various "one Shot" items & restricted components. The advantage here is this creates expendable items, (good for bringing in coin) whose prices can be scaled for the Lowbie campaign as needed (less issues of the have's and have-not's. But there will always be some - don't try to correct what can't be removed).

Plus, this opens up the avenue of PC's organizations who can issue credit vouchers for future needed production items as well as the warehousing of "one shots" which other pc's may also purchase during the game as modules crop up needing stuff they didn't pre-buy items for.

Also, I think the total amount of gobbied in items should be cut back. As is, players can bring in 100 production, that's equivalent to a "masters" level of production before workshopping. So in effect, everyone in the game has a master level production at their beck & call. I don't think that's right.

By throttling that back, you are re-direct their coin expenditures in game toward PC/NPC merchants where it belongs. (Now, If your arguing people are piling up gobbies. Well, either the Gobbies are being handed out too lavishly, or the pricing for gobbing things is too low. Pick one, as this is also economy that needs to be managed just the same as the in game economy and if it's effecting the in-game economy, it's effect must be moderated.)

Now, as for in game production drops, I agree with the comments about production drop ought to make more sense. I find it bizarre for monster X to be walking around with items it can't use, or loads of extras (unless of course they were highly expendable).

I also agree with needing to pay for more mundane things in game. Like every once in a while, Pc's should have to visit the local seamstress and get their clothing mended or replaced. They should be paying a merchant for food, paying a monthly due to stay at a guild barracks or a tavern keeper for place to sleep (unless they own a house nearby, now there's a reason to own something IG!). NPC's are solutions to things like this when there are no PC's to fill in. Plus it could also add to plot, because the Pc's have to deal with them regularly. A huge untapped service economy awaits NPC's of each campaign, if they but think creatively. I think plot should be considering how to make their towns feel alive, and not just a waystop during fights, that's where some campaigns fall into the endless looting loops.

But overall, this is how I think you move coin back into logistics - If People are hoarding coin, it had better be that their saving up for that must-get item, otherwise something is wrong.

 

[Wraith]

I also agree with needing to pay for more mundane things in game. Like every once in a while, Pc's should have to visit the local seamstress and get their clothing mended or replaced. They should be paying a merchant for food, paying a monthly due to stay at a guild barracks or a tavern keeper for place to sleep (unless they own a house nearby, now there's a reason to own something IG!). NPC's are solutions to things like this when there are no PC's to fill in. Plus it could also add to plot, because the Pc's have to deal with them regularly. A huge untapped service economy awaits NPC's of each campaign, if they but think creatively. I think plot should be considering how to make their towns feel alive, and not just a waystop during fights, that's where some campaigns fall into the endless looting loops.

These things are already covered by the assumption that your character doesn't spend 95% of his life that's not an Event in a closet somewhere like a powered-down robot. Money is earned, and spent on upkeep.

In Alliance games, time passes in-game at
the same rate as it does out-of-game. If a month
has passed between events, then a month has
passed in the in-game world.
Strange how life can be so boring for a
few weeks, then suddenly all the monsters start
attacking on Friday nights, isn’t it?
Actually, in-game, there are monsters attacking
all the time, and though things might
be heightened during an event, life still goes
on.
It is assumed that your character is still
fighting monsters and doing adventurous deeds
between events. Where does the money go that
your character earns during this period? Why,
it pays for all the food, lodging, and healing
your character needs during these off times!

But overall, this is how I think you move coin back into logistics - If People are hoarding coin, it had better be that their saving up for that must-get item, otherwise something is wrong.

Or they're just not playing the sort of character that spends a great deal of money, for that character's own reasons. Encouraging people to buy more assets for IBGA's and to flesh out their backgrounds is a great use for that sort of thing, though. Additionally, taking cash money out of the hands of players reduces the opportunity for PC Rogues to get to rogue it up more often. After all, if there's nothing worth stealing, why play a character who would want to do so?

 

[jpariury]

Apparently, the time away from events is much more a threat than the times during, since I can easily spend any entire event not having to pay for healing.

