Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

[Lucius]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

3) Perhaps I was a bit harsh

 

I was thinking of myself, actually

 

Lucius Alexander

 

6) they confuse me can't tell if they are coming or going

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

And that's how it is in my game. A priest will say - and may even believe - that it's "The power of the Gods!" A sceptic will say "It just looks like magic to me."

The Priest counters with "Do you deny the might and majesty, even mystery of the church of X?" and the sceptic replies "How do you even tell a God and a powerful magician apart?" ... at which point you're down to dueling energy blasts

 

cheers, Mark

 

Mine's similar, yes, but few priests are quite so fervent as to attack people just for debating them.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

*cough*

 

Anyhow, to get back to the topic at hand, i'll talk about counterfeiting.

 

While flooding a market with magically conjured gold can just about wreck an economy via inflation, why not conjure up goods that aren't currency? Wood, grains, and fabrics come to mind. What would THEY do to a market?

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

*cough*

 

Anyhow, to get back to the topic at hand, i'll talk about counterfeiting.

 

While flooding a market with magically conjured gold can just about wreck an economy via inflation, why not conjure up goods that aren't currency? Wood, grains, and fabrics come to mind. What would THEY do to a market?

 

If one decides to be that realistic, presumably the laws of supply and demand would continue to apply. Unless you've suddenly created a massive need for those products, merchants will buy as much as they think they need/can sell, and no more, leaving you with excess materials laying around serving little purpose.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

If one decides to be that realistic' date=' presumably the laws of supply and demand would continue to apply. Unless you've suddenly created a massive need for those products, merchants will buy as much as they think they need/can sell, and no more, leaving you with excess materials laying around serving little purpose.[/quote']

 

So some practiced magic user that has business savvy could conceivably become extremely rich by producing the right quantities as the market demands?

[Clonus]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

*cough*

 

Anyhow, to get back to the topic at hand, i'll talk about counterfeiting.

 

While flooding a market with magically conjured gold can just about wreck an economy via inflation, why not conjure up goods that aren't currency? Wood, grains, and fabrics come to mind. What would THEY do to a market?

 

They could make practises such as agriculture obsolete. (Which I have in fact done to explain how universally magically talented elves manage to combine civilisation with a total lack of agriculture). Ordinarily however, fantasy cultures don't have enough wizards with enough output in low-markup goods to make a dramatic difference in anything except a market for luxury goods.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

So some practiced magic user that has business savvy could conceivably become extremely rich by producing the right quantities as the market demands?

 

In theory, sure. I would think he could probably come up with something just as lucrative that would involve less work, though, if he was that good, though.

[Lucius]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

And that's how it is in my game. A priest will say - and may even believe - that it's "The power of the Gods!" A sceptic will say "It just looks like magic to me."

The Priest counters with "Do you deny the might and majesty, even mystery of the church of X?" and the sceptic replies "How do you even tell a God and a powerful magician apart?" ... at which point you're down to dueling energy blasts

 

cheers, Mark

 

Shermer's Last Law: "Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary reminds me that I was going to change the subject, not keep feeding it

[Old Man]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

They could make practises such as agriculture obsolete. (Which I have in fact done to explain how universally magically talented elves manage to combine civilisation with a total lack of agriculture). Ordinarily however' date=' fantasy cultures don't have enough wizards with enough output in low-markup goods to make a dramatic difference in anything except a market for luxury goods.[/quote']

 

The economic implications of magic are one reason magic is always rare in my campaigns. It's much simpler to have a stereotypical feudal political and economic milieu than it is to think through all the ramifications of obsoleting agriculture or creating stuff out of thin air.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

That definitely needs to made clear up front: if any mage can churn out hundreds of pounds of materials per day with very little cost, why hasn't the economy changed thusly?

 

I've seen so many threads of relatively simply magic "tricks" for D&D 3.5 that can generate great wealth, and yet rarely do settings make mention of any balance as to why magic hasn't influenced the economy/economies on a grand scale.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

That definitely needs to made clear up front: if any mage can churn out hundreds of pounds of materials per day with very little cost, why hasn't the economy changed thusly?

 

I've seen so many threads of relatively simply magic "tricks" for D&D 3.5 that can generate great wealth, and yet rarely do settings make mention of any balance as to why magic hasn't influenced the economy/economies on a grand scale.

 

This gets into the basic principle of 'we're playing Dungeons and Dragons, not Accountants and Merchants'. It's the same reason that a tiny little domino mask completely protects a superhero's identity, or why villains never attack when the magical girl is transforming or the robots are combining; certain suppositions are simply true because of the genre you're playing. They don't necessarily make sense (and often don't), but That's Just The Way It Works.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

This gets into the basic principle of 'we're playing Dungeons and Dragons' date=' not Accountants and Merchants[/b']'. It's the same reason that a tiny little domino mask completely protects a superhero's identity, or why villains never attack when the magical girl is transforming or the robots are combining; certain suppositions are simply true because of the genre you're playing. They don't necessarily make sense (and often don't), but That's Just The Way It Works.

 

Are you talking about the rules by themselves, or specific settings (like Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms)? Because, if it's the latter, some settings do make mention of how magic has impacted daily life (such as continual flame streetlamps) and, make mention (if only a little) on how magic specifically impacts the economy.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Are you talking about the rules by themselves' date=' or specific settings (like Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms)? Because, if it's the latter, some settings do make mention of how magic has impacted daily life (such as [i']continual flame[/i] streetlamps) and, make mention (if only a little) on how magic specifically impacts the economy.

