How are people feeling about the new "money" system?


Rules Discussion

51 to 100 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I don’t think it really matters in the long run. It’s jarring now, but I doubt I’ll think about it in six months.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Fun math: Once adventuring starts bringing in more than 36 gp per hour, it is no longer worth it to pick up copper pieces, assuming it takes 1 second to pick up 1 cp.

Of course, what you want to waste your free time doing is up to you. You're not making money at that rate (1 cp per second/288 gp per 8 hours) with downtime without a critical success at a level 20 task with a legendary skill.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gwaihir Scout wrote:
Once adventuring starts bringing in more than 36 gp per hour, it is no longer worth it to pick up copper pieces, assuming it takes 1 second to pick up 1 cp.

In terms of average pay per hour, adventuring probably pays better than picking up copper coins in the street.

But you should take into account the chances of adventuring getting you killed. If there's a 1% chance per day of death, then on average it will take 100 days of adventuring to kill you.

If adventuring kills you, then you might lose fifty years of life. (More if you're an elf.) That's a bad average ratio of time lost to financial gain, though the rate picks up again when resurrection becomes available...

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

We woke up one day in France and 1 New Franc was worth 100 Old Francs.

Going gold to silver is easy-peasy compared to that.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the deflation, but yeah I can see sad dragons complaining that they can't sleep in their riches anymore hahahhaa.


Btw I would like to point out, that it's very reasonable to have millions of each currency and not run out of the name sake material. Ex: Pennies which are "copper" coins are 97.5% Zinc.

In a world with magic, I could easily see mints using magic/alchemy to create thinly gold covered metal coins.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Takamorisan wrote:
I like the deflation, but yeah I can see sad dragons complaining that they can't sleep in their riches anymore hahahhaa.

Not really, just makes obtaining a Dragon's Hoard that much more impactful of an event. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
But you should take into account the chances of adventuring getting you killed. If there's a 1% chance per day of death, then on average it will take 100 days of adventuring to kill you.

Pfft. Only other (stupid and less handsome) adventurers get killed. I'll be fine.

Math Aside:
At that rate 100 days of adventuring has a 63.4% chance of killing you. 99% chance of surviving to the hundredth power is 36.6%. You hit a 50% chance of death on the 69th day, and it takes 459 days to have a less than 1% chance of survival.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I'm strongly reminded of the first book of Spice and Wolf, where there was a scheme based around rumors of changing value in a country's currency, and people buying up a lot of the coins to get favors out of the king. Could be a good intrigue plot in this game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, the dragon hoard breaks my verisimilitude. Publish an adventure where a dragon guards a single half of a tally stick with a handful of thick cut notches, you cowards.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Fyre wrote:

I do not like the way that money has been changed in the game.

Two reasons:
* - It is an obstical to converting older material.
* - "Grognard-ism" Long time players may not react well to fighting an epic battle to win the princely sum of 150 silver.

How are others feeling?

i have always hated the gold standard of most games so i love the new standard


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Talking about realism: Sure it seems to be a bit more towards that, but Paizo missed to change a central point - the income of unskilled and skilled workers. An unskilled hireling still earns 1 sp a day. So ten days of (unskilled!) work is worth a longsword, two months a chain mail. I know the worker couldn't buy these because of his costs, but that's not the point. A skilled one earns still 15 gp a month. After a year of comfortable living (minus 4 gp) he's a rich man.

Viewed from the base point of income the new money system is broken.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Hireling is not an average citizen, they're someone hired by an Adventurer.

The baker who works at his bakery everyday is not a Hireling.


Rysky wrote:

Hireling is not an average citizen, they're someone hired by an Adventurer.

The baker who works at his bakery everyday is not a Hireling.

Untrained hirelings in 1e:

"Examples of untrained hirelings include a town crier, general laborer, maid, mourner, porter, or other menial worker."

Trained:

"The amount shown is the typical daily wage for mercenary warriors, masons, craftsmen, cooks, scribes, teamsters, and other trained hirelings."

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Hireling is not an average citizen, they're someone hired by an Adventurer.

The baker who works at his bakery everyday is not a Hireling.

Untrained hirelings in 1e:

Well there's your issue.

Hirelings in 2e:

Hirelings wrote:
Paid laborers can provide services for you. Unskilled hirelings can perform simple manual labor and are untrained at most skills. Skilled hirelings have expert proficiency in a particular skill. Hirelings are level 0. If a skill check is needed, an untrained hireling has a +0 modifier, while a skilled hireling has a +4 modifier in their area of expertise and +0 for other skill checks. Hirelings’ rates double if they’re going adventuring with you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There are two separate issues in this thread.

