|
D&D Economics
Measurements
Barrels
Type....................Volume
PIN.....................4&1/2 gallons
FIRKIN..................9 gallons
ANKER...................10 gallons
KILDERKIN...............18 gallons
HALF HOGSHEAD...........27 gallons
STANDARD................36 gallons
TIERCE..................42 gallons
HOGSHEAD................54 gallons
PUNCHEON................72 gallons
PIPE....................92 gallons
BUTT....................108 gallons
TUN.....................216 gallons
CISTERN.................256 gallons
Currency
Type....................Quantity..........Value
TAXFIRKIN(SILVER COIN)..500lb.............2,500GP
TAXFIRKIN(SALT).........200lb.............1,000GP
Distances
Lesser...................Linear
3 FEET...................1 YARD
4 POLES..................1 CHAIN
100 LINKS................1 CHAIN
10 CHAIN.................1 FURLONG
1760 YARDS...............1 MILE
8 FURLONGS...............1 MILE
3 MILES..................1 LEAGUE
Areas
Lesser...................Square
9 SQU. FEET..............1 YARD
30.25 SQU. YARD..........1 SQU. POLE
40 SQU. POLES............1 ROOD
10 SQU. CHAIN............1 ACRE
4 ROODS..................1 ACRE
640 ACRES................1 SQU. MILE
Weights
Lesser...................Square
16 OUNCES................1 POUND
50 3rd ED. COINS.........1 POUND
2240 POUNDS..............1 TON
Specific Gravity
Material...................S.G.
WATER......................1.0
ICE........................0.918
ALCOHOL....................2.67
MILK.......................1.031
HARDWOOD...................0.896
SALT.......................2.22
BRICK......................2.0
LIMESTONE..................2.67
SANDSTONE
MARBLE.....................2.68
GRANITE....................2.7
COPPER.....................8.90
SILVER.....................10.57
GOLD.......................19.30
PLATINUM...................21.40
Conversions
Gallon.....................Cubic Feet
0.125 gallons..............0.02
1 gallon...................0.1604
2 gallons..................0.3208
8 gallons..................1.283
64 gallons.................10.264
320 gallons................51.319
640 gallons................102.64
S.G. Examples
FIRKIN OF SALT
9 GALLONS OF SALT =9 x 10 x 2.22 =199.998lb
FIRKIN OF SALT (200lb)
BLOCK OF MARBLE
BLOCK OF MARBLE (5’ x 5’ x 10’) = 250 CUBIC FT
=1560&3/4 GALLONS x 10 x 2.68 = 41,828.1lb
41,828.1lb / 2240lb = 18.67 TON
TAX BARREL
500lb OF SILVER / (10.57x10) = 4.7304 GALLONS
ROUND UP TO 9 GALLONS FOR LOOSE COIN
KINGS TAXES: 500lb FIRKIN OF SILVER
Quarrying & Mining
ALL MINING HAS A MINIMUM COST OF ONE OUNCE OF GOLD PER TON OF ROCK. THIS IS USEFUL BECAUSE IT PUTS A STANDARD VALUE ON BASIC QUARRYSTONE AND SETS A MINIMUM PERCENTAGE ON THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF A VALUABLE MINERAL PRESENT FOR MINING.
MINE TYPE........MONTHLY OUTPUT..........WORKERS.........BASIC COST
GRANITE QUARRY...76 TON (1000 CUBIC FT)..5 LABOURERS.....76 OZ. GOLD
GRANITE QUARRY(CATEGORY: SMALL, MEDIUMx2, LARGEx3, HUGEx4)
EXTRACTION COST/TON.....................................312.5CP
MONTHLY SUPPLY..........................................76 TONS
WORKERS.................................................5
MONTHLY WORKER WAGE.....................................200CP
GRANITE@QUARRY (1 TON)..................................350CP
TOTAL QUARRY INCOME.....................................2,850CP
CIVIL WORKS DESCRIPTION.......................[MATERIAL COST**|TIME TO QUARRY*]
[u]CASTLE (1 ACRE)[/u]
-1 LGE. SQR. TOWER: 12,768 TON; 60’ HIGH x 80’ x 80’ BASE.....[39,900 GP|16.8 YRS]
-4 SML. RND. TOWERS: 11,461 TON; 30’ HIGH x 50’ DIAMETER......[35,816 GP|15.1 YRS]
-STONE WALL: 6,840 TON; 600’LONG x 15’HIGH x 10’ WIDE.........[21,375 GP|9 YRS]
CASTLE TOTALS.................................................[97,136 GP|41 YRS]
[u]HUGE CASTLE(3 ACRES)[/u]
-1 LGE. RTNGL. KEEP: 25,536 TON; 60’ HIGH x 160’ x 80’ BASE....[79,800 GP|33.6 YRS]
-6 SML. RND. TOWERS: 17,190.8 TON; 30’ HIGH x 50’ DIAMETER.....[22,778 GP|23 YRS]
- STONE WALLS: 40,584 TONS; 2670’LONG x 20’HIGH x 10’WIDE......[126,825 GP|53.4 YRS]
CASTLE TOTALS..................................................[229,403 GP|110 YRS]
[u]LARGE CONCENTRIC FORTRESS(7 ACRES)[/u]
-STONE WALLS: 36,708 TONS; 10’ WIDE x 3220’ LONG x15’ HIGH........[114,713 GP|48.3 YRS]
-12 BUTTRESSES: 12,312 TONS; 30’ WIDE x 30’ LONG x 15’ HIGH......[38,475 GP|16.2 YRS]
-12 M.RND.TOWERS: 42,977 TONS; 30’ HIGH x 60’ DIAMETER........[134,304 GP|56.6 YRS]
