| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate that PCs will no longer be expected to pay for pricey magic items with 200 lbs of coins.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty sure they're sticking with silver being worth more. But from the reveals we've seen, I think the default listing might be gold. So instead of something being listed as 20 SP it'll be 2 GP. I think it's a good idea to unify how prices are listed. The way SP was the default unit for all mundane gear but magic items were all listed with GP in the playtest did create a bit of a disconnect. I can understand wanting to differentiate the standard economy and magical economy, but having to do a mental conversion every time comparing the two was more trouble than it's worth. Even though the conversion was simply a multiple of 10.
But yeah, the 50 coins to the pound rule from PF1 did make for absurdity. Some of the really high end magic items cost over 100,000 GP, a literal ton of gold. Not only did the value of coins increase, but the weight decreased too. In the playtest it was 1000 coins per 1 bulk (which is very roughly 10 pounds). Now 100,000 SP weighs 'only' half a ton, but is also roughly 10 times more valuable. So the value to weight ratio has increased by, roughly, a factor of 20. And that's just going with the same coins, 100,000 SP can be paid with 10,000 GP or 1,000 PP (100 and 10 pounds respectively). In PF1 you only had one step higher than the standard coin instead of two. 50 to the pound also means each coin was about 9 grams each. That's pretty heavy by modern standards. A US Quarter is only 5.67 grams, while the big Kenedy half-dollars are 11.34 g. And by historical standards, that's absurdly heavy. The archetypal silver piece was the Roman Denarius which started at 4.55 grams and decreased over time. 4.55 grams to the coin lines up almost exactly with 1000 coins to 10 pounds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I understand it the standard in the playtest was mundane gear had prices listed in SP, while magic anything had a price listed in GP.
Like a really nice tent is 400 SP whereas an oil of mending is 5 GP.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wanna see something glorious :D!!!
https://i.imgur.com/WgM7A0U.jpg
Look at those wealth by level numbers
(in explanation the total includes the value of the items not just liquid gold)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I gotta say, i hated the silver economy thing from the playtest. It was a primal, irrational hate.
-Skeld
I am sure there is someone in your party who would be happy to take your coin ;)
I gotta say, i hated the silver economy thing from the playtest. It was a primal, irrational hate.
-Skeld
I don't think I hate it quite that much but I'm a fan of it either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
deflation ftw? Thankfully, I kept a hoard of gold buried out in the backyard.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Very much a fan of it. D&D and PF economies aren't functional on a gold standard- either crap-covered peasants are pushing around piles of gold or they can't afford basic necessities they need to live from week to week. Pots are almost a gold piece, barrels and shovels are multiple gp. Its seriously crazy town.
Moving to silver makes the 'normal' economy more functional while keeping luxuries that adventurers want or would like at sane values.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is a bit jarring to have the value of coins suddenly change. Frankly, I think it's better just to retcon it instead of try to make some in-world explanation of how money has changed due to some event, even those centuries old coins you find in a hoard. You're not going to get a satisfactory answer for the whole world changing it's currency overnight. Just say it's always been like this. Money is an abstraction anyway. But it does make things a bit more rational, and portable. Did anyone actually track the weight of their coins?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is a bit jarring to have the value of coins suddenly change.
This is it for me but more than a bit. It seems like like something done JUST to reduce the size of numbers people use: that's cool for new people but seems off for someone coming over from PF1.
That said, this is pretty low on my 'things that bug me' as for as PF2 goes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is a bit jarring to have the value of coins suddenly change.This is it for me but more than a bit. It seems like like something done JUST to reduce the size of numbers people use: that's cool for new people but seems off for someone coming over from PF1.
That said, this is pretty low on my 'things that bug me' as for as PF2 goes.
There is that. But I see it as correcting something that has been problematic for a while. High level PCs dealing with literal tons of gold was always problematic.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is a bit jarring to have the value of coins suddenly change.This is it for me but more than a bit. It seems like like something done JUST to reduce the size of numbers people use: that's cool for new people but seems off for someone coming over from PF1.
