Fashion Police

[Maso]

Noble stipends should be way way higher than they are. Most indie merchants probably have more money than most nobles. Give nobles more money. Hike up the price of silk and gems etc. Way more. Sorted.

Noble stipends are not 'low' by any means. I'm not going to divulge 'what they are' but they are certainly 'more than enough'. As Delirium pointed out earlier, we also expect Nobles to fuel plots with their coins, not just expand their wardrobe (though they can, if they wish).

Nobles don't spend hours spam crafting and selling items to NPC's, because, whelp, they're Nobles. They fuel plots, not the economy.

I have played a couple in the past, albiet a long time ago so things may have changed...and they were Junior! However, that's kind of the point (of this thread at least), nobles should have enough coin to be fueling plots...and be better than dressed than any commoner can even dream of being able to afford - having an extensive wardrobe of the most luxurious clothes in the Known should be an expenditure that doesn't even require a second thought to budgeting.

Aside from that, commoners who choose to dress head to toe in silk should be ready to face the consequences of the attention that will attract. However, commoners who work for GMH and Noble Houses should be at the mercy of their superiors. If Lord Fancy Pants wants his Aide to look like a Borsail Lady...then that's his choice...

[Jenred]

I had a chance to look at a few of these.  Some are related to the topic, some are a bit of a derail, but I'll cover them here since they were brought up here.

I was saying undyed silk is the same price as dyed linen or sandcloth. -Andl if its supposed to be as expensive as dyed linen or sandcloth, wearing silk (white) will always be cheaper than wearing linen. So from a practical standpoint as a commoner, I'd wear cheap white silk over more expensive dyed linen. Thus creating a silk-illusion of wealth.

Okay.  Well, I'm going to go ahead and tell you that this isn't true.  Undyed silk is not the same price as dyed linen or sandcloth.  I checked every shop that sold undyed silk.

Bugged it in game

At this time, all of those things look like either a matter of proportion and specificity (where at the margins in some pretty specific cases, you might see the results you are talking about here), or a matter of a single thing here or there having an issue (where typoing it/bugging it would be appropriate).  It does not appear to be a prevalent issue.

Well, its more of a wealth inconsistency issue in general, but since its not tied to the fashion police argument anymore, I'll just drop it.

[Nyr]

I had a chance to look at a few of these.  Some are related to the topic, some are a bit of a derail, but I'll cover them here since they were brought up here.

I was saying undyed silk is the same price as dyed linen or sandcloth. -Andl if its supposed to be as expensive as dyed linen or sandcloth, wearing silk (white) will always be cheaper than wearing linen. So from a practical standpoint as a commoner, I'd wear cheap white silk over more expensive dyed linen. Thus creating a silk-illusion of wealth.

Okay.  Well, I'm going to go ahead and tell you that this isn't true.  Undyed silk is not the same price as dyed linen or sandcloth.  I checked every shop that sold undyed silk.

Bugged it in game

Easily fixed, and done.

Well, its more of a wealth inconsistency issue in general, but since its not tied to the fashion police argument anymore, I'll just drop it.

So far you've provided two examples and both were exactly as I indicated--issues at the margin.  In one case you could potentially buy water that is 1 coin more expensive than wine, and that actually made sense in that scenario.  In another case you could buy undyed silk at one place for a few coins cheaper than dyed linen at another place.  Yes, if you were a merchant and exploited this thing you could potentially find it easier and cheaper (in some cases) to outfit yourself in white silk instead of something that is more along the lines of what you should be wearing.

But that's fixed, and it's what we'd call a bug or a typo, not a wealth inconsistency issue in general.

[Nyr]

As an additional bit of derail, we definitely appreciate these typos, bugs, and ideas in-game for the little fixes like these (or others!).  There are a handful of things like these that I've noticed over the years that are really irksome once you have a grasp of what's going on there.  The biggest one I had an issue with recently was The Case of the Half-Rolled Tube of Spice (seriously, why would I not roll up a big ol' tube if I had the spice for it?).   

If you find more cases like these, use those commands--if you need to elaborate on one (or it's too lengthy to detail), you can always pop in a request.

[James de Monet]

The biggest one I had an issue with recently was The Case of the Half-Rolled Tube of Spice (seriously, why would I not roll up a big ol' tube if I had the spice for it?).   

This is fixed?! Oh man, where was I?