This got me thinking about a good basis for Athasian currency. A good foundation for currency is something that fulfills a few criteria: it's something inherently valuable; it's in sufficient quantity that a normal person might be able to regularly exchange their currency for the valuable substance it represents; it's divisible and re-combinable, so that the value of the substance is unchanged by repeated division and combination.
(I'm not talking about modern currencies, here, by the way, which are based on trust in the issuing government. Athas is a bit too barbaric to propose a reasonable fiat currency.)
The substance on Athas that fulfills all these criteria is water.
In Herbert's Dune, water is used extensively as a currency on Arrakis. They track water quantities with rings, which probably began as a simple accounting mechanism but have become a de facto currency. Thinking about this, I realized that if you put a hole in the middle of an Athasian 'ceramic piece', it's pretty much identical to a Fremen water counter.
So my revision to Dark Sun currency is this: ceramic pieces represent fixed quantities of water, which can be taken to their issuer and exchanged for the water. Issuers can be anyone who has their own supply of water; because most of the available water is in aquifers underneath the city states, these issuers are almost always the Sorcerer-Kings.
In a traditional pseudo-feudal setting, being a 'noble' means you hold a piece of land granted to you by the king, and are entitled to the rents from that land -- a portion of the agricultural production, or any other industry on your held lands. I think that in Athas, a 'noble' holds a portion of water instead; they're entitled, based on the particulars of their noble title, to a daily allowance of the city's water. (The Sorcerer Kings do this for the same reason that European rulers parceled out their land: stability and loyalty, and distribution of economic management. The templars have better things to do than manage the distribution of water to all the city's various needs; it's exactly the kind of task that a noble class arises to perform.)
So nobles take their share of the water and 'bank' it in their house reservoirs, and parcel it out as needed. Where the currency arises is two sources. First, the daily water ration for the poor. This is mentioned in descriptions of Tyr, and it is implied that one of the ways Kalak was evil and crazy was that he didn't allow this ration, suggesting that in other cities, this ration is a standard procedure. Now, asking well-guards to remember everyone's face when they come for water is probably a bit much, since a city of 20,000 with 20 wells (just ballpark numbers) means each well will have 1000 people visiting it every day. An easier solution is to distribute tokens that can be exchanged for the daily allowance; distributed once a month, for instance, to every head of household, this becomes a much simpler bureaucratic task.
So that gives the first inklings of a currency: a token that can be exchanged for water at the city well. Anyone could reasonably use those tokens, including a noble, or a noble's servants and employees. They can be traded and hoarded.
Storing a bunch of water is kind of difficult, though; you have to have slaves who move your water from the city's wells to your own reservoir. It's easier to just let the city store your water for you -- it's free to not move the water -- and get your water allowance in token form instead. Then you can trade and give away water in an easy-to-transfer form.
There are a couple of interesting consequences to this idea. The value of a ceramic token is strongly tied to the reliability of the issuer. If Bob's Discount Oasis issues tokens, and Bob gets overrun by elven raiders who poison the oasis and kill Bob and friends, Bob's tokens just became worthless. By contrast, tokens issued by the City-State of Urik are about as stable as any water source in the entire Tablelands. Obviously, the issuer of a currency will value it at exactly its face value, but others will probably not, depending on how safe they feel the issuer's supply of water is, and how likely they, or someone they trade with, is to visit the issuer's location. Merchants can thus engage in currency speculation, trading iffy Raam coins for safe Urik coins (for a percentage). Those same merchants can then sell Raam coins for a profit to travelers leaving to visit Raam.
Because the ceramic has no real inherent value, I also believe that silver and gold pieces aren't actually silver or gold. Silver pieces are just '10-gallon pieces', and gold pieces are '100-gallon pieces'. One could suppose that they're still called 'silver' and 'gold' on the premise that once, an ounce of silver was worth 10 gallons of water, and an ounce of gold was worth 100 gallons of water. I suspect, though, that actual silver and gold values fluctuate with the market for metals. This suggests that finding a hoard of metal coin from a lost civilization isn't really a find of coin, it's a find of metal, which can be sold for ceramic currency at the market rate. 10 gold coins might be worth 2,500 ceramic pieces, based on the value of the metal.
