Results 11 to 20 of 116
-
05-21-2007, 11:14 PM #11
Well, sadly I only have a few excerpts of this text, though its on my wish list for the near future. The new Silk Roads supplement also looks interesting with regard to trade.
Well, many of the books I use are in German, but I offer a few English titles:
[Last edited by Beruin; 05-22-2007 at 02:06 AM.
-
05-21-2007, 11:49 PM #12
Thanks for posting this again. I remember seeing this, though must admit I had forgotten it. My thought on yields is similar, I also thought to go with a yield of 5:1 (for the winter field after lying fallow that is, for the summer field I'd go with 4:1). However, in my view, Anuirean agriculture is advanced enough to also plant part of the fallow with legumes like peas or beans and with fodder crops like clover, thus increasing yields.
As a sidenote, in medieval Europe crop yields apparently got worse from west to east. Accordingly, for the Vos and Rjurik lands I might go as low as a yield of 3:1 (However what about the Druids?).
Okay, I definetely come back to your post later in more detail.
-
05-22-2007, 12:08 AM #13
-
05-22-2007, 01:31 AM #14
For now, I can only offer a general outline, but I'm thinking along the following lines:
For starters, I want to calculate the produce of an average peasant holding and then a manor or village in detail, down to the bushel of wheat.
This produce will then be grouped in larger cargo units like waggon or ship loads and abstracted into more general categories according to type and value/scarcity. Other resources from mining and craftsmanship shall also be figured in on the city or province level. This owes a lot to the cargo rules from Mongoose's Conan supplements Pirate Isles and Free Companies and will look something like this:
Category
Foodstuffs
common
- Grain
- Ale/Beer
uncommon
- Meat
- Fish
rare
- Exotic fruits
- Spices
Raw Materials
common
- Lumber
- Wool
- Stone
uncommon
- Leather
- Wax
rare
- Silk
- Furs
Minerals/Metals
common
- Iron
- Cooper
uncommon
- Silver
- Jade
rare
- Gold
- Gems
Crafted goods
common
- Rope
- Simple Tools
uncommon
- Paper
- Clothing
rare
- Armour
- Weapons
Well, this is just off the top of my hat and more categories of goods as well as an additional rarity (very rare) might be useful, but you get the idea.
Then you can assign what every type of unit needs for each warmove or domain turn. For instance, a unit of archers might need 10 cargo units of common foodstuffs and one common and one uncommon unit of raw materials (material for repairs, new bowstrings, wood for arrows and broken bows etc.) each month on campaign, while a unit of knights might need 20 units of common and 4 units of uncommon foodstuffs (knights eat more and better and then there are the horses), 2 units of uncommon raw materials and 2 units of uncommon crafted goods.
I would then develop a new type of military unit, the supply train (not much combat ability, but carrying capacity and speed would be important). This unit, as a caravan, could also be required to maintain trade routes. Well, I have not really thought this all through, so this still needs a lot of work.Last edited by Beruin; 05-22-2007 at 02:01 AM.
-
05-22-2007, 05:36 AM #15
Basically, for ease of using d20, I use the standard terrain types (PHB p. 163-4, DMG pp. 86-102). The only additional terrain type I use is mixed forest and farm, which has the same movement characteristics of forest, but supports more people with additional farms.
Armies move more slowly than individuals, normally a good army moves 12 miles per day, so I halve the numbers for individuals.
Mobs of civilians (say refugess fleeing invasion) move even slower, perhaps at one quarter the rate of an individual.
-
05-22-2007, 08:22 AM #16
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 165
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
You have got a point, but the implications of the (minor) beneficial effects of troops are great if one intends to incorporate them.
Every goldbar spent in a region (closed system) will generate more revenue than a single GB. However since the GB’s are first taken from the entire population this effect is limited. Moreover it depends on the capacity of a region to provide for demand, whether this is a good thing. It will only work in times of lesser demand; if the only blacksmith is already swamped with work it will only cause inflation.
That said, troops are a special way to spend resources in a region since they themselves do not provide an economic benefit. A GB spent on a harbour or road may increase revenue apart from the extra work they generate in the province. A unit does not however provide extra revenue, apart from the extra demand: troops tend to eat the food the province provides without helping to create additional crops –not to speak of plunder.
Especially in an abstracted medieval society like birthright it may be best to assume that economic all costs and benefits are already incorporated in the price. The size of a province will nonetheless limit the maximum size of a friendly or raiding army it can feed. Still, the amount of troops a province can support can be great or small, whatever we want it to be.
I really like simplicity BTW , one can easily make things more complicated, but it takes a lot of effort to introduce an extra layer of option and detail, while at the same time keeping it simple and playable.