In terms of the conversion of gold to silver I think that's pretty cool.

In terms of the way item prices are scaled, I feel like consumables are really ovepriced. If I'm ranger who wants to use snares, I can buy the ranger's kit and have money left over to craft one snare, which is a single use consumable.

If I want to buy more snares, I could... use the Earn an Income skill for two weeks to get one more.

Snares are just an example, since consumable prices are standardized across item level.

The prices seems disproportionate when compared with permanent gear. By comparison, the only common weapon more expensive than a level 1 consumable is the bastard sword. Forgoing a potency rune on your weapon is worth five level 2 consumables or about 3 level 3 consumables.

Obviously it's hard to really compare these things directly but I just can't see myself using them very often unless I get them for free from a class feature.


Squiggit wrote:

There are two separate issues in this thread.

In terms of the conversion of gold to silver I think that's pretty cool.

In terms of the way item prices are scaled, I feel like consumables are really ovepriced. If I'm ranger who wants to use snares, I can buy the ranger's kit and have money left over to craft one snare, which is a single use consumable.

If I want to buy more snares, I could... use the Earn an Income skill for two weeks to get one more.

Snares are just an example, since consumable prices are standardized across item level.

The prices seems disproportionate when compared with permanent gear. By comparison, the only common weapon more expensive than a level 1 consumable is the bastard sword. Forgoing a potency rune on your weapon is worth five level 2 consumables or about 3 level 3 consumables.

Obviously it's hard to really compare these things directly but I just can't see myself using them very often unless I get them for free from a class feature.

My only issue with snares is "you cannot pick them up without destroying them or salvage them"

Wut... If I made it, I set it... I should at LEAST have a shot at retrieving it if it was never triggered.

But, they are decent power objects and I am sure I can come up with an elegant solution for my own game.


magnuskn wrote:
The Rot Grub wrote:

Strange... older people often complain about inflation:

"Back in my day, a quarter got you into the movies AND got you a bag of popcorn! You had to WORK for a dollar!"

But now it's reversed:

"Back in my day, treasure hoards were GRANDER! You killed goblins and got GOLD for your troubles! You got REWARDED for your hard work!"

Heh.

Yeah, well. The dragon sleeping on a bed of gold and gems is kinda iconic. I guess dragons also now suddenly went through the sudden deflation which has gripped Golarion. :p

Yes it was iconic, and that was a problem for D&D 3.0/3.5 and PF1. 'Dragon hoards' became the size of a book shipping box or two. You can actually have dragons with a cavern floor piled with meaningful currency now.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Dracorage wrote:

Talking about realism: Sure it seems to be a bit more towards that, but Paizo missed to change a central point - the income of unskilled and skilled workers. An unskilled hireling still earns 1 sp a day. So ten days of (unskilled!) work is worth a longsword, two months a chain mail. I know the worker couldn't buy these because of his costs, but that's not the point. A skilled one earns still 15 gp a month. After a year of comfortable living (minus 4 gp) he's a rich man.

Viewed from the base point of income the new money system is broken.

Typical 1st level worker gets 2sp per day of successful work, per p236.

If we assume working 6 of 7 days a week, with four weeks per month, that would be about 48sp income a month, leaving them with a net income for the month of 8sp.

But it says a hireling cost 5sp per day. That can be explained by one of a couple explanations...

The adventurer will typically only accept above average workers, or the adventurers may exhibit an aura or danger that the weaker workers will not approach, or they will expect more pay. Additionally, some of the pay might be going directly to a guild, not to their pocket. Alternately some of it may be going to other work related expenses, as opposed to living expenses, such as tools, tool maintenance, and other items tied to amount of time worked, not time lived.

Lets be honest however, any spare money left-over is probably going to paying to feed their children (and potentially elders) until their children can start working at an untrained level to help cut back their cost.

-----

I'll admit, in an established setting, such as Golarion, I was kind of surprised they made the change. Especially since they said no bit in universe shifts.

On the other hand, I've long since preferred switching any of my home games over to a silver standard, so from a rules preference standpoint I personally love it, since any campaign setting I would make myself would almost undoubtedly implement it anyway.

