Economy

[Synthesis]

I don't really like any of Old Kank's ideas, either.

Too much "special stuff for GMHs" and "extra harshness for everyone else,"  but I'll admit I haven't really considered most of it in depth merely because it sounded incredibly boring, to be honest.

The root cause of the current inflation of the economy can be tracked back to one thing: vNPC sales.  If you got rid of that...oh the heartache!

I guarantee it would immediately set off epic wars, or people would return to the Old Ways...where you crafted your shit in the tavern, lived out of your backpack, and only drank booze in the bar if someone else was buying.

But then again, I think it's a little boring to make people grind for 2-3 weeks just to buy a piece of armor when the average PC only lives what? 3-4 weeks?  I mean, that's 75-80% of the time you spent playing the character just trying to afford a breastplate or something.  Fuckin' lame if you ask me.

[Aaron Goulet]

Chalton leather isn't difficult to get ahold of in Allanak.

The butcher shop sells an infinite amount, in case you hadn't noticed.

I hadn't noticed, actually.  Thank you.

[hyzhenhok]

5. Create jobs that have value over time.

I'm not comfortable flying in the face of the game world and allowing anyone to engage in this sort of entrepreneurial economics. The GMH's are rich and have it relatively easy precisely because they've monopolized this sort of thing. A guild_merchant collecting raw materials and making things in private is one thing, but I think we're looking at the game through our modern, real-world glasses if we think these are legitimate solutions that can appear in game. A free market depends on protected private ownership and contract enforcement, which simply doesn't exist in Zalanthas (except at the Sorcerer Kings' and Templars' discretion, or in a few specific cases of necessary convenience like stables and apartments).

This is why fully fledged warehouses don't make much sense either, IMO...

Anyway, I don't think there is a problem at all. Like Synthesis says, most PCs die very quickly. The ones that get rich are the very few lucky ones who manage to take advantage of the system: not a free market system, but one where those who go out and take risks that the powers at be are not interested in can do well for themselves, if they're lucky. That some independents do extremely well, even better than clannies, is irrelevant. Remember that for every wealthy independent PC you see, there are probably 20 others who have died trying to do the same thing, and 2000 vNPCs who have also died trying to do the same.

As to the argument that risk-reward is not at issue here because of risky clan positions...it's not the clan employers' faults that they managed to dupe some poor sap into pledging to loyally do something very dangerous on a regular basis for a mere 300 coins a month, and you can't remember that they also provide a lot of other perks to that employee. Though maybe the coin side could stand to be sweetened.

My suggest: bump higher rank clan employee salaries substantially. 2nd tier employees should be paid much, much substantially more than entry level employees, instead of something paltry like +100 'sid or something. For example, if a hypothetical clan pays their entry level 300 'sid, 2nd rank 400 'sid, 3rd rank 500 'sid, I'd like to see it bumped to 300-600-1000 or something like that. This would be the simplest way to fix what seems to be the general complaint, that independents have easier access to 'sid than some clanned characters, while still matching the game world somewhat (lower ranked clan members are mere tools being exploited by the clan, while higher ranks have proven their value and thus can share in the wealth the employer has access to). It also helps with the OOC concern of there not being enough incentive to join clans, without directly attacking the independent side of things (which most suggestions seem to be doing, for some reason).

Edit: Holy run-on sentences Batman. Oh well, off to bed.

[AmandaGreathouse]

Very, very well put, hyzenhok.

In fact, most clans have specific rules forbidding their members from doing the activities that result in so much wealth for independent pcs. Which says in and of itself that it's not a conflict of interest for those doing it. Plus, it's always seemed somewhat ridiculous to me that people who hold so MUCH power within the clan as having access to its bank accounts and bringing new people in weren't payed a substantially larger amount than the lowest ranking members of it in any guaranteed fashion.

I think that motivating more pcs to be part of a clan doesn't have to screw independent pcs over. It's a very good point that so many people die trying to achieve the success that people are so bent over a few people achieving. I mean, you have a risky job that's KNOWN to kill 99 out of 100 of the people who do it....

And people are surprised that it pays well?

[Lizzie]

I think there's a factor missing from the complaints that clanned people don't get enough sids.