That said, this is pretty low on my 'things that bug me' as for as PF2 goes.
I don't think it was meant so much as a way of simplifying math as it was a way of making the world make sense a little more. I guess they could have raised the price of mundane things and the pay-off of crafting and professions and such, but then copper pieces would have been worthless to absolutely everyone.
When you think about it for two seconds, Pathfinder's economy is just weird. We had adventures where homeless, starving children gave the players jewelry worth multiple gold pieces, which could have given them all they needed for what, a year? Regular guards were also walking around with magic weapons worth more than their salary for years to come, possibly even a life-time. Magic item shops were often seemingly worth more than what the whole village owned. Even a second level adventurer was filthy rich by the standards of living for other characters. The only way we got through some role-play moments in my group was through just turning a blind eye to the financial discrepancies.
This new silver based system makes it so it makes a little more sense that lots of people (but not everyone) would be able to get low-level magic items, but adventurers will still become very rich and have impressive items eventually, as they face great dangers and explore forgotten areas.
Edit: I had somehow skipped some of the replies, but yeah, there is also the matter of weight. Carrying enough gold pieces (or even platinum) to buy some of the magic items would be absurd with PF1 costs. It may not be perfect in PF2, but it's at least a little closer to something that makes sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that making the mundane economy work on silver just makes sense, not from the PCs perspective, but for people whose entire existence lies within mundanity. Since if you're a turnip farmer, or a farrier, or a tinsmith, or a bar maid, or baker, etc. you're not going to be involved in a lot of transactions in which gold is involved.
PCs, having just been laborers, or farmhands, or merchants just don't have gold on hand from before they hit level 1.
There are ways of getting around the gold piece (or siler piece) weight issue.
- letters of credit from the Church of Abadar
- gems which have a fixed GP value
This said, most players don't bother taking into account the weight of even mundane items they are carrying, let alone the weight of their vast fortunes. It's more a book-keeping issue than anything else.
Very often, my character would take his share of treasure in whatever items were in the loot haul (gems, jewelry, ivory statuettes, etc) while most of the other players in my group would just note the total GP value.
I don't expect this situation will change appreciably with PF2.
I don't think it was meant so much as a way of simplifying math as it was a way of making the world make sense a little more.
Between bulk, how experience is kept and several other things, it seems very clear to me they've made a concerted effort to keep numbers as low as possible: now with sp as the standard, people see less zeros at the end of those magic item prices. IMO, it seems like a logical progression to me.
As to making more sense? Not to me: very little about pathfinder economy actually makes sense it you rummage around under the hood for too long. JUST the fact that a silver piece is typically accepted by any merchant or kingdom no matter where it was minted makes little sense. Why would someone in the Minata Archipelago take an Irrisen sp without blinking an eye? It's of course for easy of play and not because it makes a lick of sense.
PCs, having just been laborers, or farmhands, or merchants just don't have gold on hand from before they hit level 1.
They have 15 gold as soon as they become 1st: how did they miraculously get that much if they were moments ago scrapping coppers together? Seems like they've manages to collect 1 and a half PLATINUM pieces, something "used by nobles to demonstrate their wealth". Just how do they go from '"just don't have any on hand" to 15 in that instant between 0 level and 1st?
Now if you're talking that they just don't use it in transactions I'd disagree too. A normal crossbow is 3 gp and 10 bolts are 1. That farmer buys a long tool it's 1 gp and 2 sp. Cookware is a gp. And pack animals are 20 gp and horses 80 gp. So there are plenty of things to buy for that that are gp+: As to why they'd have gp instead of sp, the same reason we carry bills instead of change. It's easier to carry, store and hide 10 gp than 100 sp. You want to hide a gp in your shoe or 100 cp? Or if you're buying a horse, do you want to carry and count out 6 gp or 60 sp?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
'Convenience' isn't a focus in early economies- you might as well be arguing why they don't move to a paper economy with that logic. 'That farmer' isn't going to have gold coins. He's going to be supplement the trade of some his goods with what few coins he has to make up the difference.