-2 LESSER GATEKEEPS: 35,112 TONS, 70’ DEEP x 120’ WIDE X 30’ HIGH.....[109,725 GP|46.2 YRS]
-6 L.RND.TOWERS: 30,084 TONS; 30’ HIGH x 80’ DIAMETER...[94,013 GP|39.6 YRS]
-STONE CAUSEWAY: 5,472 TONS; 72’ WIDE x 100’ LONG x 10’ HIGH....[17,100 GP|7.2 YRS]
-10 BASTIONS: 8,058.2 TONS; (30’ DIAMETER x 30’ HIGH)/2...[25,182 GP|10.6 YRS]
-4 SML. RND. TOWERS: 11,460.6 TONS; 30’ HIGH x 50’ DIAMETER....[35,815 GP|15.1 YRS]
CASTLE TOTALS............................................[569,327 GP|240 YRS]
[**EXTRACT COST ONLY|*SMALL QUARRY]
?
|
|
I got told off when I queried whether this was really much use a few months ago. But I can't help thinking that Dingo would help himself a lot more if he put some context down with this stuff, so we can actually use it or see why it is there. Otherwise it comes across as a sort of historic/economic onanism.
It says in New Posts that Aubrey said something, but when I read the thread, his post isn't there!
|
|
It isn't terribly complimentary about the OP - it is suggesting that dumping this stuff on the boards without any context is a bit strange and of dubious use to anyone else.
Let me elaborate, since my post appears to have vanished (it might be the Board police, since I used a potentially dubious term - I will be less explicit - though sometimes posts vanish for no obvious reason). This stuff could be incredibly useful. I'm an accountant, and have always wondered if a good basis for a campaign could be commercial issues like trade (merchants defending monopolies, opeing new trade routes, negotiations with strange natives, and so on) as well as the usual slaying the risen lord of darkness.
So I get quite annoyed when potentially interesting information is just hurled at us with no explanation, no "why you should care" context. A series of dry, dull charts. Yellowdindo is clearly very learned, but can't communicate for toffee. And this smacks very much of showing off, too.
Rather than dumping undigestible tables on an unsuspecting public, could he please explain what he is doing, and why he is doing it? Could he supply a narrative, rather than statistics? No one really wants to read this stuff, but it could be revelatory if done properly. So I don't want to discourage, but I do seriously want a more user-friendly version of all this. It has obviously taken time to do - so it is a shame that he is almost wasting this information by putting it on the board in such a raw format.
It isn't terribly complimentary about the OP - it is suggesting that dumping this stuff on the boards without any context is a bit strange and of dubious use to anyone else.
I remember the last post.
I find the information fascinating, and can see how it could be useful for creating flavor, but it is an awful lot of kb generated for probably minimal flavor useage, and isn't this pretty much exactly the same post as last time?
Is this new information?
|
|
The Other Post was Agriculture and how to calculate the agricultural wealth of your Kingdom or Estate. This is Mining and how it affects building stuff.
Once I combine them they should look like a booklet you can use quick and easy on any existing kingdom (as long as you have a description of the kingdom andsome idea of its situation).
It puts a timeframe on useful things like how long does it take to quarry the stone needed for my DMG DEFINED BUILDING(tower, keep, castle, huge castle). How much it costs just to quarry, to pave my stone paved highway or Fortress. Fun stuff that can define a setting as the PC's cross river of Blood and are forced to dodge the five hundred river barges a day that are moving quarry stone from the Quarries in the Pedesh hills to build the fortress of evil for the next hundred years that no one has seemingly noticed.
"How should I know who ordered the rock? The quarry has been here since before the village was built."
It has more to do with DMs who want to have resource wars and have that level of campaign detail. Now you can calculate your quarry outputs, your logging operations to produce firewood, trade routes and resource shortages.
Tomorrow when your DM decides that the Lawful Good Kingdom you are playing in has run out of firewood due to uncontrolled deforestation, and must now choose one of three options:
a. Buy its firewood from the evil kingdom of Rax and pay a moral and economic price.
b. Invade and fell Elfwood for its timber and suffer an alignment change.
c. Face the long winter and the prospect that your people will never bath or eat cooked food again.