 

[Talen]

I don't know that the magic fuel idea would gain any ground. Limiting the amount you put in to game starts players whining about who has access to it easier, etc. and putting enough of it out to fuel everyone just makes the have-nots have even less.

The more magic items you have, the more money you'd want to put in (but not have to, the item would simply be dormant, like a car with an empty fuel tank) to have them working. "Have nots" wouldn't have to deal with the upkeep needed to maintain an armoury of magic items and weapons. If anything, you'd be more inclined to spread around the stuff you couldn't afford to keep running personally.

Production items like scrolls and potions would be more popular as well. No upkeep required, just read/drink and you've got that spell.

Meanwhile, the Barony of Lots of Shiny Glowing Items is pouring a double handful of gold into Logistics each month to keep the power on. Or coppers. Or silvers. Whatever you set the price of fuel at, and being plot, you can dictate that cost as you prefer to increase or decrease magic item use. If you want, you can even limit the supply- but that'll be more drastic.

Either way, it's a coin sink, pulling money out of hoards and back into circulation, where it can be put into goblin pockets and treasure boxes.

 

[SkollWolfrun]

Apparently, the time away from events is much more a threat than the times during, since I can easily spend any entire event not having to pay for healing.

That is just because you are awesome.

 

[Wraith]

I don't know that the magic fuel idea would gain any ground. Limiting the amount you put in to game starts players whining about who has access to it easier, etc. and putting enough of it out to fuel everyone just makes the have-nots have even less.

The more magic items you have, the more money you'd want to put in (but not have to, the item would simply be dormant, like a car with an empty fuel tank) to have them working. "Have nots" wouldn't have to deal with the upkeep needed to maintain an armoury of magic items and weapons. If anything, you'd be more inclined to spread around the stuff you couldn't afford to keep running personally.

Production items like scrolls and potions would be more popular as well. No upkeep required, just read/drink and you've got that spell.

Meanwhile, the Barony of Lots of Shiny Glowing Items is pouring a double handful of gold into Logistics each month to keep the power on. Or coppers. Or silvers. Whatever you set the price of fuel at, and being plot, you can dictate that cost as you prefer to increase or decrease magic item use. If you want, you can even limit the supply- but that'll be more drastic.

Either way, it's a coin sink, pulling money out of hoards and back into circulation, where it can be put into goblin pockets and treasure boxes.

At the same time you're devaluing all those magic items, and the materials to make them. After all, if it's got to be coin fed, while still costing scrolls and components to make, and still having an expiration date, then you've drastically decreased the value of an item by the cost of feeding it. That has pretty strong implications for the way players look at the game. We've already seen the idea of reducing the number of magic items in play get massive negative response to the players feeling that they earned those items fairly, and losing out on them would have a negative impact on their desire to play the game.

This leaves an owner presented with this system in play with two options : Risk losing heavily invested players who are currently likely to keep playing (and hence paying) for the forseeable future, or increase the amount of coin dropping to 'make up' the difference required to keep the items going. One of these messes with the in-game economy but the other interferes with the chapter's viability, so we can guess which is more likely.

That said, even if it worked wonderfully, I can't see this being the best solution to the problem we're having. It makes coin circulate, yes. But that coin simply goes out to a player and straight back to logistics, not adding any value to the game on the way. Let us compare the path a coin takes in two scenarios.

First, in the system you propose. A coin starts in the treasure policy bucket at the start of an event. It goes out on a monster, which is killed and looted, then the player uses the coin to pay the 'activation' cost on his once-daily cure light wounds item for the second logistics period. Coin has circulated, but the only impact is that it was in a player's hand for a moment, then went right back to logistics, with no return other than being allowed to use an already purchased tag for a logistics period. If he fails to use it in that time, the coin is wasted.

Second, a coin used in a system where production is not dropped. This coin begins just as the other, going from logistics to monster to player. That player then goes to the local healer's guild, who happen to know of a potionmaker with some stock, and is spent (after a brief bit of haggling) on a cure light wounds potion. The player walks away with a cure light wounds potion in his pocket, which is good until such point as the tag gets lost or destroyed. The seller, now with a coin in hand, uses it to pay for part of his batching for the second logistics period of the weekend, building more cure light potions now that he sees a market for them.

