You are correct. I wound up having to do all of the examples on kind of a binge, so I wouldn't be surprised if I messed something up somewhere. Longbows as generated by the codex would be 5p, Short/Long and have an r4 cost.taelor wrote:Very cool. One small question about how the longbow stats in the example bow chart was generated. We start with the default stats of (2p, short/medium, RLD: -, 2h, ambush d6, draw 1). We then take the war and long modifiers, which up DR to 4p, draw to 2, range to short/long and gives us the foot attribute. Next, we take the stiff modifier, which limits us to one shot per round and ups our ambush to 2d6, but also increases our DR by one. We should then have 5p, rather than the 4p listed in the chart. Or am I missing something.
Penny counting takes up way too much game time, in my experience. In practice, even games with more concrete currency systems tend to ignore the actual rules. When you have thousands of gold in a D&D game, you stop subtracting coppers to pay for meals at the Inn.Siggi wrote:The Wealth chapter was much anticipated by me, for this system had been mentioned a lot, but never appeared in the drafts until today.
The first impression is quite positive: the system seems neat and ingenious. Speaking for me, I almost always played games with non-abstract money systems. And, naturally, they always seemed right. Now after reading this chapter I realized that I'm quite fed up with counting my gold pieces (and that's exactly what I'm doing all the time these days in a medieval-ocean's-11-style-heist adventure that we're currently playing). I expect that after trying this system it would be extremely hard to go back to that wretched penny-counting.
Even playing D&D, you'd wind up with situations where there's an odd number of treasure or the like and if you've got particularly annoying players, the debate over who gets the last gem/gold piece is a pain. As it stands, I tend to find that the easiest way to deal with it as a GM is just to put one's hand on the scales a bit and give them rewards in easy multiples. Failing that, the "buy a bottle and drink it together" option still works. "An evening’s worth of cheap ale, beer, or wine or a single bottle of good wine or cheap liquor" is r1. Drink up!Siggi wrote:Here's my question, though. Say, the group of three characters has managed to get their hands on a small chest with money. They open it and the GM happily announces that inside they find 4 Coin. So... How do 3 people share 4 Coin?
I mean, in another system, they could've found 40 gold coins (and that also does not divide by 3). But then they can have 13 coins each and then use the last one to buy a bottle and drink it together. I'm typing this because I'm trying to answer this question myself, to figure out, how I would deal with such situations. Maybe the GM should round the number of coins gained up or down (and maybe he should do it before the characters discover the gold?)? Or maybe there may be a certain formula for dividing it. All and all, I'm quite sure that such situations would arise, and there should be a way to deal with it.
This is intentional. If you have Assets 3, you need 4 coin to increase it anyway and the req is cumulative. So you'd need 4 successes on 3 dice. You could do it over multiple maintenance cycles, but that's a slow way to get money. On the other hand, it also represents that a character who has a ton of money has the ability to make investments and the like which accumulate over time without us needing to make a whole "investing in businesses" subsystem.Siggi wrote:Another controversy is about getting Coin from Assets and vice versa. For example, I have 3 Assets and and 3 Coin. I want to increase my Assets, but I need two more Coin to do that. It appears from the rules that I can produce 2 Coin from my Assets (by making a test), and then use the resulting 5 Coin to raise my Assets. Is it designed this way intentionally, or is it, maybe, a backdoor or something?..
In practice, though, for any kind of meaningful purchase, players tend to drop a coin or two whenever they have it just to make sure they get the thing they wanted.
Plus, we got the chance to include a lot of stuff that games normally don't which I think is pretty neat. Worst case scenario, you're inconvenienced by a few extra pages to turn or an extra couple seconds of mouse-clicking. The sections are even bookmarked for you in the pdf.Siggi wrote:UPDI disagree here. Tables are cool, we do need them. Shopping is the most fun in this games, or am I missing something?..myanbar wrote:I found these pages and pages of costs to be mind-numbingly boring. Do you really need 7 pages of lists? I'm talking about the costs of goods and things, pg 77 to 84. Surely it'd be better to pare it down to a page of guidelines instead.
The alternate option might be to move those to an appendix, but then you have the awkward thing where all of the weapons and armor stuff is in one section and everything else is at the end of the book.