It will also allow the DM to plot storylines in advance. Sure the kingdom has firewood now but in ten years they wont, and ten years after that they will either have sold out to evil, invaded a minor ally for its resources, or died from a leprosy epidemic while it's cities burned due to peasant uprisings and civil war.
I applied this to Greyhawk's Veluna-back when they had 250,000 people not 600,000+. (they have a substantial firewood shortage that requires them to buy from Ket at a cost of 11,000,000gp per year-It must be brought down from Bramblewood by over 9,000 river barges on fortnightly loops and there are extensive river docks opposite the capital of kitrik where it is offloaded on to Wagons that haul to the Capital who use 10% of that fuel).
These types of tables I would have expected to see in Powers & Perils (aka Charts & Tables by fellow gamers), not D&D.
I think they could add a great deal of depth to a setting if it weren't so cumbersome to employ.
I'm printing this our because, hey, you never know what might be useful.
I sure wish he didn't shout the whole post though, and did at least put a little foreward for context.
|
Kobold Press
|
The historian/numbers geek in me loves these. Sadly, I do not currently run a campaign where mining production and the units of measurement are more than a bit of flavor.
But it does make me want to figure out just how much silver a mine has to shift to be economically viable when using poorly-fed slave labor vs. when using well-paid free workers.
I think DMs and designers can probably apply what they like, and ditch the rest. Simulationists will certainly get a kick out of it.
This reminds me of playing Harn.
i just got done applying this to the new population of Veluna. The Bramblewood oldgrowth forest will be gone in 73 years, replaced by woodlots on regen.
How much wood can a woodchuck chuck in this system?
As ever,
ACE
|
|
i just got done applying this to the new population of Veluna. The Bramblewood oldgrowth forest will be gone in 73 years, replaced by woodlots on regen.
And the cost for annual firewood importation is now 26,400,000gp per year. Beyond the capacity of Veluna to pay for (So veluna can only afford 40% of its population).
So now we get into the Machinations of Mordenkainen. He has apparently undermined the merger of Veluna and Furyondy into a Lawful Good superstate by inflicting Furyondy's leader with vampirism.Now we go to the insidious plot to make Veluna a Client State of Ket.
Keep 'em coming, I love 'em!
|
The problem is, there are so many fatal flaws with those figures and assumptions, it is hard to decide where to start.
First and foremost, he keeps treating the D&D prices as representative of an actual economic system. They aren't. They aren't even a vague simulation of one. They are just a casual system for tracking what the players have, with only a very distant, very theoretical, relationship to anything partially resembling an economic system. As an inherent part of this, he assumes an a frictionless transfer of wealth along the chain of producer to supplier to consumer, with the initial farmer receiving the full final sale price of anything, and the merchant apparently working for nothing and having no costs. Regrettably, he never seems to consider that the initial farmer has any external expenses, being an utterly self-sufficient ultra-production machine, and only requiring some internal overhead that he easily covers at a lower maintenance cost than everything he sells.
Second, and just as critical, he never provides any legitimate support for any of his assertions. Take the one on firewood. As I posted over on the WotC boards when he brought it there, according to his numbers, England in 1300 needed 8 times its area solely in forests in order to have enough firewood, while France was better off and only need about 6 times its area in forests to consume yearly.
Third, and demonstrating the danger of just using numbers without considering all of the factors in such calculations, he constantly assumes 100% of arable land in a dominion, with 100% exploitation, at 100% efficiency, over a constant time frame. Ignoring that not every scrap of land even in the best of areas produces as much as every other scrap of land pales next to ignoring the need for housing, roads, and mines.
Fourth, he assumes instantaneous transitions in government structure and land use, and asserts their existence in total isolation. Barony A can become the lumber capital of the continent without anyone else even contemplating growing trees, while Barony B instantly shifts to producing all the wine everyone would ever desire to drink while facing no competition or need to establish the vines. At the same time Barony C completely converts to full peasant ownership of all plots of land, Barony D uses its new economic might to hire a million mercenaries to conquer every one, and Barony E introduces a workers paradise. Then, in a spectaular demonstration of how to make it all worse, he declares these are all the same place, making all these transitions in a single growing season.
Fifth, from his WotC forums post, he seems to have a rather weak ability to read maps, assess background, and realize a comprehensive in game political and economic structure.
Overall, the conclusions are pretty much totally worthless as they are based on completely untenable premises. At best, they serve to demonstrate that the creators of D&D did not in fact create a viable economic model, though given how they never asserted that I fail to see the value in such a proof, or it serves as proof of why you can't just throw a bunch of numbers together and call it a viable economic model.
...now there's a mouth full! :)
|
|
The problem is, there are so many fatal flaws with those figures and assumptions, it is hard to decide where to start.
First and foremost, he keeps treating the D&D prices as representative of an actual economic system. They aren't. They aren't even a vague simulation of one. They are just a casual system for tracking what the players have, with only a very distant, very theoretical, relationship to anything partially resembling an economic system. As an inherent part of this, he assumes an a frictionless transfer of wealth along the chain of producer to supplier to consumer, with the initial farmer receiving the full final sale price of anything, and the merchant apparently working for nothing and having no costs. Regrettably, he never seems to consider that the initial farmer has any external expenses, being an utterly self-sufficient ultra-production machine, and only requiring some internal overhead that he easily covers at a lower maintenance cost than everything he sells.
