So I've been reading a lot of complaints about how realistic, or how awkward the economic system of Pathfinder is. I'm currently in a campaign where we aren't necessarily meshing with the DM on how to make money either, we want to make investments and create items to sell, but realistically it's not going to happen, as we can only sell for as much as the cost of crafting, so we'd have to wait in town for months for a commission to craft something.
I'm proposing to create a coherent, (relatively) simple, economic system for Pathfinder. So I've come here to ask y'all, what is most important in y'all's games? What would you like to see?
I'm thinking of making two systems of economics, one for the micro-level, and one for the macro. The micro will be able to tell you what a business has, how a PC can make profit using their skills without adventuring. The micro will tell about a region, a city, or an area and what they make and how they make their money.
In other words if your campaign travels from the mountains all the way to the middle of the inner sea, you will probably be able to sell your gems or other mountain components for more, making a profit. If you go from a forest to mountains or bare plains, if you're carrying a portable hole full of wood you'll be able to sell it more than what you bought it for.
For those of you interested, I'll probably use mostly neo-classical, and Austrian economics for most of the models, as that is what I'm familiar with. Though obviously most of the countries will use a mercantilist system, as that is probably most historically accurate (if you can somehow translate Golarion into our time). I'll try to make some models of countries and what they make and how to figure out prices of a couple of popular countries, any recommendations on which countries?
As a player it sort of messes with my verisimilitude when wooden products cost as much in an area with abundant wood as an area struggling with wood, and things like that. The way the prices are set, you can tell that 3.5/PF gave up on a realistic and fluid economy for a simple system that allows them to evaluate wealth by level. The same problem and reason goes for crafting as well.
The way the game economy is, trading is not a feasible source of income.
Economics are rough in medieval style games... The average peasant probably never SAW a gold piece... The average coin used should be copper not gold. Yet, there has to be a balance between... Armor +1, Flaming sword... and tavern meals for peasants.
If the party has found 1200 gold... that's more than enough for an average person to buy a farm or Tavern and live long happy lives in luxury...
Economics are tough when you toss in treasure and magic....
Economics are tough when you toss in treasure and magic....
Hence the reason I have serious issues with high magic games/magic item super malls. It's really up to each GM to balance the economy in their own games. Sticking to the RAW just leads to broken systems ripe for abuse.
Also money is only as valueable as the goods and services you can buy with it mostly so does it really matter if adventurers use gold silver or copper all relatively durable. I think most peasants wuold take a good diet and being paid in copper over starving and being paid in gold where gold is not valueable.
Also will there be an Mdragon for the quantity of money possesed by dragons?
As a player it sort of messes with my verisimilitude when wooden products cost as much in an area with abundant wood as an area struggling with wood, and things like that. The way the prices are set, you can tell that 3.5/PF gave up on a realistic and fluid economy for a simple system that allows them to evaluate wealth by level. The same problem and reason goes for crafting as well.
The way the game economy is, trading is not a feasible source of income.
I was going to add a modifier, based on how rare the items would be in that place, also to categorize items into classes based upon weight (as it still matters even in teleports and what-not) that would affect these. For instance -10% market for wood products if you're next to a forest, +10% if you're away from one.
Obviously it's over simplified, but it's a general idea that I think will work (I need to think out the percentages though)
Economics are rough in medieval style games... The average peasant probably never SAW a gold piece... The average coin used should be copper not gold. Yet, there has to be a balance between... Armor +1, Flaming sword... and tavern meals for peasants.
If the party has found 1200 gold... that's more than enough for an average person to buy a farm or Tavern and live long happy lives in luxury...
Economics are tough when you toss in treasure and magic....
I think you underestimate how much a skilled worker makes a year, for just an easy estimate, not even assuming you want to work it out, you earn half your check in gold pieces/week. A level one bowyer for instance (+1 rank, +3 class skill, +1 attribute, +2 MW tools, +3 skill focus = +10) he's going to take a 10 every week (logically he should, and he would, he's under no stress) so he will average 10 gold a week in profit, or 520gp/year. That's with one skill rank, and no apprentice help, which will increase profit.
Say a 4 person party found 1200 gold, that's 300/person, like 8 months of pay or so for a 1 skill point commoner. That seems right to me.
