|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As several people have said, having productive farmland be incredibly expensive, far beyond the means of most farmers, is actually quite historically accurate. Owning significant amounts of farmland is pretty much what made you an aristocrat.
And if you *did* happen to be a small landowner who worked your own land, it was because your long-ago ancestors got it for free, or else you managed to acquire it through non-financial means (e.g. getting a land grant for serving in the army).
OTOH, having land be worth vastly more than can possibly be earned from it in a lifetime of farming is nonsensical. At least in an agricultural economy. If I have a choice between earning say 200 gp a year from my land (not counting living expenses and the like) and selling the land for ~10000gp, which would be enough to live on for 50 years?
Let's just set aside the question of whether you could find a buyer, or whether 10,000 gp really would be the sale price.
Even if you could get 10,000 gp for it, you're not just selling 50 years' worth of production. You're selling your children's and grandchildren's and great granchildren's livelihood, security, and social status.
So you've got 10,000 gp. If you can't find a way to ensure that your 10,000 gp will keep your family fed, clothed, and out of slavery for three generations, you've made a bad deal.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is why the farmers are serfs and work land they don't own.This.
Most commoner-class types that the PCs encounter are legally considered part of that land that's so expensive. When a lord buys or inherits that land, the peasants go along with it.
Please, don't generalize England Middle ages as All the Know World Middle Ages.
If you're talking about non-noble land ownership, you're talking about the bourgeoisie, who were (in some periods) quite wealthy, if not wealthier than the lords.Of course, this is all real-world feudalism. I do hate to use the past tense when discussing fantasy realms, but in this case the comparable form of government barely exists in our modern era.
Golarion may work on a totally different system, but the simple explanation is that it's feudalism, since we have Kings and Barons running around.
It says a lot about the progress of society that the modern reader of game rules presumes "working the land" means ownership and a sole share of the profits!
Better.
Even in our Middle Ages there were nations where a good percentage of the farmers owned the land (and even had other farmers as serfs) and other where the serf/master relationship was in force till the XX century.The Inner Sea mostly has a low population density. The largest city has little more than 100.000 persons in it and the Inner Sea territory is larger than Europe. A few years ago I did some calculation, and the population density seem to be 1/4 of that of 1300 Europe.
That make free land relatively easy to find and labor relatively precious.
On the average the peasant in the Inner Sea should have better access to land than a peasant during the middle ages.
Add that, if you want to have some population, seeing the dangers present in the gaming world, you need to allow them to use weapons, and you will see that oppressing farmers as during the worst part of the middle ages isn't so simple.
|
|
Hey, the wealth rules don't work in a 3.x variant. That's unbelievable! I mean, it's been true for 13 years, but still! Unbelievable!I actually don't have many problems with money in 3E/Pathfinder. Most "complaints" I see run along the lines of:
If you spend 8 hours a day doing something, people will pay you for it and you can make money FOREVER!!! (In modern terms, we call that "having a job".)
Some things in D&D are incredibly expensive and poor people would never be able to afford them!!! (I feel the same way when I pass a Bentley or Lamborghini dealership...)
However, I agree with the original poster that prices for land and buildings have always been on the high side in D&D. I imagine that's supposed to make it challenging for adventurers to buy real estate, but that makes no sense when you consider that by level 5 (or whatever), most adventurers are the equivalent of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.
Not even close. At level 5 your WLB is 10.500 gp. My group dis some math, a gp is worth about 50 €, so we are speaking of about 50.000€ or about 65.000 $, nice but nothing more.
Even the WBL of a 20th level character isn't much. 880.000 gp. Less than 6.000.000 $.|
|
You can't have land prices that are that far out of line with what can be earned from them. It can't take generations to earn back the initial investment. Either land prices will fall since no one is buying, or food prices will rise since no one is farming.
Having done the accounting for a farm for a few years, I can assure you that the return against the value of the land is really low.
With a land value of about 2,000,000 € the net profit was in the order of 25,000 €. If you add some unregistered sale and the secondary benefits like free food products it would go up to 50,000 €.A 2.5% return from the capital value, including the farming incentives.
