I was wondering if there was much discussion on the value of items / gold pieces in the Pathfinder world
I have seen mention in parts of 1 gp being similar to $100
However I feel like this falls down when you consider a level 1 character with 1 rank in profession and no attribute bonus can take a 10 and earn that in a day.
Now sadly even in the modern world that cannot be said for the majority of people, let alone a medieval style setting.
So this suggests a GP is overvalued at $100
My main prompt for this was actually from an adventure path which included the following:
- 1 dose of a common street drug - 25gp : So almost a months work or potentially 2,500 for one dose!
- 15 minutes with a prostitute in a vice den meant for the lower ends of society - 5gp : 5 days work for the average person!
I don't think this really all stacks up.
I know proper functioning economies aren't what the game is for or indeed what most people are interested in. But it arguably kills immersion in a setting (especially and urban one) if you struggle to see how any of the populace can pay for anything on sale...
Am I the only one who has got unreasonable bothered by this?
Am I the only one who has got unreasonable bothered by this?
No three of the most common unresolved questions in Pathfinder are "why doesn't magic follow the laws of physics?" and "Why doesn't the economy follow the economy I live in?" and "Why don't weapons follow the laws of physics?"
Trying to conform Pathfinder economics to any known economic system has never been possible.
If you are the GM, you can adjust pricing, availability (or scarcity) of goods, and daily profit for your merchants any way you like.
Otherwise, it's a good idea to shrug your shoulders and say, "Huh, so *that's* how it works." without trying to construct a rational system that makes sense to you. Same advice goes for how magic works. And for how weapons work
I'm bothered by it so I do my best not to think about it. Trying to create a marginally coherent economic system would likely require a significant rework of the game mechanics with regards to WBL and wealth/items being a significant aspect of PC power. I think the verisimilitude could be helped to some small degree by moving away from copper, silver, gold and platinum as currency to a more symbolic system. The values would still be messed up though.
Am I the only one who has got unreasonable bothered by this?No three of the most common unresolved questions in Pathfinder are "why doesn't magic follow the laws of physics?" and "Why doesn't the economy follow the economy I live in?" and "Why don't weapons follow the laws of physics?"
Trying to conform Pathfinder economics to any known economic system has never been possible.
If you are the GM, you can adjust pricing, availability (or scarcity) of goods, and daily profit for your merchants any way you like.
Otherwise, it's a good idea to shrug your shoulders and say, "Huh, so *that's* how it works." without trying to construct a rational system that makes sense to you. Same advice goes for how magic works. And for how weapons work
Interesting about the 3 most common unresolved questions. For 1 I tend to give a hard pass on magic with the "it's magic" explanation. Seemingly several don't go for that
>Forgive me but what is the weapons and physics issue? Not something I have ever thought about but I do not have a lot of in depth physics knowledge or exposure to real weapons.
The obvious follow up is about why the economy then bothers me. It is about immersion. You accept certain things when entering a fantasy world of any kind (such as the existence of magic).
I find aspects such as no explanation as to how things are supported by the system a bit of a problem - if you go there.
The Tolkein route ignores it completely which I am fine with as well.
But when you start mentioning that someone sells drugs to loads of addicts at a months wages per hit it jumps out at me. Because even the "they resort to crime" doesn't work because no one else will be carrying around the necessary gold
Anyway I am rambling. I will follow the pointers and just adjust the numbers somewhat. It probably doesn't really bother my group that much - just me
I have seen mention in parts of 1 gp being similar to $100
However I feel like this falls down when you consider a level 1 character with 1 rank in profession and no attribute bonus can take a 10 and earn that in a day.
Now sadly even in the modern world that cannot be said for the majority of people, let alone a medieval style setting.
Someone who earned $100 a day and who worked 365 days a year would make $36,500 a year.
Someone who worked 250 days a year would make $25,000 a year.This doesn't seem high for a professional in our own society.
In terms of "what can you earn from a day of work?", 1gp / $100 is a reasonable metric to judge things by. The 'unskilled labor rate' of 1sp / $10 a day represents the buying power of the poor, who are in a similar position to cheap outsourced workers on Earth.
But in those terms, certain things are shown to cost an unrealistic amount. I chalk it up to those being the inflated prices adventurers have to pay.
I like to think the majority of trade that takes place between commoners is based on a barter economy where no money changes hands and the gp values of items are ignored. My GM tends to ignore official gp values, instead it's based on the value the item has to the npc. For example I payed a few GP for an elixir of fire breath (in the form throat lozenges) because the seller had no idea they were magical. Furthermore it doesn't matter how much an item is theoretically worth, it only matter what people can afford to pay e.g. an item can be listed as 10000gp but most anyone has is 1000gp then 1000gp is what you'll get.
Chivalry and Sorcery handled Fantasy European economy well.
Their Land of the Rising Sun, by Lee Gold handled Fantaisy Naipon economy very well.
Most DnD gamers hated it by the way. Horses, Armor, Knightly Weapons and the like were often prohibitively expensive. Money was just as unfairly distributed as it was in real life.
The Paizo/DnD model economy is unrealistic, but it does support the standard, don't-look-too-close playstyles that most tables play by. As noted above it is the same for pretty much every other aspect of the game. If you like the very egalitarian approach to resource availability the game has, you really just need to accept that things don't always make sense.
You can more easily get a less jarring effect by just going Silver Standard, basically treat silver as gold, copper as silver, etc. Some players and tables won't like the feel of giving up the huge piles of treasure though, even though resource-wise there is no difference at all. Gold by the tens does not feel as cool as gold by the hundreds, even if the gold is more valuable.
I just make mundane stuff cheaper *shurg*
I like to think the majority of trade that takes place between commoners is based on a barter economy where no money changes hands.
Well, that's certainly reasonable for a more realistic model of a medieval economy, but it doesn't really work well for Golarion. Golarion is "obviously" a much more cash-based and trade-centered economy, which means that everyone needs and expects portable stores of value.
I think that's part of the problem, actually. There are at least three competing economic models at play, and they don't all work well together. Gygax was pretty explicit in the early editions that he was modeling a "gold rush economy" where prices for adventuring gear (which was more or less all that had listed prices in the rulebooks) were incredibly inflated to take advantage of the adventurers with gold burning holes in their pockets. In an actual medieval economy, a few pounds of gold was literally a king's ransom -- gold coins literally didn't exist, and an English shilling (12d) was enough for a month, except that you couldn't typically pay for long-term subsistence with money, because it was a feudal economy and you either grew your own food, your patron provided it, or your peasants grew it for you.
And then, if you look at most of Golarion, it's pretty obviously a post-feudal society, where free humanoids, even in tiny hamlets, engage in cash-based trade with other settlements and use money as the basis of the economy.
It's not surprising that the jigsaw pieces from three different puzzles don't really fit together into one unified whole.