Second, and just as critical, he never provides any legitimate support for any of his assertions. Take the one on firewood. As I posted over on the WotC boards when he brought it there, according to his numbers, England in 1300 needed 8 times its area solely in forests in order to have enough firewood, while France was better off and only need about 6 times its area in forests to consume yearly.
Third, and demonstrating the danger of just using numbers without considering all of the factors in such calculations, he constantly assumes 100% of arable land in a dominion, with 100% exploitation, at 100% efficiency, over a constant time frame. Ignoring that not every scrap of land even in the best of areas produces as much as every other scrap of land pales next to ignoring the need for housing, roads, and mines.
Fourth, he assumes instantaneous transitions in government structure and land use, and asserts their existence in total isolation. Barony A can become the lumber capital of the continent without anyone else even...
Actually Sam, what i got was a savaging by uncreative thugs who thought their worldview was god...they were more than happy to rush off anyone who was there with real interest in the game's development and still continue with that electronic terrorism because no one poped by their house and put a gun to their head.
They certainly were not interested in the fact that the existing economic rules for the mystaran setting were very inaccurate when it came to dealing in fact, were only capable of peddling the very prophaganda that the real agricultural data proved wrong.If you had ever read what I posted you would find that the model I did for france was fifty percent forest and other non farmable and that they were slightly better off than england for whom records seem far tainted with propaganda of the subsequent centuries than france who is described to have succumbed to the plague despite the fact that its agicultural efficiency (reducing the farm labour vs. output) drops off to an average of 35.5% and incapacitiates it's ability to feed its urban populations (plague is a minor irritation by comparrison-especially considering that plague arrives after there is a problem with the food supply and economy, not before it-they imported the plague with the people bringing in the food). No consideration is given to the high percentage of ergot present in european grain at this time on account of the screwed up environmental conditions and the plague like symptoms of that beauty.
This is very much tied to the mass executions of the assorted templar knights at the rate of 1 per 1/2 hour every day for fifteen years and their export of the wealth from the economy of france.
Yes England had a problem. They were as low as 25% in agricultural efficiency and no concern is given for the fact because historybooks are tainted with a thousand years of social prophaganda (Scotland went from 80% forest to 8%? in two hundred years thanks to deforestation). You obviously dont understand the woodlot model I gave. sustainable woodlot of forest requires a hundred years of regrowth on a single acre that provides a years firewood for two people...england lost forest which means that its woodlot supported population was unsustainable by what was available. lets see, 50 acres of woodlot forest per person...what was the geographical area of england?
There is only one way we will ever be able to put England up against France with certainty. We need the complete translation of the Doomsday Book. That will provide us with land areas, and produce volumes from which we can extract yield efficiencies for every farm, estate and province until we can completely describe the entire economic status of England.
Oh and yes: they were mining coal in newcastle post 1200AD because the clearing of forest for firewood was unsustainable.
As to the use of this in the game, I think there was a lot of criticism on the 100% exploitation model but if your sustained population exceeds the geographical area of the kingdom and its limit of support, then there is something wrong with the game.
|
|
INTRODUCTION
THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO PROVIDE THE DM AND HIS/HER PLAYERS WITH AN IMPROVED GAMING EXPERIENCE.
THIS WILL GRANT THE DM THE CAPACITY TO ENTER A SET OF KNOWN OR ASSUMED DATA- GEOGRAPHICAL AREA, LAND TYPES (FOREST, HEAVY FOREST, CLEARED FARMLAND, MARSH) AND PERCENTAGES, POPULATION, AGRICULTURAL YIELD RATES, AND PULL OUT AN ESTIMATE OF EXPORT INCOMES OF THE STATE, TRADE ROUTES, POPULATION SUPPORT CAPACITY, CAMPAIGN ARCS INVOLVING THE ECONOMY (WHEN THE KINGDOM WILL EXPERIENCE A RESOURCE SHORTAGE, WHEN A RIVAL KINGDOM WILL EXPERIENCE A RESOURCE SHORTAGE, EFFECTS OF THE SHORTAGE, WHO WILL NEED TO BE INVADED FOR THEIR RESOURCES, WHEN THE WAR WILL BEGIN, WHAT EFFECT THE BURNING OF VITAL CROPS WILL HAVE ON THE ECONOMY AND PEOPLE, ETC.) .
THIS IS USEFUL FOR EXISTING CAMPAIGNS AND FOR THE BUILDING OF NEW CAMPAIGN WORLDS. IT CREATES A REAL (AS REAL AS 1/50TH POUND GOLD PIECE GETS) ECONOMY BASED ON ALL THE EXISTING GAME STATS.