The owner could have sold the land for the equivalent of 40 years of revenues, but money devalues, faming land, if you work it, don't.
Please, don't generalize England Middle ages as All the Know World Middle Ages.
Oh, you're preaching to the choir on that one. For starters, there is no such thing as "All the Known World" middle ages, so yes, I'm talking about european-style feudalism. Not specifically English, though.
It's a trap. The setting has kings and barons and nobility and the trappings of feudalism, so there's nothing really to compare it to besides Earth feudalism.
However, it's not Earth, and it isn't "medieval" in any meaningful sense.
Not even close. At level 5 your WLB is 10.500 gp. My group dis some math, a gp is worth about 50 €, so we are speaking of about 50.000€ or about 65.000 $, nice but nothing more.
I'm not sure how you multiple 10,500 by 50 and get 50,000. ;-)
At any rate, I was exaggerating for comic effect.
One point to remember, if that yeoman is starting from scratch, he will need to buy everything he needs for that farm. Everything. And that is a fair bit of equipment. To compare, the Conestoga wagons that the settlers used to move West were crammed as full as they could get them with just the tools and seeds they would need for the new farm. different times to be sure, but a useful comparison nonetheless.
I actually don't have a problem with that cost (15 Goods, 15 Labor) for the initial piece of farmland - it "feels" about right. Beyond that? Why buy a new plow for each new sections of farmland? Do you really need separate harrows for each acre? Once you have the permission or right to a piece of land, you would need the tools (that 15 Goods and some gold) only once, and then it is just LOTS of labor, labor that can be performed by the yeoman himself. (along with his family, that is.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1st ed. Players Handbook, p. 35,Gygax modeled D&D economy on that of the gold rush boom towns.Maybe, though I don't remember a source for that.
Your character will most probably be adventuring in an area where money is plentiful. Think of the situation as similar to Alaskan boom towns during the gold rush days, when eggs sold for one dollar each and mining tools sold for $20, $50, and $100 or more! Costs in the adventuring area are distorted because of the law of supply and demand...
|
|
Please, don't generalize England Middle ages as All the Know World Middle Ages.Oh, you're preaching to the choir on that one. For starters, there is no such thing as "All the Known World" middle ages, so yes, I'm talking about european-style feudalism. Not specifically English, though.
It's a trap. The setting has kings and barons and nobility and the trappings of feudalism, so there's nothing really to compare it to besides Earth feudalism.
However, it's not Earth, and it isn't "medieval" in any meaningful sense.
In Europe we have kings, barons and nobility even today and we had the equivalent even during the Roman Monarchy, the Republic and the Empire. And we had and have the equivalent in most of the world, so kings and nobility don't define the Middle Age.
Personally I see most of the D&D worlds as the Renaissance, with parts of the still backward, parts of it very advanced and a lot of it in a intermediate situation where the advanced part and the remnants of the older style of living coexist.
|
|
Not even close. At level 5 your WLB is 10.500 gp. My group dis some math, a gp is worth about 50 €, so we are speaking of about 50.000€ or about 65.000 $, nice but nothing more.I'm not sure how you multiple 10,500 by 50 and get 50,000. ;-)
At any rate, I was exaggerating for comic effect.
Brain fart. 500.000 €
Still a good sum but nothing staggering.Even a 20th level character with about 50,000,000 $ of wealth is rich but not a mover and shaker of the financial world, even in Renaissance terms.
|
|
Make that thirty odd years. Gygax modeled D&D economy on that of the gold rush boom towns.Hey, the wealth rules don't work in a 3.x variant. That's unbelievable! I mean, it's been true for 13 years, but still! Unbelievable!(in my head as i read this)
ha ha that's ..... 13 years..... god i am oldMaybe, though I don't remember a source for that.
But the model skipped the important part. It's not dynamic. Prices are fixed. They don't change when the adventurer brings in a dragon hoard. They don't change from one region to another.