-
05-22-2007, 05:06 PM #17
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Location
- California, near LA. (Mo
- Posts
- 143
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Side issue related to my discussions with Sir Tiamat related to this topic:
(too much to quote directly)
I don`t remember what the population levels are supposed to repreent
off-hand. Let`s say, for the moment, that population level is 5,000 people
although that`s probably way off. Now, let`s assume that the economy
`settles` at this population level. There`s no reason to assume that at a
settled population/economic level, the economy is `maxed out`. That is, the
blacksmith in your example would welcome more work. If there`s a lot more
work than can handle, more people will want to become blacksmiths. The
amount of blacksmiths that can be supported in a province are directly
controlled by the Guild, probably represented by the percentage of Guild
control in the province (and thus, the amount of Guild holdings in
proportion to the province level.)
Let`s assume a province level of 3 and 15,000 people. Now, add in two
military units. Let`s say, that`s 400 people, or about 2.5% increase in
foreign demand with no noticeable increase in production. If troops buy
goods from villagers, villagers will be richer and turn around and spend
that money, giving their gold to villagers. Total spending will thus
increase. Total demand will increase. As demand increases, supply
increases. More people work to full the demand. Villagers from nearby
provinces come to the new markets. The town utilizes and exploits whatever
comparative advantage it has. Trade via trade routes is increased. Taxes
are increased, increasing government spending for roads and troops and other
stuff which utilizes labor and resources from nearby provinces.
It`s likely that an economy can support any increase or decrease in
population of about 2% or less per domain turn without a signficicant BAD
THING happening. Beyond that, you`re probably looking at economic
destabilization in the form of random events and losses of morale. I would
imagine a strong guild structure could prevent the random events, while a
strong temple structure could prevent the morale losses. (That is, a strong
guild structure is one where that are no "vacant" guild holdings left.)
On the other hand, "safe" population increases and military deployments
could result in increases to the overall population and productivity, in the
form of additional `virtual` province levels for purposes of collecting
income from existing holdings and trade routes. The amount of total virtual
province levels a province could support would probably depend on it having
a strong law holding structure (no "vacant" law holdings). Of course, these
economic advantages probably wouldn`t apply if the village wasn`t at a high
morale or if the military units were acting as law holdings into themselves
(in which case, you could just plunder the province for money, if you`re
into that sort of thing).
The implications are huge whenever money, information, and people are moved
around from place to place.
Of course, now imagine what happens to the town when 10 military units (or
about 2000 people, 12% of the population). That`s probably way too many.
Worse, imagine what happens to the town if 4 military units (about 800
people, 5%) suddenly leave, die off, or are mustered into the army from the
villages...?
If you`re looking for detail, these effects are not minor by any means.
If you`re looking for simplicity... well...Last edited by Thelandrin; 05-22-2007 at 09:38 PM. Reason: Removed lengthy >> quote to save vertical space.
-
05-22-2007, 10:17 PM #18
Because the guild controls the supply of blacksmiths, its safe to assume that the number of blacksmiths is correct for normal smith work. The existing smiths will not welcome more smiths (and in the towns at least) can control access to market entry. A manor can employ as many smiths as it pleases, but you have to pay them to stand around if you want slack, and they will attempt to obtain additional business to earn money on the side, which will annoy the town smiths. A medieval economy generally doesn't have enough surplus to support idle hands (soldiers took day jobs in cities into the 18th century because their garrison pay was too low to live on). Typically civilian products were just displaced by war-time production.
Let`s assume a province level of 3 and 15,000 people. Now, add in two military units. Let`s say, that`s 400 people, or about 2.5% increase in foreign demand with no noticeable increase in production. If troops buy goods from villagers, villagers will be richer and turn around and spend that money, giving their gold to villagers. Total spending will thus increase.
Total demand will increase. As demand increases, supply increases. More people work to full the demand. Villagers from nearby provinces come to the new markets. The town utilizes and exploits whatever comparative advantage it has. Trade via trade routes is increased. Taxes are increased, increasing government spending for roads and troops and other stuff which utilizes labor and resources from nearby provinces.
Medieval economies are not flexible and adaptive. This is in part because of the high investment required for the start-up of any economic activity, and also because the suplus generated by any activity is so small. The peasant leaving can't sell a house, (in part because his house may not be his to sell, and because there are no buyers) but he must aquire one. He has spent 10-15 years learning a profession, and cannot learn a new one (the one in demand in the new market) quickly. New tools must be aquired, and in the mean time, he must eat. If he has a family (and most certainly must if the population is not in decline for this very reason) they must eat too.
We are all familiar with the requirement that a person must live a year and a day in town before he is freed of other (peasant) obligations, and the reason for this is that the default expectation, based on cold experience, is that such a move is not likely to work out, even one peasant at a time. This dismal evaluation of economic flexibility and adaptation already assumes a high medieval death rate in cities (and elsewhere). If these places are not so full of lethal disease because of temples and priestly magic, then the situation is more troubled, as there are few places for new people.