-----

Biggest weak-point in my view of the new system is the 4 day base time to make any items. It creates a situation where it is more economically expedient for someone who can make something themselves (even if it is their expertise) to work for someone else making things they want for cash and then go buy the item they wanted to make from someone else. It seems to me that the four days and 50% starting materials base, that the four initial days should count granting of cost discount towards paying off the remainder of the full price. So if a 6th level crafter can produce 2gp of discount per day on an item. If they were crafting something that cost 20gp, then investing 50% starting materials, and 4 days of crafting they should be at 18gp progress in, and should only take one more day before they would be. For that matter, if they were trying to make something that cost 4gp to make, I think they should be able to pay the 50% materials, and be completed in one day.

Otherwise, I love that the amount of income is much more regularized now as opposed to in first edition where certain types of crafting, such as magic created situations where people felt they should be able to be selling their crafted items for full price and making money hands over fists for them. Or the crafter in the part was expected to donate all their downtime to crafting items for the other party members at cost.

I think that the above loss of income each new project created an issue for lower level craftmen being able to sustain a viable living with any projects or variety due to the mechanic as originally written. One can always rule NPCs don't use these rules, but I like to keep rules as similar as they can, when there isn't a real reason to need to have them being different, which in this case I think it is simpler to rule the initial time counts towards your discount and it covers most or all of the issues/disconnect.

There than that, there is only the issue that the first levels that a new rank (Trained/Expert/Master/Legendary) is available. Someone with that rank is no more productive than someone who did not invest in that skill. That seems counter intuitive to me. I saw a table produced by, I think it was Mathmuse, back during the playtest that I may want to compare against the final table here, that addressed that by simplifying the table and using some math he liked playing with.

But in general, I consider most of the directions taken by the economics in second editions as generally improvements, which I might want to tweak, don't require as much potential tweaking, or extra care, as first edition economics did.


Good luck with that dragon hoard; WBL is 140k for the entire party at lv 20.

Must be a poor dragon.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Crafting, Medicine, Performance, Thievery, etc all have the ability to perform the same "Earn an Income" check. When you're a crafter you're assumed to be making small items that are in demand in the settlement that you're in for an income.

If you're crafting a specific item you're spending time getting your resources together and preparing to craft the item, and banging out the initial parts of it.

There are methods to reduce the time that it takes to do that if you're really interested in finding them.

Additonally, the "Earn an Income" downtime activity is likely going to be limited by the settlement that you're looking in. Crafting work is almost always needed but it's possible that other lore checks may not be as in demand so you could be stuck working lower level jobs.


Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

Fine to me. I don’t really see it as a change per say. But I never gave out heaps of coins.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Temperans wrote:

Good luck with that dragon hoard; WBL is 140k for the entire party at lv 20.

Must be a poor dragon.

That's a fortune in the Midwest!


captain yesterday wrote:
Temperans wrote:

Good luck with that dragon hoard; WBL is 140k for the entire party at lv 20.

Must be a poor dragon.

That's a fortune in the Midwest!

Im not sure its enough for a hoard as seen in media. Its definitely a small room full if using cp as filler.

calculations for PF1e hoard size, using pennies as filler:
A lv20 PF1e dragon hoard as the final boss for a 5 man team could give a max default reward of 1.075 Mgp (assuming the GM follows WBL strictly). Which is a little more than 1 million gp.

For reference, 1 million tightly packed pennies can occupy ~20 cubic ft. Assuming 1 penny = 1 cp, converting 1 million gp to cp would give 100 20-ft cubes; which (if I did it correctly) is 6,400 5 ft high squares.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I very much like the new economy. Makes more sense, and even giving my players 20gp now makes them happy, where before that wouldn't be worth getting out of bed for.

Lord Fyre wrote:
Items get more complicated. A +1 longsword in PF1 is 2,315 gold (or 231.5 gold in PF2) but, that same sword in PF2 costs 35 gold (PF2 Core p. 536) which would be a 3,500 gold item in PF1.

I don't understand this. A +1 longsword in 2e is 35gp, or 350sp, and is equivalent to a masterwork longsword in 1e (+1 to hit, no extra damage) which cost about 350gp. Aren't the they same price for the same thing? Where did the 3500gp value come from?


Maybe a typo?

Also now that you mention that a +1 pf2e longsword is equivalent to a masterwork pf1e longsword, do other magic item price scale similarly? If so that might mean that power/cost increased, it might even mean that Golarion is becoming industrialized (one of the big ways to lower prices).

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Not a typo it comes from runes. Just read about runes and it would be clearer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I did read it, but I don't see the 3,500 cost.