I read "they're not allowed to engage in the things that make the sids that Independents do and make."

I don't read "they ARE allowed to engage in these things, IF their character proves himself trustworthy to his clan leader."

Having played in a couple of GMH leadership roles, I can't tell you how many characters have passed through employment, whining about not making sids. And then, when their character dies, I go to empty their lockers and find around 5000 sids worth of stockpiled loot. And then I learn that their apartment was just rented by a friend, who found another 20,000 worth of stockpiled loot in it.

I guess some of these whiners didn't really need a raise in salary. Or that bonus my character didn't think they deserved, because they were too busy mudsexing in their apartment to help saw more wood for my character's project. Or gather their group together to escort me from point A to point B. Or even take a few minutes to check in over the way to let me know they're still alive and in need of their monthly pay (this was before the autopay).

Seeing it from the leadership side of things, I just don't get why anyone would have a complaint about not enough sids in a GMH. If you earn it, you get it. If you don't, you don't, OR have to break the rules. I was renting apartments for employees, giving out sid bonuses, buying equipment for them, giving them fancy food that they didn't have access to, getting them out of jail, convincing "important people" to leave them alone...I worked my ass off for the ones that EARNED that from me.

Everyone else, the pests, or needy, or whiny, or lazy, or had an attitude, were welcome to leave, or die.

When I was an underling in a GMH clan I was given plenty of opportunity to get rich, or rise in the ranks. It was't even that difficult. Just make yourself USEFUL to your boss. It wasn't just me, I saw plenty of PCs get showered with gifts, sids, and perks that the "less deserving" got. If your characters never have those opportunities, then maybe you should try RPing a character who deserves them.

[Old Kank]

5. Create jobs that have value over time.

I'm not comfortable flying in the face of the game world and allowing anyone to engage in this sort of entrepreneurial economics. The GMH's are rich and have it relatively easy precisely because they've monopolized this sort of thing. A guild_merchant collecting raw materials and making things in private is one thing, but I think we're looking at the game through our modern, real-world glasses if we think these are legitimate solutions that can appear in game. A free market depends on protected private ownership and contract enforcement, which simply doesn't exist in Zalanthas (except at the Sorcerer Kings' and Templars' discretion, or in a few specific cases of necessary convenience like stables and apartments).

I'm not sure I understand your point, hyzenhok.  I fully support strong-arm, GMH monopoly tactics, which is exactly why I proposed removing the GMH pawn shops: they don't make sense.  Were you referring to the 4-5 job ideas I proposed?  If so, all I have to say is that some of them were taken straight out of our history books and aren't tainted by our modern, real-world glasses (though, to be fair, some came out of my head just for regional flavoring).  Two-thousand years ago, most people were either farmers or goat-herders, and the tangible goods they produced were, in a sense, their money.  If your objection is the proposed implementation where players can rent a plot of land, all I can say is that's a limitation of the game.  It's not perfect, but most of the code needed for it already exists and so with a little adaptation it could be implemented well before Arm 2.0 arrives.

[Sinna]

Was the argument that Clannies don't get enough or was it (as I had thought) That indies make _far_ too much?

[spawnloser]

A little of both.

[Sephiroto]

In regards to the independent wealth/clanned-perk gap, one thing that bothers me is how much GMH employees have to pay for house gear and finery.  Sure they get some discounts, but it still seems like theyr'e still paying too much.  I could be wrong, but when PC merchants of a certain PC clan that I was part of wants me to pay 700-1000+ coins for two pieces of SHARPENED BONE to help me climb rocks, I can't help but laugh.  Seriously, what's so special about sharpened bones?  Were they made out of Adamantium? 

This extends to less-rare items too.  Considering that VNPC and PC hunters are going out and gathering copious amounts of common, raw materials, the crafters are being paid mostly on salary, and that House agents/merchants shouldn't be profiting from internal sales, it seems like it should cost relatively little for a house member who has sworn a LIFE oath to equip themselves with good, dependable equipment.  But instead, I have the overwhelming feeling that they are being taken advantage.  I'm aware that there is a base price in the system and that the Agent/Merchant charges more to 3rd parties to make profit, but more could be done to save clan PC's money on House goods.

