The Out-of-Wack Economy

[Narf]

I think it would be interesting if we did away with banks altogether.
If people had to haul around scads of coin all the time -thievery and conflict would enjoy good times.
Nobles could trade notes of trade among themselves and have their servants handling the coin (and perhaps skimming).

Knowing you have to travel and can't carry your 10k in coin because its just too damn heavy would be a good thing.
Hiring people responsible for transporting that would give jobs to transporters, professional money-counters whatever.

I just like it. It would make the world more dangerous and make travel more interesting.

We already have a sample of what will happen if this were enacted by looking at the raw material economy. What's more, because raw materials and heavier and more encumbering than coins the effects of it should be exaggerated compared to the money economy.

And yet the interaction provided by it isn't that impressive. People rarely hire the Byn to transport lumber. Bandits and pickpockets don't flock to grebbers to steal their what-have-you's, and the big warehouses of clan materials are really only a moderately attractive force.

This isn't to say it hasn't added anything to the game, it just wasn't as significant as people are prognosticating would happen with a similar change to the coin economy. And coins aren't even close to as encumbering as lumber and stone.

[spicemustflow]

Your comparison is weird. You don't think that two large chests of coins would present a much more attractive target than several tons of lumber?

[Riev]

I think what he's saying is that since people tend to just transport their raw goods, as they are, and since that is already a pretty "safe" enterprise, that transporting coins wouldn't be as dangerous.

Though, transporting a chest of obsidian is worth a lot more than a small party of agafari logs.

[Desertman]

I think what he's saying is that since people tend to just transport their raw goods, as they are, and since that is already a pretty "safe" enterprise, that transporting coins wouldn't be as dangerous.

Though, transporting a chest of obsidian is worth a lot more than a small party of agafari logs.

I've said it before, I will say it again.

Deposit 1300

You deposit 1300 coins with a Nenyuki banker.

A Nenyuki banker hands you a darkly-stained leather voucher.

A Nenyuki banker says to you in sirihish, "Please present this voucher to reclaim your coins."

Offer Voucher

You give a darkly-stained leather voucher to a Nenyuki banker.

A Nenyuki banker gives you 1300 coins.



(I would prefer if they charged you 10% of the balance on the voucher to reclaim the coins the voucher represents, as that would be very realistic and "Zalanthan" for a House that has a monopoly on the only bank in the world.)


Suddenly, the banking system makes a lot more IC sense, and suddenly you can't just deposit your vast salt foraging fortune into Nenyuk and have it be 100% safe from anyone who would want to raid you. Conflict incoming.

Also, this makes it so that low end folks who can't afford the services of Nenyuk will keep their coins on them as well. Can't afford/don't want to pay Nenyuk's 10% fee to bank with them? Well, enjoy guarding/defending your wealth yourself, instead of having Nenyuk do it for you.

[Riev]

In that system, D-Man, what would be the way in which a House could have its "shared" account be different from a single Noble's account?

I'm not saying mine would handle it ANY better, but that WOULD be an issue, as sometimes its necessary to use House/Clan funds for something rather than your personal account.

Though I like the idea of a voucher of sorts. Easier to hide, easier to steal, and it'd be like saying "Gimme your wallet" out in the sands. Also..


Deposit numerous 50coin instances, get back 20 vouchers. "Sorry man this is all I have... please don't kill me." or even "We're running a raffle for these Nenyuki vouchers of varying amounts! Buy in today!"

[Lizzie]

So what happens when you deposit 1300 today, and get a voucher. In two days, you deposit another 250, and get a voucher. Then two days later, you deposit 300, get a voucher.

By the end of the RL week, you have, let's say - 2000 total, with 7 vouchers.

Now - you need some money. You need 400 sids to pay the rent.

Which voucher do you cash in?

And how do you know that's the one, if your character can't read?

What happens if you cash the wrong one for, oh - 200 sids. So now you need just 200 sids more. So you grab another one - that's the 700-sid one. Woops. Now you have 900 sids, and you only wanted 400. So you have to deposit 500 sids...and get another voucher.

Sounds like a WHOLE lot of work to me, isn't even remotely realistic (since - realistically, people know how to read and don't use obsidian as currency and don't have bank accounts that don't require them to sign things - which they can't do because they can't write, either)...

A waste of time, an added frustration, that doesn't do anything believably, or playably, or realistically. It's just another thing to make the game harder, without providing any useful functionality.

[Desertman]

In that system, D-Man, what would be the way in which a House could have its "shared" account be different from a single Noble's account?

I'm not saying mine would handle it ANY better, but that WOULD be an issue, as sometimes its necessary to use House/Clan funds for something rather than your personal account.