1st ed AD&D DM if I recall correctly. If not there in some number of Dragon. They are both in a box in the basement, so I will not check.
|
|
You can't have land prices that are that far out of line with what can be earned from them. It can't take generations to earn back the initial investment. Either land prices will fall since no one is buying, or food prices will rise since no one is farming.Having done the accounting for a farm for a few years, I can assure you that the return against the value of the land is really low.
With a land value of about 2,000,000 € the net profit was in the order of 25,000 €. If you add some unregistered sale and the secondary benefits like free food products it would go up to 50,000 €.
A 2.5% return from the capital value, including the farming incentives.
The owner could have sold the land for the equivalent of 40 years of revenues, but money devalues, faming land, if you work it, don't.I think the income we were talking about at the start of this thread was gross, not net. You grow this much wheat, which would sell for X. Not you would clear X in profit.
The daily/weekly skill checks for profit are net income, not gross income. Same thing for the UCamp rules, they include the unskilled hirelings and the equipment needed to run your property. They are part of the cost of "buying" it.
Brain fart. 500.000 €
Still a good sum but nothing staggering.
Obviously Italians are more fashionable than we are, but if I saw someone walking down the street with $500,000 in clothes, jewelry and equipment, I'd be impressed. :-)
Obviously Italians are more fashionable than we are, but if I saw someone walking down the street with $500,000 in clothes, jewelry and equipment, I'd be impressed. :-)Brain fart. 500.000 €
Still a good sum but nothing staggering.
The scary part about high-level murder hobos is that a decent chunk of their personal net worth is not immediately visible. ;)
The best analog I've been able to find for money has actually be in dollars at $1 = 1 CP, $10 = 10 SP, $100 = 1 GP, etc.
This fits pretty well for my purposes. I came to this conclusion not based on the market value of items but based on services such as meals, lodging, etc. It's not perfect but it's much more usable than any other conversion or analog I've ever seen proposed for it (as most are based off things like the value of gold, whereas I've based it off the value of common living expenses and the like).
My group also finds this acceptable and they feel it really puts a lot of things into perspective for them.
People in D&D aren't generally poor however, unless you want to make them poor. Everyone has the option to take 10 on Profession or Craft checks, which means the average untrained laborer makes 5 gp per week, or 20 gp a month (even someone with a 3 in both Int AND Wis can make 3 gp per week). Paying your way is relatively easy, but not getting eaten by whatever is the BBEG this week is less easy. :P
I think that perhaps the costs listed in the Campaign book were thinking only of PCs and adventurers, creating a weird disconnect from verisimilitude (OR perhaps they just didn't get the measurements right). Alternatively, perhaps they are assuming that wheat is not the primary means of business and food for said farmers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A yeoman farmer, a peasant just wealthy enough to own enough land to feed himself, his wife and a couple of kids, will need about 25 acres of farmland. One acre of farmland is about 43,560 square feet or 1742 squares of 5' x 5'.
/QUOTE]But the yeoman cant sell the land, its not actually his own property.
The yeoman's lord owns the land not the yeoman. The yeoman holds a mini-fief from his lord in exchange for military service as an archer or infantry depending on culture and era.
Technically, in the Middle Ages, the only one who had actual ownership of the land was the King. Everyone else was a vassal to either the king, or one of the kings vassals.
Historical notes:
It takes about 11 bushels of wheat to make the grain for a person to have their daily bread for a year. Wheat returns about 4 bushels of grain per acre, after you pull out next year's seed grain. Assuming 2 adults and several kids that eating like 2 more adults means that the family needs about 11 acres of wheat. Using the price given in the Core Rulebook, wheat costs 240cp per acre, or 26 gold and 4 silver for the family's initial seed grain.Not a complaint, just an observation...
A yeoman in medieval England would hold between 30 and 120 acres.
