Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Birthright Developer
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    388
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On 10/2/06, Sigmund <brnetboard@birthright.net> wrote:
    > No, don`t have d20 Modern ATM. True20 uses a wealth system though, but I imagine it`s
    > different somewhat. I don`t really like the wealth system, so I won`t be using it no matter
    > what. My players like counting coins and so do I.

    Somebody posted a link earlier in this thread to the d20 modern SRD,
    which includes the wealth rules. But I`m pretty sure the true20
    wealth system is the same thing.

    --
    Daniel McSorley

  2. #22
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,946
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund
    I really like this idea.

    I have always thought that the reason d20 Modern (and True20 for that matter) uses a wealth system is because the game can be used for many different genres/time periods and so presenting a more detailed economic system to try and fit all of them would be completely unrealistic. Since BR doesn't suffer that condition, I'm curious as to why ya'all feel it needs a different economic system. I don't remember having many difficulties with the system is it was originally presented, and I don't understand why it wouldn't translate almost directly over to 3.5. What am I missing?
    IIRC it was started because people were complaining about the complex "math" and bookkeeping involved in the BRCS currently. One thing that popped up as an alternate was the wealth system from d20 Modern. It is math and bookkeeping simple when compared to pretty much any system that "counts coins".

    The one thing I wanted to maintain was the "difference" between domain level economics and personal level economics -they really are supposed to be "different" and if the 2 systems are too similar then people will invariably start to mix the two, IMO.

    The wealth system may not be the ideal solution, nor may it end up being "the" solution but it is definitely something that is "outside the box" of normal thinking and is OGC (something else that needs to be considered in all of this, IMO).
    Duane Eggert

  3. #23
    Senior Member Sigmund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    101
    Downloads
    137
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman
    IIRC it was started because people were complaining about the complex "math" and bookkeeping involved in the BRCS currently. One thing that popped up as an alternate was the wealth system from d20 Modern. It is math and bookkeeping simple when compared to pretty much any system that "counts coins".

    The one thing I wanted to maintain was the "difference" between domain level economics and personal level economics -they really are supposed to be "different" and if the 2 systems are too similar then people will invariably start to mix the two, IMO.

    The wealth system may not be the ideal solution, nor may it end up being "the" solution but it is definitely something that is "outside the box" of normal thinking and is OGC (something else that needs to be considered in all of this, IMO).

    Ah, I understand I guess. I think I'm once again I'm missing out on relating to these troubles because we did vastly more adventuring with BR than "wargaming" (as we called the domain level game, not meant to be derogatory at all), so I don't remember domain level economics being all that complicated. Could be my memory though . Hell, we used to mix the heck outa domain and adventuring level economics. When one of our players did play the regent (William of Osoerde after we laid the smack down on Rainech), he used to spend great amounts of his treasure gained adventuring on his domain (not that he got all that much compared to today's treasure-hauling standards ).

    Personally, I've always thought the wealth system was more complicated than just using coinage, but that's probably because it's much easier for me to visualise and relate to a coinage system than it is a more abstract wealth system.

    Using the wealth system would mean abstracting every spell that requires a gp cost, every potential magic item that might be created in the game, every item, every henchman/hireling (including services and spells cast by npcs), and all the BR specific stuff too. Big job, I'd suggest it being part of a separate options document as it would seem to me to need to be a pretty extensive change.

    Seems to me it would just be easier to simplify the current BR economic system. I assume that means domain level maintenance and stuff. Just looking at the table, it seems to me that instead of breaking up the GB it might be easier to visualise and/or keep track of by breaking up the time increments instead. For example, a wooden bridge can cost 1 GB every 4 seasons, instead of 1/4 GB every season. So, every spring, once the snows have melted, the Lord can pay his craftsmen to maintain the bridge for the next year. A ferry could just cost 1 GB per year. Maybe, just disregard the maintenance cost of the ferry and say that the ferryman charges for it's use and that money goes towards maintenance. Fortifications could cost 1 GB per 2 levels (province), or per 3 levels (holding). Highways could use one or two "levels" of cost, depending on how difficult the terrain is to traverse. "Hard" could be (swamp, tundra, glacier, mountain, desert) and cost a GB every 2 seasons, or 2 GB per year, and "Easy" could be (plains, steppe, scrub, forest, hills) and cost 1 GB per year. And so on. I would just simplifiy it, get rid of the fractions every Domain turn or for each level.