Which of these is adding more to the game?

 

[Talen]

agreed...magic item fule is just another way to screw the PC over, plus there are better ways to make coin have value. Food and auction people its that simple. If you have food throughout the weekend, people will buy. Its not that hard to go to Costco or BJ's and get a bunch of food that players could donate for gobbies, then have your chapter tavern sell for coin the whole weekend. Plus have an auction, who says you have to auction off magic items, I have seen everything from rit scrolls to ships for sale at an auction.

Both methods make the PC and chapter happy.....again.......simple.

This is why we have pie that literally costs a small fortune in gold. Talk about your currency devaluation!

And auctions generally aren't a continual part of a game, nor are they steady or reliable in being a way to draw game money from players back to the chapter.

If either worked that well, we wouldn't have the problem in the first place.

 

[tazoulti]

These things are already covered by the assumption that your character doesn't spend 95% of his life that's not an Event in a closet somewhere like a powered-down robot. Money is earned, and spent on upkeep.

Your missing the point, the assumption says their spending money in between events for those normal things, hence they should also be doing that during the event as well. In your version, they are taking "vacations" from their normal expenditures during events. So if we went by your version, coinage should be turned in at the end of each event so that Logistics could supposedly deduct your tab for in between event upkeep costs. That's not what we're talking about here, What we're trying to deal with here is the micro-cosme of economy that happens strictly DURING events, and not the other times. UNLESS your proposing we add that back in order to deal with the money circle being tilted mostly outbound.

Or they're just not playing the sort of character that spends a great deal of money, for that character's own reasons.

Oh, their hoarders. Personally in my opinion, not much worth playing, but some people do. Alright so we'll go with that for a moment, so your saying we should be asking "what's a owner to do when she/he has a serious case of hoarders on their campaigns hands?" then. Hmm. Well, my original suggestion still applies, you modify a game mechanic in order to draw coinage away from those hoarders, otherwise the coin hoarding will cause other problems like the "have and have-nots" situation again (like during auctions, the hoarder who have lots of coin will simply keep outbidding those who do not).

Encouraging people to buy more assets for IBGA's and to flesh out their backgrounds is a great use for that sort of thing, though. Additionally, taking cash money out of the hands of players reduces the opportunity for PC Rogues to get to rogue it up more often. After all, if there's nothing worth stealing, why play a character who would want to do so?

Sounds like your advocating that if a campaign has a serious hoarder problem they should be sending out NPC rogues to siphon money back into Logistics coffers. I seriously don't think any PC's will enjoy that. So I'd say that's not a solution.

 

[Talen]

At the same time you're devaluing all those magic items, and the materials to make them. After all, if it's got to be coin fed, while still costing scrolls and components to make, and still having an expiration date, then you've drastically decreased the value of an item by the cost of feeding it. That has pretty strong implications for the way players look at the game. We've already seen the idea of reducing the number of magic items in play get massive negative response to the players feeling that they earned those items fairly, and losing out on them would have a negative impact on their desire to play the game.

On the other hand, the massive amount of magic items in the game itself is degrading the play experience and rendering the coin side of the economy virtually worthless. Chapters are having problems getting enough coins back into the system, meaning more treasure is either MI's (making that problem worse) or production (devaluing PC production skills). Giving MI's a cost (which like the cost of any "fuel" can be dictated by Plot, including absolutely zero) to use means yes, you have access to every item you own- you just have to choose which or be rich (which if you have a ton of MI's, you probably were to begin with).

Your once-ever Cure Light item could have zero cost, while that +2 Damage Aura with a one-per-cycle Death spell mace might run a gold or two to keep active (for the event, per-tag cycle is a headache waiting to happen).

This leaves an owner presented with this system in play with two options : Risk losing heavily invested players who are currently likely to keep playing (and hence paying) for the forseeable future, or increase the amount of coin dropping to 'make up' the difference required to keep the items going. One of these messes with the in-game economy but the other interferes with the chapter's viability, so we can guess which is more likely.

