HW as a concept, and _Adding_ abilities, wealth and wells

From: Julian Lord <julian.lord_at_...>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 16:45:49 +0200


The thread seems to be wandering away from rules discussion, and into the realm of game philosophy. Is this the proper place for such talk ?

Let's hope that we can steer it back to more productive rules discussion...

Anyway :

Tim :

> > I don't see how the presence of such rules (and we're actually
> >talking here about changes to the existing rules, not pages and
> >pages of charts, tables, and mathematical orthodoxy ; for zero net
> >increase to the complexity and number of pages in HW devoted to
> >rules) could possibly ruin the game for people who don't care about
> >such things anyway ("You find a torc : Great ! +1 Wealth !" <move
> >along to more interesting things>)
>
> which seems to be missing the whole point. HW Wealth =/= Gold.

I'm hardly missing the point ; indeed you seem to be flinging my own arguments back at me !

> You not only can't say "A torc = +1 Wealth" because of the non-
> linearity of the Wealth rating (so a torc will represent a different
> value to a Sticpicker and a Tribal King) but because your wealth is
> not just the sum of all the torc's you possess. If you start
> inventing "side rules" to add up wealth outside of the normal method
> of increasing abilities then where do you end? Do you no longer have
> to cement magic items?

Who ever said anything about dumping the need to cement new-found Wealth with HPs ?

What I am suggesting is that HW should have several compatible and coherent methods for dealing with wealth and money.

  1. The Wheels, Lunars, and Clacks accountancy method (plus cows), of fond RQ remembrance, still used as is by some HW players.
  2. Narrativist Wealth rules, as already existing in HW, albeit with improved design and more sensible numbers to placate the simulationists in the crowd.
  3. A semi-simulationist method for adding Wealth to Wealth, knowing the proper TNs for ready cash, pocket money, numbers of cows, and other forms of exchangeable goods.
  4. The existing "A torc = +1 Wealth" method, totally ignoring mathematical accuracy as unnecessary to the right-braininess of HW. More power to the right hemisphere !
  5. Especially, some method to convert each of these approaches into the terms of the others.

All of this to be (re-)built upon the solid framework of HW rules for Abilities. Wealth is indeed a normal Ability, albeit an unusual one, and should in any case be used as one in most circumstances. No-one has suggested that the core of HW should be scrapped.


Tim and Bryan :

> > "How many HP am I going to spend on increasing my Wealth this
> > session" - this might be at the "unrelated" rate (if little or no
> > loot was garnered), the "related" rate (if a "normal" amount of
> loot
> > was garnered) or a special "Cementing" rate offered by the GM (If a
> > large amount was achieved). Once you have decided this, it has
> > automatically answered your second question - The amount you
> actually
> > get to keep is represented by the amount which your wealth rating
> has
> > just gone up.
>
> I think this sums beautifully one solution to the wealth rules. It
> makes getting rich a little more hero point intensive in some ways,
> which is only fair since if you save someone's life you only gain a
> relationship with them if you use a heropoint on it. In short this
> brings wealth more clearly into the realm of other abilities.
>
> I'd love to see the rules in HW2 say basiclly what Tim wrote above,
> with the addition that if the narrator is giving wealth to the
> characters and doesn't want to otherwise drain their HP gains, he can
> give them an assigned (directed? whatever the proper term is) HP
> point to cement it with.

I completely agree : and we need (that is : HW2 needs) some method of working out what the proper numbers should be.


Christian :

> I was really surprised about the comments to my suggestions.If
> everybody knows the things I said,why do so many questions occur,that
> deal with this special misunderstanding?

Because it's a difficult issue ?

> I for myself think,that the wealth rules are good and very elegant-
> only need a little more guideline,how to generate costratings.

Yes indeed : there are two schools here, those who want improved rules, and those who use Wealth as any other HW ability. I believe that these are compatible approaches.

> So if you have a problem with them,why don�t you just use cash
> rules,taking the pricelists from Runequest?

Because I don't want to ?

Because the Wealth ability is a far superior concept, albeit a poorly executed one as far as the suggested TNs are concerned ?

> That�s by far the simplest
> solution,and you can happily add up all of your cows and
> lunars.Either you understand,that everything is an abstraction and
> then you do just that or you don�t and then you want mathematics to
> add wealth,which will not work.

Mathematics don't work to add wealth ?

Generations of economists, bankers, and stockbrokers turn in their graves ...

> I still believe that you can�t add wealth and that there is no
> exception to the HW concept.

Well I'm sorry, but this strikes me as an absurd statement !

And if there is no such exception, what about the Quest Challenge rules, particularly NB p. 41 paragraph 3 ?

> And beside that is not wanted,I would
> say,forgive me if I�m egocentric.

Well yes : one part of the HW paradigm is that it offers a wide range of gaming style _choices_.

I'm not accusing your gaming style of being Wrong or anything ; and though you may not like mine, please refrain from implying that it is, and using such words as "misunderstanding" et cetera. It's extremely annoying. Nobody wants to ruin HW. But some of us think that the current Wealth rules and Ability Addition rules are totally unnecessary blemishes on an otherwise very fine RPG system.