Because of the implausibility of platinum as a currency metal, Dark Sun doesn't include platinum pieces or astral diamonds. But if those are just larger numbers stamped on a ceramic piece, they can still exist as part of the currency system. I'd imagine that a platinum-equivalent ceramic token is probably created with a psionic ritual as part of the process, imbuing it with an un-counterfeit-able 'signature'; these tokens are probably used as part of high-level transactions between major merchant houses.
Farming is interesting under this mechanic, because it's a specific kind of (relatively) safe and known investment of water. Food crops have a known value, based on the quantity of water a noble house has to sink into irrigation to make the crops grow. I suspect that large, old noble families are probably farming families, with their water heavily invested into the long-term, safe crop-growing business. (I say 'safe' because Athas has so little weather variance that the growing seasons are likely very well known and well understood, as opposed to modern farming in unpredictable rainfall and frost.) Younger noble families are probably more likely to invest outside of agriculture, in trade goods and risky caravans, because they want to increase the return on their water as quickly as possible.
I've had some other thoughts on this topic, mostly related to how small currencies are valued, how the fall of Kalak destabilized Tyr's water supply, and customs related to the use of tokens (strung on long leather straps through their central hole, worn as ornaments, painted with colored glazes, given as gifts to a host, etc). But I'll leave the idea here, and invite discussion and comment.
High-level summary for the tl;dr crew:
Ceramic pieces are the only kind of currency in Athas, and they represent water, not metal.
I think that i would just use the ceramic pieces, and besides most modern currencies are based on the government backing it up, that would probably apply in Athas too.
(Naturally, your game may never get into the details of how currency works, but mine is going to be a trading-based game, so it's important.)
In 4e "storywise" magic can repair a ceramic coin that's been broken into bits. Although, it appears that is no longer the case. The Coin is called a Bit. Not something I like. I'll probably be using the old revised 2e system, as I really enjoyed lead beads and bits. I'm also a fan of the uncommon silver piece and the rare gold piece as it adds a cool element to the game and in darksun, actually feels like real treasure and not just parcel filler.
Don't know if our games will ever get into the details of a water-based currency. Even if we just use the ideas as backround flavor though, its more interesting than the currency system in the book I think.
I'm gonna propose we use ideas from this thread in our own games. I can't think of anything to add myself unfortunately ;). Thank you for starting things off.
/\ Art
This has came up before but I never got around to asking. There used to be a way to save forum pages as pure text but I haven't seen that option since the boards update.
I don't like the currency cop-out in the 4e Dark Sun, because it leaves the entire currency system with a metal foundation, and metal is just too rare in Dark Sun to make a good basis for currency.
This is incorrect. Per the DSCG, the day-to-day economy uses ceramic pieces in the city, and the ceramic system is backed by "royal wealth," with some nobles holding ancient metal coins as a guarantee against ceramic devaluation. The true wealth of the state is held by the sorcerer kings (and the nobility, to a lesser extent) in various forms, probably including land, magic items, and maybe slaves. It's stability is somewhat protected from SK whim by metal coins held by nobles and merchants.
If an SK were to suddenly ramp up ceramic production, everyone holding ceramic (the wealthy) would be jeopardized. Thus, they secure themselves against inflation by hoarding metal, which will always be valuable. The economy isn't based on metal - it's based on real assets like land. It just uses metal as a buffer.
On the other hand, the 2e ceramic coins don't really make sense, because ceramic (unlike gold) can't be changed back from a currency into something useful. You can't make a ceramic pot out of ceramic coins; once fired and possibly glazed, ceramic is forever.
