Quote from: rusty shackleford on February 25, 2023, 09:36:48 PM
If the property they acquired was originally taken by force, then they'd presumably be expected to return it to its owners or be branded thieves themselves.

Which is actually the quite well-done plot of the Mithgar novel Dragondoom: a clever party of Human treasure-hunters, led by the crown prince of a northern kingdom, manages to kill a Dragon and recover much of the hoard it stole from a Dwarven mountain-hold ... but his kingdom is immediately visited by descendants of the Dwarves who once inhabited that hold, demanding the treasure back and triggering a war between the two realms. (The argument between the two sides even brings in the cultural differences produced by the differing peoples' lifespans: the Dragon conquered the original Dwarfhold over fifteen hundred years ago, which was only four or five lifespans of the Dwarven folk but nearly sixty generations of Men's -- so the idea that the Dwarves could still consider their grudge and their entitlement to their forebears' property just as valid even after fifteen centuries simply didn't make any sense to the Humans.)

Other people showing up to take said loot. See everything that happens in The Hobbit after Smaug dies.

In the middle of nowhere it's mostly a non-issue; rolling into a village where most people will never see a gold piece in their entire lives with bags of gold might be funny, but they'd have little the party would want in the first place, so there's little to nothing to actually spend money on.  In order to be disruptive to the economy, there must be motion through which the treasure is actually entering the economy.  Consider Bilbo; he came home a man of great wealth by the local standard, but he didn't seem to spend it on much.  He hired some of the locals to care for his property, he gave occasional lavish gifts and lived comfortably in retirement.  The potential for damage really only arises if people are actually throwing the money around; if a party came into town with thousands of gold and gave ten to every last person, the value of money there would immediately plummet.

All valuation systems must reset, the challenge is how big of an impact crater would this level of valuation swing be to a given time/space economy. If it is hard enough the system resets and then new holders of power are shaken out of the chaos. Basically SHARK's historical recounting in a nutshell.

Humanity kind of just does a social accounting of communal graces, social mercies, and abstraction debt accounting. It seems an innate function of what we do, like humans and language, akin to like corvid birds and gifting (especially "shiny things"). Currency (the abstracted debt's representation) can be anything; the concepts of debt, favors, interconnected social expectations, legacies, intertwined familial ties, monuments, etc. has been elaborate beyond easy summation; similarly legendary graces and mercies litter historical & ethnographical records. Gold pieces and life's "common daily base rates" is a mere nerdy hobby's delusional short-hand searching to reduce the world to a ledger.

Go read stories. Countless ways upset the standard expectations. In fact, I recommend starting with "Debt: the First 5000 Years" for a delightful anthropological collection of anecdotes (along with a wonderful sundering of economic sand castles upon quicksand). e.g. Did you know several Congo and Chadian tribes would be 'offended' by people saving their lives? Because to be grateful is to be indebted, and that is to risk losing your allegiance to the lord you swore to serve, and thus be an oath-breaker atop it all. So saved people expected you *to reward them*, to harm you for your 'insult' in saving their life, or at least allow your gift to be rejected, so that they can save face for themselves and their leaders.

The world's too big and unconstrained by our finite expectations of 'believability'. Have fun. The fact that you're even interested in ways how it can affect your fictional world means you are several steps ahead of the average n00b or rote Org Play official adventures GMs. Part of the fun is dreaming how your world breathes, for you are its Frankenstein giving it life.

How do YOU want it to be "realistic"? And how far can you and your table believe? Earth alone witnessed far more that is already forgotten, so you cannot surprise actual reality. Go. Dream. Play.

Another thing to think about would be how many coins are actually in circulation.

You can see below how much the actual coinage may shift over time and if the party dumped a large percentage into the market, then it might cause massive issues (which might be another adventure hook).


The volume of the English currency, 1158-1470. The volume of the currency is an important factor underlying economic change in medieval England. The author estimates the size of the currency at fourteen dates from 1158 to 1470, using recorded mint outputs, estimated outputs of dies, and coin hoards. The English silver currency, which was supplemented by foreign gold, increased from less than £0.1 million in 1158 to nearly £0.5 million in 1247 and at least £1 million in 1290. It rose to a peak of about £1.5-£2.0 million in 1310-31, falling to less than £1 million in 1351 and a fraction of that in the fifteenth century. The English gold coinage, introduced in 1344, increased from about £0.1-0.2 million in 1351 to approximately £0.8 million in 1422, declining to about £0.4-0.5 million in 1470.

