|
Cutting back the wealth can be done by adjusting the cost of magic items and then lowering the wealth discovered by an appropriate factor. They've already said they want magic items to be level appropriate and to be special. To do that, they wanted to end the reliance on "gotta have" items.
Great. Now take that a step further and make the crafting system so it is much more difficult to make magic items. In PF1 the system allows for a DC 5 penalty in lieu of many crafting requirements. That was a huge mistake and was a meaningless penalty. The result in any campaign that allowed it was an overabundance of magical gear and high powered gear at that.
If an item requires a CL of 11 to make, then that's it. It if requires a wizard, that's it. If it requires a druid, that's it. No more DC 5 freebie penalties. Make loot from adventures meaningful. That also means adjusting that loot so that it is level appropriate.
Adjusting the economics can be done.
Cutting back the wealth can be done by adjusting the cost of magic items and then lowering the wealth discovered by an appropriate factor. They've already said they want magic items to be level appropriate and to be special. To do that, they wanted to end the reliance on "gotta have" items.
Great. Now take that a step further and make the crafting system so it is much more difficult to make magic items. In PF1 the system allows for a DC 5 penalty in lieu of many crafting requirements. That was a huge mistake and was a meaningless penalty. The result in any campaign that allowed it was an overabundance of magical gear and high powered gear at that.
If an item requires a CL of 11 to make, then that's it. It if requires a wizard, that's it. If it requires a druid, that's it. No more DC 5 freebie penalties. Make loot from adventures meaningful. That also means adjusting that loot so that it is level appropriate.
Adjusting the economics can be done.
Wouldn't items would still be made, just they'd have flaws (or curses)?
Wouldn't items would still be made, just they'd have flaws (or curses)?Cutting back the wealth can be done by adjusting the cost of magic items and then lowering the wealth discovered by an appropriate factor. They've already said they want magic items to be level appropriate and to be special. To do that, they wanted to end the reliance on "gotta have" items.
Great. Now take that a step further and make the crafting system so it is much more difficult to make magic items. In PF1 the system allows for a DC 5 penalty in lieu of many crafting requirements. That was a huge mistake and was a meaningless penalty. The result in any campaign that allowed it was an overabundance of magical gear and high powered gear at that.
If an item requires a CL of 11 to make, then that's it. It if requires a wizard, that's it. If it requires a druid, that's it. No more DC 5 freebie penalties. Make loot from adventures meaningful. That also means adjusting that loot so that it is level appropriate.
Adjusting the economics can be done.
The attempt could not be made at all. You know the 'recipe' which requires all of the 'ingredients' to work.
If you have all of the ingredients, congratulations, you can make a Chelish Chocolate Cake. If you do not have all of the ingredients, you have a bunch of food cluttering up your kitchen.
Perhaps those ingredients you do have could be used to make something else ... but you cannot make a Defective Chelish Chocolate Cake.
I suppose that's the main Sticking point I'm coming back to. IS everything cut by 1/10? I really don't see that fixing anything. Are more commonly gold stuff only getting cut? Those first few gems, paintings, magic stuff that no one wants suddenly funds your group for the next possible several levels.
I will agree we DO need to hear more on the Economy in PF2 but I don't see it being as easy as a 1/10th cut. Or at the very least it won't be easy for player/gm perception to get on the silver standard.
It could very well be something like reduce everything of 1gp or more by 10, leave anything below that alone. Although this does create an area of weirdness for things that cost between 1 sp and 10 gp currently where some things that were 10 times as much now cost the same and such. But possibly those can be dealt with on a case by case basis, or a more in depth rule set. Or the 1/10th thing could mostly just apply to magic and treasure while mundane items are either left alone or have new values set in the rule book. Regardless, it probably is more complicated than simply reduce everything by 10. Because that's just the same economy with lower numbers.
But it's always been that way. Back in AD&D you were expected to build castles and things and semi-retire from the actual treasure seeking part. After then, it's just been the gear treadmill.
But frankly, money's always been a lousy motivation for adventuring in D&D. It just doesn't scale properly. Find a more personal reason to be out there, then "Just leave, I got what I came for" isn't a problem.