In my game, PCs start out with 5 points in a profession or craft and get a free skill point in it each level. I have a simple table on which they can roll to see how much money the make in a month (50-100 gps) and then they subtract their expenses. So I can say something like "The winter passes, and the spring thaw brings news of brigands on the north road. Three months have gone by, make three income rolls."
So I can have chunks of time pass without people feel like they are idle.
I think this may be the wrong system for you to implement something like this if you really think about what the rules seem to allow.
One Decanter of Endless water lets you put a thriving community in the harshest desert.
You've got all the other economic problems a system with casual magic like this would experience.
Fabricate
Wall of Iron
Teleportation Magic (Teleportation Circle permanencied, Gate Rings, etc)
Discern Location (point out all the good ores)
Locate Object (for low level prospecting)On and on and on.
I'm sure you could come up with something that would make sense in True20 or the like, but the magic system here (Pathfinder) and 3.5 in general makes everything blow up.
I just think you would make things more complicated, and not fix something that can't be fixed by the fundamental nature of the system.
Wall of iron produces no usable iron, so it's not free mining, it's just a wall of iron produced for 660gp (spellcasting services section, PHB) so yay, you can build a vault, it's still cheaper for a king to have peasants build walls of stone, and a spellcaster doing the intricate work on consignment then to have an 11th level wizard lying around to make walls of iron or stone at his whim.
I think this may be the wrong system for you to implement something like this if you really think about what the rules seem to allow.
One Decanter of Endless water lets you put a thriving community in the harshest desert.
You've got all the other economic problems a system with casual magic like this would experience.
Fabricate
Wall of Iron
Teleportation Magic (Teleportation Circle permanencied, Gate Rings, etc)
Discern Location (point out all the good ores)
Locate Object (for low level prospecting)On and on and on.
I'm sure you could come up with something that would make sense in True20 or the like, but the magic system here (Pathfinder) and 3.5 in general makes everything blow up.
I just think you would make things more complicated, and not fix something that can't be fixed by the fundamental nature of the system.
Sorry, I forgot to answer your other concerns, Fabricate costs at a minimum 450gp to make something, and you need a 9th level wizard that has the skill, so one out of every 10 9th level wizards might have the right craft skill (assuming they have a random distribution of craft skills taken, and your campaign has 10 craft skills)
Teleportation is limited by number of people and carrying capacity, and it's 450gp to cast, so it will help lower shipping costs of luxury goods, but not of staple goods.
Discern Location is a 1,200 gp spell, and you must have touched the object. Personally I would rule that you can't find a vein of ore unless you touched that vein of ore.
Locate Object is a 60gp spell with a long range, it won't help you find new ores or resources because that would take forever to comb over such huge distances with it. It's also blocked by divination blocking things (thin sheet of lead, lots of rock, earth, etc.)
A decanter of endless water, or well multiple ones, might make a desert city viable, but the people still need a reason to be there. So I see no problems, vegas is only viable because we can transport water, but the reason people are there is for the casino/tourism industry. And once you realize how much water crops take, you need many decanters to support even a moderate amount of people, and that's if your DM allows you to put it at full blast for unlimited amount of time.
Hence the reason I have serious issues with high magic games/magic item super malls. It's really up to each GM to balance the economy in their own games. Sticking to the RAW just leads to broken systems ripe for abuse.
Economics are tough when you toss in treasure and magic....
Well with a first level skilled worker making 520gp/year, it certainly puts things in perspective. A magic item is only 4 years of salary, certainly attainable, and if you add a wife working at the same rate, and say a kid as unskilled labor, it's probably more like a year and a half for a 2,000 gp item. Certainly enough for a family to invest in.
The game mechanics aren't designed to handle an actual economy. They're designed to let PCs buy cool gear and sell the stuff they find to do so.
Trying to extrapolate that doesn't work. It isn't intended to.
It actually works better than you think, and that's what I'm trying to do, is to get a logical, mostly consistent economy that will fit within the rules.
And the rules are actually really tough on PCs finding the gear they want, it takes a ton of time to craft items, but you probably have a DM that just says yes, that item is for sale in town.