Though I like the idea of a voucher of sorts. Easier to hide, easier to steal, and it'd be like saying "Gimme your wallet" out in the sands. Also..


Deposit numerous 50coin instances, get back 20 vouchers. "Sorry man this is all I have... please don't kill me." or even "We're running a raffle for these Nenyuki vouchers of varying amounts! Buy in today!"

Maybe "House Accounts" could be "left alone" for coding purposes in this instance. That is a perk of having a House account, no fees and/or it would be assumed Nenyuk handles House banking fees on a very high end level above the PC's.

[Desertman]

So what happens when you deposit 1300 today, and get a voucher. In two days, you deposit another 250, and get a voucher. Then two days later, you deposit 300, get a voucher.

By the end of the RL week, you have, let's say - 2000 total, with 7 vouchers.

Now - you need some money. You need 400 sids to pay the rent.

Which voucher do you cash in?

And how do you know that's the one, if your character can't read?

What happens if you cash the wrong one for, oh - 200 sids. So now you need just 200 sids more. So you grab another one - that's the 700-sid one. Woops. Now you have 900 sids, and you only wanted 400. So you have to deposit 500 sids...and get another voucher.

Sounds like a WHOLE lot of work to me, isn't even remotely realistic (since - realistically, people know how to read and don't use obsidian as currency and don't have bank accounts that don't require them to sign things - which they can't do because they can't write, either)...

A waste of time, an added frustration, that doesn't do anything believably, or playably, or realistically. It's just another thing to make the game harder, without providing any useful functionality.

get coins pack

get voucher pack

offer voucher

deposit total amount

Walk away with one voucher.

If you want to carry five vouchers on you, that is up to you, but if that is your choice, it is up to you to remember which voucher goes with which amount.

It's like having five mount tickets on you now. It is up to you to remember which mount ticket goes with which creature, or you just cost yourself 20 coins to get out a mount you don't need.

Really, most people would just make sure to consolidate their funds under a single voucher every time they stop at the bank. It would mean an extra three commands, depending on how quickly they type....your problem is resolved with about eight seconds of work on the part of the player.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Uh, just have a ticket specific to each region of the world. Then force people to transport their coins between locations in person. Money is relatively safe as long as you stay in one location - it's moving between locations with your funds that is dangerous.

a cross-emblazoned ticket
a sun-emblazoned ticket
a storm-emblazoned ticket
a outpost-emblazoned ticket
so and and so forth

[Desertman]

Uh, just have a ticket specific to each region of the world. Then force people to transport their coins between locations in person. Money is relatively safe as long as you stay in one location - it's moving between locations with your funds that is dangerous.

a cross-emblazoned ticket
a sun-emblazoned ticket
a storm-emblazoned ticket
a outpost-emblazoned ticket
so and and so forth

Ohhh, I like this too.

This is a lot better than my recommendation to introduce multiple currencies and currency exchange NPC's. (Thread from about a year ago.)

This is a much more simple way of forcing people to transport their fortunes in a realistic manner.

[TillForPie]

Uh, just have a ticket specific to each region of the world. Then force people to transport their coins between locations in person. Money is relatively safe as long as you stay in one location - it's moving between locations with your funds that is dangerous.

a cross-emblazoned ticket
a sun-emblazoned ticket
a storm-emblazoned ticket
a outpost-emblazoned ticket
so and and so forth

I like this.

[Barsook]

Uh, just have a ticket specific to each region of the world. Then force people to transport their coins between locations in person. Money is relatively safe as long as you stay in one location - it's moving between locations with your funds that is dangerous.

a cross-emblazoned ticket
a sun-emblazoned ticket
a storm-emblazoned ticket
a outpost-emblazoned ticket
so and and so forth

I like this.

[evilcabbage]

I hate this.

[Fujikoma]

I hate this.

Aw, you hate everything, but... For once I must agree, although I will choose the words "Dislike, but will learn to cope with if it becomes a reality".

[evilcabbage]

My solution: Any bank account that's independent with over 1,000 coins in it should be taxed lightly. Any independent with over 5k should be taxed moderately. 10k? Heavily. 20k? Voraciously.

[Eyeball]

What people seem to have lost track of here is that, beyond a certain point, money is useless to an independent anyhow. What is he going to spend it on? Even silks would just make him a target of hostility.

It doesn't take a newly rich independent long to figure this out either.

[Riev]

What people seem to have lost track of here is that, beyond a certain point, money is useless to an independent anyhow. What is he going to spend it on? Even silks would just make him a target of hostility.

It doesn't take a newly rich independent long to figure this out either.