> It�s the same with adding skillevels,you are stressing to much the
> numberside of the game,which is again �leftbrained"and thus not
> aproppiate.

I am stressing the numbers in this discussion because it is a discussion about Target _Numbers_, their nature, what they mean and represent, and how they could be implemented less haphazardly than in the HW1 rules books. Similarly, if we were discussing botany I would mention plants.

> What I see,is that this very long discussion brought many flawed
> tries to generate some kind of mathematics,that do not work and in
> the end,resulted in something we all already knew:that you have to
> spend heropoints to cement new gained wealth,thank you.But it brought
> no inspiration for the existing rules.And this is still the point,I�m
> working at.

Well.

What's wrong with the mathematics, why are they flawed ? I would be very glad if you could produce better ones !

The fact that one needs to spend HPs to cement newly gained wealth isn't a result of the discussion, but one of its _starting points_.

And why is it, if the things I have proposed have brought "no inspiration for the existing rules", that your proposals (below) seem to closely resemble _my own_ ones ?

> So again I tried to find patterns and levels in the abstraction of
> (target)numbers/costratings.So that you can generate a rating for
> anything with just these little hints (the rules are obviously
> already there).

That's exactly what I've been doing myself over the past two weeks ...

> -Also I see another pattern of concept levels in each increment of 5:

That's funny, so do I.

> - 5 is for simple things
> -10 is for things,that need a certain time to do,but are still
> moderately fast to accomplish(like one week) OR
> basics in their category....(building a hut)
> -15 is for more complex or useful things(a cow can be used for
> meat,milk,fat and skin/leather-so has many possibilities of
> being used and is thus more useful than a pig)
> -20 is for things that are at the threshold of transcending into
> another category(wealthy clothing)
>
> Okay,I admit that this is still a bit vague,

No it's not. I certainly agree that there appears, from analysis of the TN examples given in HW, to be a general system of increased levels of magnitude every 5 points or so. But if you want a more precise examination of the issue, please refer to previous posts in the thread.

> and I think that is
> because the whole rightbrainconcept hasn�t got a broad stand in our
> culture.

But it's given a broad stand in the HW rules.

> Still I think you can do it,if
> you analyze the tables I mentionend,and try to find the levels in
> them,I found/or see....

I already have.

In mathematical terms, it works out as a logarithmic doubling of "game-world stuff" every 5 points : every 5 points you reach another level of magnitude. I hasten to point out that this is mathematical representation of a right-brainish HW concept.

> Maybe it�s just a matter of practice.....
> In the end,this concept is much more versatile,than having a
> costtable for every culture.

It's not _more_ versatile, but you're right that some description of what the various levels of wealth should mean, beyond their monetary value ; this would also be useful to characterise money itself, and what a lunar or a wheel are worth from a more rightbrained gut-feeling point of view, as lacking in the price lists of other RPGs.

If you could please refrain from degrading my approach and concentrate on this issue, you would make a helpful contribution to the discussion, and help translate the maths into something useful for the game ; which is, after all, why I did them in the first place...


Garreth (?) :

> It might be worth exploring wealth as indicative of social status
> rather than as a fixed value. A solid socio-anthropological argument
> can be made that wealth is merely indicative of the esteem with which
> an individual is held in society, and therefore which productive
> resources are made available to them. So raising a point of wealth
> does not so much represent adding coins to your hoard, because unless
> society values those coins and is willing to exchange them for
> tangible goods, the material wealth itself is valueless.

Yes indeed, but it is a basic point that wealth can *always* be represented in monetary terms.

The HW Wealth ability is in fact a form of currency, in absolute terms !

And far more fluid and versatile than lunars and clacks, or even land, cows and sheep...

> Thus, wealth as an abtsract value makes perfect sense to me, becuase
> it is not and should not be a representation of a "bank account" type
> model, it is a representation of the individuals abvility to command
> the market to meet their desires.

Well put !

> This is, necessarily, a lot
> fuzzier than mere numbers, and I don't think it should be reduced to
> mere numbers.

Except that Wealth is represented by a TN...

> In fact, I think the conventional systems in RPG's,
> which make no attempt at economic analysis and merely "count coins",
> is the LEAST simulationist of their rules devices; it simply does not
> describe how an economy of this nature works.

Excellent !

I think that if we can fit the Wealth TNs more snugly into the levels of magnitude that are already present in the system, associating the numbers with some text and examples of what each Wealth level represents (much as Christian has suggested), and sample Resistances to acquire certain important goods and commodities (but more sensible figures than given in HW1), with a holistic piece of Ability Addition rules text, then I think that everyone could be satisfied.

> Again, actually physically embodied wealth can
> correctly be exchanged for "fuzzy" wealth to represent the characters
> tacit ability to command that communal economic entity to exert its
> pressure on their behalf within the wider society.

Again, excellent !

That's actually a damn good expression of what I've been aiming for myself.


Julian Lord

Powered by hypermail