Dragon 293 Conversions

[lordtog]

Hi,

I was going through the Dragon issue 293, with the realmcraft rules in them.
I compared some of the figures, and it seems that the BR rules are a bit low
on tax rates and the like. I did some calculations, and I thought I might
run them by you guys. I found that on average, the Dragon gave 16 times more
tax than BR. I went looking in the DMG, and I found mercenaries are 5 times
higher than BR, ships 1.5 times higher and castles 3.5 times higher.

Here`s some of the assumptions I made.

The DMG says a common labourer can earn 3 gp per month (pg 149), which works
out as 1 sp per day. The DMG variant upkeep rule (pg 142) states that at
self-sufficient level, a person pays 2 gp per month, working out at 6 cp per
day. The DMG also states that at this level the person grows his own food,
and the like. The costs cover minor items, such as new shoes or a road toll.
That made me think that about 3/4 of the 6 cp would be tax. Doing the
calculations it worked out a commoner pays about 45 sp per season in tax (30
days per month, 3 months per season).

Taking a level 6 province, having approximately 40,000 people in it, it
would pay about 5 GB on average in Moderate taxes in BR. Using my figures,
they pay about 90 GB, which is fairly close to the 100 GB (converted) from
Dragon. Using my figures, BR is 14 times less.

Guilds were more interesting. I assumed that 80% of the province would be at
the economic level of common labourers, and 20% would be at Artisans, or
middle class. Using the same level of tax, 6 cp, I figured that 80% would
have about 36 sp per season to spend on goods, while 20% would have 18 gp.
It says in the rulebook that guild levels represent control of business, so
I used level 3 guilds in level 3 provinces, and the like. What I found was
collection was consistently 1.44 times more than taxation.

Does it make sense that guilds and temples would make more money than a
taxing regent at moderate levels? Are there errors in my logic? If you want
my calculations in detail, let me know.

What I like about these figures is that realms can support larger armies and
bigger fleets. I found that while playing a BR PBEM a average realm can
support about 2,000 to 3,000 troops at the most. Reading history with armies
of 5,000 to 10,000, BR could never make up for this.

What I would be tempted to do is split the collection into 3, with guilds
gaining 2/3 with temples gaining 1/3. It doesn`t make sense to me how a
temple can earn the same money as business, the goals are different. Using
influence points as John Machin does or something similar, like fixed
points, this would mean that Temples would gain more influence politically
than guilds, as religious people tend to believe what a priest tells them.
Guilds uses their money to get what they want.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

Tax rates of 75% are confiscatory. If people were producing such a huge
surplus in BR, the population would be undergoing a huge demographic
expansion.

More probabaly, the surplus is about 10% of total production. Tax rates
(temple tithes + land taxes) are probabaly more on the order of 8-12% each
with about half of that amount going to support specialists off the land,
and the other half being an investment into he land (irrigation, road, dike,
soil, forest management, &c) and hence only redistributive.

The problem with the realm rules as I see it, are that populations are low
by at least an order of magnitude. If you accept BR population figures,
taxes and other surpluses are almost certainly too high. Mostly because
much the costs of realm operation are ignored, and because trade is not as
profitable as it is in the game.

> Does it make sense that guilds and temples would make more
> money than a taxing [ruler] at moderate levels?

It does make sense that landed regents would get less coin, but not less
value. Both landed rulers and priests would have access to obligatory
labor, but landed rulers would get far more unpayed labor. Some of this is
probabaly represented as GB which could be used for construction of roads or
buildings. Some of this is reflected in the fact that if you raise and
dispand a levee in the same season, it costs you nothing.

> I found that while playing a BR PBEM a average realm can
> support about 2,000 to 3,000 troops at the most. Reading
> history with armies of 5,000 to 10,000, BR could never make
> up for this

Realms in BR should be (historically) supporting about 500 troops on
average. Those histories of armies of five to ten thousand were supported
by states the size of all Anuire or Khinasi. Further, the population base
of say, France, was 20 million. Anuire is no where near that figure.
Didn`t someone once calculate that the population was 1.2 million?

> What I would be tempted to do is split the collection into 3, with
> guilds gaining 2/3 with temples gaining 1/3. It doesn`t make sense
> to me how a temple can earn the same money as business, the
> goals are different.

Do what ever fits your campaign, but be aware that canny players will begin
to draw implications from the details your present. If guilds are making
more money than temples (the reverse of historical well into the modern era)
it means that wealth is abundant and that money has a high velocity (it
changes hands frequently). If this is true, I should see growth rates of
people, economics, technology, and other such things which naturally result
from all this surplus wealth and commerce.