I think thats why people are advocating that their money just isn't 100% safe, then. 20k doesn't buy you much, if nobody likes you or is willing to do what you want anyways. So if you have that much, why let it sit in a bank? If you can't spend it on plots or people, maybe it should be able to be a target.

[Synthesis]

Pegging bank accounts to tickets is a really stupid idea, both for raiders and for depositors.

We can all imagine what the downside for depositors would be, so I'm not going to belabor that.

For raiders, though, the downside is that every swinging dick in the Known World is going to run like their entire life savings is in their pack, because THEIR ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS IS IN THEIR PACK.

[DustMight]

Pegging bank accounts to tickets is a really stupid idea, both for raiders and for depositors.

We can all imagine what the downside for depositors would be, so I'm not going to belabor that.

For raiders, though, the downside is that every swinging dick in the Known World is going to run like their entire life savings is in their pack, because THEIR ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS IS IN THEIR PACK.

Actually, this does not make the idea stupid.
That people run has nothing to do whether their entire life savings is in their pack or not.  People run already and their entire life savings isn't in their pack (or doesn't have to be).

The problem is that people THINK they can get away or that they are certainly dead either way.  Realistically someone would likely give up all their coin to avoid dying - if they thought they had a good chance of not dying by doing so.

[Fujikoma]

I think part of the problem is the player having the impression that the raider will take all their PC has on them and/or kill them. If bandits were less greedy, maybe there would be more opportunities for interaction, although, I must admit, some are a bit quick to run, but, if anything, when the opportunity presents itself, it's up to the raider to present themselves as not just another one of "those" raiders. An arrow to the face is a good way to communicate "I intend to kill you and take all your things".

While "Drop your packs or die!" presents an opportunity for cooperation, it obviously presents some problems... Myself, I've never had much issue with raiders, definitely enriches the grebbing/salting experience by providing real danger aside from the naturally occurring hazards.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Pegging bank accounts to tickets is a really stupid idea, both for raiders and for depositors.

We can all imagine what the downside for depositors would be, so I'm not going to belabor that.

For raiders, though, the downside is that every swinging dick in the Known World is going to run like their entire life savings is in their pack, because THEIR ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS IS IN THEIR PACK.

This IS something I didn't necessarily think about. It does make the idea of a ticket sort of bad, particularly for independents, unless the ticket was tied to the PC and thus couldn't be used by other folks.

But I still think I'd like to see you have to transport money between individual banks. The banking system could remain exactly as it is, but instead of you depositing 12k in Allanak, and then riding to Tuluk and pulling out 12k, your account in Tuluk should be at zero, unless you transport that 12k to Tuluk.

[Drayab]

I don't like the ticket voucher idea. You're basically doing away with Nenyuk as a safe place to store your money, only instead of having to stash your coins because there isn't a bank, you have to stash your voucher so you can get your coins back when you need them. If we were going this route, I would rather just stash the coins because the vouchers seem suspiciously like the beginnings of paper money.

I do like the idea of separating banks by locale. I think the current system is a little too convenient. I want travel to be both dangerous as well as lucrative, and I think this would help make travel marginally more difficult. One more thing to add on your list of necessary supplies: food, water, and coin.

I think the tax idea is almost a good idea. I would rather have a deposit fee as opposed to a periodic fee based on the balance. Make it something like a flat 5% of all deposits go straight to Nenyuk. That might provide a little encouragement for players to stash a little in the apartment and keep more on hand while still providing a rainy day fund in case disaster strikes.

[TimTembo]

I agree that people should have to move coin between the cities.

However, what will happen is that the merchant house PCs will just move it on their wagons. Maybe for a fee. It'll basically be like Nenyuk except you'll have to pay a percentage to whatever PC Agent.

The wagons won't be attacked because that can't happen without a lot of boxes being checked. It'll happen once in a great while but basically the coins will be at negligible risk.

[Patuk]

Yeah, I like the idea of needlessly overcomplicating a facet of the game without making it any more fun to show for it.

Great stuff, that.

[Desertman]

I agree that people should have to move coin between the cities.

However, what will happen is that the merchant house PCs will just move it on their wagons. Maybe for a fee. It'll basically be like Nenyuk except you'll have to pay a percentage to whatever PC Agent.

The wagons won't be attacked because that can't happen without a lot of boxes being checked. It'll happen once in a great while but basically the coins will be at negligible risk.

Wait? You mean people are going to have to start caravanning and hiring guards and creating plots/roleplay based around the idea of moving currency in a desert world in a semi-realistic manner instead of just having magic auto banking?

You are making this idea sound awesome, and I think you were advocating against it.