I am so glad I did that up and posted it, makes these things so easy when I can once again point to the numbers and outcomes of paying attention to the system instead of just spouting nonsense that doesn't actually match the rules.
Abraham, that thread is one that actually led me to make some modifications to my world's economic assumptions. I didn't follow it exactly, I made some assumptions about economies of scale (a farmer, wife and kids would live quite a bit cheaper than four farmers, for example).
In the end it was clear to me that a suitably industrious and perhaps fortunate farmer could become reasonably comfortable.
My own campaign world is not modeled after the earth's dark ages. It's more enlightened and less stratified into economic classes. "Farmer" is a description that could describe a single family tending a few acres mostly for their own use, to a "Farmer Maggot" type of farm with lots of extended family members contributing to farming a very large farm, providing a significant income from the process.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still not seeing numbers here. In a world where the average non-adventurer earns maybe a few silver a day, where do they get the funds for having magic items made? You do understand that adventurers generally are operating under a "gold rush" economy, not something that's actually representative of day to day life?Serfs? Which published fantasy setting has those? I think you might be confusing history and fantasy...I don't get where you're going here. Most farmers ARE serfs, toiling for the noble lord who actually owns the land. Where are the rules that say a farmer can buy a magic item, when that item isn't defined by the rules at all. Most farmers given the basic subsistence level don't have hundreds or thousands of gold pieces to spend on enchanted equipment.Actually LazarX, magic items that can be purchased by the average FARMER is, and has been demonstrated to be, completely consistent with the rules.
Nobody mentioned "the average serf" until you did just now in a transparent attempt at exaggeration to try to make your point, which just demonstrates that exaggeration is required to do so.
look at the profession skill, it can be used untrained, you get an amount of gold pieces value in goods per week equal to half the result of the profession check.
the lifestyle rules, list that an average lifestyle is 10 gold pieces per month, generally assumed that half is living expenses and half is taxes
an untrained laborer with an average wisdom has an average result of 10 for 5 gold pieces per week
even children can make untrained profession checks with average wisdom for 5 gold pieces a week.
Farmer Families tend to be quite huge, like 10 kids per set of parents
lets assume we have 3 sets of 1st level parents with a 13 wisdom and +5 in profession (Farmer)
10 kids per set of parents with no ranks and no wisdom modifier for a bonus of +0
and 2 pairs of a 3rd level grandparents with a 16 wisdom and skill focus for +12 to profession farmer
the 30 kids make an average of 5 gold per week, most of them are going to be doing this anywhere between the ages of 4 and 16 with no bonus.
each kid makes 20 per month, 5 of which goes to expenses and 5 of which to taxes, equaling out to 10 gold pieces for an average lifestyle or 10 net gold per kid per month. the kids are churning out a combined 300 GP per month in excess goods to use.
each of the parents brings home 7 gold pieces per week or 28 gold pieces per month, 10 of which goes in the appropriate distribution, bringing 6
sources of 18 unspent gold per month
the grandparents, all 4 from the combination of both sets, make 11 gold pieces per week or 44 a month, 10 of which goes to the average lifestyle rules
300+72+136 =508 gold pieces of miscellanius trade goods per month for this farming family of 40.
the family pools their resources at 10 gold a month apiece for 5 months to buy masterwork tools, effectively giving them +2 to the check and an extra gold piece of income per week, at an initial combined payment of 2,000 gold for this upgrade, they combined, make 40 more gold a week or 160 more a month, this turns out to be repaid in the first 4 months and becomes a net profit for weeks 17 and after
so this family with 668 gold per month can afford the following afterwards
up to 13 1st level potions for emergencies
up to 2 2nd level potions and a 1st level potion for emergencies
a 2nd level potion and 7 1st level potions for emergencies
up to 112 castings of create water from a 1st level acolyte in the case of a drought
and this is a traditional massive farming family using the rules as written. a family of 40 that makes 1,068 a month, 200 of which goes to the lifestyle expenses of the family and 200 of which goes to taxes, or a combined net income of 668 a month after expenses and yes, medeival style farming families did have groups of 30-50 mostly due to the fact they had to churn out so many kids to upkeep the needs of the farm and the people.
The idea that the majority of people are dirt poor farmers, bound to the land in a strict class based society, just isn't that compatible with all the free-spirited adventuring. If nothing else, in a world in which a peasant can wake up the magical blood sleeping in his veins, go off adventuring for a couple of months and come back strong enough to shake kingdoms, you might want to treat them just a little more kindly.