A bushel is about 56 pounds. Yields of 4 bushels per bushel of seed were actually pretty low. But yields could vary considerably by the land used and some yields of as high as 8+:1 were reported on some church lands. Also some sources indicate they planted 2 Bushels seed per acre and got 8 per acre yield. Yield also varied considerably by the amount of land owned. They typically planted 2/3 of the fields each year. Also wheat was a cash crop. The Yeoman would eat Rye, barley, and/or oats.
Using your statistics:
56 pounds(the weight of a bushel of grain) x (4 - 1 bushels) x 30 acres x 2/3 = 3360 pounds of grain. That does not include the yeomans garden or his animals.That means 33.6 gold pieces produced after setting aside next years seed. The cost of living of a Peasant is about 3 GP/month or 36 GP a year. Not really far off.
And once you account for the:
1) The Fact that smaller populations mean more land for the peasants
2) Yields would be higher in a fantasy words where gods blessing the crops of god-faring peasants has a measurable impact. (Church lands were getting yields closer to 8:1 or 10:1 historically.) The church tended to use state of the art techniques but the peasants were often not taught these new techniques.
3) Their is some indication that 2 Bushels were planted per acre for a yield of 8 Bushels making it 6 profit.So that would make cash value of crops closer to 67.2 to 100.8 GP on 30 acres.
This would make the cost of living costs given by Paizo in the Core Book accuracy with regards to peasant income.
On a side note, 1 Pathfinder Silver Piece would be about the value of 1 real life Pence in medieval England. 1 medieval English pound would be roughly 24 Gold Pieces in pathfinder.
1st ed AD&D DM if I recall correctly. If not there in some number of Dragon. They are both in a box in the basement, so I will not check.
I love when I post the exact quote, with the source and page reference, and people ignore it in order to idly speculate where the quote came from.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, the wealth rules don't work in a 3.x variant. That's unbelievable! I mean, it's been true for 13 years, but still! Unbelievable!I actually don't have many problems with money in 3E/Pathfinder. Most "complaints" I see run along the lines of:
If you spend 8 hours a day doing something, people will pay you for it and you can make money FOREVER!!! (In modern terms, we call that "having a job".)
Some things in D&D are incredibly expensive and poor people would never be able to afford them!!! (I feel the same way when I pass a Bentley or Lamborghini dealership...)
However, I agree with the original poster that prices for land and buildings have always been on the high side in D&D. I imagine that's supposed to make it challenging for adventurers to buy real estate, but that makes no sense when you consider that by level 5 (or whatever), most adventurers are the equivalent of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.Not even close. At level 5 your WLB is 10.500 gp. My group dis some math, a gp is worth about 50 €, so we are speaking of about 50.000€ or about 65.000 $, nice but nothing more.
Even the WBL of a 20th level character isn't much. 880.000 gp. Less than 6.000.000 $.
I did some math my self. I compared known medieval costs of grain and alcohol from the actual middle ages to pathfinders costs and it comes out to about 1.7 silver pieces = 1 Pence.
1 quarter of grain costs 2 shillings and 2 pence in London.( A real medieval price) 1 Quarter = 8 Bushels = about 448 pounds weight = 448 copper pieces in pathfinder(1# grain = 1cp). 26 pence = 448 Copper Pieces.
17.230769230769 Coppers per pence.
10,500 GP at lvl 5 would make a character worth just under 254 Medieval Pounds.
A 20th level character would be worth about 21,280 medieval English pounds.
For Comparison the crown revenues of England in the reign of Edward I was about 30,000 pounds per year.
That would place a value of about 24 - 48 gold pieces to 1 Real Life Medieval Pound.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A yeoman farmer, a peasant just wealthy enough to own enough land to feed himself, his wife and a couple of kids, will need about 25 acres of farmland. One acre of farmland is about 43,560 square feet or 1742 squares of 5' x 5'.
But the yeoman cant sell the land, its not actually his own property.
The yeoman's lord owns the land not the yeoman. The yeoman holds a mini-fief from his lord in exchange for military service as an archer or infantry depending on culture and era.
Technically, in the Middle Ages, the only one who had actual ownership of the land was the King. Everyone else was a vassal to either the king, or one of the kings vassals.