How handy that if people need more money, and there's more stuff out there with money, then they're going out there more often to get it. That sounds like a winner.

That said, even if it worked wonderfully, I can't see this being the best solution to the problem we're having. It makes coin circulate, yes. But that coin simply goes out to a player and straight back to logistics, not adding any value to the game on the way. Let us compare the path a coin takes in two scenarios.

First, in the system you propose. A coin starts in the treasure policy bucket at the start of an event. It goes out on a monster, which is killed and looted, then the player uses the coin to pay the 'activation' cost on his once-daily cure light wounds item for the second logistics period. Coin has circulated, but the only impact is that it was in a player's hand for a moment, then went right back to logistics, with no return other than being allowed to use an already purchased tag for a logistics period. If he fails to use it in that time, the coin is wasted.

See above on costs and duration (seriously, having to go through all your items EVERY period? That'd be horrible.).

How about with the increased flow of coin, more gold/silver/copper go out instead of other items each event, because they're available. This means the player is more likely to actually do things to get those items, which means they're more likely to use those items. Also, a once-a-day 1st level spell item? The cost (should be, in any sane case) should be trivial. Your newbie isn't going to be running around swinging something that costs gold after gold to keep active.

Second, a coin used in a system where production is not dropped. This coin begins just as the other, going from logistics to monster to player. That player then goes to the local healer's guild, who happen to know of a potionmaker with some stock, and is spent (after a brief bit of haggling) on a cure light wounds potion. The player walks away with a cure light wounds potion in his pocket, which is good until such point as the tag gets lost or destroyed. The seller, now with a coin in hand, uses it to pay for part of his batching for the second logistics period of the weekend, building more cure light potions now that he sees a market for them.

How about you combine both? A magic-fuel economy makes potions more popular as they don't take coin to keep going (and scrolls too). More coin goes through player's hands from Treasure, which means you, the potion maker gets more business for those now-more-handy potions. That coin ALSO gets sent back in the form of production costs, which happens more often as there's now more business for the more popular potions- and since Treasure is putting less production items out since they have the physical coins to put out instead, there's even more demand for a production type's products.

Which of these is adding more to the game?

Assuming you do it right? Both at once.

 

[Wraith]

These things are already covered by the assumption that your character doesn't spend 95% of his life that's not an Event in a closet somewhere like a powered-down robot. Money is earned, and spent on upkeep.

Your missing the point, the assumption says their spending money in between events for those normal things, hence they should also be doing that during the event as well. In your version, they are taking "vacations" from their normal expenditures during events. So if we went by your version, coinage should be turned in at the end of each event so that Logistics could supposedly deduct your tab for in between event upkeep costs. That's not what we're talking about here, What we're trying to deal with here is the micro-cosme of economy that happens strictly DURING events, and not the other times. UNLESS your proposing we add that back in order to deal with the money circle being tilted mostly outbound.

Sure, they should be, unless there's a reason not to. I know that there are several chapters I've been to that do charge in-game money for lodgings and food, although it doesn't sit particularly well with me as a player if I'm also paying OOG money for the same thing, it works out fine in-game. Generally this is a plot issue, not a mechanical one. Overall, my philosophy on the matter is that we should always look at solving a problem like this from the perspective of how we can add more interaction to the game. Creating an economy that moves money though the hands of multiple players in a meaningful way seems like a much more interactive goal than simply turning coin in to logistics to meet whatever quota that has been set, and achieves the goal of the player coming away from the transaction feeling that she received something of value for spending that resource. Nikolai buying a new Vardo and a team of draft horses to pull it has exactly the same effect at an event as me, as a player, handing in the ~10 gold this will cost to logistics for some other reason. But I'm getting something that my character wants out of the deal, which will mostly be referred to in passing to explain how he gets from place to place, and have zero effect at game.

I don't think I'm getting across here, somehow. What I'm saying is that having coin is not at all the issue. The issue is the underlying cause behind why that coin piles up, rather than there being things that players and their characters want to spend it on. As far as those who don't spend their money, generally they're one of the several races in the rulebook who have specific outlooks on money written into their roleplay.