Please don't mistake me for saying ALL house products should be acquired cheaply.  But necessities or highly functional, though valuable items should be a bit easier to come by.  Amos should still have to pay out the ass for that special ordered, ornimental silt-horror helmet, a diamond-studded cheese knife, or an intricately decorated Kadian dress.

If we made it cost less for House employees of reasonable status to deck themselves out in good clan gear then they could spend less time and less worry on making those extra coins through illegal/twinkish/dangerous/iffy means.

[HaiWolfe]

Two-thousand years ago, most people were either farmers or goat-herders, and the tangible goods they produced were, in a sense, their money.  If your objection is the proposed implementation where players can rent a plot of land, all I can say is that's a limitation of the game.  It's not perfect, but most of the code needed for it already exists and so with a little adaptation it could be implemented well before Arm 2.0 arrives.

What about a sharecropping system in lieu of renting? In sharecropping, landlords let tenants use their land in exchange for a share of the harvest, generally around 50%. Tenants may or may not have to pay rent, depending on the contract, and could purchase starting seeds, tools, animals, etc. from the landowner (often at inflated prices).

Seems more thematically fitting, reinforcing the notion of commoners as serfs/peons, not entrepreneurs. There would also be the added benefit of a natural cap on the amount of coin entering the IG economy, since a 50% tax on profits on top of overhead would lead to a point of diminishing returns for PC farmers and herders.

[Qzzrbl]

I'd bet if PC templars -really- started cracking down on PC's selling to NPC shops, it would fix a few things.

I've had and seen PCs sell to NPC merchants and to other PCs even, without even having heard of a merchant's token.

Couple that with templars taking a little "tax" from profits....

Just a thought.

[Sephiroto]

Its illegal to sell to NPC merchants without a token?

[Xeran Van Houten]

Are NPCs and PCs equivolent?

[spawnloser]

In both cities, one person must have a merchant's license/token in every transaction for it to be legal.  Shopkeeper NPCs can all be assumed to have the license/token.

[AmandaGreathouse]

In both cities, one person must have a merchant's license/token in every transaction for it to be legal.  Shopkeeper NPCs can all be assumed to have the license/token.

That's kind of what I thought, also. Which is why I always assume that you don't need one to deal with NPCs or GMH players, because theirs are taken care of also.

[Qzzrbl]

In both cities, one person must have a merchant's license/token in every transaction for it to be legal.  Shopkeeper NPCs can all be assumed to have the license/token.

Oh, right.... I forgot only one person needs a token. x-X

I tried.

[Synthesis]

Templars cracking down on PCs selling to shops would be silly, anyway.

It's assumed that, when the shopkeeper buys something, it's something he thinks is worth the money.  So if templars start cracking down on sales to GMH shops, they're also cracking down on profits that are expected by the GMHs.

I suppose you could go that route if you really wanted to, as a PC templar.  I don't think it would be particularly wise, though.

[Qzzrbl]

Templars cracking down on PCs selling to shops would be silly, anyway.

It's assumed that, when the shopkeeper buys something, it's something he thinks is worth the money.  So if templars start cracking down on sales to GMH shops, they're also cracking down on profits that are expected by the GMHs.

I suppose you could go that route if you really wanted to, as a PC templar.  I don't think it would be particularly wise, though.

I meant more cracking down on profits to unaffiliated PCs more than anything.... Doubt a templar would bother GMH merchants much.

[hyzhenhok]

5. Create jobs that have value over time.

I'm not comfortable flying in the face of the game world and allowing anyone to engage in this sort of entrepreneurial economics. The GMH's are rich and have it relatively easy precisely because they've monopolized this sort of thing. A guild_merchant collecting raw materials and making things in private is one thing, but I think we're looking at the game through our modern, real-world glasses if we think these are legitimate solutions that can appear in game. A free market depends on protected private ownership and contract enforcement, which simply doesn't exist in Zalanthas (except at the Sorcerer Kings' and Templars' discretion, or in a few specific cases of necessary convenience like stables and apartments).

