Nantambu as a post-scarcity solarpunk utopia

[Lawrencelot]

In preparing for this AP, I've decided that I really wanted to lean into the utopian aspects of Nantambu. It is already described as a haven of peace, learning and culture, but I want to take it one step further. The Magaambya being focused on both arcane and primal magic also gives me solarpunk vibes, with nature and magic (instead of nature and technology) as core aspects of the city. With so much magic going around, and so many people dedicated to improve society, and such long periods of peace due to the tempest-sun mages, in my campaign I imagine Nantambu has recently developed a post-scarcity society where everyone has their basic needs met. Unseen servants keep the streets clean, primal magic causes an abundance of food, and healing magic keeps everyone healthy (though resurrections would still be rare and costly). Money is no longer necessary: everyone can ask for basic things like food and minor healing, and if anyone needs something more special like a big house, or transportation to another city, it is freely given if it is 1) abundantly available and 2) deemed necessary. The chime-ringers help in making sure no one gathers wealth for themselves (cough Froglegs cough) and also that slackers (cough Chizire cough) get a bad reputation and might be refused luxury goods and services.

Now, the question is, if I make such a choice, besides the effects on the story it will also have mechanical effects.
1. No money means less bookkeeping, which is good, because I can focus more on bookkeeping for NPC relations and an elaborate academic subsystem. Even more so if I add milestone leveling and automatic bonus progression.
2. Item levels. These are a good way to limit what characters can get (no you can't get this scroll of teleport, that's for this teacher who is doing an important mission in Absalom). But what about, let's say, 4-th level items for 1st level PCs? These items should still be abundantly available, what would be a good reason to deny them to the PCs at first?
3. Importance of diplomacy. If items are not traded for money but on the basis of need and availability, a PC who has invested in diplomacy or deception might be able to convince someone to give them a high level item. This makes social skills very powerful, maybe too powerful?
4. Trade with other cities. If Nantambu is the only post-scarcity society, they still need to trade with neighbouring cities and countries. So money still exists, unless they are so utopian that they are self-sufficient and just give away what they have for free, but that seems unlikely on such a dangerous world as Golarion. Maybe PCs will need to keep track of their money after all, just not in Nantambu?
5. Treasure: what do PCs do with treasure they don't need if they can't trade it for money? They can give it away to gain reputation with a certain NPC or group maybe, or go to other cities to trade it for money. How would you react to such a rule as a player?

[hauk119]

As cool as this is, I think it will in many ways make Book 2 weaker, or at least require some substantial change. It doesn't really make sense that a crime boss could amass wealth and power in a society where wealth is meaningless. Her entire motivation and structure would have to change into something more overtly sinister. And IMO thats a shame, because I really love her as a sympathetic bad guy! Especially contrasted with the more overtly terrible Stone Ghost and Salathiss.

What I would recommend instead is still playing up the ways in which Nantambu approaches this ideal while having it fall short for practical reasons (the rest of the world is not like this, after all) and then having some of those shortcomings resolve throughout the AP. I am personally much more interested in a society that can change, and in watching the PCs drive that change if they want to, than portraying an already existing perfect utopia. Obviously the players won't be the only actors with influence, but I think letting them shape society through their actions will be a more rewarding experience overall.

Maybe froglegs using amassed wealth and power is a great reason for the people of Nantambu to try to abolish money once and for all! Maybe the discovery of Salathiss's plot is an argument for either more democracy, better transparency / civilian oversight of whatever elected representatives are in power (the whole plot point rests on Asanda being in a position of power in a representative democracy, after all, rather than a direct democracy like most anarchists would prefer, and at no point did it seem possible to recall him when he neglected his duties in favor of "fixing up his manor" (sidenote why are people allowed to have manors all to themselves lol?))

I will say as well, part of the fantasy of a game like D&D (at least by default, as written in the rules) is amassing wealth and treasure. That's just a part of the game's style of play, meaning that you'll have to do a lot of work to work around that default if this is the route you wanna go. Possibly worthwhile ofc!