Nor can you make a book out of a paper dollar. The point of a currency is that it has no value in and of itself. Using commodities as currency is problematic because their value is constantly changing. There's a reason why oil, corn, and water aren't used as currencies. If a city was struck with drought, for instance, the physical need to consume the water would eliminate any value it would have had as a currency.
Gold is pretty and nice, but not really essential. Nevertheless, it acquired a mystical, alchemical significance over centuries of use as the storage material of value.
Water, in our world, already has massive mythic/mystic/symbolic baggage, in every culture in every part of the world in every era of history. Water is one of the most profoundly spiritualized substances in the world.
Imagine how water is treated on Athas, then, where dehydration is literally 2 days away at all times (2 days being the rough life expectancy of someone in 120 degree heat with no water). I'm thinking again of Dune, where Paul crying at the death of Jamis is a moment of shock and reverence for the Fremen: 'Usul gives water to the dead!' -- and spitting is a sign of respect and honor, of giving your body's water to another.
I imagine that Athasian adulthood rituals include a single ceramic token given to the child, to be worn around the neck; this token is a symbolic water source of last resort. Because ceramics can be colored when fired, and glazed with different colors, I expect Athasian homes are often decorated with strings of brightly-colored ceramic tokens -- functional art pieces, to be taken down and used in times of need, in much the way an ancient or medieval family might have a necklace of beads made of precious metals.
If a host serves you a meal, he's giving water to you -- water used to prepare the food as well as water in the wine, or just plain water to drink. It is probably polite, then, to give the host a gift of a single ceramic token, in symbolic reparation for the water he's used for you. Long ago, people probably brought actual water with them, to add to the soup pot or pour for their host to drink. If that gifting has since become more ceremonial and symbolic than an actual water-transfer, the tokens given might be painted or decorative, as much a trinket or memento as an actual coin.
I imagine that the marker of wealth, in a land where you can't really afford a lot of decorative clothing -- all-encompassing white robes are going to be the standard fashion no matter where you go -- is sound, specifically the sound of jingling water tokens (and also scent, but that's a different discussion entirely -- what does Athas smell like?). And I suspect that sound has long since become divorced from the tokens themselves, so that someone 'dressing up' might wear bells, or clappers, or other noisemakers, rather than actual strings of money.
I don't like the currency cop-out in the 4e Dark Sun, because it leaves the entire currency system with a metal foundation, and metal is just too rare in Dark Sun to make a good basis for currency.
This is incorrect. Per the DSCG, the day-to-day economy uses ceramic pieces in the city, and the ceramic system is backed by "royal wealth," with some nobles holding ancient metal coins as a guarantee against ceramic devaluation.
I'm confused -- that's exactly what I said? Ceramic currency backed by stored metal. But stored metal, I'm arguing, is not a useful backing for a currency in Athas, because there simply isn't enough of it to reach even the semi-plausible level of 1% of all extant wealth. And nobody would ever trade metal for ceramic, given any value of ceramic.
The economy isn't based on metal - it's based on real assets like land. It just uses metal as a buffer.
Land is valueless in Athas. There is a lot of it, and 99% of it is useless. Only applying water to land makes it valuable, because there is no rain. This is why, for instance, there aren't any dotted lines on the map showing which city-state owns what terrain: except for the cities themselves, and the oases, nobody owns any of it, because nobody wants any of it.
Nor can you make a book out of a paper dollar. The point of a currency is that it has no value in and of itself.
That's true of modern currencies, but modern currencies are a recent development, based as much on trust in a particular mercantile endeavor than any government. Even so, a purely fiat currency, with no inherent value and no explicit backing value, is something that's only been widely accepted in the last century or so. Remember that it was a big, big deal for the US to go off the gold standard; that happened just 40 years ago, so easily within living memory. Before that, US currency did, in fact, have intrinsic value: one dollar was a unit of measurement of a quantity of gold, specifically 1/35th of an ounce of gold.