As a player it sort of messes with my verisimilitude when wooden products cost as much in an area with abundant wood as an area struggling with wood, and things like that. The way the prices are set, you can tell that 3.5/PF gave up on a realistic and fluid economy for a simple system that allows them to evaluate wealth by level. The same problem and reason goes for crafting as well.
The way the game economy is, trading is not a feasible source of income.
I was going to add a modifier, based on how rare the items would be in that place, also to categorize items into classes based upon weight (as it still matters even in teleports and what-not) that would affect these. For instance -10% market for wood products if you're next to a forest, +10% if you're away from one.
Obviously it's over simplified, but it's a general idea that I think will work (I need to think out the percentages though)
I agree with these modifiers. Also I would consider most blacksmiths to take skill focus which makes them even more productive. Also if they are humans give them the +2 bump to int the numbers end up higher this way. Also the prodigy feat from ultimate magic could make the bonus even higher. Also assuming that the the blacksmith or whatever has masterwork artisan tools add another +2.
With this and a 13 as highest stat for npcs you can get a +13 total modifier for a human expert at first level. Now this means if he can take 10 he can add 10 to the dc of crafting simple weapons like spears to make 50.6 gold pieces of revenue every week. With 52 weeks in the year . This makes a profit of 1754 gold pieces a year which is a lot after expenses from raw material. Note this does not include things like property taxes on the shop for whatever you are producing.
I think the crafting rules may only work when pushed to the limit and all craftsmen are minmaxed.
I just realized this expert makes 25.3 spears in a week that can supply an army pretty well. He makes more money making spears than martail weapons at this point but that will change once he gets another +2 like he has a capable assistant that is his apprentice aid another.
I'd say it's one of the Miracles of Abadar that the economy works and leave it at that.
Reasonably there should be such a thing as supply and demand, exotic versus common, fashionable versus unfashionable and so forth.
The way I deal with economics for my games is to just apply common sense. Last game the party was taking an extended stay in Okeno, the third largest trading city in Katapesh and foremost slave market. The players asked if they could hire wizards to put book-standard enchantments on their items. I said, "Yeah, sure, of course." I mean, it's the third largest city in the nation known as the shopper's paradise whose main trade is trade itself. The only things I would be prepared to say "No" to would be hideously rare, dangerous, and costly things which would only technically be available in the Night Stalls, but realistically would be available in Okeno with a small charge for next-day delivery.
When they're in some dumpy town in the River Kingdoms? Or even a somewhat less dumpy place, like Daggermark, home of the famed assassins and poisoners guilds? I tell them that they can buy any poison they want. Slaves? This is the River Kingdoms. Slavery is illegal here.
One adventure they went to the town of Nystra, source of the famed Nystran silks, and came away with a treasure consisting of many bolts of the rare fabrics. I told the players the value of the bolts and mentioned that they would sell for double if they could find someone who would appreciate their quality and would have the requisite cash. They took them to Oppara, capital of fashionable Taldor, and sold them to the city's foremost fashion designer.
I do this as a house rule with an Appraise check, telling the players what sort of people would be willing to pay above book price for various items. Some items are so common, however, that I just say that they sell for standard and that's the end of it.
I think one of the problems with implementing a "realistic" economy in an RPG is that one doesnt want to incentivise going into business as opposed to going out adventuring. It's very easy in a game to say "I run my trading enterprise for twenty years, saving every penny - now before continuing my adventuring career I go and buy..." but harder to apply that discipline in real life (and it's not as heroic). Consequently, if I were to implement some kind of simulationist economic system, I'd make sure it was hard to "skip ahead".
As a more constuctive comment - I think it's important to align risk with reward. I have seen many suggested economic systems which fail in this regard - no matter how many tables, charts and die rolling there is - if there's a way to make lots of money with very little chance of losing everything, the price of such goods is going to decline pretty rapidly (until you cant make much money at it anymore). Players are (in my experience) much more willing to accept the odd windfall gain than they are the occasional bankruptcy, but you can't have one without the other (or everyone would be doing it).
I think one of the problems with implementing a "realistic" economy in an RPG is that one doesnt want to incentivise going into business as opposed to going out adventuring. It's very easy in a game to say "I run my trading enterprise for twenty years, saving every penny - now before continuing my adventuring career I go and buy..." but harder to apply that discipline in real life (and it's not as heroic). Consequently, if I were to implement some kind of simulationist economic system, I'd make sure it was hard to "skip ahead".