Historically temples took in far more money during the late medieval and
early Renaissance because everyone paid a tithe. Its a 10% collection on
every man woman and child earning money. Under reported income (harder to
do when everyone sees your business) can be made up with gifts and then
some. Guild activity is vastly smaller because only the elite are engaged
in consumption of their products and trade. Where as temples take 10% from
nearly 100% of the population, guilds are taking something closer to 50%
(before expences) of about 5% of the population, albeit the wealthiest 5%.
While that wealthy group may have a disproportionate amount of wealth, most
of it is otherwise active. Land represents the great source of wealth, but
if you sell of part of your acreage to purchase luxury goods, next year you
make less income. So, we are really only talking about the extracted
surplus of wealth, which is again, more on the other of 10%. So if you
assume that the average income of all people is about 1 sp per day (or ever
so slightly higher) then the annual income of temples is 1 cp per adult
inhabitant. Guilds are looking at making profit off the extracted surplus
of priests and lords. So they must (be definition if we bother with an
economy even sustainable for just a few years) make only a fraction of what
priests and lords make, because they are the richest of the consumers. So,
guilds must be lower than temples unless you assume that your guilder is
sending out the Sears cataloge and for the first time extending the guild
activity away from just the towns and into the agricultural districts as
well. Tell those farms to end their self-sufficient production and buy from
the Sears guild from its catalogue.

Its true that there has been some specialist craft in agriculture since at
least the colonization of Mesopotamia by agriculturalists. However, the
vast, vast majority of that surplus is consumed by the craftsmen to provide
himself with subsistance, leaving little to work its way higher and higher.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ConjurerDragon]

Hello!

Sean Money wrote:

>I was going through the Dragon issue 293, with the realmcraft rules in them.
>I compared some of the figures, and it seems that the BR rules are a bit low
>on tax rates and the like. I did some calculations, and I thought I might
>run them by you guys. I found that on average, the Dragon gave 16 times more
>tax than BR. I went looking in the DMG, and I found mercenaries are 5 times
>higher than BR, ships 1.5 times higher and castles 3.5 times higher.
>Here`s some of the assumptions I made.
>The DMG says a common labourer can earn 3 gp per month (pg 149), which works
>out as 1 sp per day. The DMG variant upkeep rule (pg 142) states that at
>self-sufficient level, a person pays 2 gp per month, working out at 6 cp per
>day. The DMG also states that at this level the person grows his own food,
>and the like. The costs cover minor items, such as new shoes or a road toll.
>That made me think that about 3/4 of the 6 cp would be tax. Doing the
>calculations it worked out a commoner pays about 45 sp per season in tax (30
>days per month, 3 months per season).
>
Did you calculate the tenth (1/10) for the church? Because I assume that
the collection that the church gathers comes from the peoples income as
well.

>Guilds were more interesting. I assumed that 80% of the province would be at
>the economic level of common labourers, and 20% would be at Artisans, or
>middle class. Using the same level of tax, 6 cp, I figured that 80% would
>have about 36 sp per season to spend on goods, while 20% would have 18 gp.
>It says in the rulebook that guild levels represent control of business, so
>I used level 3 guilds in level 3 provinces, and the like. What I found was
>collection was consistently 1.44 times more than taxation.
>
Did you calculate that the guild does not have in profit what it has in
income? I mean you can´t take the money people can spend on goods and
see it as profit - the guild has expenses as well.

>Does it make sense that guilds and temples would make more money than a
>taxing regent at moderate levels? Are there errors in my logic? If you want
>my calculations in detail, let me know.
>
Sure does it make sense. Just compare the bilances of our modern
industry with the amount the country can spend ;-)
But it would not be unfair - most province regents control the law, too
and could earn some more with law claims from temples and guilds - thus
balancing things out.

>What I would be tempted to do is split the collection into 3, with guilds
>gaining 2/3 with temples gaining 1/3. It doesn`t make sense to me how a
>temple can earn the same money as business, the goals are different. Using
>influence points as John Machin does or something similar, like fixed
>points, this would mean that Temples would gain more influence politically
>than guilds, as religious people tend to believe what a priest tells them.
>Guilds uses their money to get what they want.
>
:-) Exactly that I thought the first time I read the rulebook - temples
gain the SAME income as guilds? Nonsense...
bye
Michael Romes

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[lordtog]

Hi,

Michael Romes wrote:


>Did you calculate the tenth (1/10) for the church? Because I assume that
>the collection that the church gathers comes from the peoples income as
>well.


What I did was use the collection tables, and it was mainly for guilds. I
suppose I could call those figures spending money. That was the amount not
used by taxes and upkeep. I didn`t divide it between Guild and Temple. I`m
not to sure of the 10% figure, I think that`s only Judo-Christian. Then
again, how many churchs were there in medievil to Renaissance Europe. Does
anyone have any thoughts of how much tithe a common person would pay?

>Did you calculate that the guild does not have in profit what it has in
>income? I mean you can´t take the money people can spend on goods and
>see it as profit - the guild has expenses as well.


Those figures were strictly net income. I have no idea how much maintainence
cost would be for any holding or province. Any one like to venture a guess?

>But it would not be unfair - most province regents control the law, too
>and could earn some more with law claims from temples and guilds - thus
>balancing things out.


Are law claims justifiable in a non-BR setting? I always considered them
taxes on guild and temple income, seperate from a persons taxes. If so, how
much should they be?

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.