What I did see is that a +1 Striking weapon, which is equivalent to a +1 Improved Impact (normal Impact just raises the dice) pf1e, cost the same as a pf1e Armor Enchantment.
Armor runes appear to be on par cost wise if not more expensive than PF1e.

The really big thing is that there is no more exponential costs which is very nice. Every thing combined and it does look like Golarion is on the verge of a magic industrial revolution.


Rysky wrote:
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Hireling is not an average citizen, they're someone hired by an Adventurer.

The baker who works at his bakery everyday is not a Hireling.

Untrained hirelings in 1e:

Well there's your issue.

Hirelings in 2e:

Hirelings wrote:
Paid laborers can provide services for you. Unskilled hirelings can perform simple manual labor and are untrained at most skills. Skilled hirelings have expert proficiency in a particular skill. Hirelings are level 0. If a skill check is needed, an untrained hireling has a +0 modifier, while a skilled hireling has a +4 modifier in their area of expertise and +0 for other skill checks. Hirelings’ rates double if they’re going adventuring with you.

I don't get the issue. What's the difference for you between e.g. a porter in 1e and soneone who can perform simple manual labor (2e)?


Loreguard wrote:

The adventurer will typically only accept above average workers, or the adventurers may exhibit an aura or danger that the weaker workers will not approach, or they will expect more pay. Additionally, some of the pay might be going directly to a guild, not to their pocket. Alternately some of it may be going to other work related expenses, as opposed to living expenses, such as tools, tool maintenance, and other items tied to amount of time worked, not time lived.

Lets be honest however, any spare money left-over is probably going to paying to feed their children (and potentially elders) until their children can start working at an untrained level to help cut back their cost.

Creative explanations, I have to admit. :) But that may only solve the problem of too rich workers. Still I have to pay for 10 days unskilled work as much as for a weapon. I think this is disproportinate.

That adventurers have to pay that much more, because they are adventurers, doesn't convince me. And for the least, rules don't say so. Rules say, price is doubled for going on adventures. But why should the baker want more for baking bread? No danger with that. A higher skilled baker for the adventurer? Come on. :)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Hireling is not an average citizen, they're someone hired by an Adventurer.

The baker who works at his bakery everyday is not a Hireling.

Untrained hirelings in 1e:

Well there's your issue.

Hirelings in 2e:

Hirelings wrote:
Paid laborers can provide services for you. Unskilled hirelings can perform simple manual labor and are untrained at most skills. Skilled hirelings have expert proficiency in a particular skill. Hirelings are level 0. If a skill check is needed, an untrained hireling has a +0 modifier, while a skilled hireling has a +4 modifier in their area of expertise and +0 for other skill checks. Hirelings’ rates double if they’re going adventuring with you.
I don't get the issue. What's the difference for you between e.g. a porter in 1e and soneone who can perform simple manual labor (2e)?

A worker and a Hireling are two different things.

Earn Income in the beginning of the Skills section would be closer to the standard worker, which for a level 0 aka a Commoner, would be 5cp a day.


Spoiler Alert: I have not completely read the second rules yet.

Has anyone sat down and done an analysis of the new economy yet?

Other than what is in the skill/crafting/items section, has Paizo put out more information about NPC expectations/setting economics?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

A worker and a Hireling are two different things.

Earn Income in the beginning of the Skills section would be closer to the standard worker, which for a level 0 aka a Commoner, would be 5cp a day.

Okay, now I get your point. Although I don't see what an unskilled hireling would do different than the worker. And/or why he gets double the money.

Either way, the income of 5 cp a day only means that four (instead of two) months of work are equivalent to a longsword. Still missing the proportion. I think, Paizo forgot to change the income numbers. Just my two coppers. :)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:

A worker and a Hireling are two different things.

Earn Income in the beginning of the Skills section would be closer to the standard worker, which for a level 0 aka a Commoner, would be 5cp a day.

Okay, now I get your point. Although I don't see what an unskilled hireling would do different than the worker. And/or why he gets double the money.

Either way, the income of 5 cp a day only means that four (instead of two) months of work are equivalent to a longsword. Still missing the proportion. I think, Paizo forgot to change the income numbers. Just my two coppers. :)

1) the double part is if you drag someone along on a adventure, which brings with it a high rate of mortality.

2) An unskilled hireling would be “hey kid, wanna earn some coin real quick? Can you take this package to this location?” You ordering pizza from a pizzeria does not make the pizza makers Hirelings.

3) what does longswords have to do with anything?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:

A worker and a Hireling are two different things.