Quote from: Opaopajr on February 26, 2023, 07:57:57 AM
All valuation systems must reset, the challenge is how big of an impact crater would this level of valuation swing be to a given time/space economy. If it is hard enough the system resets and then new holders of power are shaken out of the chaos. Basically SHARK's historical recounting in a nutshell.

Humanity kind of just does a social accounting of communal graces, social mercies, and abstraction debt accounting. It seems an innate function of what we do, like humans and language, akin to like corvid birds and gifting (especially "shiny things"). Currency (the abstracted debt's representation) can be anything; the concepts of debt, favors, interconnected social expectations, legacies, intertwined familial ties, monuments, etc. has been elaborate beyond easy summation; similarly legendary graces and mercies litter historical & ethnographical records. Gold pieces and life's "common daily base rates" is a mere nerdy hobby's delusional short-hand searching to reduce the world to a ledger.

Go read stories. Countless ways upset the standard expectations. In fact, I recommend starting with "Debt: the First 5000 Years" for a delightful anthropological collection of anecdotes (along with a wonderful sundering of economic sand castles upon quicksand). e.g. Did you know several Congo and Chadian tribes would be 'offended' by people saving their lives? Because to be grateful is to be indebted, and that is to risk losing your allegiance to the lord you swore to serve, and thus be an oath-breaker atop it all. So saved people expected you *to reward them*, to harm you for your 'insult' in saving their life, or at least allow your gift to be rejected, so that they can save face for themselves and their leaders.

The world's too big and unconstrained by our finite expectations of 'believability'. Have fun. The fact that you're even interested in ways how it can affect your fictional world means you are several steps ahead of the average n00b or rote Org Play official adventures GMs. Part of the fun is dreaming how your world breathes, for you are its Frankenstein giving it life.

How do YOU want it to be "realistic"? And how far can you and your table believe? Earth alone witnessed far more that is already forgotten, so you cannot surprise actual reality. Go. Dream. Play.

Greetings!

Really nice exhortation, Opaopajr! I always love the way you chew on these things so philosophically, my friend. Your analysis often seems to have one foot in history, one foot in philosophy, and...maybe another foot in literature.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Greetings!

I'm also reminded of the example in Ancient Sparta. The Spartans, beyond the royal government, refused to even use money. Coinage was deemed as being decadent, unmanly, and corrupt. They used a system that was built entirely on Barter. Individual Spartans didn't own money, and didn't use coin money. There was nothing to buy, because coin money was not recognized as being legitimate or in any way legal. Coinage was ultimately just useless baubles and trinkets to the Spartans. As "valuable" as any common seashell.

That's also another way of guarding against a campaign being totally trainwrecked from mountains of gold and jewels.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Any time I'm trying to inject realistic economics into an RPG, my go to is always Richard Cantillon's Essai Sur La Nature Du Commerce En Général. And I recommend the more recent translation edited by Mark Thornton, as the aim in that one was to preserve the economic meaning of Cantillon's writing, where the earlier translation was aimed at preserving the linguistic style. My usual selling points on this work are:
1) This is the world's first full treatise on economics, pre-dating Adam Smith,
2) Cantillon was no mere ivory tower academic--he worked in finance and made a vast fortune putting his theories to use speculating on the rise of the Mississippi Bubble, and then a second vast fortune accurately predicting and short-selling its crash.
3) He was writing in pre-industrial times, but his theories also hold up in a post industrial-revolution world a lot better than more modern theories of economics, indicating he's zeroed in on some things that can be applied regardless of time or place of the game world setting,
4) It's especially well-suited for the fantasy campaign because as the oldest full-treatise, it's also the one closest in time to anything resembling such game worlds, and the ideas are abstract enough to apply to a world that never was.
5) The opening chapters almost read like an RPG world-builder guide.


Now as it pertains to the specific question at hand here, the first thing that needs mentioning is, it is not the case that doubling the money supply just means a doubling of the prices. The actual effects are not so uniform. Economists even have a term for these ripple effects that result from a change in the supply of money. They are actually called Cantillon Effects.

Cantillon's Essai has three chapters on the increase and decrease in the quantity of hard money. He traces through the effects of mining operations that introduce a large amounts of gold, silver, and copper into society. And the way it goes is, those things the miners increase their spending on will be the first prices that increase. In turn, where those beneficiaries increase their spending will raise their prices next. Those who receive the new money last are at a disadvantage. As well as those who have locked-in rates, such as lessors who must wait until the lease expires before raising their prices.