As a more constuctive comment - I think it's important to align risk with reward. I have seen many suggested economic systems which fail in this regard - no matter how many tables, charts and die rolling there is - if there's a way to make lots of money with very little chance of losing everything, the price of such goods is going to decline pretty rapidly (until you cant make much money at it anymore). Players are (in my experience) much more willing to accept the odd windfall gain than they are the occasional bankruptcy, but you can't have one without the other (or everyone would be doing it).
I think most of the risk that is averted from something like that is because of the DM not wanting to bankrupt a group.
But why shouldn't a business be a cool thing to do in an RPG? Obviously the main point of any pathfinder game is adventuring, but there's no reason to not have rules of something if a group wants to spend a couple of sessions on building a business or trade network, or if a character wants to do it on the side, the income won't overpower the character most likely (Rule 0) and it will obviously take an investment, underpowering a character early on to give them an income later.
If there's very little risk and lots of wealth, there's no reason for the PCs to be doing it, as it will have already been filled, somebody less powerful will have filled it as they aren't at risk from big bad guys.
But there's no rules for building costs, or land costs, or taxes, or why trade is actually worthwhile, or how much wealth a city actually produces.
What I'm proposing to do is totally filler and optional, it's for groups who want to build a castle and actually plan for it rather than a DM saying it will cost X gold, yay 2 years later you have a castle, or here's a castle, you get it. Or a wizard who wants to make money to buy something he wouldn't be able to otherwise, or for the rest of the party to make money while the wizard is making their stuff.
Also, what is wrong with a group passing 20 years between adventures if they want to and the DM is fine with it? It seems totally logical, rather than a burn from 1-20 in a year, it even seems more plausible for an adventurer's career to have large breaks of years at a time.
Also Adventurer's wealth is much less compared to the average person than people seem to think, without even calculating individual item creation, just the blanket rule gives a person with a craft skill (1 point) about a gold a day, only unskilled labor is silver a day, and that would be children/young adults without marketable skills. It's pretty easy to say that by the time a person is 18 or 19 in Pathfinder they'll have a skill of something.
I'd say it's one of the Miracles of Abadar that the economy works and leave it at that.
Reasonably there should be such a thing as supply and demand, exotic versus common, fashionable versus unfashionable and so forth.
The way I deal with economics for my games is to just apply common sense. Last game the party was taking an extended stay in Okeno, the third largest trading city in Katapesh and foremost slave market. The players asked if they could hire wizards to put book-standard enchantments on their items. I said, "Yeah, sure, of course." I mean, it's the third largest city in the nation known as the shopper's paradise whose main trade is trade itself. The only things I would be prepared to say "No" to would be hideously rare, dangerous, and costly things which would only technically be available in the Night Stalls, but realistically would be available in Okeno with a small charge for next-day delivery.
When they're in some dumpy town in the River Kingdoms? Or even a somewhat less dumpy place, like Daggermark, home of the famed assassins and poisoners guilds? I tell them that they can buy any poison they want. Slaves? This is the River Kingdoms. Slavery is illegal here.
One adventure they went to the town of Nystra, source of the famed Nystran silks, and came away with a treasure consisting of many bolts of the rare fabrics. I told the players the value of the bolts and mentioned that they would sell for double if they could find someone who would appreciate their quality and would have the requisite cash. They took them to Oppara, capital of fashionable Taldor, and sold them to the city's foremost fashion designer.
I do this as a house rule with an Appraise check, telling the players what sort of people would be willing to pay above book price for various items. Some items are so common, however, that I just say that they sell for standard and that's the end of it.
Well it's not a miracle, it's literally just the DM saying it works, but I want to give it rules for working, why trade happens, and how the players can profit. Everything you've said basically can be translated to a %price modifier, if it's easy to find, there's more of it and the price is lower and selection is higher. Bigger cities have more selection and lower prices. Prices on the black market are higher as costs are higher.
Basically I'm taking what you've applied as common sense and giving it set rules that a DM can apply across the board to answer questions that players have without making something up and being inconsistent.
|
We really need a 'ENTREPENEUR' fantasy business roleplay game so players stop trying to live out their Donald Trump styled fantasies in Pathfinder.