Edit: So you don't find a gold candlestick, then. There's still going to be WBL or some equivalent. At least suggested treasure for monsters. You'll just find less gems or cheaper ones.
I was going to quote both, but I noticed you were the same person both times. So I'll just put them together.
Now I never played ADnD. But I'm willing to bet that's near the end of your game stuff, or the whole campagin. Not "Hey we have a few dozen grand of gold, maybe we buy a castle now?" events. I could be wrong, never played.
And I can find reasons to keep going. Can you say that about every character and or player? I'm good with playing the game, retiring means either dead character or playing the economic game. Which I don't care for and I can't be the only one. I don't care if Soap is actually affordable based on the average profession check, I'm still going to have some unwashed masses.
As for having it not be a gold candlestick, yeah no. Even with the new standard, I'm willing to be DMs aren't going to have understanding players the first time all the loot turns out to be copper and silver stuff.
I do look forward to the guys that will math out weight to gold ratios again though, just to see how many people follow it.
When the characters are created they'll get 15gp that will buy them their starting gear. They'll know what the silver will buy. How many potions or the better armour or weapons they want. How much more the silver will buy. So I don't think it will be that big a problem.
Plus, there's usually some dire threat that still needs stopping. If your party is happy to retire and not deal with, it is time to roll up a new party.This is sorta where I was going with that, yeah.Metric ton of worth. Why go adventure? Unless there's something at the door willing to kill me, I'm out.
If your first magic item lets you retire, why play the game? Your character is set for enough time that any problem shouldn't BE a problem. Just leave, I got what I came for.
Or worse, if you actually want to continue playing, your group sells it off and comes back geared up way better. So any threats you have are just Poof.
If your character doesn't want to keep adventuring, then congratulations, you can either roll up a new character or quietly leave the game. Most adventures have a motivation to participate beyond simply earning gold-- your home will be destroyed if someone doesn't stop this giant army, reality will be consumed by a Great Old One if someone doesn't stop that cult, the magically tyrant demi-god will be revived if someone doesn't stop his underlings.
If your character doesn't care about any of these or just doesn't want to risk life or limb going on adventures, you did a bad job at building a character, full stop. To be fair, I've seen a lot of people do this at the table, but it is absolutely on the player to make a character appropriate to the campaign. Having the funds to retire doesn't change this.
You are correct that this change seems arbitrary to me because there appears to be no reason behind it (or at least no reason that's been pointed out to me yet), which is definition of an arbitrary change. If something's going to change, I'd like there to be a good reason behind it. For me, the change barrier for game mechanics is low, but this change isn't just about game mechanics, it affects something (the price/cost/value of everything) that's been established in the game world across a few hundred published books. Even that wouldn't bug me so much if the change didn't appear arbitrary (again, having no apparent or stated reason behind it).
I'm right there with you, Skeld. I personally despise when changes are made to the world just because. "People love playing goblins, so let's make them a common playable race!" This doesn't do it for me at all, which is why I'm really hoping they establish some sort of continuity for it. Same goes for the currency. I actually love the idea of going to a silver standard; in fact, I love it far more than having a gold standard like they have now! But I've been playing in Golarion for over eight years now, and goblins are akin to vermin, save that they're far more deadly, and gold has always been the standard. Changing mechanics is one thing, but arbitrarily altering the way the world works without explanation is just a No-No, in my opinion.
It's what I hated about the Forgotten Realms change to 4e. Yeah, I didn't care for the new system, but what I despised more than anything was the destruction of the Weave without explanation as to how magic was still able to be used in the world other than "just because." Yeah, they ended up creating a story about all that later on to help with the explanation, but that didn't help me at all for years before, which is why I never played in the Realms again. Give me a reason. It doesn't even have to be the greatest reason, but it needs to be plausible and not contrived.
All that said, I realize that Paizo has plenty of time to give us that explanation, so I'm not really too concerned at this time. However, if the time should come, and they give us nothing, then shame on them. I'd really prefer it if someone in Development would just come out and say, "Worry not! We've got in-world reasons for these changes, but it's just not time for us to reveal them yet!" Since they aren't doing this, we've no choice but to have a little faith at this time that they do. Otherwise, I'll not even consider moving Golarion into the future that is 2E and keep it where it's at in our own games until another world catches our attention. We did it once, so doing it again won't be too difficult.