Major horse traders dealing with merchant consortiums and nobles? Yeah, they're going to deal with gold. Farmer Joe looking for a passable horse to pull his plow because a goblin dog ate his old one? Isn't.
As for PC starting money- it's abstracted. It's what they can beg, borrow, steal or have handed down to them when they come of age, not a sudden pile of cash at a narratively convenient time. They aren't popping fully formed into the world, but it's what they've accumulated in life so far.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Carrying enough gold pieces (or even platinum) to buy some of the magic items would be absurd with PF1 costs.
If you've got the 400lbs of platinum coins for a Mirror of Life Trapping, you can probably afford the Bag of Holding to carry them in.
In 5e, a single mundane meal is around 5 sp and subsistence costs are measured in gold pieces. Clearly, gold in these magical medieval societies isn’t as rare as we think it is (kind of reminds me of that 1,001 Ways to Die in the West scene where all the farmers are astonished to see a man with a real life dollar bill). In my campaign, even the poorest turnip farmer averages a gold a day in wages, so 300 to 400 gp a year. And most everyone else makes far more than that. So a guard’s equipment, even for a well equipped one, is *not* far more than he sees in salary for a year, let alone a lifetime.
The all in cost to be a simple farmer is 100s of gold once you account for animals, tools, equipment, feed, etc. They must be familiar with gold pieces. Of course, in PF 2 the standard has dropped a tier, so silver becomes the equivalent of the old gold and gold pieces are now more like platinum, which is something that an average peasant very rarely (but not never) interacts with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The relative, actual weight of coinage never bothered me. Coins in bulk are heavy, and....bulky.
That the financial system made no sense never bothered me. Real world capitalism and credit systems make no sense either...
I was never wed to the prices, so that it has changed doesn’t bother me. It’s a reset. Of a fantasy world. My characters aren’t real, and adjust in an instant, retroactively.
But there is something somehow relaxing about handing over silver coins generally, and perhaps a gold coin here or there. Maybe because here in Oz we use $1 and $2 coins that are “gold”...We even call them gold “Gold coin donation” etc...
Carrying enough gold pieces (or even platinum) to buy some of the magic items would be absurd with PF1 costs.If you've got the 400lbs of platinum coins for a Mirror of Life Trapping, you can probably afford the Bag of Holding to carry them in.
Oh, I'm well aware of that. My main point was the first part of my reply. Still, are you supposed to leave the bag of holding to the merchant on every large transaction, or do you just dump 400 pounds of coins on their countertop? I'll admit, I've never played at such high levels that this would happen (I've played at most level 10). Maybe giving away bags of holding makes sense once you have that much gold. I've only dealt with the discrepancies when dealing with commoners. The rest is mostly me thinking about things with friends, extrapolating and joking around as we picture the scenes.
I'll also add that I am by no means saying second edition economy is suddenly perfect. Just that it reduces some (but not all) of the weird discrepancies in first edition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd tip my bag of holding into his bag of holding. Though dumping 18 pints of platinum onto a countertop sounds fun too.
But this isn't a normal transaction; I don't suppose many people in our world would buy a $20 million dollar passenger jet with sackfuls of cash.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even if you assume that the 1 gp income is before expenses are taken out for lifestyle rather than discretionary/savings (which is a reasonable assumption), in world the intake/outflow is not on a literal day to day basis, but monthly.
The peasant takes his trade to the village market day each week and sells it for 5 to 10 gold, depending on how well he does that week (and this is born out by the mundane equipment prices in the PHB). He might immediately spend some of his gold at the village market, but at the end of some months, he might alternatively take the 30 or so gold he earned that month to spend at a larger city.