  4. #24
    Birthright Developer
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    388
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On 10/2/06, Sigmund <brnetboard@birthright.net> wrote:
    > Using the wealth system would mean abstracting every spell that
    > requires a gp cost, every potential magic item that might be
    > created in the game, every item, every henchman/hireling
    > (including services and spells cast by npcs), and all the BR
    > specific stuff too. Big job, I`d suggest it being part of a separate
    > options document as it would seem to me to need to be a pretty
    > extensive change.

    The wealth system being discussed is for domain level stuff, not
    PC-level stuff. Those are two distinct systems, as evidenced by the
    fact that you can`t even convert a GB directly into gp (or vice
    versa), it takes a domain action to do that. You don`t have to have
    PCs use a wealth score to use a wealth score at the domain level.

    The idea would be that your realm has a wealth score, which you use
    for domain-level activities that have normally been measured in GB.

    --
    Daniel McSorley

  5. #25
    Senior Member Sigmund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    101
    Downloads
    137
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DanMcSorley
    On 10/2/06, Sigmund <brnetboard@birthright.net> wrote:
    > Using the wealth system would mean abstracting every spell that
    > requires a gp cost, every potential magic item that might be
    > created in the game, every item, every henchman/hireling
    > (including services and spells cast by npcs), and all the BR
    > specific stuff too. Big job, I`d suggest it being part of a separate
    > options document as it would seem to me to need to be a pretty
    > extensive change.

    The wealth system being discussed is for domain level stuff, not
    PC-level stuff. Those are two distinct systems, as evidenced by the
    fact that you can`t even convert a GB directly into gp (or vice
    versa), it takes a domain action to do that. You don`t have to have
    PCs use a wealth score to use a wealth score at the domain level.

    The idea would be that your realm has a wealth score, which you use
    for domain-level activities that have normally been measured in GB.

    --
    Daniel McSorley

    Ah, ok. So then would one still be able to translate adventure level gps into a wealth score? There's more than one thread on the True20 forums trying to do just that and it seems very complicated, and it didn't seem to be just a direct translation. If the d20 Modern SRD has a conversion then perhaps I should download it.

    I've always thought that 1 GB equaled 2000gp. Is that not accurate? I can understand that it takes a domain action to convert, but I always thought that was due to a moneychanger (or whatever) requiring time to collect that large of a pile of gold (or whatever).

  6. #26
    Senior Member ploesch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    182
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund
    Ah, ok. So then would one still be able to translate adventure level gps into a wealth score? There's more than one thread on the True20 forums trying to do just that and it seems very complicated, and it didn't seem to be just a direct translation. If the d20 Modern SRD has a conversion then perhaps I should download it.

    I've always thought that 1 GB equaled 2000gp. Is that not accurate? I can understand that it takes a domain action to convert, but I always thought that was due to a moneychanger (or whatever) requiring time to collect that large of a pile of gold (or whatever).
    Well 1GB ~~ 2000GP. A GB is actually Cattle, Grains and other possesions that are resources the crown/domain ruler owns. Their actual value is likely higher than the 2000GP, but if you need to sell it fast to get hard currency, then you get 2000GP per GB. The reverse is true also, since if you are converting personal wealth for use by the crown, your name goes a long way toward making better deals for yourself with the large summs of money. But that is all an abstraction, and can be interpretted many different ways.

    The whole discussion started in another thread because a couple of us feel that the fractions used in maintenance are too cumbersome, and don't traslate well into spreadsheets,a nd so we felt it would be a good idea to explore other options, and a wealth system is one of them.
    When you play the game of thrones you win or you die.
    George R. R. Martin - A song of Ice and Fire

  7. #27
    Senior Member Sigmund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    101
    Downloads
    137
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ploesch
    Well 1GB ~~ 2000GP. A GB is actually Cattle, Grains and other possesions that are resources the crown/domain ruler owns. Their actual value is likely higher than the 2000GP, but if you need to sell it fast to get hard currency, then you get 2000GP per GB. The reverse is true also, since if you are converting personal wealth for use by the crown, your name goes a long way toward making better deals for yourself with the large summs of money. But that is all an abstraction, and can be interpretted many different ways.

    The whole discussion started in another thread because a couple of us feel that the fractions used in maintenance are too cumbersome, and don't traslate well into spreadsheets,a nd so we felt it would be a good idea to explore other options, and a wealth system is one of them.
    I figured the fractions I saw in the other discussion helped inspire this thread. I've never been a fan of the wealth system though, so I won't use it whether it becomes official or not. I'd rather just simplify in the manner I described in a previous post, and I'm hoping the official document doesn't switch to the wealth system either.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.