This is a vast overgeneralization.
That's classic theoretical feudalism, true.
But it didn't work so purely everywhere, even in Europe, or over the whole period.
And it's only vaguely applicable to Golarion. Much of which is definitely not feudal.
A yeoman is a feudal rank denoting a middle class vassal holding 30 to 120 acres of land from a knight in exchange for military service. Enough to be an infantry soldier but not enough to support oneself as a knight. If you are a yeoman it is because you are in a feudal society. Therefore a Yeoman can not sell their land, it would revert to their lord.
In a non-feudal society they would not be a yeoman.
As several people have said, having productive farmland be incredibly expensive, far beyond the means of most farmers, is actually quite historically accurate. Owning significant amounts of farmland is pretty much what made you an aristocrat.
And if you *did* happen to be a small landowner who worked your own land, it was because your long-ago ancestors got it for free, or else you managed to acquire it through non-financial means (e.g. getting a land grant for serving in the army).
OTOH, having land be worth vastly more than can possibly be earned from it in a lifetime of farming is nonsensical. At least in an agricultural economy. If I have a choice between earning say 200 gp a year from my land (not counting living expenses and the like) and selling the land for ~10000gp, which would be enough to live on for 50 years?
Let's just set aside the question of whether you could find a buyer, or whether 10,000 gp really would be the sale price.
Even if you could get 10,000 gp for it, you're not just selling 50 years' worth of production. You're selling your children's and grandchildren's and great granchildren's livelihood, security, and social status.
So you've got 10,000 gp. If you can't find a way to ensure that your 10,000 gp will keep your family fed, clothed, and out of slavery for three generations, you've made a bad deal.
Trinite is right. 10,000 GP cant buy you food in a famine year when their is no food to be bought cause the farmers and noble lords don't have any surplus to sell at the market. To a farmer in premodern times the land was security, its a sure thing.
A yeoman farmer, a peasant just wealthy enough to own enough land to feed himself, his wife and a couple of kids, will need about 25 acres of farmland. One acre of farmland is about 43,560 square feet or 1742 squares of 5' x 5'.
But the yeoman cant sell the land, its not actually his own property.
The yeoman's lord owns the land not the yeoman. The yeoman holds a mini-fief from his lord in exchange for military service as an archer or infantry depending on culture and era.
Technically, in the Middle Ages, the only one who had actual ownership of the land was the King. Everyone else was a vassal to either the king, or one of the kings vassals.
This is a vast overgeneralization.
That's classic theoretical feudalism, true.
But it didn't work so purely everywhere, even in Europe, or over the whole period.
And it's only vaguely applicable to Golarion. Much of which is definitely not feudal.
A yeoman is a feudal rank denoting a middle class vassal holding 30 to 120 acres of land from a knight in exchange for military service. Enough to be an infantry soldier but not enough to support oneself as a knight. If you are a yeoman it is because you are in a feudal society. Therefore a Yeoman can not sell their land, it would revert to their lord.
In a non-feudal society they would not be a yeoman.
Fair enough. In a strictly technical sense.
Though the bit about everyone in the Middle Ages being vassals except for the King was what I really was talking about.
Not everyone, just landholders.
City Dwellers such as Merchants, Craftsmen and such were not vassals. But neither do they own any land to sell. It still technically all belongs to the king. They pay rent to the city. The city government is a vassal to the king though.
Now, as far as Golarion goes, non-feuldal societies are a different animal. A lower class farmer who owns 25 arces would be free to sell to whoever they desired in a nation like Andoran or Galt.
Trinite is right. 10,000 GP cant buy you food in a famine year when their is no food to be bought cause the farmers and noble lords don't have any surplus to sell at the market. To a farmer in premodern times the land was security, its a sure thing.As several people have said, having productive farmland be incredibly expensive, far beyond the means of most farmers, is actually quite historically accurate. Owning significant amounts of farmland is pretty much what made you an aristocrat.