Earn Income in the beginning of the Skills section would be closer to the standard worker, which for a level 0 aka a Commoner, would be 5cp a day.

Okay, now I get your point. Although I don't see what an unskilled hireling would do different than the worker. And/or why he gets double the money.

Either way, the income of 5 cp a day only means that four (instead of two) months of work are equivalent to a longsword. Still missing the proportion. I think, Paizo forgot to change the income numbers. Just my two coppers. :)

1) the double part is if you drag someone along on a adventure, which brings with it a high rate of mortality.

2) An unskilled hireling would be “hey kid, wanna earn some coin real quick? Can you take this package to this location?” You ordering pizza from a pizzeria does not make the pizza makers Hirelings.

3) what does longswords have to do with anything?

1) No, I mean, why does an unskilled hireling (1 sp/day) would earn twice as much as a worker (5 cp/day).

2) I know what hiring means. I just don't see what makes the income double just by being hired. Unskilled people mostly will be hired, else they will earn nothing.

3) Making clear the missing proportion by example. Either Paizo wanted to change the system from gold to silver standard. Then they should not only reduce the price of a standard valuable item (the longsword) but also the middle income of everyday people. Or they wanted to dump prices of valuable items so that the longsword is no more equivalent to 150 days of unskilled work but equivalent to 10 (or 20) days of unskilled work.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Dracorage wrote:
Rysky wrote:

A worker and a Hireling are two different things.

Earn Income in the beginning of the Skills section would be closer to the standard worker, which for a level 0 aka a Commoner, would be 5cp a day.

Okay, now I get your point. Although I don't see what an unskilled hireling would do different than the worker. And/or why he gets double the money.

Either way, the income of 5 cp a day only means that four (instead of two) months of work are equivalent to a longsword. Still missing the proportion. I think, Paizo forgot to change the income numbers. Just my two coppers. :)

1) the double part is if you drag someone along on a adventure, which brings with it a high rate of mortality.

2) An unskilled hireling would be “hey kid, wanna earn some coin real quick? Can you take this package to this location?” You ordering pizza from a pizzeria does not make the pizza makers Hirelings.

3) what does longswords have to do with anything?

1) No, I mean, why does an unskilled hireling (1 sp/day) would earn twice as much as a worker (5 cp/day).

2) I know what hiring means. I just don't see what makes the income double just by being hired. Unskilled people mostly will be hired, else they will earn nothing.

3) Making clear the missing proportion by example. Either Paizo wanted to change the system from gold to silver standard. Then they should not only reduce the price of a standard valuable item (the longsword) but also the middle income of everyday people. Or they wanted to dump prices of valuable items so that the longsword is no more equivalent to 150 days of unskilled work but equivalent to 10 (or 20) days of unskilled work.

1) Because you're not formally employing, you're hiring them for a quick job or the like. I would charge more too if you asked me to leave my job for a couple of days.

2) See the above.

3) A longsword is not something every commoner has. And your days equivalent doesn't take into account food, lodging, taxes, etc


I recommend the Guild 2 for anyone looking for an economic simulation game. It is a computer game, gosh, can you imagine trying to write and run a robust economic simulation game by hand?

My only problem with the system will be occasionally checking treasure and rewards in published products to ensure that a gp reward/item value wasn't labelled as sp by accident.


What I mean is that the buying power of the everday people is drastically increased if you reduce the prices of valuable items and leave the middle income as it was. The longsword is, as I said, just an example. It's not about the worker really buying the longsword, it's about the relative worth of his income. When the prices of valuable items, like weapons, armor or elixiers, drop significally but the income stays the same, the relative worth of the income rises. In this case (from 1e to 2e) by about the factor 10 - 15! And I don't think that was intended by Paizo.


DM Livgin wrote:

I recommend the Guild 2 for anyone looking for an economic simulation game. It is a computer game, gosh, can you imagine trying to write and run a robust economic simulation game by hand?

My only problem with the system will be occasionally checking treasure and rewards in published products to ensure that a gp reward/item value wasn't labelled as sp by accident.

Yes, you're right with this. A roleplay game cannot have a realistic economy system (and be fun). Just some pseudo-realism. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dracorage wrote:
DM Livgin wrote:

I recommend the Guild 2 for anyone looking for an economic simulation game. It is a computer game, gosh, can you imagine trying to write and run a robust economic simulation game by hand?

My only problem with the system will be occasionally checking treasure and rewards in published products to ensure that a gp reward/item value wasn't labelled as sp by accident.