Talen : The problem with just putting more coin in play is inflation. Just like we can't get out of debt by printing more money, just putting more coin out there just means the minimum prices people are willing to take for things goes up, and people sit on more coin longer before bidding on that item they want. It doesn't do anything to improve the situation, just makes the amount of coin that chapters have to have pressed even higher. Production skills are the natural point to drain coin out and control the money supply, but the wide availability of LCO magic items means that people are much more likely to go for those instead of production. It's a complex problem.

It's not like you can tax adventurers anyway. Generally any given crowd of them is a disaster waiting to happen to the first thing that irritates them, and a ruler who decided to do so had best be a dragon mage/greater fey/actual bloody dragon in disguise if he doesn't want to be turned into a loot pinata.

 

[Talen]

Your missing the point, the assumption says their spending money in between events for those normal things, hence they should also be doing that during the event as well. In your version, they are taking "vacations" from their normal expenditures during events. So if we went by your version, coinage should be turned in at the end of each event so that Logistics could supposedly deduct your tab for in between event upkeep costs. That's not what we're talking about here, What we're trying to deal with here is the micro-cosme of economy that happens strictly DURING events, and not the other times. UNLESS your proposing we add that back in order to deal with the money circle being tilted mostly outbound.

Amusingly enough, some near-Alliance games do something similar- you do pay an upkeep cost at the end of events, while whatever you do between them is considered to be "break-even" otherwise. Which also doesn't do too badly for getting small amounts of coin back- even a silver an event for 60 people is a lot of smaller coins getting back to treasure.

Oh, their hoarders. Personally in my opinion, not much worth playing, but some people do. Alright so we'll go with that for a moment, so your saying we should be asking "what's a owner to do when she/he has a serious case of hoarders on their campaigns hands?" then. Hmm. Well, my original suggestion still applies, you modify a game mechanic in order to draw coinage away from those hoarders, otherwise the coin hoarding will cause other problems like the "have and have-nots" situation again (like during auctions, the hoarder who have lots of coin will simply keep outbidding those who do not).

People hoard all the time. They're saving up for a fancy item, or simply making more money than they want to lug back and forth all the time. If they stop playing, those hoards vanish from the coin pool frequently, stuck in a closet or the like. Heck, one of my friends went into the Army and had left all of his (considerable) pile of coins in his car.

It got repo'd. -a few dozen gold in mixed coins.

Each time, that's fewer coins in circulation, and when it drops too low...that chapter either has to buy (with real money) more coins or starts plugging other items in as treasure to compensate. Which can get ugly whether it's production or magic items.

If anything, I tend to see higher level players as pulling more coinage out of the system, simply because they have fewer reasons to spend it, and more ways to get large amounts of coin...unless prodded, and usually then for MI components or MI's. Which is it's own problem.

Sounds like your advocating that if a campaign has a serious hoarder problem they should be sending out NPC rogues to siphon money back into Logistics coffers. I seriously don't think any PC's will enjoy that. So I'd say that's not a solution.

Besides, with Wards all over the place, it's pretty tough getting into a cabin to begin with for your cabin-raiding band of merry thieves.

 

[Talen]

Talen : The problem with just putting more coin in play is inflation. Just like we can't get out of debt by printing more money, just putting more coin out there just means the minimum prices people are willing to take for things goes up, and people sit on more coin longer before bidding on that item they want. It doesn't do anything to improve the situation, just makes the amount of coin that chapters have to have pressed even higher.

I look at it this way. For coin to be more useful, there has to be 1) A constant reason for it's use and 2) A steady flow of said coin to use.

There is no 1) in the game at this point, which leads to 2) being impossible. The reason you see people paying golds for a freakin' pie is because there is no constant outlet for coins, which means they either get used on those few useful items that come along (and since there's a hoard in so many pockets, those prices are high indeed) or thrown like pennies at whims.- in other words, inflation.

There are tons of ways coin goes into a player's pockets. There are precious few that don't create some other kind of problem to begin with to get them out, and frankly, they need to get out.