I'm not sure I understand your point, hyzenhok.  I fully support strong-arm, GMH monopoly tactics, which is exactly why I proposed removing the GMH pawn shops: they don't make sense.  Were you referring to the 4-5 job ideas I proposed?  If so, all I have to say is that some of them were taken straight out of our history books and aren't tainted by our modern, real-world glasses (though, to be fair, some came out of my head just for regional flavoring).  Two-thousand years ago, most people were either farmers or goat-herders, and the tangible goods they produced were, in a sense, their money.  If your objection is the proposed implementation where players can rent a plot of land, all I can say is that's a limitation of the game.  It's not perfect, but most of the code needed for it already exists and so with a little adaptation it could be implemented well before Arm 2.0 arrives.

I was talking about your job ideas.

You're trying to use subsistence level activity for justification for profit-oriented economic activity, while they are completely different animals. 1000 years ago, in actual urban environments more comparable to what we have in Zalanthas, you had guilds monopolizing industries and utterly preventing any sort of independent activity. The GMH's are much, much more powerful than medieval industry guilds. My question would be, why are these opportunities even available to commoners? Wouldn't the GMH's have bought them all up to use them as cash cows? And used their political connections to enable that? (Same argument goes against player-rented warehouses, really).

Was the argument that Clannies don't get enough or was it (as I had thought) That indies make _far_ too much?

The OP complained generally about some indies being able to make more than clanned roles. The problem I have is that a lot of suggestions are aimed at crippling indie money generation, apparently with the assumption that all indies are swimming in obsidian, and with the blatant purpose of driving them into clans. Having played plenty of indies that have trouble making ends meet (especially early on, or when some disaster or theft costs them a large portion of their wealth), I really can't accept anything that would make it more difficult for independent characters. It's already difficult enough, and it already is set up in a way that meshes coherently with the game world.

[Aaron Goulet]

The OP complained generally about some indies being able to make more than clanned roles. The problem I have is that a lot of suggestions are aimed at crippling indie money generation, apparently with the assumption that all indies are swimming in obsidian, and with the blatant purpose of driving them into clans. Having played plenty of indies that have trouble making ends meet (especially early on, or when some disaster or theft costs them a large portion of their wealth), I really can't accept anything that would make it more difficult for independent characters. It's already difficult enough, and it already is set up in a way that meshes coherently with the game world.

After reading through this thread again, I sort of agree that, aside from a few tweaks, the ability for independent PCs to generate obsidian coins shouldn't be hindered (it really does shaft casual players), though I still think that somehow limiting the amount of coins an independent PC can safely amass is a good idea; it doesn't affect the casual or middle-class independent PCs, but it does lower the frequency of mega-wealthy independent PCs.  That's only one side of the coin, however.

The other side is giving clanned PCs a substantial salary boost.  Like it or not, the in-game economy is inflated, and even cheaply-made goods (armor, blades, and more) rarely come at a price lower than 100-200 coins.  Current clan pay does not reflect this, creating much of the disparity.

My personal take on salaries is that they should be set up something like this (though clans should vary in pay based on in-game wealth):

Entry Level:	500
Middle Management:	1000
Upper Management:	2000

I'm basing these numbers on the following:

The cost of an ale in the Gaj is 18 coins.  Even with a pay of 500 coins every 115 days, an entry level employee would only be able to purchase an ale at the end of a hard day's work for 27 days before going broke.  At "middle management" pay, it's 55 days.  This still seems kind of poor, especially given what independent PCs make, but since PCs typically aren't logged in for every single IC day, this amount is at least workable, perhaps even fair, as clanned PCs don't have to codedly work for their coin (aside from what their superiors demand), and they typically get free food, water, and lodging.

I'd also like to encourage people that play nobility/superiors to consider issuing performance-based pay, to supplement an employee's base salary.  This will achieve two things:

• Your employees will feel that their efforts are appreciated.  ICly, this means your employees are likely to become more productive.  OOCly, the benefits differ based on who's playing your employees, but it isn't unreasonable to suggest that they'll also feel more involved.

• Your employees won't need to seek an alternate source of income.  Grebbing and other traditional moneymaking activities are discouraged in most clans, even clans like the T'zai Byn (unless it's part of a contract).  If people are getting what they need from their clan, there's less incentive to look outside of it for income.

These are net benefits to you, both as an OOC and an IC leader.

