Ok. I'm not a great fan, but it does have its uses when you're modelling an ecomony from the bottom to the top and don't want to get involved in bean-counting too much.
So, i have come up with something where the occupation of the character determines what kind of Lifestyle he can support. All the way from Vagrant (the lowest Lifestyle) to Decadant (the highest).
My thought was that instead of actually having costs of items, holdings etc in £ shillings and pence, or ducats etc, that they'd be ranked by the minimum Lifestyle needed to purchase it or maintain it.
So maybe a longsword would be listed as - Sword - Frugal. Meaning that you must at least have a Frugal Lifestyle to buy one. Ordering a castle built might have a Privileged cost, meaning that you must have a Privileged Lifestyle in order to commision it.
Likewise, it could be used in other ways. So you might offer a Poor bribe to an informant or a Privileged one to a noble. A coach ride between 2 cities might have a cost of Comfortable - as long as your own Lifestyle is equal to or higher than those costs, you can make that outlay.
Now, the problem with this comes when some bright spark says that as he has a Frugal Lifestyle, he buys all the swords in the shop, or a noble orders 20castles 'cos he's got a Privileged Lifestyle.
Let's say that this system is in operation. How can you code in restrictions, so that abuse doesn't happen?
Is the system any good?
Quote from: One Horse Town;475212So, i have come up with something where the occupation of the character determines what kind of Lifestyle he can support. All the way from Vagrant (the lowest Lifestyle) to Decadant (the highest).
My thought was that instead of actually having costs of items, holdings etc in £ shillings and pence, or ducats etc, that they'd be ranked by the minimum Lifestyle needed to purchase it or maintain it.
The old Swordbearer RPG used a system like that. I haven't looked at it in a long time. However, as I recall it had some system where if you tried to do too much (like those 20 castles) you might actually use up some of your wealth and drop a wealth level or two -- aka (in modern terms) you bought so much you had to spend your principal instead of get living of the interest.
That sounds reasonable to me, and then like in Clash's SC games, things are listed according to the minimum lifestyle needed to be able to support them. Also, if a character wants to purchase something above their lifestyle level, they could take a chance in lowering their lifestyle level either temporarily or perhaps permanently (as RandallS said, which I didn't read until after posting :D ), depending on how badly they'd damaged their financial health. I find these kinds of systems work best for sci-fi games where the currency is much more abstract anyway, and also work ok for a credit sim in modern games where they can kinda mix with a cash system if desired.
In your example, a character with a frugal lifestyle could easily offer poor bribes to beggars, but when the time comes to hit the noble with the privileged bribe, the character takes a chance of damaging their finances to the point they drop to poor themselves just to make the bribe. I'd always allow them to make that bribe (or buy that expensive whatever), and I'd also always allow them to change their mind if it turns out that their finances will drop by making the expenditure. One can always choose not to spend, even at the last minute. In some cases, however, there might also be consequences for that as well, IMO.
Yeah, the dropping levels if you make too large an outlay is an option that i've toyed with. You could temporarily rise too if you gain a large reward or win a tourney or something.
You're right that someone with a Frugal Lifestyle could easily cover a Poor bribe to a beggar, but how many could he make comfortably? When do all those Poor bribes add up to something that he can't afford?
That's the problem with abstract systems - it becomes either a wing-it thing or you actually need more structure to it, which then takes it out of abstract territory.
So how does it get used in play - when you come to rewards, treasure etc?
If your world is medieval or ancient analogue a very large number of people, potentially PCs included, will be living on the breadline, and can't acquire anything unless they find a way to get some coin, or in return for service and labour. So I'm confused as to how you move up.
This might work if all the PCs are high status, and if you also allow them to sacrifice their standard of living to create some ready cash, and vice versa. A shorthand way of saying that my wealth is by default in land (realistic for the majority of people). That generates me an income I need not compute but gives me "x" lifestyle, with any excess covering family costs etc. I would simply then offer a starting "kit" at each level, possibly with a bunch of either/or choices - and yes it could include transport, food and lodging using regularly available means. GM might allow kit to be replaced when lost or worn out without bothering with the transactions, but additional stuff is still calculated in coins generated by adventure activities this being "surplus" to basic needs.