Using commodities as currency is problematic because their value is constantly changing. There's a reason why oil, corn, and water aren't used as currencies. If a city was struck with drought, for instance, the physical need to consume the water would eliminate any value it would have had as a currency.
Except, and this is why I propose water for Athas but not the real world: all of Athas is always in a drought. Everyone needs to consume 1 gallon of water a day, and there is no other source of water except the city's water supply, which is tightly controlled by the ruler of the city. That makes water an ideal currency: the value of water is fixed precisely at the needs of any person for a day.
If there were frequent rain, or a nearby river, or a freshwater lake, water's value would change too much to be a stable currency. It's specifically because the supply is so tightly controlled, and thus so stable, that water can work as the unit of value for a currency.
This is important to me strictly because my game is a sandbox with a very significant financial/trading component, and 'where does the money come from?' and 'what will happen to the economy if we find a super-rare super-awesome treasure?' are serious questions that need answers.
I think the out-of-the-box currency solution in the book is probably fine for a game that isn't about the underlying mechanics of the trade economy. But as I started thinking about water currency, I started imagining interesting cultural elements that would be pretty neat in any game -- water traditions, water ownership rights, the role of the nobility, etc -- so I thought I'd share them.
If you don't think water works as a currency mechanism in a desert world, I'm not really going to argue it further; me and Frank Herbert will sit over here in the water-currency corner and figure out courtship rituals related to strings of water tokens.
I'm confused -- that's exactly what I said? Ceramic currency backed by stored metal.
No, it's entirely different from what you said. Quoting myself: The true wealth of the state is held by the sorcerer kings (and the nobility, to a lesser extent) in various forms, probably including land, magic items, and maybe slaves.
In other words, the true wealth is in land and labor.
Land is valueless in Athas.
So where's all the food grown? Every city state is surrounded with cultivated land. It's ownership of the small remaining pieces of land that makes nobles wealthy. Of course water is required, but, as you say, there's no rain. So where's that water coming from? It can only be from fixed land sources, like aquifers and springs, or aqueducts that carry it from the rare frost runoffs of mountains. Water flow is inconstant, but land is not.
There is a lot of it, and 99% of it is useless.
That's precisely why land suitable for agriculture is extremely valuable. The rare patches of land that aren't dead are the cities's only primary sources for food and water.
Even so, a purely fiat currency, with no inherent value and no explicit backing value, is something that's only been widely accepted in the last century or so.
There's only been a globally-accepted fiat currency for a short time, but its use is as old as writing. Specie in any form is only a symbolic representation of how much wealth to which one can legitimately lay claim. When a noble hands a pouch of ceramic pieces to a merchant, he's not indicating, "I have 100 gallons of clean water to back this up," but rather, "These ceramic pieces are commissioned by Hamanu, who has arbitrarily high wealth in the form of all valuable goods, including, but not limited to, land, water, slaves, and magic."
If you think fiat currency works for you, by all means, use fiat currency. I suspect that unless you're running a mercantile game, it will never, ever matter.
If what you really want to do is debate economics, I'm not really interested in that; we're starting from a fundamentally absurd point, which is a world that is ruled by magical, evil overlords. That makes any economic argument immediately suspect.
Water-culture and water ownership is, to me, interesting. And I hope that other people find discussion of ways to use it in a game interesting. I thought it was interesting in Dune, which is where I'm stealing 90% of the concept; I think it adds additional depth and complexity to Athasian culture, which is the only reason I've bothered to post about it at all, because I'm certainly not proposing that anyone else should try to run a crazy econ-sim game like I'm about to do.
I would guess that water would be the main backing for currency (and why you could actually use ceramic pieces from one city state in another, or even in the desert), and then in the city states, there would be the additional backing of land and land use (in the middle ages, you could have plenty of gold, but you weren't as rich as the dude that had a lot of land, and Europe had lots of useful land. It wasn't until the renaissance that things started to shift to where you could give a noble the finger if you just had a lot of gold).