In response to mechanical questions:

1. There is value to bookkeeping, even if it can be annoying, it can also add depth, and it seems like changing to a new treasure system will likely be as much bookkeeping if not more

2. I'd have magic items still be relatively rare, and broadly more in the "personal property" than "private property" camp. This both explains why the PCs dont start with many (and limits their acquisition) and why its not super weird and gross that they amass so many by level 20 lol. If you want you could even have this be what Froglegs is targetting, stealing magic items from people?

3. if its a level-based DC (with the hard adjustment for things the party probably shouldnt have), they wont usually succeed on higher level stuff. More than that though, I think people usually just, won't wanna give them the magic items lol because someone is using them already.

4. Makes sense to me! I think there probably have to be other concessions to the fact that the rest of the world is very much not a utopia as well.

5. Either trade it to people directly, or have it help generate like a "goodwill" stat or something that often results in people gifting them things or makes their rewards better in an obvious and tangible way.

I'm curious how this goes though! Super interesting idea, I think there's a lot of room to play with this.

[keftiu]

I feel like the positive influences from both the Magaambya and the city's connection to the plane of Axis can definitely be highlighted without turning the city into a post-scarcity utopia. Personally, I would advise against committing to the idea as hard as you propose; first, it would involve a lot of rewrites, but more than that it undercuts Osibu's role both in the Mwangi Expanse and in this AP as... well, a utopian Mwangi city full of magic that's worth protecting.

[keftiu]

keftiu wrote:

I feel like the positive influences from both the Magaambya and the city's connection to the plane of Axis can definitely be highlighted without turning the city into a post-scarcity utopia. Personally, I would advise against committing to the idea as hard as you propose; first, it would involve a lot of rewrites, but more than that it undercuts Osibu's role both in the Mwangi Expanse and in this AP as... well, a utopian Mwangi city full of magic that's worth protecting.

Another thought on this (apologies for the double post): if Nantambu is so utopian, then it makes Walkena's argument significantly weaker - why put up with his tyranny when a perfect life is so relatively close at hand? The hardscrabble lives folk make in Bloodcove or while (re)building Vidrian are somewhat cheapened if they could just move to a nearby slice of paradise.

[Lawrencelot]

hauk119 wrote:

It doesn't really make sense that a crime boss could amass wealth and power in a society where wealth is meaningless.

Maybe she wants to go back to the old ways, or just keep wealth for herself instead of sharing it with society. However...

Quote:

What I would recommend instead is still playing up the ways in which Nantambu approaches this ideal while having it fall short for practical reasons (the rest of the world is not like this, after all) and then having some of those shortcomings resolve throughout the AP.

This sounds like a very good idea to me. The events with Salathiss and Froglegs like you mention, and later with Dimari-Diji visiting Nantambu, could all result into big changes in Nantambu society.

And thanks for answering my questions! This helps.

keftiu wrote:

I feel like the positive influences from both the Magaambya and the city's connection to the plane of Axis can definitely be highlighted without turning the city into a post-scarcity utopia. Personally, I would advise against committing to the idea as hard as you propose; first, it would involve a lot of rewrites, but more than that it undercuts Osibu's role both in the Mwangi Expanse and in this AP as... well, a utopian Mwangi city full of magic that's worth protecting.

Plane of Axis? I missed that, is it in the Mwangi expanse book? And yes I would have to make sure Osibu still plays an important role, I didn't yet have a solution for that. Taking your and hauk's ideas together, maybe Nantambu is on the edge of becoming a paradise, but some troubles need to be solved (stone ghost, frogless, salathis, etc.) and once Osibu is protected and Dimari-Diji visits Nantambu, the heroes can help shape Nantambu into a paradise city like Osibu.

Quote:

Another thought on this (apologies for the double post): if Nantambu is so utopian, then it makes Walkena's argument significantly weaker - why put up with his tyranny when a perfect life is so relatively close at hand? The hardscrabble lives folk make in Bloodcove or while (re)building Vidrian are somewhat cheapened if they could just move to a nearby slice of paradise.

This, however, doesn't seem an issue to me. Because it is already the case (Nantambu being a haven of peace and culture), just to a lesser degree. And Nantambu is much too open of a society for Walkena.