NOW THE WEALTH OF KINGDOMS CAN BE MEASURED IN THE BILLIONS OF GOLD PIECES EVEN IF THAT WEALTH IS GRAIN, WOOL AND FIREWOOD.
|
|
Actually Sam, what i got was a savaging by uncreative thugs who thought their worldview was god...they were more than happy to rush off anyone who was there with real interest in the game's development and still continue with that electronic terrorism because no one poped by their house and put a gun to their head.
They certainly were not interested in the fact that the existing economic rules for the mystaran setting were very inaccurate when it came to dealing in fact, were only capable of peddling the very prophaganda that the real agricultural data proved wrong.
Actually what you got was a series of reasoned responses, simply and directly pointing out the very critical flaws in the pseudo-scientific nonsense you spewed at people.
In response, you do what you are doing here, calling people terrorists or pointing out the flaws in your base data, basic assumptions, and overall analysis, interspersed with frenzied Marxist propaganda, denouncing the whole world for not embracing your economic dictatorship.I certainly can't stop you from posting such garbage, but I can post simple rebuttals exposing it for what it is, while your reply showing what you are.
|
|
Resource Requirements
RESOURCES SUPPORT PEOPLE AND ANIMALS, AND ULTIMATELY IT IS THESE TWO GROUPS WHO SUPPORT AGRICULTURE, INDUSTRY AND TRADE AND ALL THE OTHER CRUCIAL COMPONENTS OF OUR CIVILIZATIONS.
Human Requirements..............................Quantity
FUEL (FIREWOOD|PEATMOSS).......................10,000LB|28,500LB
GRAIN...........................................587LB
VEGETABLES......................................365LB
MEAT............................................365LB
WOOLCOLTH.......................................6LB
LEATHER..........................................5LB
CHEESE..........................................182LB
|
|
Using all capitals does not make any of your figures any more legitimate.
I am guessing this is supposed to be yearly.
These people eat 1 pound of meat, 1 pound of vegetables, 1-1/2 pounds of grain, and 1/2 pound of cheese every day? Those are some seriously well fed peasants.
And they use more than 27 pounds of firewood every day? Even in the summer?
If the meat were more grain, that would look right, but that wood use has definite problems, as it means there shouldn't be a single tree in all of Europe. So how about some reference to support that rate of use?
Using all capitals does not make any of your figures any more legitimate.
I am guessing this is supposed to be yearly.
These people eat 1 pound of meat, 1 pound of vegetables, 1-1/2 pounds of grain, and 1/2 pound of cheese every day? Those are some seriously well fed peasants.
And they use more than 27 pounds of firewood every day? Even in the summer?If the meat were more grain, that would look right, but that wood use has definite problems, as it means there shouldn't be a single tree in all of Europe. So how about some reference to support that rate of use?
I'm thinking that his rate of consumption assumes spoilage rates, which was 30% to 50% of total production.
|
|
1. This is the nutritional minimum for peasant farmers. Anything less is malnutrition (and the 10% model you described for a France of 18 million implies something very unpleasant at the Peasant level that makes annorexic supermodels look well fed).
2. The Wealthy eat more and so I am thinking SOCIAL CLASS should define greater use-especially considering 6lb woolcloth is bare enough for a peasants single clothes, I've looked at the historical evidence for feasts of the wealthy and I'm thinking For game purposes:
CLASS..........................CONSUMPTION MAGNIFIER
PEASANT........................FOOD REQUIRED + (0.1 X LEVEL X FOOD REQUIRED)
WARRIOR........................FOOD REQUIRED + (0.2 X LEVEL X FOOD REQUIRED)
ARTISAN........................FOOD REQUIRED + (0.3 X LEVEL X FOOD REQUIRED)
ADEPT..........................FOOD REQUIRED + (0.5 X LEVEL X FOOD REQUIRED)
ARISTOCRAT.....................FOOD REQUIRED + (O.7 X LEVEL X FOOD REQUIRED)
3. No this doesnt include spoilage though it should.
4. The Firewood is minimum for cooking three times a day.
|
Using all capitals does not make any of your figures any more legitimate.
I am guessing this is supposed to be yearly.
These people eat 1 pound of meat, 1 pound of vegetables, 1-1/2 pounds of grain, and 1/2 pound of cheese every day? Those are some seriously well fed peasants.
And they use more than 27 pounds of firewood every day? Even in the summer?If the meat were more grain, that would look right, but that wood use has definite problems, as it means there shouldn't be a single tree in all of Europe. So how about some reference to support that rate of use?
Grain is an underestimate and meat is an overestimate. Medieval people got some meat every day, but not a whole pound of it (the diet was not as poor as we often imagine it to be; people were not subsisting on bread and water alone; for one thing, the water in most places would make you sick). Pork and chicken were the staple meats of the medieval Christian, because pigs and chickens would live anywhere people would, and ate scraps and leftovers, so they were cheap to feed. If you ate beef, you were either a noble, or had a plow ox that had keeled over and died that week. The typically consumed chicken of the time was the ol' stewin' hen; the broiler/fryer that we see in grocery stores today is much younger, smaller and more tender than the hens of medieval times.