Once you flesh it out and calibrate it - is this really any simpler than running a typical in game economy with currency values and costs?
There's a difference between Wealth and Lifestyle.
If someone has a Low Wealth but an Extravagent Lifestyle then they will be in trouble.
I'd have equipment/services based on a Wealth Level (Destitute, Poor, Moderate, Well-Off, Wealthy, Rich, Filthy Rich etc), so even a Destitute person would be able to buy a loaf of bread but you would need to be Wealthy to be able to buy a warhorse, for example.
If you include Lifestyles, then I would say that if you live a Lifestyle below your Wealth level then you would be able to make one-off purchases above your normal Wealth Level. Similarly, if you live a Lifestyle that is above your Wealth Level then you would struggle to buy things at your Wealth Level.
So, Martin the Miser lives as if he is Destitute, but is actually Well Off. He wants to buy a Warhorse (Wealthy) and can because he has saved all his pennies by living a Destitute life.
Samuel Spendalot, however, has a Moderate Wealth but lives as if he is Well Off. He wants to buy a horse (Well Off) but struggles because his effective wealth is Poor for large purposes.
One thing you have to look at is repeat purchases. If I have Moderate Wealth then I can buy a couople of chicken, but if I buy a couple of chickens a day then my wealth will go down, even though Chicken has a Poor rating.
Also, what happens if you come into money? That would bump your Wealth rating up a bit, but the GM/Players have to decide by how much. A Poor character who sells a Warhorse doesn't become Well Off, but he might be able to up his level temporarily on the proceeds. You have to decide whether an increase is temporary or permanent and by how many levels Wealth is changed.
It can work, but in some ways it is fiddlier than having actual values.
Quote from: Iron Simulacrum;475222Once you flesh it out and calibrate it - is this really any simpler than running a typical in game economy with currency values and costs?
I'm beginning to think not.
I've played with the idea because I generally don't like bean counting but have never been totally satisfied.
Aside from specific items, treasure could be listed in a item/lifestyle items. For example, the troll temple yields enough treasure to buy one extravagant item or to raise one person's lifestyle to wealthy. Along with this you could have charts like 2 rich items can be subbed for 1 extravagant item and 5 people could be middle class for one wealthy. The details of the numbers and categories are fudged but you get teh idea.
Quote from: One Horse Town;475220You're right that someone with a Frugal Lifestyle could easily cover a Poor bribe to a beggar, but how many could he make comfortably? When do all those Poor bribes add up to something that he can't afford?
When the bribes or expenditures add up to more than the passive income that their wealth level generates?
You could set a limited number of Wealth checks per month, perhaps - a character might have to spend one check on Upkeep/Lifestyle and the rest on purchasing stuff in their price range. An unusual windfall would give a character an extra check (at an appropriate level).
You could also work out equivalences (e.g. 4 Poor purchases = 1 Frugal purchase) and let a rich character make multiple cheap purchases as a single (higher wealth rank) purchase.
"Wealth" ratings are good if you want to gloss over treasure and stuff - a lot of the superhero games use these, because money is something that's generated off-camera by the heroes' secret identity. Its not such a good idea for fantasy games where you're supposed to be beating up orcs for pocket money and that's the point of the game, IMHO.
Is there any way for someone to save up for something nice without moving down in wealth? What if someone on the bread line can only afford broken swords, but they want a nice sword - could they choose to live the vagrant life style for x amount of time so they can buy it? How do you determine the amount of time or how frugally they have to live?
Quote from: One Horse Town;475220You're right that someone with a Frugal Lifestyle could easily cover a Poor bribe to a beggar, but how many could he make comfortably? When do all those Poor bribes add up to something that he can't afford?
That's the problem with abstract systems - it becomes either a wing-it thing or you actually need more structure to it, which then takes it out of abstract territory.
A rough guideline is all I'd go with. Say, per month, 4 (frex) expenditures per level of wealth lower. So 4 bribes of one wealth level lower, 8 for 2, etc... Then maybe 2 of the same level and of course only one per month of higher with ecalating chances of financial damage. Not too complicated.
I find that the Diaspora completed the abstraction with satisfying mechanics. They made Wealth a stress track and the skill Assets represents the capacity of the character to absorb price tags, just like the Health stress track and the Stamina skill work for combat damage.
