> However, I find the wealth rules work just fine if you add a touch
> of common sense (you can't buy something that doesn't exist) and
> are careful about adding resistance values together.
But how can you be careful about it? I just don't think you can add values together _at all_.
The problem I have with this rule (adding abilities) is not that it also requires using common sense, the problem is that every result I can think of is _against_ common sense.
> Someone who acquires 10W7 wealth has just about the resources to
> pay for a castle (50% chance) but can't buy it because the local
> market desn't have any in stock.
The largest price on the list is 15w5 and you could buy that easily with 10w7. Actually, you can double your wealth temporarily for a mafor purchase - so wealth 17w2 or so would have a 50% chance against 15w5. And all the building prices ARE for actually making it and does cover labour, materials etc. But this isn't, of course, the point.
> Adding resistances works fine at low levels (or for buying multiple
> items: 10 cows for 4 horses or whatever).
What do you mean with low levels? What WOULD let your players buy with 10 cows and what wouldn't? The rules work if the wealth rates of the original items are VERY close to each other, but not in any other case IMO.
> Improved rules would be OK, but need (IMO) to retain the advantages
> of the present rules.
>
> Thom
Here I'm in complete agreement. I hate the '2L for a place in a inn' kind of bookkeeping. Wealth system has very unique advantages and fits nicely with rest of the game.
Juha Ratilainen
Powered by hypermail