I'm used to systems similar to Alliance that do use an upkeep system that you pull a few silver each event out when you turn in your character. It's worked rather well, but obviously different games need different approaches to the problem of "If you keep handing out coins faster than they come back, how do you hand out coin as treasure?"

 

[Wraith]

The problem I see with upkeep is tied in to the same one we've pointed out with magic items, the massive wealth disparity between the 'haves' and 'have nots'. An upkeep system that's an across-the-board fee is going to widen that gap further by being a much greater percentage of the take for those who don't already have the expensive tools that make adventuring easier, while being pocket change to the powerful. On the other hand, if you make upkeep costs that scale by level or number of magic items, the people who are powerful now and have come to be so under the current system are going to argue (with some merit) that they are being unfairly targeted. Not to mention the question of how you 'maintain' an indestructible item.

In either case, all you are really changing is the expected average treasure policy split per player.

I think the most effective solution that we have available to us as a game is to avoid that problem entirely and instead focus on making more desirable things for that coin to be spent on.

 

[jpariury]

The more magic items you have, the more money you'd want to put in (but not have to, the item would simply be dormant, like a car with an empty fuel tank) to have them working. "Have nots" wouldn't have to deal with the upkeep needed to maintain an armoury of magic items and weapons. If anything, you'd be more inclined to spread around the stuff you couldn't afford to keep running personally.

I'm not disagreeing that it is a functional way to siphon gold back into the campaign coffers, I'm saying it would never pass. There is a strong resistance to weakening magic items in general, this would, in effect, weaken them by making it harder to support their lifespan. People with lots of magic items will typically pull in more coin by virtue of having more power, and the drive to acquire coin to support them will be significantly increased. People with fewer items will, by extension, be harder pressed to find coin to support their use.

 

[Talen]

The problem I see with upkeep is tied in to the same one we've pointed out with magic items, the massive wealth disparity between the 'haves' and 'have nots'. An upkeep system that's an across-the-board fee is going to widen that gap further by being a much greater percentage of the take for those who don't already have the expensive tools that make adventuring easier, while being pocket change to the powerful. On the other hand, if you make upkeep costs that scale by level or number of magic items, the people who are powerful now and have come to be so under the current system are going to argue (with some merit) that they are being unfairly targeted. Not to mention the question of how you 'maintain' an indestructible item.

Which is why I didn't suggest "Pay X amount per event or your magic sword goes *poof*". It's "Pay X amount per event or this item won't function this event, but you can always do so next time and use it.". In other words, it's optional. Besides, those expensive tools (MI's) that make adventuring easier? Well then, those people should be out there getting more treasure anyway. And they generally do.

Far as upkeep goes, it also means that people tend to flat-out go after arrangements for at least a small, regular income. Nobles pay their retinue, guilds take care of their members, adventurers go out and mug the local goblins more often. . It's a lot easier finding someone to help in the tavern washing dishes. It's a gentle goad to not sit on your butt and do nothing, because Bad Things Happen if you're so poor you can't afford meals for the next month. As it stands, for most people the only direction they go is up- and most people in REALLY bad straits find help rather easily. After all, it sucks when your buddy goes hungry.

You can say any change is "targeting someone unfairly". Wealth in this game is = I've got lots of magic items, because that's where wealth gets spent the most and most often, and the people with the piles of items are the ones who most easily get the coin to get more- because MI's make things easier to do what adventurers do. MI's don't go away. They're almost inevitably useful, and because they're so useful to everyone, they become currency of a kind themselves (that and the raw materials to make them). But you generally don't get to put MI's back out for treasure, nor do they generally go back to Treasure to begin with. And the guys with the shiny MI's still have them and still can bloody well afford them- that's how people with lots of MI's get them. By being good at being able to afford them to begin with. What it'll likely do is mean they don't get as many new ones, and the old ones will probably spread out a bit rather than being stored in a hoard somewhere next to a pile of gold coins. Which there will be fewer hoarded, as they're being spent back to Treasure to fuel their MI's, which in turn means Treasure is putting out less non-coin treasure as they're no longer forced into doing so for lack of coin to give out.