And if you *did* happen to be a small landowner who worked your own land, it was because your long-ago ancestors got it for free, or else you managed to acquire it through non-financial means (e.g. getting a land grant for serving in the army).
OTOH, having land be worth vastly more than can possibly be earned from it in a lifetime of farming is nonsensical. At least in an agricultural economy. If I have a choice between earning say 200 gp a year from my land (not counting living expenses and the like) and selling the land for ~10000gp, which would be enough to live on for 50 years?
Let's just set aside the question of whether you could find a buyer, or whether 10,000 gp really would be the sale price.
Even if you could get 10,000 gp for it, you're not just selling 50 years' worth of production. You're selling your children's and grandchildren's and great granchildren's livelihood, security, and social status.
So you've got 10,000 gp. If you can't find a way to ensure that your 10,000 gp will keep your family fed, clothed, and out of slavery for three generations, you've made a bad deal.
Are we still talking about PF? Cause food prices are fixed. Along with land prices. That's the root of the problem.
But even in a more realistic world, 10,000gp buys you thugs who can take the food.:)
Would they be fixed?? Or would the GM have to make a descision about how it works in his game. Just because your GM does not have occasional fluxuations to account for famine or other adventure related events that might affect something does not mean all GM's do.
In one game I ran, for a while prices of food went up for a few months because bandits had prevented many of the farmers from selling their harvest to towns.
And 10,000 GP will buy you thugs who take the food and your money and if they get caught point to you as the person who hired them. In any event they don't give you the food as if you were strong enough to beat the thugs you would have done the jub yourself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would they be fixed?? Or would the GM have to make a descision about how it works in his game. Just because your GM does not have occasional fluxuations to account for famine or other adventure related events that might affect something does not mean all GM's do.
In one game I ran, for a while prices of food went up for a few months because bandits had prevented many of the farmers from selling their harvest to towns.
And 10,000 GP will buy you thugs who take the food and your money and if they get caught point to you as the person who hired them. In any event they don't give you the food as if you were strong enough to beat the thugs you would have done the jub yourself.
Funny how people manage to hire thugs in the real world, even though those thugs could beat up the hirer. Look at gangs and dictators. Of course, that was mostly a joke.
Of course a GM can change prices. RAW though food prices are set. Just like all other prices. A GM can also rule that you've brought so much cash into the local economy that magic item prices are soaring and you can't actually afford the thing you've been saving up for.
The downtime and kingdom building rules are, to quote Ultimate Campaign, to
...simply take much of the burden away from busy GMs, allowing them more time to work on creating adventures and other campaign issues.
There is no indication that you MUST use these rules ALL the time, that this is how the economy of the world works or always works, or that Paizo is holding your head in a vise until you agree to use them exactly as written all the time.
If you want to talk "RAW," there are numerous passages through out the section which clearly suggest use or don't use the guidelines presented as they need to, and make adaptations as needed for their campaigns. That's probably the most important "RAW" there is in the entire book.
(Not to mention, "RAW's" important for things like Pathfinder Society, where you're probably not going to be using the downtime rules anyway, and otherwise part of conversations in your gaming group to determine what works for you, and that's it.)
The rules are, as noted on page 76 in the quote I provided, meant to be a TIME SAVER for the GM, that is all.
It does not mean anything such as the prices in Golarion are fixed or any other such nonsense. They can effectively be, because why? Because it's a freaking game and it's easier to play the freaking game that way than have to work out constant variables and variations that probably have nothing to do really with the game you are actually playing.
Maybe you want to play Economy: the Role Playing Game. Fine, go for it. But that game ain't ever gonna have "Pathfinder" on the cover.
I'll play the fantasy game where I get to slay dragons and... if I want to build a stronghold with the riches I've plundered from the dragon's horde, there's guidelines for me and the GM to use for me to do that... and that's pretty cool. If you want more out of the system than that, you are going to forever be disappointed.
This is why the farmers are serfs and work land they don't own.This.
Most commoner-class types that the PCs encounter are legally considered part of that land that's so expensive. When a lord buys or inherits that land, the peasants go along with it.