It absolutely IS compatible. Most peasants eat, sleep, and die as peasants. The one that throws off the shackles of his lifestyle and goes off on andventure.... He's rare, he's special. He's made that one way step into the world of wonder and danger, he's crossed that bridge from which there is no turning back.
If he's ever remarked upon by those he left behind, it is as a legend.
i already listed how a large farming family of 40 members whom save up for masterwork tools can make a combined total of an extra 668 gold pieces per month after lifestyle expenses.
you have to tweak the system a lot to justify the use of historical dirt poor serf farmers.
how does the family afford anything neccessary for their profession if they each only make a silver piece per day when the gold piece is literally the standard currency for a lot of things?
The idea that the majority of people are dirt poor farmers, bound to the land in a strict class based society, just isn't that compatible with all the free-spirited adventuring. If nothing else, in a world in which a peasant can wake up the magical blood sleeping in his veins, go off adventuring for a couple of months and come back strong enough to shake kingdoms, you might want to treat them just a little more kindly.
It absolutely IS compatible. Most peasants eat, sleep, and die as peasants. The one that throws off the shackles of his lifestyle and goes off on andventure.... He's rare, he's special. He's made that one way step into the world of wonder and danger, he's crossed that bridge from which there is no turning back.
If he's ever remarked upon by those he left behind, it is as a legend.
Lazar, you are describing a society that is drastically different than my own campaign world, and different from any campaign I've played in. Your description seems to be an attempt to match the worst periods of dark ages European earth history.
I deliberately, long ago, chose not to have my world operate that way. My world is deliberately more enlightened. Most farmers own their own land. The merchant class is very large and there is quite a bit more social mobility than it seems you would expect. The average hard-working humanoid in my world has a decent chance to have a comfortable, if not extravagant,life.
I just like it better that way. I prefer to tell my stories in that sort of world. I don't really care if it matches European history, because historical accuracy is not any sort of goal for my games. I figure that my world evolved its own way, and the presence of magic alone generally provides a significant productivity boost to the world, meaning there is more wealth to go around.
Call it the RPG trickle-down economy if you like. But as it turns out, my world's approach is much closer to the economics described in the Pathfinder profession rules than what you describe.
Fantasy was never meant to be historically accurate. a world with the existence of magic, or even the absence of christianity, would indeed be a very different world, possibly more enlightened, possibly less.
if in our own world, the wizards and druids honestly possessed real powers, dragons and faeries roamed the world, and gods alongside their servants interacted with their mortal followers. our world would have been a lot more enlightened in that era than it is now. magic would work alongside technology, and as the boon that is wizards provides the baseline, the technological developers would try to replicate the arcane feats and open them up to the common individual for cheaper.
Fantasy was never meant to be historically accurate. a world with the existence of magic, or even the absence of christianity, would indeed be a very different world, possibly more enlightened, possibly less.
if in our own world, the wizards and druids honestly possessed real powers, dragons and faeries roamed the world, and gods alongside their servants interacted with their mortal followers. our world would have been a lot more enlightened in that era than it is now. magic would work alongside technology, and as the boon that is wizards provides the baseline, the technological developers would try to replicate the arcane feats and open them up to the common individual for cheaper.
I see no evidence of that. In the 1930's people had no internet, no television. And for the most part, they were better informed about civics, national, and foreign affairs, than the average American is now who'd be challenged to point out Iraq or Idaho on a map. While technology has provided more information easily accessible, it has drowned it out with an even greater expansion of noise.
Magic is NOT technology. It's idiosyncratic, and unlike machines, not something that can be rubberstamped on an assembly line by cheap labor. it truly is power for the relative few who use it for good and ill over the less equipped many. The so-called "benefits" of the magical world are more than outweighed by the horrors it brings.
we have 18 classes, only 6 of which don't cast spells, a third of the classes don't cast spells,,this doesn't count alternate classes or casting archetypes, 3 of those 6 have archetypes that grant spell like or supernatural abilities
magic isn't rare and wondrous at all in the pathfinder system
in fact, the only classes that don't have an option for gaining magical powers as an archetype at the minimum, are the fighter, cavalier, and gunslinger.