"Our daily bread" was a literal reality in medieval times; people in the middle ages ate nearly four pounds of bread per day, most of it hard, dark and dense. Short on meat? Eat more bread. Short on vegetables? Eat more bread. Short on cheese? You guessed it.
Wine and beer consumption per capita were off the charts by today's standards - typical consumption was nearly six gallons of ethanol per year; a typical modern person drinks just under a gallon of ethanol per year.
I'd say more but I have to leave for work at this point.
|
|
FireValkirie: The Agricultural Economics component is:
HERE!
If you see the Knights estate for beer manufacturing and consumption...
|
|
Grain is an underestimate and meat is an overestimate. . . .
Yeah, I know.
That's what I'm trying to get across to yellowdingo, but he is so caught up in proving the Medieval world would explode before evolving into the Renaissance world, he doesn't want to acknowledge it.Also, the reason for beer was both to keep grain from spoiling and to increase caloric intake.
|
|
So a commoner family of 7 (which was not uncommon) would require 70,000 lbs of wood per annum for cooking/heat?
Yes: They need that to support what they need to do to not suffer from disease and malnutrition. Once you start using less or even as low as 10% of what is a minimum need as Sam suggests you have serious problems setting in.
With the magnifier I'm recommending a bonus to that based on the level of the Commoner Base Use+(0.1 x Level x Base use).
That way a wealthier or higher level Commoner will use more than that level 1 commoner.
Actually sam, it does take that to cook your vege and meat stew and bake your bread ration in the hot coals.
Actually sam, it does take that to cook your vege and meat stew and bake your bread ration in the hot coals.
9 lbs of wood isn't much.
I've got to agree with that. And I've stayed in cabins long enough, and cooked camping on open fires enough to reckon so. You would be heating some water with that too, though.
Now, you CAN cook some meals with less wood and I'm pretty sure I have done so... Like wrapping a fish in leaves and steaming it in the coals, or roasting something skinny like a rabbit, but we are talking 7 people here and they eat more than one skinny rabbit.
... the more people you have the more efficient your cooking will get. Do the stats reflect that?
And I've got to second (third, ed)the objection that a peasant eats 1 lb of meat every day. There are still peasants here in China and they certainly don't eat that much. Yah they look skinny and don't work like a well fed lumberjack, but the point is that a peasant, serf, or any low class commoner does not have that much meat except on special occasions.
|
|
Actually sam, it does take that to cook your vege and meat stew and bake your bread ration in the hot coals.9 lbs of wood isn't much.
I've got to agree with that. And I've stayed in cabins long enough, and cooked camping on open fires enough to reckon so. You would be heating some water with that too, though.
Now, you CAN cook some meals with less wood and I'm pretty sure I have done so... Like wrapping a fish in leaves and steaming it in the coals, or roasting something skinny like a rabbit, but we are talking 7 people here and they eat more than one skinny rabbit.
... the more people you have the more efficient your cooking will get. Do the stats reflect that?
And I've got to second (third, ed)the objection that a peasant eats 1 lb of meat every day. There are still peasants here in China and they certainly don't eat that much. Yah they look skinny and don't work like a well fed lumberjack, but the point is that a peasant, serf, or any low class commoner does not have that much meat except on special occasions.
Fun though aint it. If they dont get it, their agricultural efficiency lowers dragging everything down with it.
|
|
I thought they did their fires up with cow dung and peat. That way, they didn't have to chop down the king's forest and get executed.
Except not every meal is eaten hot.
Except you bake more than one serving of bread at a time.
Except other fuel sources exist.
Of course they also used peat. Unfortunately Peat is actually less efficient as a fuel.
INDIVIDUAL FUEL NEED (FIREWOOD VS PEATMOSS) 10,000LB VS 28,500LB
|
|
WALLSGRAVE MANOR
A KNIGHT’S ESTATE OF SIXTY ACRES LOCATED AT SCARSDALE
DESCRIPTION
A LARGE WOODEN HOUSE WITH TEN ROOMS AND A THATCH ROOF, ALONG WITH AN EXTENSIVE VEGETABLE GARDEN, BARN, AND STABLES ALL LOCATED ON 1&1/2 ACRES OF THE ESTATE. THE REMAINING 58&1/2 ACRES IS DEVOTED TO INTENSE AGRICULTURE.