As a DM, I've been happy to reward a player's clever business decision, but the more successful the PCs are, the more they'll find adverse events keep happening that somehow ensures that the party wealth is equivalent to their level.
Ithink most of the risk that is averted from something like that is because of the DM not wanting to bankrupt a group.
Yes, I agree. My point is that, if you're looking for a simulation which is relatively 'realistic' the chance for astronomical gains should come with a high risk. The various fan-built economic systems I've seen over the years have often allowed for enormous gain but with relatively little chance for bankruptcy - I suspect that's because players are pretty happy learning they had a particularly excellent month/year/season but would expect to 'play out' any disaster so that they get a chance to prevent it occurring.
I think any realism is significantly at odds with what makes a good advemture game, but I wouldnt want to disuade a group who enjoyed a mercantile simulation.
But why shouldn't a business be a cool thing to do in an RPG?
No reason at all - my first paragraph was an (admittedly pretty ill-informed) opinion about game design. I personally quite enjoy the mercantile game and would be delighted if Paizo produced an AP where you started out with a wagon and a mangy donkey, ending up with a world-spanning merchant empire going head to head with the Aspis Consortium (for example).
Obviously the main point of any pathfinder game is adventuring, but there's no reason to not have rules of something if a group wants to spend a couple of sessions on building a business or trade network, or if a character wants to do it on the side, the income won't overpower the character most likely (Rule 0) and it will obviously take an investment, underpowering a character early on to give them an income later.
If there's very little risk and lots of wealth, there's no reason for the PCs to be doing it, as it will have already been filled, somebody less powerful will have filled it as they aren't at risk from big bad guys.
But there's no rules for building costs, or land costs, or taxes, or why trade is actually worthwhile, or how much wealth a city actually produces.
What I'm proposing to do is totally filler and optional, it's for groups who want to build a castle and actually plan for it rather than a DM saying it will cost X gold, yay 2 years later you have a castle, or here's a castle, you get it. Or a wizard who wants to make money to buy something he wouldn't be able to otherwise, or for the rest of the party to make money while the wizard is making their stuff.
I dont think there's anything wrong with that - I'd quite like to see decent rules on economic enterprises (from memory there was a little bit about running a business in one of the first two instalments of Second Darkness).
My more constructive comment was a suggestion that risk should correlate with reward or anyone who understands economics is going to face a large problem with suspending disbelief.
Also, what is wrong with a group passing 20 years between adventures if they want to and the DM is fine with it? It seems totally logical, rather than a burn from 1-20 in a year, it even seems more plausible for an adventurer's career to have large breaks of years at a time.
I dont think there's anything wrong with that - in my favorite campaign we generally has one adventure per year of game time. I was raising the possibility of players developing insanely disciplined savers - who scrimp and save every penny for ages so as to maximise their utility in twenty years time. Pretty much nobody is able to do that, in the real world.
Those that are able to save so aggressively are probably so risk averse that, when the time comes, they're going to prefer to pay someone else to don a sword and run off to save the world.
Also Adventurer's wealth is much less compared to the average person than people seem to think, without even calculating individual item creation, just the blanket rule gives a person with a craft skill (1 point) about a gold a day, only unskilled labor is silver a day, and that would be children/young adults without marketable skills. It's pretty easy to say that by the time a person is 18 or 19 in Pathfinder they'll have a skill of something.
It depends a lot on how in depth you want the simulation to be, in my opinion. In general, people do not simulate a medieval economy, they simulate a modern industrial one - substituting accountants for blacksmiths and so forth (it's not that rare to hear people surprised that banks used to charge you interest for holding your money, for example). Personally, I prefer that 'unrealistic' approach - but I'm happy with the hand-wavy economic system as is. If you are trying to simulate a medieval economy (as most seem to aim for) then you should aim to have a vast underclass of unskilled labour pretty much subsisting. If you're shooting for some genuine prediction of what a world with magic and easily transportable wealth (in the form of near-universally accepted currency) would actually be like, I think you have a far more difficult path ahead.
I think the difference between Adventurers' wealth and Ordinary Folks' wealth is not in amount so much (though I think a mid-level character is phenomenally wealthy in-game). I think the significant difference is that adventurers get it in massive amounts at one time, rather than more continuously spread through their lifetime.