Rogue has the ninja archetype
Monk has the Quinggong Archetype
and Barbarian has lots of supernatural rage powers
Serfs? Which published fantasy setting has those? I think you might be confusing history and fantasy...I don't get where you're going here. Most farmers ARE serfs, toiling for the noble lord who actually owns the land. Where are the rules that say a farmer can buy a magic item, when that item isn't defined by the rules at all. Most farmers given the basic subsistence level don't have hundreds or thousands of gold pieces to spend on enchanted equipment.Actually LazarX, magic items that can be purchased by the average FARMER is, and has been demonstrated to be, completely consistent with the rules.
Nobody mentioned "the average serf" until you did just now in a transparent attempt at exaggeration to try to make your point, which just demonstrates that exaggeration is required to do so.
If you are talking about Fantasy Worlds from Novels? Then David Eddings, Elizabeth Moon and Steven Brust have some sort of serfdom in at least part of their worlds. (And depending upon the particular area the serfs are of the dirt poor day to day survival types, others are well fed, clothed, and housed but none have the wealth to afford magic).
On the other hand, these worlds also have wealthy farmers that most likely could save for a magic plow or some other thing. Then again in most of these worlds, magic items (beyond potions) are rarely for sale and usually only loot or items passed down from parents or grandparents.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems that your magic is different from my magic. If x, y, and z produce a specific magical item, I see no reason that it cannot be mass produced. Sure some steps are more technical or advanced than others, but that does not mean that all steps are equally difficult.
There is a reason that all of the long swords have the same stats. They are built using the same template. Two longswords +1 really can be identical. I see no reason that they cannot be effectively mass produced. Surely less wondrous, but I see magic as equal to technology. And for some reason I like it better that way. You get the high tech with easier technobabble. I like sci fi and futuristic settings the most, but I find that doing high magic fantasy has similar results and in some ways it is better. You do not need to have the hyperdrive malfunction but you can get the desired effect with wonky mana or a similar arcane occurrence.
I deliberately, long ago, chose not to have my world operate that way. My world is deliberately more enlightened. Most farmers own their own land. The merchant class is very large and there is quite a bit more social mobility than it seems you would expect. The average hard-working humanoid in my world has a decent chance to have a comfortable, if not extravagant,life.I just like it better that way. I prefer to tell my stories in that sort of world. I don't really care if it matches European history, because historical accuracy is not any sort of goal for my games. I figure that my world evolved its own way, and the presence of magic alone generally provides a significant productivity boost to the world, meaning there is more wealth to go around.
To bring Tolkien into it (with my apologies) for a moment, you only have to look at Hobbit society to see this in a fantasy world (even without the benefit of any magic behind them.) They all seem to be able to live very comfortably doing relatively little in the way of actual work ;) Even those running and working on farms seem to be able to sit down in the evening for a nice meal and a chat (followed by another nice meal, no doubt) in a well-furnished hole without any real threat of economic struggle. So yep, a "comfortable" society can easily happen in a fantasy world and doesn't have to parallel our own history.
It seems that your magic is different from my magic. If x, y, and z produce a specific magical item, I see no reason that it cannot be mass produced. Sure some steps are more technical or advanced than others, but that does not mean that all steps are equally difficult.
There is a reason that all of the long swords have the same stats. They are built using the same template. Two longswords +1 really can be identical. I see no reason that they cannot be effectively mass produced. Surely less wondrous, but I see magic as equal to technology. And for some reason I like it better that way. You get the high tech with easier technobabble. I like sci fi and futuristic settings the most, but I find that doing high magic fantasy has similar results and in some ways it is better. You do not need to have the hyperdrive malfunction but you can get the desired effect with wonky mana or a similar arcane occurrence.
i agree with this
the real issue with magic being wondrous, is that it is generally a crutch used by writers to make their wizard protagonist stand out in a mary-sueish kind of way, or if the wizard isn't the protagonist, they are likely the DMPC and Walking Deus Ex Machina.