Which itself is absurd that at high levels, even bandits tend to all have +1 weapons meaning they are already richAnother example is that since 1000 gp is 4 years worth of hard work for average commoner, adventuring because you want to become rich is silly because even at level 1 you earn in one adventure more loot than commoners would earn for months if not years. And then is question of "So if you sell all these uber expensive items, who even has money to buy them, this +1 magic sword costs more than average house"Monthly Cost of Living, Extravagant (1,000 gp/month): "lives in a mansion, castle, or other extravagant home—he might even own the building in question. This is the lifestyle of most aristocrats."
So the answer would be "aristocrats" as they toss away 1000gp/month JUST on lifestyle. Even the plain old Wealthy spend (100 gp/month). Also there are all those NPC's that need equiping so the PC's can defeat them and take the items in the first place: there are always bad guys that are willing to buy discounted magic items so they can act as foils for other 'heroes'.
I don't see the point you're making. Is changing to silver making that less true? Isn't the amount people earn ALSO shifting to silver, meaning it's a lateral move? Aren't those same weapons going to be just as expensive, just using a different standard?
Please explain why a new pathfinder bandit isn't as equally rich as a pathfinder classic one...
Sorry for the multiple posts . . . I'm into this conversation late, so just throwing stuff out as I come to it!
Might it be, Graystone, that the difference will be the new mechanics? I thought I read somewhere that this new system is trying to reduce the necessity of magic items/weapons/armor to be viable, and so it's possible that bandits in this new system won't be carrying +1 magic swords, as they'll still be dangerous with mundane swords in their hands.
This is just a thought on the subject, however, as I can't say for certain if it's true or not. I'll say this though: I think it much preferable should it be true! If bandits are carrying around magic weapons and armor to be a challenging threat in this new system, as well, then there's really no reason at all for any of these changes in world.
I'd really prefer it if someone in Development would just come out and say, "Worry not! We've got in-world reasons for these changes, but it's just not time for us to reveal them yet!"They already have done that. I think it was in the Goblin blog. They don't want to give the reasons because they would spoil upcoming adventures.
EDIT: As for changing the currency standard. Honestly this feels like bringing mechanics more in line with setting descriptions. Gold pieces are written about like they are something worth giving a damn about, were in the mechanics they really aren't.
My apologies . . . I don't recall reading that.
I'll still disagree with the currency standard change on this, though. Mechanics are one thing, world continuity is another. Gold has been established. I don't mind them changing to silver at all, but there's got to be a worldly reason for it. Honestly, this seems like something you could have fun with Druma concerning, and maybe have them do something with gold that makes it more scarce in some way. Something.
Well, there's a very simple explnatation for why they might change to a silver standard. There's simply not that much gold around to cover all the economic transactions requiring them going around, so the various kingdoms, in order to avoid crashing their economies, decided to change the values of the coin denominations.
It is pretty obvious that they got going coin denominations, with how the copper coin is worth 1/10th of a silver going without being enourmous relative to the silver coin
But there has been, and, by all accounts, there has been for millennia. Why the change? The story is important here. =)
Might it be, Graystone, that the difference will be the new mechanics? I thought I read somewhere that this new system is trying to reduce the necessity of magic items/weapons/armor to be viable, and so it's possible that bandits in this new system won't be carrying +1 magic swords, as they'll still be dangerous with mundane swords in their hands.
No, not possible: past a certain level, magic weapons are going to be a requirement as they multiply base damage. That means that no magic weapon = no credible threat. Would you think the bandit with the d6 rapier as a threat to a PC with 120 hp and a greatsword that does 3d12 base?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In terms of setting, I don't think I've ever seen a setting description or in-universe discussion dealing with specific amounts of money down to the gold piece level. It all gets abstracted to the point that I don't think a single setting element changes or a single book or story now has obsolete dialogue with this change. The only thing that changes are the price listings in the books and what you write on your character sheet.
Thus, I've got to agree that this is a mechanics change rather than a setting one, and needs no explanation.