Slavery would cause a push for land being valuable. If you have a slave, you have less water or you don't have a slave (so, it's more practical for nomads to eat captives). If you have a slave and land, your land works harder and better for you, and you don't come closer to heat stroke.
In most communities, water is as strong a currency as coin. The city-states ration water to citizens by circulating ceramic pieces. Each token can be exchanged for a pint of water drawn from a city-controlled well. Ceramic pieces have a gold piece value and can be traded for an equivalent amount of goods or services within the issuing city. This equivalency does not extend beyond the city-state's region, however. Thus, travelers either trade these tokens for gold or invest them in survival days.
I just want to note that per the 4e DSCG, ceramic coins are backed by water (not metal) in the RAW. See page 211 of the DSCG, "Survival Days and Water."
Hah! That's really funny; because I'd already written an alternate survival/water-use system, I didn't do more than skim sections talking about survival days.
I suspect that there are many merchants willing to trade one city's ceramic tokens for another city's, though, if they can make a profit off a thirsty stranger in town.
Oh and I'm also going to support that one poster in regards to fertile land being very valuable. Because it is.
It should be noted that the idea that gold coins have value because they can be melted and turned into something useful doesn't make a lot of sense. How useful is a gold necklace or ring, really? Metals, particularly gold were minted into coins which represented stored grain. Having a gold coin meant that it could be redeemed at the granaries for a certain amount of grain. It was pretty easy for the ruling classes to maintain control of the very few local gold sorces and use the metal to mint coins. Anyone seeking to counterfeit the coins would likely not get their hands on raw gold to do so. The value of gold coins was thus backed by the stored grain and the ability of the city-state to protect that grain.
Much later, the value shifted onto the metals themselves as a medium of exchange no longer representing banked grain. Later still, paper currency was used to represent stored precious metals (Pay to the bearer one silver dollar), and then paper currency became a medium of exchange independant of precious metals. Personally, I see no meaningful difference between placing intrinsic value in a precious metal versus placing intrinsic value in a currency note. Both are essentially fiat money.
I am considering, in my campaign, to have Ceramic coins represent stored water. We know that 5 gold worth of ceramic is one day's supply of water. I would rule that there is only one denomination of ceramic coin, and that all smaller denominations are actual pieces of a ceramic coin (real 2e bits, not the fake ones in the 4e book), and the size is such that 5 gold worth of ceramic has the same volume as 1 day worth of water.
Fiat currencies are pretty implausible in a barbaric/chaotic setting.
(Naturally, your game may never get into the details of how currency works, but mine is going to be a trading-based game, so it's important.)
Fiat currencies are extremely plausible when backed by the wrath of a living god (Sorcerer-King).
Fiat currencies are pretty implausible in a barbaric/chaotic setting.
(Naturally, your game may never get into the details of how currency works, but mine is going to be a trading-based game, so it's important.)
Fiat currencies are extremely plausible when backed by the wrath of a living god (Sorcerer-King).
But wouldn't it be far to easy to counterfeit "ceramic" money? Think about the Elf tribes that visist a City-State just once in 1-2 years. They could ruin the economy of an whole CS.
Indeed, the book does talk about currency exchange. It states that most city states will accept the coin of other city states at a 5% cost for conversion. So, basically, 100 Urik minted ceramic pieces are worth 95 ceramic pieces in any other city state. However, when one moves away from the city states (or places that frequently trade and purchase goods from the city states) their value drops significantly.
Agreed. It's also important to note that most villages and individuals that live outside of the cities see no value in ceramic coins. Metal coin and goods (like survial days or water) are valuable.
Free citizens in corrupt cities, like Raam, could have to supplement their daily salaries with additional work because Survival Days might cost more to aquire.
Free citizens with smaller salaries (less than 5gp/day) could probably afford the necessary water (assuming they can get at least 2-4 gp for water) but would start to go hungry. In the long term, they would start to appear malnourished. If they got sick, they would be unable to afford treatment. They might lose their lodging. They might lose their business. If nothing changes, the state might eventually hold them for slavery.