If you're talking about non-noble land ownership, you're talking about the bourgeoisie, who were (in some periods) quite wealthy, if not wealthier than the lords.
Of course, this is all real-world feudalism. I do hate to use the past tense when discussing fantasy realms, but in this case the comparable form of government barely exists in our modern era.
Golarion may work on a totally different system, but the simple explanation is that it's feudalism, since we have Kings and Barons running around.
It says a lot about the progress of society that the modern reader of game rules presumes "working the land" means ownership and a sole share of the profits!
Well, maybe. Serfdom like that was rather unusual. What is more likey if for them to be peasants, who are free to come and go (to an extent) but do not actually own the land they farm. They are tenants.
|
|
Obviously Italians are more fashionable than we are, but if I saw someone walking down the street with $500,000 in clothes, jewelry and equipment, I'd be impressed. :-)Brain fart. 500.000 €
Still a good sum but nothing staggering.
I wouldn't be so impressed if I did know that the person I see is wearing all of his wealth. I would think more about countesses fleeing tsarist Russia fall than rick woman showing her wealth.
It is like my neighbor having a Ferrari and living in a middle class apartment. I am more annoyed by the wail of the car leaving a garage that is not meant for that kind of vehicle that by the show of apparent wealth. (I am not a car lover, but the lamentation of the motor of his car while he maneuver out of the garage are both saddening and fastidious)
The equipment of the man that made the record highest free fall drop a few years ago probably was worth that much or more. What impressed you in that, the equipment or the drop?
|
|
1st ed AD&D DM if I recall correctly. If not there in some number of Dragon. They are both in a box in the basement, so I will not check.I love when I post the exact quote, with the source and page reference, and people ignore it in order to idly speculate where the quote came from.
I was replying to the new post in the order in which I was reading them, so I was unaware that you had already replayed.
|
|
Hey, the wealth rules don't work in a 3.x variant. That's unbelievable! I mean, it's been true for 13 years, but still! Unbelievable!I actually don't have many problems with money in 3E/Pathfinder. Most "complaints" I see run along the lines of:
If you spend 8 hours a day doing something, people will pay you for it and you can make money FOREVER!!! (In modern terms, we call that "having a job".)
Some things in D&D are incredibly expensive and poor people would never be able to afford them!!! (I feel the same way when I pass a Bentley or Lamborghini dealership...)
However, I agree with the original poster that prices for land and buildings have always been on the high side in D&D. I imagine that's supposed to make it challenging for adventurers to buy real estate, but that makes no sense when you consider that by level 5 (or whatever), most adventurers are the equivalent of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.Not even close. At level 5 your WLB is 10.500 gp. My group dis some math, a gp is worth about 50 €, so we are speaking of about 50.000€ or about 65.000 $, nice but nothing more.
Even the WBL of a 20th level character isn't much. 880.000 gp. Less than 6.000.000 $.I did some math my self. I compared known medieval costs of grain and alcohol from the actual middle ages to pathfinders costs and it comes out to about 1.7 silver pieces = 1 Pence.
1 quarter of grain costs 2 shillings and 2 pence in London.( A real medieval price) 1 Quarter = 8 Bushels = about 448 pounds weight = 448 copper pieces in pathfinder(1# grain = 1cp). 26 pence = 448 Copper Pieces.
17.230769230769 Coppers per pence.
10,500 GP at lvl 5 would make a character worth just under 254 Medieval Pounds.
A 20th level character would be worth about 21,280 medieval English pounds.
For Comparison the crown revenues of England in the reign of Edward I was about 30,000 pounds per year.
That would place a value...
Very interesting. for a comparison about what a wealthy non adventurer character can have the Bardi and Peruzzin bankers in Florence were capable to loan 600,000 and 900,000 fiorini to Edward III, if the data I have found are right that is 125.000 pounds, so between 3 and 6,000,000 gp if we use your values.
|
|
Not everyone, just landholders.