the whole role of Wizards in Fantasy works where magic is rare and wondrous is built to serve two purposes. the first is either to create a powerful and unique protagonist or to create a powerful and unique ally for the protagonist, the second is to create challenging foes of great power whom require a grand struggle
as an Example, look at the following summary of the Inheritance Cycle by Christopher Paoloni
a common farmboy and trapper, finds a living intelligent magical battery, he raises this live arcane power source as a dependant pet, through the battery's infusion of power, he becomes a freaking sorcerer via template gestalt, he gains another template in the third book, he literally devastates armies with his newfound magic and restarts a long lost order of sorcerers by producing more of these magical batteries, he overthrows an evil overlord by literally going nova with a mountain of magical devices, and by having a better magical sword
One question, well several really. If "the system" is what some of you people say it is (economics extrapolated from profession rolls, ubiquitous magic items, middle class peasants)... why doesn't Golarion reflect that? Do the designers not understand their system? Is Golarion, not so obviously, just like that? Or are you extrapolating too much from some game rules / simplifications that are not intended to be robust enough to create an entire economy / society from? I understand the intellectual draw of the exercise, but it tends to take the game to ends that are unintended. At best. My 2 cp.
One question, well several really. If "the system" is what some of you people say it is (economics extrapolated from profession rolls, ubiquitous magic items, middle class peasants)... why doesn't Golarion reflect that? Do the designers not understand their system? Is Golarion, not so obviously, just like that? Or are you extrapolating too much from some game rules / simplifications that are not intended to be robust enough to create an entire economy / society from? I understand the intellectual draw of the exercise, but it tends to take the game to ends that are unintended. At best. My 2 cp.
Personally, I think the system itself can be used for pretty much any setting, as long as you don't over-analyze it. I'd much prefer individual GMs to do what they feel works best than to feel constrained by the rulebook.
Availability of magic items to the party matters a lot more than overall availability to the populace. It's easy enough to have all those discarded treasures disappear into a storyline black hole if you don't want them distributed amongst the peasantry (if, indeed, your setting even has a peasantry). It's equally easy enough to extrapolate a magic-rich setting from the same thing where lanterns of continual light hang from every post in the village.
As long as a group finds a way to keep the martials in the party equipped, it all works without any fudging of the main rules, and even that can be gotten around if the GM is happy doing a bit of work.
Quite honestly, I don't see why there's any need for any of us to push for one way or the other. To each their own, and let table (or campaign setting) variance give everyone the game they want to play.
One question, well several really. If "the system" is what some of you people say it is (economics extrapolated from profession rolls, ubiquitous magic items, middle class peasants)... why doesn't Golarion reflect that? Do the designers not understand their system? Is Golarion, not so obviously, just like that? Or are you extrapolating too much from some game rules / simplifications that are not intended to be robust enough to create an entire economy / society from? I understand the intellectual draw of the exercise, but it tends to take the game to ends that are unintended. At best. My 2 cp.Personally, I think the system itself can be used for pretty much any setting, as long as you don't over-analyze it. I'd much prefer individual GMs to do what they feel works best than to feel constrained by the rulebook.
Availability of magic items to the party matters a lot more than overall availability to the populace. It's easy enough to have all those discarded treasures disappear into a storyline black hole if you don't want them distributed amongst the peasantry (if, indeed, your setting even has a peasantry). It's equally easy enough to extrapolate a magic-rich setting from the same thing where lanterns of continual light hang from every post in the village.
As long as a group finds a way to keep the martials in the party equipped, it all works without any fudging of the main rules, and even that can be gotten around if the GM is happy doing a bit of work.
Quite honestly, I don't see why there's any need for any of us to push for one way or the other. To each their own, and let table (or campaign setting) variance give everyone the game they want to play.
I agree completely on pretty much every point. You could construct some very different settings using the rules, especially so with a bit of tinkering. The idea that the system, like some inflexible machine, will yield result "X" leaves me wondering...
One question, well several really. If "the system" is what some of you people say it is (economics extrapolated from profession rolls, ubiquitous magic items, middle class peasants)... why doesn't Golarion reflect that? Do the designers not understand their system? Is Golarion, not so obviously, just like that? Or are you extrapolating too much from some game rules / simplifications that are not intended to be robust enough to create an entire economy / society from? I understand the intellectual draw of the exercise, but it tends to take the game to ends that are unintended. At best. My 2 cp.
Generally in the places it doesn't you have external factors weighing in on the situation. That doesn't mean the average isn't observed -- only that there is variation based upon location and geopolitical factors.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's be clear on something. If you want serfs and dirt poverty you need two things:
1) A totalitarian LE government enforcing a societal caste system that does not let people rise above their station, so they can force people to stay serfs
2) You need tax and tithe rates that amount to 90%+ of a serf's income, accomplished by monopolizing key elements of society and charging the hell out of your own populace to use them.