One other problem arises. When it comes time for artisans to raise their prices, it can become less expensive to import goods rather than buy from the artisans. So even in the longer run, it produces asymmetric changes. Although through import, money is sent out in the exchange. This would suggest if we're talking about a one-time infusion, such as the dumping of a single vast hoard of treasure, there would eventually be some return to normalcy. It's a different matter if new money is being introduced perpetually via a mining operation, or a series of treasure dumps from adventures exploring the same set of caves with several trips over a long period of time. Then the problem could potentially persist.

The prince taking their cut doesn't really solve or negate the problem at all. Because there's still the Cantillon Effects of the cut they didn't take. And then there's the cut they do take, and how they spend it, and what those Cantillon Effects are. And Cantillon does likewise write about what happens when subsidies are paid to the state by foreign powers. Their cut of a vast hoard of treasure will work fairly similarly.

Quote from: SHARK on February 26, 2023, 07:47:53 PMThe Spartans, beyond the royal government, refused to even use money. Coinage was deemed as being decadent, unmanly, and corrupt. They used a system that was built entirely on Barter. Individual Spartans didn't own money, and didn't use coin money.

That may be more part of the myth than the reality. Legendarily Spartan warriors were forbidden to own gold and silver coins, but iron bars were used as a form of currency (this to discourage hoarding). In practice, the city-state was minting its own currency by 250 BC, and the wealthier Spartans made a practice of owning artworks of bronze and ivory and precious jewelry which could very likely have served as a medium of exchange too.

While individual Spartans might have been forbidden to accumulate private wealth, the kings and the gerousia (elders) might well have seen some political value in taking state control of any convenient hoards that fell their way, the same way the state owned all the helots (slaves) of the nation; I imagine the warriors who brought that wealth back could no doubt have earned their own rewards of political status in compensation.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on February 26, 2023, 08:14:57 PM

Quote from: SHARK on February 26, 2023, 07:47:53 PMThe Spartans, beyond the royal government, refused to even use money. Coinage was deemed as being decadent, unmanly, and corrupt. They used a system that was built entirely on Barter. Individual Spartans didn't own money, and didn't use coin money.

That may be more part of the myth than the reality. Legendarily Spartan warriors were forbidden to own gold and silver coins, but iron bars were used as a form of currency (this to discourage hoarding). In practice, the city-state was minting its own currency by 250 BC, and the wealthier Spartans made a practice of owning artworks of bronze and ivory and precious jewelry which could very likely have served as a medium of exchange too.

While individual Spartans might have been forbidden to accumulate private wealth, the kings and the gerousia (elders) might well have seen some political value in taking state control of any convenient hoards that fell their way, the same way the state owned all the helots (slaves) of the nation; I imagine the warriors who brought that wealth back could no doubt have earned their own rewards of political status in compensation.

Greetings!

Quite right my friend! Yes, for the Spartan officer that was victorious on the battlefield....bringing back lots of foreign loot...*Laughing* it makes perfect sense for the Kings to say, 'Well, for contributing to the glory of Sparta, you should be rewarded! How does General sound?"

Good point, Stephen!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

If you're researching historical sources for a semi-realistic economy, it's worth mentioning that the English treasury have kept financial records going back almost 900 years now, referred to as the "pipe rolls". There's also the Domesday Book, a 1086 survey of wealth in every shire of England at that time.

Perhaps disregard anything you know about modern taxation though.

Quote from: Lunamancer on February 26, 2023, 07:56:36 PM
Any time I'm trying to inject realistic economics into an RPG, my go to is always Richard Cantillon's Essai Sur La Nature Du Commerce En Général. And I recommend the more recent translation edited by Mark Thornton, as the aim in that one was to preserve the economic meaning of Cantillon's writing, where the earlier translation was aimed at preserving the linguistic style. My usual selling points on this work are:
1) This is the world's first full treatise on economics, pre-dating Adam Smith,
2) Cantillon was no mere ivory tower academic--he worked in finance and made a vast fortune putting his theories to use speculating on the rise of the Mississippi Bubble, and then a second vast fortune accurately predicting and short-selling its crash.
3) He was writing in pre-industrial times, but his theories also hold up in a post industrial-revolution world a lot better than more modern theories of economics, indicating he's zeroed in on some things that can be applied regardless of time or place of the game world setting,
4) It's especially well-suited for the fantasy campaign because as the oldest full-treatise, it's also the one closest in time to anything resembling such game worlds, and the ideas are abstract enough to apply to a world that never was.
5) The opening chapters almost read like an RPG world-builder guide.