In either case, all you are really changing is the expected average treasure policy split per player.

I think the most effective solution that we have available to us as a game is to avoid that problem entirely and instead focus on making more desirable things for that coin to be spent on.

Power is what coin gets spent on, more often than anything else. As it is, we have regular topics on "Magic Item creep" and "Level creep". Whatever else gets put in as that theoretical coin-getter, it would be the next topic after those two. Yeah, people hate taxes, but they love power more. Turn MI's into a coin sink, and you're solving a lot of problems.

 

[Talen]

I'm not disagreeing that it is a functional way to siphon gold back into the campaign coffers, I'm saying it would never pass. There is a strong resistance to weakening magic items in general, this would, in effect, weaken them by making it harder to support their lifespan. People with lots of magic items will typically pull in more coin by virtue of having more power, and the drive to acquire coin to support them will be significantly increased. People with fewer items will, by extension, be harder pressed to find coin to support their use.

Isn't this exactly the way it is anyway? Lots of magic items = easier gathering of wealth, (with nothing going back into the system as it stands). Fewer items = harder to adventure. That's why MI's have become a de facto currency in and of themselves, and a lack of physical coin has been pushing the increase in production/MI treasure being put into the game.

If your MI's are a financial drain, there's at least one check to the otherwise-unceasing increase in power. As it stands, MI's are an investment that yields more than it costs, almost without fail.

 

[jpariury]

Isn't this exactly the way it is anyway?

Not really. Right now, the people with a cool magic item or two get to play with them. This system would mean they have the item, but they don't get to enjoy it.

Again, I'm not against the idea, I just think it has a snowball's chance in Bermuda of making it through the assorted voting processes.

 

[OrcFighterFTW]

Magic items aside, the system I outlined would be simply for coinage, which was the original question of this thread.

The issues of inflation, etc. will exist in any economy with set or controlled prices, but that is a necessity for our game, as a system based on raw supply/demand chains would lead to much bigger headaches. As someone who worked in banking and loans, many of the modern ideas and notions surrounding the word "banking", such as interest for savings, are based on a fairly recent (post-WW1) system of banks loaning out money and making much more money off of those loans by charging compound interest over many years, thus perpetuating the banking system. The Alliance bank (Bank of Fortannis?) would be concerned with protecting coins of nobles and adventurers, not profits.

The OOG concern is having more physical coin in circulation (frequently changing hands from NPC-to-PC, PC-to-PC, and PC-to-NPC) in order to keep out-of-game costs down for the Chapters by not having players sitting on pounds and pounds of coins. One way to get the physical coin to move more is to give the game more things to do with it, but for large sums of coin that players, especially those working in teams, can amass, a system of unloading those coins is really the only option.

But it would not be fair to charge players arbitrarily in-game, so an incentive must be offered to separate characters from their wealth. As those characters are not actively spending and investing, a savings account makes the most sense. Like real life savings account, the primary incentive is safety, not profit, which is why most savings rates are less than even the least risky of investments ("You have to spend money to make money"). By limiting the savings to coins, thieves and others who would take from others would still have targets in the form of items and whatever coin was not yet deposited. I think it's a fair and balanced system.

If players are saving up coin just to save up coin, why not have a banking system that players can access on a regular basis during Logistics? It reduces out-of-game costs and could add a lot of plot fodder (as I said in my earlier post).

The issues of inflation and lack of spending are separate issues from a banking system, but both are solvable through diversified markets.

 

[Talen]

Not really. Right now, the people with a cool magic item or two get to play with them. This system would mean they have the item, but they don't get to enjoy it.

Again, I'm not against the idea, I just think it has a snowball's chance in Bermuda of making it through the assorted voting processes.

*shrugs* I know. Logistically speaking, I can't think of any other way to pull money back into the chapter that's a constant and wide-spread system that doesn't involve some kind of "tax", since the Alliance system doesn't really have any real reason to spend coin otherwise. And without something pulling coins back in regularly, the economy stagnates.

 

[jpariury]

RE: a banking system - what do you do when there's an auction and everyone makes a run on the bank?