"Due to a shortage of gold, more silver coins are being minted, and a new gold coin worth 10 of the old gold coins is being produced."
or whatever excuse works. Just phase out the old coins worth 10 silver pieces.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we look at the real world the natural relative abundance of silver to gold is about 19:1 but in recent years the perceived value is very different with an ounce of gold worth around 70 times what an ounce of silver is worth. China and Russia are hoarding physical gold, plus there is plenty of speculation on paper gold (script) by those who are nervous about the economy and want to preserve their wealth. There is far more gold script than there is physical gold to service the script, if the economy tanks people will try to cash in their script for physical gold which will drive the price of physical gold even higher relative to silver.
On Golarion (assuming it is like Earth) the ten to one gold to silver ratio would be unusually low compared to the relative natural abundance. Maybe that was caused by adventurers plundering vast ancient hoards and dumping large amounts of gold into the economy. Once that gold starts to circulate through the economy and the rich start hoarding and speculating on gold the price of gold relative to silver could climb very quickly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we look at the real world the natural relative abundance of silver to gold is about 19:1 but in recent years the perceived value is very different with an ounce of gold worth around 70 times what an ounce of silver is worth. China and Russia are hoarding physical gold, plus there is plenty of speculation on paper gold (script) by those who are nervous about the economy and want to preserve their wealth. There is far more gold script than there is physical gold to service the script, if the economy tanks people will try to cash in their script for physical gold which will drive the price of physical gold even higher relative to silver.
On Golarion (assuming it is like Earth) the ten to one gold to silver ratio would be unusually low compared to the relative natural abundance. Maybe that was caused by adventurers plundering vast ancient hoards and dumping large amounts of gold into the economy. Once that gold starts to circulate through the economy and the rich start hoarding and speculating on gold the price of gold relative to silver could climb very quickly.
There certainly seems to be much more gold in use in Golarion than medieval earth, before the gold mines of the Americas were opened up to the rest of the world. But at the same time you've got Dwarves with much better mining than was around on earth at the time, and you've got magic to improve mining as get access to the Elemental Plane of Earth where there is even more gold available, and of course things like wishes getting gold created out of nothing. Golarion might very well have a higher abundance of gold in the crust than earth does.
I think the exchange rates between gold and silver were more constant in previous eras though. Moving away from currency backed by precious metals, made the price more volatile I think. Plus now there are actually industrial uses for gold while before it was just decoration and coinage.
Platinum is really the weird one though. It wasn't fully identified in the real world until the 18th century. It was apparently known in the 16th though where it was considered an impurity of gold. I figure in this case the advanced state of alchemy probably helped identify it earlier.
Coinage in D&D/Pathfinder is also much more stable than the real world. No series of debasements by monarchs inflating prices and the like. Mostly I figure this is just done for simplicity. The same with the universal nature of CP, SP, GP and PP. Instead of dealing with a dizzying number of different denominations from different countries of various weights and purity. It'd just be a serious pain to have to keep track of all the different denominations and nationalities with exchange rates and which coins are debased how much, etc. So I think this is really just some abstraction we need to accept to avoid getting bogged down in minutia.
Coinage in D&D/Pathfinder is also much more stable than the real world. No series of debasements by monarchs inflating prices and the like. Mostly I figure this is just done for simplicity. The same with the universal nature of CP, SP, GP and PP. Instead of dealing with a dizzying number of different denominations from different countries of various weights and purity. It'd just be a serious pain to have to keep track of all the different denominations and nationalities with exchange rates and which coins are debased how much, etc. So I think this is really just some abstraction we need to accept to avoid getting bogged down in minutia.
Not to mention measuring systems and languages (although I kinda miss the latter a bit). Or just the magically refilling spell component pouches. ^^
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Due to a upheaval in the Plane of Earth, all silver has turned to copper, all gold turned to silver and all platinum to gold. Yet unmined platinum ore has not been affected though for reasons unknown. So platinum coins are being produced still but they are considerably rarer
|
|
Due to a upheaval in the Plane of Earth, all silver has turned to copper, all gold turned to silver and all platinum to gold. Yet unmined platinum ore has not been affected though for reasons unknown. So platinum coins are being produced still but they are considerably rarer
Machina ex magicae!
-Skeld