And when the bandits jump him, it helps explain how they are able to outfit another of their band (or distribute the gold amongst their members for the PCs to loot later). A DM might only place silver pieces in the pouches of NPCs the players encounter, but I find that less realistic. Otherwise, how are the bandits affording their bow, arrows, armor, and sword, which together can approach 100 gp in value depending on whether they favor longbows and which type of armor they wear.
I find it best to use the following analogue to our own economy: a copper piece is equivalent to $1, a silver piece is $10, and a gold piece is $100. So, worthwhile and desirable, but not something an average person wouldn’t encounter, even those living paycheck to paycheck so to speak. It also helps that I assume a lower level of wealth disparity in my campaign than the real world, and that your average farmer has a relatively acceptable lifestyle and standard of living and wouldn’t even necessarily consider himself in “poverty.” My NPCs are generally happy, well-fed, and due to magical curtailment of potential epidemics/pandemics or other widespread problems of the real Middle Ages, fairly healthy (that is when not being attacked by goblins or dragons, for which a great deal of villager wealth goes to “wandering security experts”).
I find it best to use the following analogue to our own economy: a copper piece is equivalent to $1, a silver piece is $10, and a gold piece is $100.
That's the standard I used for PF1. Mundane items like candles mostly made sense using a $1 = 1cp exchange rate.
It only stops making sense when peasants try to give adventurers level-appropriate quest rewards ("Please find my missing pig! I'll give you this magic sword that is worth a hundred pigs!"), or when people get addicted to drugs that they can't possibly afford.
Does PF2 have ten-dollar copper pieces? That makes the mundane economy less sensible. "How much for a pint of beer?" "Ten dollars." "How about half a pint?" "Ten dollars."
It also helps that I assume a lower level of wealth disparity in my campaign than the real world
In PF1 you can supposedly hire unskilled workers for 1sp per day. That's pretty bad wealth disparity compared to anyone with a Profession skill.
The relative, actual weight of coinage never bothered me. Coins in bulk are heavy, and....bulky.
It should, though as its one of the easiest things to fact check. Grab a pile of change, count how many you've got and how much it weighs. Now compare it to PF/D and D numbers. They don't really align at all.
The economy is more complicated because most people (who play these games) simply don't have a frame of reference for anything but a modern industrialized economy, which doesn't really resemble an early 20th century economy, let alone something predating that.
1 gp to $100 really doesn't match up with any sort of economic history (nor does a better standard of living in preindustrial societies).
That's honestly $200 shovels and backpacks, and $80 for a clay pot. That's even less functional than the default assumptions of PF1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd tip my bag of holding into his bag of holding. Though dumping 18 pints of platinum onto a countertop sounds fun too.
But this isn't a normal transaction; I don't suppose many people in our world would buy a $20 million dollar passenger jet with sackfuls of cash.
Well, we have a much more robust banking and electronic payment system than Golarion does. I suppose it isn't impossible that in certain cities you could deposit your gold with a bank and use the equivalent of checks or money transfers at least within that city, though. But I'd guess that for any campaign that has you hopping between unaligned settlements (Like, say, the upcoming Age of Ashes) you've got to be handing over copious amounts of cash at some point. Now some of that could be getting your coins turned into platinum bars, but you still have the weight of platinum at that point.
So, $100 per day in expenses is $36,500 a year, which is about twice what is affordable on minimum wage (a category only 2% of Americans fall in apparently). However, hard for me to speak to as my kid’s daycare and tuition is almost that much on its own and my annual mortgage, utilities, and non-discretionary exceeds that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1 gp to $100 really doesn't match up with any sort of economic history (nor does a better standard of living in preindustrial societies).
That's honestly $200 shovels and backpacks, and $80 for a clay pot. That's even less functional than the default assumptions of PF1.