[AmandaGreathouse]

The OP complained generally about some indies being able to make more than clanned roles. The problem I have is that a lot of suggestions are aimed at crippling indie money generation, apparently with the assumption that all indies are swimming in obsidian, and with the blatant purpose of driving them into clans. Having played plenty of indies that have trouble making ends meet (especially early on, or when some disaster or theft costs them a large portion of their wealth), I really can't accept anything that would make it more difficult for independent characters. It's already difficult enough, and it already is set up in a way that meshes coherently with the game world.

After reading through this thread again, I sort of agree that, aside from a few tweaks, the ability for independent PCs to generate obsidian coins shouldn't be hindered (it really does shaft casual players), though I still think that somehow limiting the amount of coins an independent PC can safely amass is a good idea; it doesn't affect the casual or middle-class independent PCs, but it does lower the frequency of mega-wealthy independent PCs.  That's only one side of the coin, however.

The other side is giving clanned PCs a substantial salary boost.  Like it or not, the in-game economy is inflated, and even cheaply-made goods (armor, blades, and more) rarely come at a price lower than 100-200 coins.  Current clan pay does not reflect this, creating much of the disparity.

My personal take on salaries is that they should be set up something like this (though clans should vary in pay based on in-game wealth):

Entry Level:	500
Middle Management:	1000
Upper Management:	2000

I'm basing these numbers on the following:

The cost of an ale in the Gaj is 18 coins.  Even with a pay of 500 coins every 115 days, an entry level employee would only be able to purchase an ale at the end of a hard day's work for 27 days before going broke.  At "middle management" pay, it's 55 days.  This still seems kind of poor, especially given what independent PCs make, but since PCs typically aren't logged in for every single IC day, this amount is at least workable, perhaps even fair, as clanned PCs don't have to codedly work for their coin (aside from what their superiors demand), and they typically get free food, water, and lodging.

I'd also like to encourage people that play nobility/superiors to consider issuing performance-based pay, to supplement an employee's base salary.  This will achieve two things:

• Your employees will feel that their efforts are appreciated.  ICly, this means your employees are likely to become more productive.  OOCly, the benefits differ based on who's playing your employees, but it isn't unreasonable to suggest that they'll also feel more involved.

• Your employees won't need to seek an alternate source of income.  Grebbing and other traditional moneymaking activities are discouraged in most clans, even clans like the T'zai Byn (unless it's part of a contract).  If people are getting what they need from their clan, there's less incentive to look outside of it for income.

These are net benefits to you, both as an OOC and an IC leader.

Very well put. I think the issue is more with clanned pay than independent pay as well. And largely for the sake of playability and the very real IC risk, independent pay should remain what it is. Largely for very real IC circumstances and the way things work with the IC economy, the pricing on ~99% of things is accurate to reflect things as well. I think the simplest, most realistic to IG economy, and most easy to do change would be to increase the clanned pay to the same rough amount as in your suggestion.

Another idea I like is setting clanned pcs up with items for their clan in the manner previously suggested. A pittance.

I was in a clan a while back in which a pc of mine wanted a specific type of armor and the leader set up an rpt to take all the hunters to the place where the animal which resulted in the parts to make it lived and we all went on a huge hunt, followed by pc crafters making the armor from the freshly skinned parts. Not only was it fun and realistic, but it involved more than just one branch, and brought pcs together, leaving them with a fun story to tell and knowing where their armor came from. It was a blast, and I'd love to see this happen more often.

However, I think that in some cases, the suggestion of leaders issuing extra, performance-based pay to underlings could be difficult to do without increasing the pay of those in question. Another thing which I heartily back. I know that the stipend for one particular noble house seems exorbitant, but if you give out smallish bonuses, bribe templars, and use your coin to flaunt and make a show of and bring other pcs into things.... it's very, very easy to spend it all in less than half the time it's supposed to cover.

[Aaron Goulet]

However, I think that in some cases, the suggestion of leaders issuing extra, performance-based pay to underlings could be difficult to do without increasing the pay of those in question. Another thing which I heartily back. I know that the stipend for one particular noble house seems exorbitant, but if you give out smallish bonuses, bribe templars, and use your coin to flaunt and make a show of and bring other pcs into things.... it's very, very easy to spend it all in less than half the time it's supposed to cover.