 

A little of both, really. Ultimately, I think fictional worlds nigh universally fall under Bellisario's Maxim ("Don't examine this too closely").

[Lucius]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

A little of both' date=' really. Ultimately, I think fictional worlds nigh universally fall under Bellisario's Maxim ("Don't examine this too closely").[/quote']

 

I think everyone should take a much closer look at that maxim.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders if we should closely scrutinize Bellisario instead

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

A difference between "realism" and "verisimilitude".

[Clonus]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

A little of both' date=' really. Ultimately, I think fictional worlds nigh universally fall under Bellisario's Maxim ("Don't examine this too closely").[/quote']

 

That's more of a maxim for players/audiences than for world builders. Players may not question why in a world with Continual Light Spells, the city doesn't have streetlamps, but they'll appreciate your attention to detail if they see the Continual Light streetlamps.

[Tasha]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Are you talking about the rules by themselves' date=' or specific settings (like Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms)? Because, if it's the latter, some settings do make mention of how magic has impacted daily life (such as [i']continual flame[/i] streetlamps) and, make mention (if only a little) on how magic specifically impacts the economy.

 

Yes but many settings tend to ignore little facts like the 50GP of Ruby Dust required for each Continual Flame Spell. Most D&D mage spells that create something permanently tend to also have expensive materials that compensate.

[Markdoc]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Are you talking about the rules by themselves' date=' or specific settings (like Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms)? Because, if it's the latter, some settings do make mention of how magic has impacted daily life (such as [i']continual flame[/i] streetlamps) and, make mention (if only a little) on how magic specifically impacts the economy.

 

We play in the Forgotten Realms, and much as I love it, nothing in it makes sense (what do Sandworms eat, exactly given that they live in a place with almost no life?), economics least of all. It has trade routes where there is no trade to be had, magic items which would have huge effects on daily life (but actually have little or none), cities in places where there is nothing to live on, etc. My own character comes from a substantial Monastery of Torm, high in the mountains above a frozen lake. There's no food, no trade to speak of .... what do the hundreds of holy brothers live on? The GM didn't think about it, and I don't press the point. A little further north is the Monastery of the Yellow Rose, which is famous for its blueberry wine (canon). I'm sorry? These guys live on a perpetually snowcapped peak above the glaciers, weeks travel from anywhere .... and they make wine? Enough to export, even?

We could go on, but it makes the point, I think.

 

Basically, like most high fantasy games, the point is not the setting itself, which is pure goofball. The point is roam the realms, finding strange and interesting places, slaying their inhabitants and taking their stuff, so that we can roam into even stranger places. The adventure is the thing, not the setting.

 

cheers, Mark

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

That could be a cop-out which discourages world builders from integrating a believable economy into their setting.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

That could be a cop-out which discourages world builders from integrating a believable economy into their setting.

 

Or it could simply be acceptance of the conventions of the genre. This is a game, you shouldn't have to micromanage like that; at that point, it goes from being fun to being work. It doesn't need to be realistic, it just needs to be playable.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Or it could simply be acceptance of the conventions of the genre. This is a game' date=' you shouldn't have to micromanage like that; at that point, it goes from being fun to being work. It doesn't need to be realistic, it just needs to be playable.[/quote']

 

I said believable, not realistic. A fully realistic economy would likely take up an entire book on it's own.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

I said believable' date=' not realistic. A fully realistic economy would likely take up an entire book on it's own.[/quote']

 

This day I swear to you, the fine people of the HERO Boards, that if I ever put pen to paper and try to 'publish' my setting in any way, shape, or form... I swear to put more thought into the "believability" of the setting with regards to many of the things omitted, overlooked, or outright pulled from one's ass so common to other settings

[Markdoc]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

That could be a cop-out which discourages world builders from integrating a believable economy into their setting.

 

I should point out that I would never run a game set set in the realms - it's just too goofball for me. However, I also realise that our GM really isn't into "realistic world-building" - she's using a prebuilt gameworld and running largely off modules. My point was not that goofball world with unworkable economies are a good idea - I think it's a terrible idea and shows a) laziness and lack of imagination on the part of the writers. I agree that it's a cop-out.

 

However, I can still have fun in such a game setting. Not as much fun as if it were more realistic, or better thought out, but still. And to be fair, I recognise that making workable economies, or even quasi-realistic game settings in a high-magic environment is hard - and the end product might not appeal to a lot of gamers because we can be pretty sure that it wouldn't look much like Ye Olde Medievale Worlde that so many game worlds resemble.

 

cheers, Mark

[Ragitsu]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Well, believable would cover obvious gaps like "Hm...how does that outpost, way out in the middle of nowhere, that doesn't use magic, manage to keep themselves constantly supplied"?

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Fantasy Economies: How closely should we examine them?

 

Well' date=' [b']believable[/b] would cover obvious gaps like "Hm...how does that outpost, way out in the middle of nowhere, that doesn't use magic, manage to keep themselves constantly supplied"?

 

Unless I have some reason to suspect that it's a plot point of some kind, I'd just let it slide. I wouldn't find it important enough to fuss with, unless something keeps leading me back to that.