So it must be until industrialization makes it possible for the new people to cheaply aquire new goods and for the new people to find unskilled labor.
-
05-23-2007, 09:55 AM #19
kgauck has a lot of good points here; Cerilian economics should be based on medieval standards rathern then modern-day models and theories.
Even the existing domain system used in BR assumes that provinces and holdings generate a vast amount of capital that can be invested in various endeavours; some of which will have an almost guaranteed return rate.
I'm not saying I have a perfect fix for this; but I would like to point out that it would be an error to assume that taxation and trade should produce large amounts of capital that can be freely moved about and invested.
-
05-24-2007, 04:49 PM #20
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Location
- California, near LA. (Mo
- Posts
- 143
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Because the guild controls the supply of blacksmiths, its safe to assume
that the number of blacksmiths is correct for normal smith work. The
existing smiths will not welcome more smiths (and in the towns at least) can
control access to market entry. A manor can employ as many smiths as it
pleases, but you have to pay them to stand around if you want slack, and
they will attempt to obtain additional business to earn money on the side,
which will annoy the town smiths. A medieval economy generally doesn`t have
enough surplus to support idle hands (soldiers took day jobs in cities into
the 18th century because their garrison pay was too low to live on).
Typically civilian products were just displaced by war-time production.
not midieval ones, but my understanding of guilds weren`t that they would
create a shortage of craftsman, but rather that they would centralize
economic power on selected Masters. That is, a master might have countless
apprentices of incredible skill that would be limited to apprentice status
until the Guild approves them (or they pay guild fees), and thus, they
couldn`t setup their own competing shops against other masters. It was my
understanding that most of the gear an army needs would be delegated to
apprentices anyway, with the master blacksmith acting as a sort of
combination of trainer, merchant, and supervisor.
Also, I vaguly recall the guild structure resulting in an excess of
apprentices ready to become a master who couldn`t because of the needs of
their village as dictated by their guild. If those needs went up, the
Guilds have a vast potential of unused capacity to increase thier supply of
trainers, merchants, and supervisors. The only requirement for this is the
assurance that they these "promotions" won`t result in reducing the current
business income of other masters in the city. Of course, once the soliders
leave, the Guild may have some problems with too many blacksmiths about, but
it seems to me Birthright guilds that span many provinces and realms are
within their rights to migrate masters that are to heavily concentrated in
one area.
Again this assumes unused capacity in the system, and medieval
economies don`t have unused capacity. Feeding the 400 soldiers means that
food once in the mouths of others is now in the mouths of soldiers. If the
province has a food suplus, the food is not being sold to towns If the
province has no food surplus than its the local towns who get less food.
This means the price of food goes up as towns folk are effectivly bidding
against one another for food. To cover the costs of bread, towns folk may
try and raise the prices of their goods. This 400 new mouths, far from being
good for the economy has probabaly produced inflation, and may produce
actual want.
or trade routes. Or Rule for that matter.
I understand the dangers in raising the population significantly, but it
seems absurd to assume the current level of production is the maximum
possible safe output.
In a free market economy things work this way, but in exchange we
accept certain ills, such as a business cycle, structural unemployment, and
a welfare system to prevent structural unemployment from being starvation.
Medieval economies who experienced people moving from nearby provinces to
our towns would actually experience a labor shortage in the nearby
provinces, reducing wealth there, and extra mouths to feed here, causing
inflation, off-setting their productive gains here, possibly by quite a lot.
Medieval economies are not flexible and adaptive. This is in part because
of the high investment required for the start-up of any economic activity,
and also because the suplus generated by any activity is so small. The
peasant leaving can`t sell a house, (in part because his house may not be
his to sell, and because there are no buyers) but he must aquire one. He has
spent 10-15 years learning a profession, and cannot learn a new one (the one
in demand in the new market) quickly. New tools must be aquired, and in the
mean time, he must eat. If he has a family (and most certainly must if the
population is not in decline for this very reason) they must eat
too.
time required to learn a profession. It still strikes me as odd that you`re
saying we should assume a lack of excess labor in a mideival economy as a
basic premise. And it seems to me that guilds (or masters within a guild)
would make accomodations to attract and maintain additional apprentices for
as long as it is profitable to do so. Thus, they wouldn`t own their own
home in either province.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Project standing?
By Drakkan in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 EditionReplies: 0Last Post: 02-18-2006, 10:46 PM -
Birthright economics & Monetary system
By Beruin in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 10Last Post: 03-21-2003, 02:40 PM -
Update on 3E project?
By Ulairi in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 2Last Post: 12-04-2002, 02:47 PM -
NWN Birthright Project
By soudhadies in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 5Last Post: 10-28-2002, 12:21 AM
Bookmarks