If that's the case, then it ought to be considered.  If the noble stipend is raised, however, I think the staff should be clear as to where the extra money is supposed to go, so nobles don't go straight to Kadius and spend it on more silk pretties (in my experience as playing a templar/multiple clanned PCs, this is where a large amount of noble stipends tend to go).

[Lizzie]

• Your employees will feel that their efforts are appreciated.  ICly, this means your employees are likely to become more productive.  OOCly, the benefits differ based on who's playing your employees, but it isn't unreasonable to suggest that they'll also feel more involved.
• Your employees won't need to seek an alternate source of income.  Grebbing and other traditional moneymaking activities are discouraged in most clans, even clans like the T'zai Byn (unless it's part of a contract).  If people are getting what they need from their clan, there's less incentive to look outside of it for income.

Untrue. Pay is now automated, for the most part. They're not getting paid because they're appreciated. They're getting paid because the code automatically pays them when they got to an NPC pay-bot and asks for their pay. They can work their ass off, or sit at the tavern and do nothing all day, and get paid the same regardless. This means the employees are likely to become less productive, because there's nothing preventing it and everything to gain by getting paid more than ever to do absolutely nothing.

Employees will seek an alternative source of income anyway. People who go outside the rules when they're getting free food, water, usually stable fees, a place to sleep, storage guarded by NPCs, and training, are people who will go outside the rules no matter how much they're getting paid.

Call me a pessimist, but I've seen characters who are -highly- paid, high-ranking in their clan, who -still- go outside their clan to get more. It's all good if it's for IC reasons, but the fact remains, it happens, and no amount of pay will change that.

[Aaron Goulet]

• Your employees will feel that their efforts are appreciated.  ICly, this means your employees are likely to become more productive.  OOCly, the benefits differ based on who's playing your employees, but it isn't unreasonable to suggest that they'll also feel more involved.
• Your employees won't need to seek an alternate source of income.  Grebbing and other traditional moneymaking activities are discouraged in most clans, even clans like the T'zai Byn (unless it's part of a contract).  If people are getting what they need from their clan, there's less incentive to look outside of it for income.

Untrue. Pay is now automated, for the most part. They're not getting paid because they're appreciated. They're getting paid because the code automatically pays them when they got to an NPC pay-bot and asks for their pay. They can work their ass off, or sit at the tavern and do nothing all day, and get paid the same regardless. This means the employees are likely to become less productive, because there's nothing preventing it and everything to gain by getting paid more than ever to do absolutely nothing.

Employees will seek an alternative source of income anyway. People who go outside the rules when they're getting free food, water, usually stable fees, a place to sleep, storage guarded by NPCs, and training, are people who will go outside the rules no matter how much they're getting paid.

Call me a pessimist, but I've seen characters who are -highly- paid, high-ranking in their clan, who -still- go outside their clan to get more. It's all good if it's for IC reasons, but the fact remains, it happens, and no amount of pay will change that.

Obviously, you didn't read my post.  Those two bullet points were addressing the benefits of leader PC-issued, performance-based pay, not increases to automated pay.

[Lizzie]

Ah you mean bonuses. I missed that line, sorry about that!

The problem with raising pay of clanned people, whether automatic or performanced-based, is that it doesn't really matter how much they get paid, as I said in my previous post. Characters whose players choose for them to disregard "loyalty to the house" or "abiding by the rules of the clan" or anything similar, will disregard them. If my character is a scoundrel, and you pay her 3,000 sids per game month, she will -still- sell all her hides to the NPC merchant in town instead of dumping them in the crate in the estate. If you offer her 30 sids per hide, she'll make an effort so you know she was doing -something- to earn her keep, and then she'll tan the hides, and sell them at the NPC shop in town for 50 sids each.

Characters who disregard the rules/policies/guidelines/laws of the clan, will do so, no matter how much they get paid. Most of them aren't even disregarding it for the sids. They're doing it because the nature of clanned life, and the nature of independent life, and the nature of trying to mix the two - freedom with benefits - is just too damned attractive to NOT do, with some characters.