Now as it pertains to the specific question at hand here, the first thing that needs mentioning is, it is not the case that doubling the money supply just means a doubling of the prices. The actual effects are not so uniform. Economists even have a term for these ripple effects that result from a change in the supply of money. They are actually called Cantillon Effects.

Cantillon's Essai has three chapters on the increase and decrease in the quantity of hard money. He traces through the effects of mining operations that introduce a large amounts of gold, silver, and copper into society. And the way it goes is, those things the miners increase their spending on will be the first prices that increase. In turn, where those beneficiaries increase their spending will raise their prices next. Those who receive the new money last are at a disadvantage. As well as those who have locked-in rates, such as lessors who must wait until the lease expires before raising their prices.

One other problem arises. When it comes time for artisans to raise their prices, it can become less expensive to import goods rather than buy from the artisans. So even in the longer run, it produces asymmetric changes. Although through import, money is sent out in the exchange. This would suggest if we're talking about a one-time infusion, such as the dumping of a single vast hoard of treasure, there would eventually be some return to normalcy. It's a different matter if new money is being introduced perpetually via a mining operation, or a series of treasure dumps from adventures exploring the same set of caves with several trips over a long period of time. Then the problem could potentially persist.

The prince taking their cut doesn't really solve or negate the problem at all. Because there's still the Cantillon Effects of the cut they didn't take. And then there's the cut they do take, and how they spend it, and what those Cantillon Effects are. And Cantillon does likewise write about what happens when subsidies are paid to the state by foreign powers. Their cut of a vast hoard of treasure will work fairly similarly.

That's interesting as one of the books/papers that I've been reading for England made the statement that due to customs put on wool by the English King, traders quit exporting the wool and kept it in England which then started a new industry of making cloth from the wool.

Quote from: rusty shackleford on February 26, 2023, 09:06:55 PM
If you're researching historical sources for a semi-realistic economy, it's worth mentioning that the English treasury have kept financial records going back almost 900 years now, referred to as the "pipe rolls". There's also the Domesday Book, a 1086 survey of wealth in every shire of England at that time.

Perhaps disregard anything you know about modern taxation though.

The other thread that I'm posting data to is from the "close rolls".  I'll have to look up the "pipe rolls" and see if they can contribute anything that I'm missing.

Quote from: LordBP on February 26, 2023, 09:36:39 PM
That's interesting as one of the books/papers that I've been reading for England made the statement that due to customs put on wool by the English King, traders quit exporting the wool and kept it in England which then started a new industry of making cloth from the wool.

There could be any number of reasons for that not having to do with any influx of hard money. Although if exports exceed imports, it will result in some influx of money into the state.

The big thing, though, is there are very different effects of exporting commodities versus manufactured goods. Exporting commodities does indeed enrich the state with an influx of gold and silver, however there will be a tendency for population to decrease. Because wool and other commodities are primarily production of the land, and there is only finite land within a state to support the population. Manufactured goods, on the other hand, are mostly a product of labor rather than the land.

  I think something like Count of Monte Cristo could be a good example IF the party has a real haul on their hands.   The best method would be to petition for or forge some sort of patents of nobility, buy a manor or the like and set up a vault to keep their wealth somewhat confidential.   I guess another method would to allow for guilds similar to what we see in the game Skyrim where more or less the guilds operate under local control but all contributing to a central power that pays fees to the government/rulers of the areas each guild house is set up in.  This sort of cuts out the taxation/local lord getting handsy with treasure.   The reality is though, if you have lots and lots of money available (as in not underground guarded by horrors that keep cautious and superstitious people away) some mercenary/bandit/lord might decide to gamble 50 or so of his men on liberating that treasure from the party.  I dont think inflation can be too big an issue simply from the perspective there just that isnt much to buy in a small economy.   Now they could substantially grow a local economy if they want to invest in it, but I dont think they destroy the area with inflation too easily, mainly because the sorts of buying of common goods that could do that would be unlikely just because most parties are not that many people doing that much buying of household goods.