My campaign doesn’t assume a historical standard. It assumes not only that magic is relatively prevalent (and has a “trickle down effect” to those not fortunate enough to have their own magic, but also that people in general are smarter, hardier, and more efficient workers (which they’d have to be in a world in which zombies and monsters are real). So, not medieval Europe, but more like storybook and fairytale context (the hobbits in LotR, for example, are pretty much at the bottom of my scale, and they don’t look like they are in poverty, in general).
My campaign doesn’t assume a historical standard. ).1 gp to $100 really doesn't match up with any sort of economic history (nor does a better standard of living in preindustrial societies).
That's honestly $200 shovels and backpacks, and $80 for a clay pot. That's even less functional than the default assumptions of PF1.
I can't speak to your campaign, beyond pointing out example consequences like the $200 shovels.
But the general assumptions of the game do assume (or imply) a vaguely historical standard (or at least an attempt at them), so that seems more relevant.
My campaign doesn’t assume a historical standard. ).1 gp to $100 really doesn't match up with any sort of economic history (nor does a better standard of living in preindustrial societies).
That's honestly $200 shovels and backpacks, and $80 for a clay pot. That's even less functional than the default assumptions of PF1.
I can't speak to your campaign, beyond pointing out example consequences like the $200 shovels.
But the general assumptions of the game do assume (or imply) a vaguely historical standard (or at least an attempt at them), so that seems more relevant.
I mean, does it? Apparently not, IMO.
I found one very good article (I think it was Ashiel's blog) about disregarding the "silver piece a day" economy, and actually using the Profession or Craft rules as basis of economy. That said, silvers as basis serve to reduce the ridiculous amount of coins that character usually had to carry. The bad thing about that is that it means it's even more unlikely that dragons are sleeping on piles of coins :D Frankly I would divest the gold from magic item economy and use coins as basis for kingdom building subsystems rather than personal power through items.
Eh. The PF stuff I've read has slaves, peasants/commoners excited by silver, the threat of failed harvests and disease and rich folks essentially immune to the everyday cares of money.
For example, all those issues pop up in Liane Merciel's writing and she's all over the new world guide, so I'd go with the idea that yeah, it was relevant in PF1 and will remain so in PF2
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They have 15 gold as soon as they become 1st: how did they miraculously get that much if they were moments ago scrapping coppers together?
I prefer to think of it as "they have 150 silver" which is the sum total of what they have been able to save up in their pre-adventuring life. It's something like half a years wages saved up, or one big score.
It makes the most sense to think of starting wealth in SP, since if you're buying like a 1 cp bedroll and a 1 sp backpack, the vendor might not be able to break a PP.
I found one very good article (I think it was Ashiel's blog) about disregarding the "silver piece a day" economy, and actually using the Profession or Craft rules as basis of economy. That said, silvers as basis serve to reduce the ridiculous amount of coins that character usually had to carry. The bad thing about that is that it means it's even more unlikely that dragons are sleeping on piles of coins :D Frankly I would divest the gold from magic item economy and use coins as basis for kingdom building subsystems rather than personal power through items.
There might be something interesting you could do with some sort of raw magical material instead-- something that could be used not only as a currency for purchasing items but also the material used to craft them. But... I dunno how you'd explain that having no intersection with the gold economy. Like, eventually a wizard is going to need to buy a house or whatever, or an island, and I don't see why you couldn't spend gold to get the raw materials a some conversion rate or another.
The alternative is doing away with magical item shops entirely, I guess. But to maintain the level of "let players pick their items" that Pathfinder is based around, you'd basically make crafting mandatory.
so is there a 1/10th coper piece the bit or something?
One really shouldn't look too closely at the economics of banditry in D&D (or Pathfinder).The economics seem pretty simple to me. Bandits intend to ambush level 0 or 1 NPCs who aren't subject to WBL guidelines and pose minimal threat. Attacking a party of adventurers that are tougher than that is just a fatal mistake.
banditry through pure combat strength is economically and strategically infeasible