City Dwellers such as Merchants, Craftsmen and such were not vassals. But neither do they own any land to sell. It still technically all belongs to the king. They pay rent to the city. The city government is a vassal to the king though.
Now, as far as Golarion goes, non-feuldal societies are a different animal. A lower class farmer who owns 25 arces would be free to sell to whoever they desired in a nation like Andoran or Galt.
As thejeff said, there were plenty of exceptions even during the middle ages. In most Italian city states you owned the land, not the king. Then there are the church properties, I have no idea of how it worked in England, but in Italy there was plenty of church land and it was sold or brought without problems.
Slight derail, but then back on track:
I'm seriously considering multiplying the costs of magic items by as much as 10x the listed prices in the books. That goes for both creation and sale. It won't necessarily lower the number of magic things in my games but make them much more valuable.
Ok...back on track, now.
|
|
Slight derail, but then back on track:
I'm seriously considering multiplying the costs of magic items by as much as 10x the listed prices in the books. That goes for both creation and sale. It won't necessarily lower the number of magic things in my games but make them much more valuable.
Ok...back on track, now.
The effect of this change depend on how much of the loot will be magic items and how much money.
If you do that and try to keep the current WBL giving out money and not magic items the caster classes and those that get magic or quasi magic items as part of their class (black blade magus in particular) would get a boost. If you give out abundant magic items and your players are capable to sell them it will make them really rich.In my 3.X campaigns I have used the price of the magic items as their sale price, while the purchase price was between x1.5 for "common" magic items, up to x3 for more rare or specific orders items with a ceiling of about x10 for unique items, but I was totally unconcerned with WBL and crafters working on order were relatively rare and low level.
The cost in XP of crafting was enough to avoid problems with the campaign. That is not true with Pathfinder as crafting has no additional costs.
If you do what you say you need to remove some trait and feat than allow people to produce magic items at a discount or you will have a few very rich characters with the others lagging behind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Note the cost is for clearing the land and fertilizing. Guess what 'clearing the land' usually means? Chopping down the trees and pulling out the stumps. Normally this would have been done over several years (chop down trees one year, let the stumps rot a few years, then yank them out with the help of some horses).
Doing that to a patch of land in 20 days (or less)? You're digging out the stumps by hand and cutting them well below the surface - labor intensive and probably not a cheap endeavor. That or hire some wizards to disintegrate the trees or something.
Clearing land is a serious pain in the kiester, thus the expense. If you've got several years to burn it becomes easier/cheaper, and as the book mentioned, some lands are pretty much instant farmland.
The effect of this change depend on how much of the loot will be magic items and how much money.Slight derail, but then back on track:
I'm seriously considering multiplying the costs of magic items by as much as 10x the listed prices in the books. That goes for both creation and sale. It won't necessarily lower the number of magic things in my games but make them much more valuable.
Ok...back on track, now.
I have a reputation for being pretty stingy with all of it.
Why are we assuming a mideaval crop yield? The available technology is well into the 16th century (full plate armors, firearms in some settings), there is a significant knowledge of chemistry (alchemy) and access to things like weather control (at least in emergencies) as well as long sea voyages (meaning good crops will spread around) - never mind things like Teleport. I think they'd be far more productive than 13th century farming.
Actually anybody who paid attention would notice that a average farmer makes around 450 GP a year. Thats a very decent number. With some skill rolls and some work and elbow-grease they could quite easily afford a VERY GOOD QUALITY home in about 2 years work.
I ran the math for a 1st level Expert Blacksmith (1 Rank, INT12, Skill Focus = Take 10 to get 18, 20 once he buys masterwork tools). In a little over a year (Average upkeep of 10gp/month, Earning 10gp/week), he can afford to earn the capital to buy a Smithy in a little over a year (less if he doesn't save most of his money). Then he jumps to a weekly income of 17gp/week. It will take him longer if he wants a house attached to his Smithy. Assuming a bit of discretionary spending and the want for a house + smithy, he probably works for 3-4 years as a journeyman blacksmith before setting up his own business.