KNIGHT, LADY, 3 CHILDREN, 6 SERFS
THREE FIELDS IN ROTATION, EACH 19&1/2 ACRES
REGIONAL YIELD=55%
WHEAT, BARLEY, AND RYE
• 6&1/2 ACRES OF WHEAT@0.55 YIELD
36 x 0.55 x 6.5 = 128.7 BUSHELS
128.7 x 50LB = 6,435LB GRAIN,
14,543.1LB WHEATCHAFF
-350LB SEED GRAIN = 6,065LB WHEAT GRAIN
• 6&1/2 ACRES OF BARLEY@0.55 YIELD
28 x 0.55 x 6.5 = 100.1 BUSHELS
100.1 x 50LB = 5,005LB GRAIN,
11,311.3LB BARLEYCHAFF
-350LB SEED GRAIN = 4655LB BARLEY GRAIN
• 6&1/2 ACRES OF RYE@0.55 YIELD
30 x 0.55 x 6.5 = 107.25 BUSHELS
107.25 x 50LB = 5,362.5LB GRAIN,
12,119.25LB RYE THATCH
-350LB SEED GRAIN = 5,012.5LB RYE GRAIN
OATS AND HAY
• 6&1/2 ACRES OF OATS@0.55 YIELD
24 x 0.55 x 0.6 x 6.5 = 51.48 BUSHELS
51.48 x 50LB = 2,574LB GRAIN,
5,817.24LB OATS STRAW
-350LB SEED GRAIN = 2,224LB OAT GRAIN
• 13 ACRES OF HAY@0.55 YIELD
5 TONS x 0.55 x 0.6 x 13 = 21.45 TONS HAY
SHEEP
• 19&1/2 ACRES OF SHEEP WITH FODDER SUPPORT
19.5/3 = 6.5 SHEEP
6 EWES & 1 RAM
1/4 GALLON x 6 @180 DAYS = 270 GALLON OF MILK
(270 x 10.31 x 5/43.25) = 321.81LB CHEESE
7 X 14LB = 98LB WOOL
2 SLAUGHTERED SHEEP = 154LB MEAT,
2 LEATHER HIDES
ESTATE USE
BREAD: (5538.75LB / 50LB) X 73 = 8,086 LOAVES OF MIXEDGRAIN BREAD. THIS IS SUFFICIENT FOR 11 PEOPLE RECEIVING 2 LOAVES PER DAY.
STRONG ALE: 5,005LB / 20LB = 250 GALLONS
FODDER: 25,304LB
WARHORSE (112 BUSHELS),
OXEN (29 BUSHELS)
CHAFF: 15 TON
SURPLUS PRODUCE
HAY: 21 TONS (VALUE=47GP)
|
|
This reminds me of playing Harn.
By Larani's spurs, it sure does! I still have the Harnmanor suppliment with detailed tables for running a manor. Useful material for a details based RPG like Harnmaster, no so much for your typical D&D game when Wall of Iron and Fabricate can flood the market with pots and pans overnight. :)
The D&D economics system (that presented in the DMG) does not stand up to even casual scrutiny for being a supportable economic model, but it rarely has much impact on the game, so it does not get a lot of attention. If the level of realism presented by the OP is desired in a campaign, then good work. That, for me at least, got old after running a manor on the outskirts of Chybissa for a year. Becoming a master bookeeper instead of an adventurer was not fun. Interesting read though, thanks!
|
|
This reminds me of playing Harn.By Larani's spurs, it sure does! I still have the Harnmanor suppliment with detailed tables for running a manor. Useful material for a details based RPG like Harnmaster, no so much for your typical D&D game when Wall of Iron and Fabricate can flood the market with pots and pans overnight. :)
The D&D economics system (that presented in the DMG) does not stand up to even casual scrutiny for being a supportable economic model, but it rarely has much impact on the game, so it does not get a lot of attention. If the level of realism presented by the OP is desired in a campaign, then good work. That, for me at least, got old after running a manor on the outskirts of Chybissa for a year. Becoming a master bookeeper instead of an adventurer was not fun. Interesting read though, thanks!
That depends Xuttah: Would your Gold Dragon have a Vinyard or a cave?
SWINFIELDS VINEYARD
A BISHOP’S VINYARD LOCATED AT LEDBURY
DESCRIPTION
A VINYARD SUFFICIENT TO PRODUCE SEVEN TUNS OF WHITE WINE.
A BISHOP’S VINYARD OF UNKNOWN SIZE
REGIONAL YIELD=83%
WHITE WINE GRAPE VINYARD
• TUN=216 GALLONS, 7 x 216 = 1,512 GALLONS OF WINE
1,512 / 5 = 302.4
302.4 x 85LB = 25,704LB OF WHITE WINE GRAPES
A TEN ROW VINYARD-ACRE YIELDS 2&1/2 TONS
ASSUMING 83% YIELD
(25,704 / 83) X 100 = 30,968LB
30,968LB / 2240LB = 13.825 TONS
13.825 / 2.5= 5.53 ACRES
WITH THE EXTRA ONE ACRE, A BUILDING AND VEGETABLE GARDEN SUPPORTING SERFS, THE PROPERTY SITS AT 6&1/2 ACRES.
SURPLUS PRODUCE
WINE: 7 TUNS (VALUE=544GP, 3SP, 2CP)
A TENNANT FARM
A TENNANT FARM AT OMBERSLEY
DESCRIPTION
NINTEEN AND A HALF ACRES, MOSTLY WHEAT, BUT ALSO VETCH, OATS, AND RYE.