This system is why medieval serfs were dirt poor.
This is not Pathfinder, except possibly in parts of Cheliax where slavery is legal and they treat their people like crap.
The vast majority of the Pathfinder world, and the assumed campaigns, is that free farmers and a strong merchant class vie with any nobility and will use money, power, blades and magic to prevent themselves from being stepped on by hereditary rulers. The grinding people into the dust tactic isn't going to work, and not just because of Catching Fire.
There are entire, and popular Churches, devoted to the betterment of the common man, notably Erastil and Cayden Callidean. They have very distinct martial edges.
The rise of bloodlines is not restricted to noble families, which means no monopolizing of arcane power is possible.
Women being as strong as men means even gender equality is forcibly going to be better then in our world.
Tyrants get what is coming to them. How much you want to bet that once the Worldwound problem is resolved that Iomadae's church is going to start taking a good, hard look at Cheliax? Karma is a B$$$h when it comes calling.
==Aelryinth
It seems that your magic is different from my magic. If x, y, and z produce a specific magical item, I see no reason that it cannot be mass produced. Sure some steps are more technical or advanced than others, but that does not mean that all steps are equally difficult.
There is a reason that all of the long swords have the same stats. They are built using the same template. Two longswords +1 really can be identical. I see no reason that they cannot be effectively mass produced. Surely less wondrous, but I see magic as equal to technology. And for some reason I like it better that way. You get the high tech with easier technobabble. I like sci fi and futuristic settings the most, but I find that doing high magic fantasy has similar results and in some ways it is better. You do not need to have the hyperdrive malfunction but you can get the desired effect with wonky mana or a similar arcane occurrence.
Seeley, just so people reading this thread don't get confused, I believe you are using a different definition of "mass production" than I am using when I compare and contrast "technology" with "magic".
Your definition seems to be saying that a "mass produced" item is one that has essentialy the same properties as a bunch of other identical items. Your example of two +1 swords being identical is an example of that. To me that suggests that magic is predictable and the results are standardized such that many magical items would be essentially indistinguishable from their equivalents (most +1 rings look and act the same, etc.)
My definition is not about the end result, but the process, and I am using "mass production" in the purely technical sense that items are manufactured through a process of interchangeable parts and are assembled in an assembly line process, so that the efficiency of production is greatly increased which drives the cost down and produces massively more finished items than could be produced by individuals creating them one at a time.
In that sense there is no way to "mass produce" magic items. Each magic item has to be enchanted by the same time consuming process that every other magic item is produced with, whether that is done by one lone wizard in a lonely tower on a hill, or a bunch of wizards in some sort of magic sword "factory."
The number of magic swords you can create is directly dependent on the number of magic crafters who have to do them one at a time. In technology you can automate everything, eventually removing the need for manual intervention at all, so that your mass produced swords can come off the assembly line at a rate of hundreds or thousands per hour.
I suppose if you somehow enslaved thousands of wizards and forced them to do nothing but make magic swords, you could create some sort of "mass magic production" but I have never seen anything like that in any game world I've played in, and to me that would introduce some difficulties in verisimilitude since a thousand wizards capable of making swords would be a formidable force requiring tremendous exertion of power to keep chained to their work tables, and it is likely the effort to keep them enslaved would probably not be worth the production of magic swords in the end.
Just my $.02.
I'd take that bet. Iomedae's church has had a fair amount of slack time between Incursions, and the House of Thrune is still riding pretty dammed high. Saraenrae's church has been obsessed with conquering Taldor under the Qadiran flag, and look where that's got them.
Tyrants get what is coming to them. How much you want to bet that once the Worldwound problem is resolved that Iomadae's church is going to start taking a good, hard look at Cheliax? Karma is a B$$$h when it comes calling.==Aelryinth
Actually, Qadira's been obsessed with conquering Taldor under the Saranraen flag, and look where that has gotten them. Saranrae is not a deity of conquest.
And you do know that the Taldan throne is now descended from a family with blood obligations to Asmodeus, and technically is not of the lineage to inherit? Heh. Asmodeus has his little king-pawns everywhere.
==Aelryinth
The towns that I have seen in Golarion remind me more of the 19th century. There are definitely some places that the government is more harsh/demanding, but when I read through the Inner Sea World Guide those seemed to be the exception and not the rule.