|
Also keep in mind that most midieval economies, especially rural, used barter more often than cash exchange.
Which is why commodities sell for full price in the game, they can be used to represent barter and non-monetary wealth.
The 1st level commoner farmer who has a 10 wis, basic tools, one skill point can take 10 and get 14/2=7 gp per week. That equals two pigs and a goat so you could say his income represents animal husbandry. Same for any of the other listed trade goods.
|
|
RAW really doesn't make more than a token effort to build up a real economy, by RAW, the players are the ones that drive the main economic engine for game purposes, but it's a Gygaxian "Gold Rush" standard which hardly makes sense in the big picture.There's at least one cartoon I remember that lamp shaded the situation it was a bout a town who had a kid whose duty was to watch for incoming adventurers, when he gave the alarm, the citizenry would flip over the pages changing the prices from medieval standard to "adventurer standard."
So any attempt to describe the economy as it's modeled in game terms should be taken with a heavy tongue in cheek.
My opinion is people trying to stick to a 'medieval standard' is part of what hurts any real attempt to work on it.
RAW really is neutral in terms of the type of economy you wish you run. It is the base level.
Examples of Governments in Golarian run the full gamut from primitive tribes to old crumbling empires to fresh representative democracies to anarchy. The game lets you model these by giving space for the DM to adjust RAW to fit the idea he wants to convey. You can adjust prices, income, population, or anything to fit your vision.
|
My opinion is people trying to stick to a 'medieval standard' is part of what hurts any real attempt to work on it.
Especially as they try to stick to what they think is rural England "medieval standard".
In the same period we have Byzantium, Venice, Naples, all the Arab states and large sections of Asia that are noticeably wealthier and more advanced.
A large percentage of the gold and silver currency used in England during the middle ages was minted in Byzantium.
Beside that, most of Golarion (to speak of the Paizo setting for Pathfinder) is more a Rinascimental age world than a middle age world.
Honestly I was with you up until this point. Then your whole thing gives away to assumptions that aren't in RAW, and really doesn't hold up.
Even given the most generous view of income, only the extremely wealthy would have access to magic items of any kind. Also, since it generally takes a spellcaster to use a spell-casting item anyway and creating them is expensive, the local public service or retail facility will use direct spell casting rather than items.The magic item economy shouldn't be compared to the modern economy for groceries, or clothing, or even cars. It's more like the modern economy for oil tankers, satellites, or jets. That is, made under contract rather than mass produced and sitting on shelves waiting for buyers.
To what non-RAW assumptions are you referring? There really aren't rules written to establish an economy beyond the prices of day labor, crafting rules, and performance rules.
Aside from whatever poor assumptions I may have made, do you feel it's more realistic (and/or fun) to have a magic item economy based on:
Magic items sold here!
Quality workmanship!
Fast delivery times!
50% down payment required on all orders.
or
Magic items sold here!
Quality workmanship!
Largest stock in town!
If we don't have it, nobody does!
Aside from whatever poor assumptions I may have made, do you feel it's more realistic (and/or fun) to have a magic item economy based on:
Magic items sold here!
Quality workmanship!
Fast delivery times!
50% down payment required on all orders.or
Magic items sold here!
Quality workmanship!
Largest stock in town!
If we don't have it, nobody does!
The two can coexist IMO.
'findel
|
|
@ Blueluck
You are not considering some factor:
1) adventurers (and non adventurers too, a down on the luck or retired mercenary could own a magic weapon that he wish to sell) are selling magic items to some merchant. So there will be sellers with items in stock, unless you force your players to wait for a interested buyer.
selling to a merchant that know that he will have the magic item in stock for a long time is the reason why "used" magic items sell for half price.
2) "Fast delivery times" is hardly credible. Your crafter will be required to always keep at hand the components to make all kind of possible magic items. That mean that he would be in exactly the same position of the guys already crafting the whole item: plenty of stock to have the possibility to sell what the client want.
At that point, if you are forced to have a stock, it is better to spend your available time doing the enchanting process instead of staying behind a desk twirling your thumbs.
I agree that people making the big magic items without a order will be dumb, but the "common2 items, that can be sold with relative ease? (+1 weapons, magic arrow, simple wands, ecc.) I think they are readily available.
3) Orders pile up. Even if you don't sell 365.000 gp of items in a year the normal mechanics of how queues work will ensure that you will have periods of glut where you will have more orders than time, and famine periods where you have no orders.
Losing clients because you don't have the item to sell is generally bad for businnes. Delivery on demand is a modern idea.
|
|
The problem is that there are too many ways to make a magic items for a guild to really clamp down on all of them unless the government is fully supporting them. And for that to work the guild have to be the real government, even if they officially aren't.
The Guild want to control magic items production but:
- lord So and So has his pet magician that build stuff for him. If lord so and So has him all his rivals should have one too, or they are in trouble, but then all the rival rivals will want one.
Very rapidly every noble will have one.
- same thing for merchants. If my competitors have one of them I need one for defence. it will work this way for each possible power group, legal or illegal.
- churches can construct magic items than are indistinguishable from arcanist constructed ones and most churches will take very dim view on mage Guilds trying to dictate what they do and they usually have the power needed to resist.
- the charisma based spellcasting classes don't require formal training.
It is not particularly hard for them to learn how to incant stuff.
So, to limit the activity of freelancers Arcane Guilds need to become the government. At least in Golarion no mages guild seem to hold that kind of power.
|
|
The problem is that there are too many ways to make a magic items for a guild to really clamp down on all of them unless the government is fully supporting them. And for that to work the guild have to be the real government, even if they officially aren't.
The Guild want to control magic items production but:
- lord So and So has his pet magician that build stuff for him. If lord so and So has him all his rivals should have one too, or they are in trouble, but then all the rival rivals will want one.
Very rapidly every noble will have one.
- same thing for merchants. If my competitors have one of them I need one for defence. it will work this way for each possible power group, legal or illegal.
- churches can construct magic items than are indistinguishable from arcanist constructed ones and most churches will take very dim view on mage Guilds trying to dictate what they do and they usually have the power needed to resist.
- the charisma based spellcasting classes don't require formal training.
It is not particularly hard for them to learn how to incant stuff.So, to limit the activity of freelancers Arcane Guilds need to become the government. At least in Golarion no mages guild seem to hold that kind of power.
While I agree with most of your points I disagree with your conclusion. Selective murder of non guild crafters could do a lot to discourage competition. That only requires a guild with evil leaders. Once the guild has supremecy the threat of violence could be enough to at least keep a lid on it.