Yes, you're right with this. A roleplay game cannot have a realistic economy system (and be fun). Just some pseudo-realism. :)

As someone who has done it a bit in 5e... it quickly ends up with characters doing less adventuring and spending more time in a life sim.

Now, this was my intention and there is fantasy adventuring elements in there. But yeah, for the standard Golarion adventure it would get... Weird :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dracorage wrote:
When the prices of valuable items, like weapons, armor or elixiers, drop significally but the income stays the same, the relative worth of the income rises. In this case (from 1e to 2e) by about the factor 10 - 15! And I don't think that was intended by Paizo.

Why not? It happened in our society. Maybe unskilled laborers are finally making a tolerable living due to recent economic reforms and the savings brought on by the recent decline in goblin attacks.


Matthew Downie wrote:
Dracorage wrote:
When the prices of valuable items, like weapons, armor or elixiers, drop significally but the income stays the same, the relative worth of the income rises. In this case (from 1e to 2e) by about the factor 10 - 15! And I don't think that was intended by Paizo.
Why not? It happened in our society. Maybe unskilled laborers are finally making a tolerable living due to recent economic reforms and the savings brought on by the recent decline in goblin attacks.

This is why I asked the questions I did.

Basically none of the development of society/civilization can happen if you don't have a stable and growing industrial set up.

If you are going to have kingdoms and civilization you literally can't have a savior-based game.

Thread for first edition on this.

Basically if everyone is simply a goblin attack away from being wiped out then you would never have enough luck or time to actually get to where the setting is today.

A base level of assumed competence in the world is mandatory or everyone would have already been wiped out.

A society where people latch on to the super-competent and build life around these superior beings would be vastly different than anything we see in Golarion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Worth noting, the whole “an unskilled laborer makes X amount of Y currency per day” thing is very rooted in modern economic thinking. A feudal system just plain doesn’t work that way. Accordingly, I don’t sweat the price of various goods as compared to the abstract income of a hypothetical laborer. For the vast majority of the population, what they’re actually doing is working land someone else owns, tithing a portion of the goods they produce to the landowner, and living off the rest. Most people rarely, if ever, exchange actual coins.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Charlaquin wrote:
Worth noting, the whole “an unskilled laborer makes X amount of Y currency per day” thing is very rooted in modern economic thinking. A feudal system just plain doesn’t work that way.

Golarion is not a feudal setting. In almost no places does it behave as one. It's much more Renaissance in technology, and almost 1800s in terms of things like schooling (even small towns have a schoolhouse, paid for by the town, and literacy is almost universal). Really, judging it by feudal terms is incorrect on a lot of levels.

Which doesn't mean we should focus too much on the economic system, mind you, but seems worth noting.


Anguish wrote:

Don't care.

150 FantasyBucks works just as well. Silver coins, gold coins, gem stones, kidney stones... whatever.

Gary Gygax published a game called Dangerous Journeys back in the early 90s, where all prices were given in Basic Units of Currency, or BUCs. There was a conversion table for various types of coinage, but as I recall all prices and such were given in BUCs.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Abraham spalding wrote:

Basically if everyone is simply a goblin attack away from being wiped out then you would never have enough luck or time to actually get to where the setting is today.

A base level of assumed competence in the world is mandatory or everyone would have already been wiped out.

I reject your thesis. Here is why.

Pathfinder, or any RPG is a game. It IS explicitly intended that the PCs be heroes, even at Level 1!

So, having villages on the verge of being wiped out by a goblin attack is exactly what is needed to support that paradigm.

Unrealistic, sure. That does not matter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Be heroes" usually translates to: Higher potential (faster level up, PC classes, more wealth etc.); And/or, more abilities (again faster level up, PC classes, more wealth, etc.).

The reason why a 2+ level farmer or guard wouldn't go out to hunt monsters/bandits is based on a threat assessment. They could go out and risk dying, or send 4-6 people out to do the work for them. Which is also why the problems usually occur when a large amount of monsters, or a high level monsters shows up and disrupts things.

Edited: typed heros instead of heroes, didn't think it was wrong since auto correct didnt change it.


Temperans wrote:
"Be heros"

Hmmm... heroes... Now I want a 12' sub sandwich... ;)


A 12' sub would definitely be good.

But seriously, most heroes are average people trust into strange situations; at least until they find out about some "mysterious past", realize "they are actually special", and/or "they always had the mcguffin".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I like it. And I'm as grognard-y as they come.

Also, I've been using a silver standard in my home games for decades.

51 to 100 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / How are people feeling about the new "money" system? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.