The problem is of genre here. For a travelleresque game it's suitable for a character to be taken down by loan sharks and spending years paying his/her debt. For medieval fantasy it's not going to work really well ("What do you mean my barbarian can't go on adventure because he owes money?")
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;475227"Wealth" ratings are good if you want to gloss over treasure and stuff - a lot of the superhero games use these, because money is something that's generated off-camera by the heroes' secret identity. Its not such a good idea for fantasy games where you're supposed to be beating up orcs for pocket money and that's the point of the game, IMHO.
This is my opinion as well. I wouldn't use the system for fantasy, and usually not fully for modern. It works as a very abstract credit system, and a decent financial system for sci-fi and supers.
You might want to take a look at Burning Wheel. It had an abstracted wealth system, from what I remember (don't have it in front of me), you had to make a Resources Test to actually acquire something. In other words, if you were Rich and wanted to buy a Poor item, usually it would be no issue, but you might currently have a cashflow problem (represented by a really low roll). Also there were ways to temporarily and permanently lower Wealth based on how much you stressed it.
The One Ring has a system for Treasure and Standing, it's probably too basic though for what you want.
HeroQuest has Abstract Wealth - the way it used to work is that you matched the cost of an item against your Wealth and if you won you could buy it with no effect on your Wealth, but if you lost then your Wealth level went down slightly.
That's a bit OTT for buying a loaf of bread, but would work well for buying expensive items.
Thanks for the input, guys, but i think i've decided against it. Too much trouble for no real gain.
Quote from: One Horse Town;475317Thanks for the input, guys, but i think i've decided against it. Too much trouble for no real gain.
Well, you could get some gain, particularly if you don't want to deal with setting up an economic system that can't be exploited by players. Sett, for example, could probably find a hole in your pricing system and would disassemble plows, selling off the raw metal and clubs from the wood, for a profit. :D
Quote from: CRKrueger;475322Well, you could get some gain, particularly if you don't want to deal with setting up an economic system that can't be exploited by players. Sett, for example, could probably find a hole in your pricing system and would disassemble plows, selling off the raw metal and clubs from the wood, for a profit. :D
Ah, but i wrote the unofficial
trade & commerce in the old world document for WFRP and also co-wrote the trade section in
The WFRP Companion. ;)
I have trade info coming out the wazoo!
As this system is for my WFRP clone game, i think i'll stick with a more conventional approach.
Quote from: One Horse Town;475324Ah, but i wrote the unofficial trade & commerce in the old world document for WFRP and also co-wrote the trade section in The WFRP Companion. ;)
I have trade info coming out the wazoo!
As this system is for my WFRP clone game, i think i'll stick with a more conventional approach.
My apologies sir, I had forgotten. :hatsoff:
You going to publish the WFRP clone?
BTW, totally off-topic, what section of the SIFRP Campaign Guide did you do?
Quote from: CRKrueger;475325My apologies sir, I had forgotten. :hatsoff:
No worries. I hate that kind of 'project dropping' (a kind of name dropping, i guess), but i thought i'd get it out there.
QuoteYou going to publish the WFRP clone?
Mate, i haven't finished the project i started 4 years ago yet. Truly, publishing or not hasn't entered my mind. I just like the time period and the location that i'm covering and it happens to coincide with many of the themes of WFRP, so it looks a little bit similar.
Not sure whether to have fantasy elements in it or not yet, though.
QuoteBTW, totally off-topic, what section of the SIFRP Campaign Guide did you do?
I didn't. Am i still in the credits? I was on the roster to do the Riverlands, but real-life intervened.
Quote from: One Horse Town;475326I didn't. Am i still in the credits? I was on the roster to do the Riverlands, but real-life intervened.
I remembered you were listed in some preview info I saw, I can check the book when I get home. Probably not.
Wealth systems that are abstract depend on two factors:
1. That wealth not be a particularly central aspect of what your game is for. In D&D, for example, wealth is absolutely central, its the whole point of why you're going adventuring, for the loot.
2. That you be dealing with a post-industrial society where the benefit of going abstract is more significant because people are actually living above subsistence level and have a complex economy, and its very hard there to really keep a meaningful track of things like expenses with a straightforward monetary system that isn't abstract.
RPGPundit