19&1/2 ACRES DIVIDED INTO THREE FIELDS IN ROTATION
REGIONAL YIELD=55%
WHEAT
• 6 ACRES OF WHEAT @ 55% YIELD
36 x 0.55 x 6 = 128.7 BUSHELS
128.7 x 50LB = 6,435LB WHEATGRAIN,
14,543.1LB CHAFF
-350LB SEED = 6,085LB WHEAT
HAY, OATS, AND RYE
• 2 ACRES OF RYE @ 55% YIELD
30 x 0.55 x 0.6 x 2 = 19.8 BUSHELS
19.8 x 50LB = 990LB RYEGRAIN,
2,237.4LB RYE THATCH
-350LB SEED = 640LB RYE
• 2 ACRES OF OATS @ 55% YIELD
24 x 0.55 x 0.6 x 2 = 15.84 BUSHELS
15.84 x 50LB = 792LB OATS,
1,789.9LB CHAFF
-350LB SEED = 442LB OATS
• 2 ACRES OF HAY @ 55% YIELD
5 TONS x 0.55 x 0.6 x 2 = 3.3 TONS
WITH THE EXTRA 1&1/2 ACRES SUPPORTING A SMALL HOUSE AND VEGETABLE GARDEN, 20 GEESE, 5 PIGS, A COCK AND 4 HENS, TWO OXEN, A COW, AND THE THREE CARTLOADS OF FIREWOOD THAT REPRESENT ACCESS TO A WOODLOT BEYOND THE LIMITS OF THE TENNANT FARM.
SURPLUS PRODUCE
WHEAT: 6,000LB (VALUE=60GP)
?
!
My players don't have time to adventure, they are all cutting wood, threshing wheat, and milking goats.
|
|
WITH THE EXTRA ONE ACRE, A BUILDING AND VEGETABLE GARDEN SUPPORTING SERFS, THE PROPERTY SITS AT 6&1/2 ACRES.
They feed 6 serfs and their families with 1 acre of land?
SURPLUS PRODUCE
WHEAT: 6,000LB (VALUE=60GP)
Did you remember to feed his entire family, and not just the one peasant?
Did you remember to account for the various fees and taxes he has to pay on his lands our of that 60 gp?Do you recall that in 3.5 an ordinary laborer makes 1 sp/day, which is 36.5 gp per year, which means this farmer doesn't even double that as surplus with his year of labor, and thus is unlikely to become a major economic power in the region?
|
|
My players don't have time to adventure, they are all cutting wood, threshing wheat, and milking goats.
Oh Dear...Well probably for the best...cutting the cheese, raping the fields, and all.
WITH THE EXTRA ONE ACRE, A BUILDING AND VEGETABLE GARDEN SUPPORTING SERFS, THE PROPERTY SITS AT 6&1/2 ACRES.They feed 6 serfs and their families with 1 acre of land?
SURPLUS PRODUCE
WHEAT: 6,000LB (VALUE=60GP)Did you remember to feed his entire family, and not just the one peasant?
Did you remember to account for the various fees and taxes he has to pay on his lands our of that 60 gp?
Do you recall that in 3.5 an ordinary laborer makes 1 sp/day, which is 36.5 gp per year, which means this farmer doesn't even double that as surplus with his year of labor, and thus is unlikely to become a major economic power in the region?
Still not reading those posts huh? Six Serfs on 60 acre Wallsgrave manor, not on the 6&1/2 acre Vinyard of Bishop Swinfield.
As to the lonely tennant farmer with 6000lb surplus wheat, he has 640lb rye mixed with 85lb wheat, so conceivably he has lots of blackbread to go with his vegetable stew.
|
|
Still not reading those posts huh? Six Serfs on 60 acre Wallsgrave manor, not on the 6&1/2 acre Vinyard of Bishop Swinfield.
So you haven't fed those serfs.
Bishop Swinfield is somewhere not mentioned in all your calculations buying enough food to feed them.That should be listed as a debit on the accounts of the manor.
As to the lonely tennant farmer with 6000lb surplus wheat, he has 640lb rye mixed with 85lb wheat, so conceivably he has lots of blackbread to go with his vegetable stew.
Not the tenant farmer, his family. That farm has to support his entire family of about 5 people.
If you are assigning 825 lbs. of grain to feed the farmer, you need another 3,300 lbs. of that wheat to feed the rest of his family.That leaves him a mere 1,700 lbs. to sell for 17 gp per year, out of which he must pay for various things.
Oh, and that's not counting how much of his barley he drinks instead of bakes, reducing his wheat surplus even further.
Or do you mean he is lonely because he doesn't have a family? If so, he is going to need some help taking care of that farm, and will need to spend some of his 60 gp per year on hirelings. He needs at least one, who at the 1 sp per day costs him 36.5 gp per year, leaving him 13.5 gp to pay his taxes and such. If he needs another part time worker, he will need to find a way to get an extra 5 gp per year to pay that salary.
He is probably better off getting married and filing a joint return.