Does this seem to make sense... or am I speaking foolishness?
I would imagine that in some of the outlying villages the economy is not stratified, so the citizens get food, water, and shelter directly and solely, without any intermediate currency. They work in the single industry, whether that industry be agriculture or mining. This is a lot like the ancient Greek type of slavery, where the people are tied to a particular parcel of land, considered an extension of it. In these cases, merchants would deal directly and solely with the elite of the village in some kind of barter.
Big_Goon, I like your thoughts. If a pint of water equals one ceramic piece, and the biology of most city denizens requires a gallon per day, eight pints or eight ceramic, wouldn't the math be slightly different?
Fiat currencies are pretty implausible in a barbaric/chaotic setting.
(Naturally, your game may never get into the details of how currency works, but mine is going to be a trading-based game, so it's important.)
Fiat currencies are extremely plausible when backed by the wrath of a living god (Sorcerer-King).
But wouldn't it be far to easy to counterfeit "ceramic" money? Think about the Elf tribes that visist a City-State just once in 1-2 years. They could ruin the economy of an whole CS.
Well I'm sure the treasurers put some anti-counterfeit measures into their bits (a dye or clay color that is illegal for non-templar to have raw), not to mention that anyone caught counterfeiting or indeed even unknowingly using counterfeit bits will be dealt with harshly.
The DSCG also mentions that bits are useless in wasteland villages or even to many inter-city traders, since they can be devalued at any moment and have to use to wastelanders. They specifically mention metal coinage that can replace this
I do like the idea of alternative currency though and I may figure out how to get my PCs partial interest in an iron mine or well to give them their money.
Outside of the city-states are a whole nother thing. Halflings or Kreen might very well operate primarily on a gift economy (the clutch particularly lends itself to this arrangement). Other nomads would likely operate more on a loose reciprocal system. Small settlements are likely communitarian out of necessity, similar to medieval free communes, and if they had a medium of exchange, it is likely to based on a combined survival day/labour hour economy.
I also agree that currency speculation could occur but would likely only happen amongst merchants (maybe templar agents or veiled alliance members as a politico-economic strategy) and even then, it would only really work between city-states. Likewise, you could also have a trading futures market amongst city-states as well between noble/merchant houses. This activity would likely be taxed by individual city-states but could still exist nonetheless.
Personally, I don't find these more complicated systems at all implausible, city-states have existed for thousands of years, they are supervised by an unchanging monitor (SK) and the climactic conditions impacting commodities/resources, while harsh are very consistent. In other words, though the land and society are generally very harsh, the relative stasis of conditions lends itself well to the creation of intricate economic systems. In the real world, it's a modern conceit that, because people are construed as 'savage' or 'barbarous' that they can't create complex systems so this should not apply in DS either. After all, everyone who wasn't considered a modern european had those terms applied to them at some point or another more to justify European expansionism rather than to actually comment on the reality of a given culture. Look at the complex horizontal organization of the Iroquois federation, the stratified societies of the Incas, Mayans, Aztecs, and Amazonians; Calenders, petroglyphs, pyramids, complex perennial crop and water storage systems, etc. etc. etc.
All this talk is making me really interested in running a DS campaign and I don't normally like DMing
one water coin would be 5gp would be 1 survival day
Except, survival days are far more than just water, and the DSCG already states that a "1 gp" ceramic coin, which is a water coin, actually equals 1 pint of water.
I felt that I needed a good grasp on trading in order to make it work, but it never made sense to me that ceramic coins would be valuable, based on things like gold. Water makes perfect sense, though. Land and slaves may be valuable, but nothing on Athas is more valuable than water. Since the SKs are in charge of the water in the cities, it makes perfect sense to back the currency from it. Like someone said earlier, it also gives a reason for the nobles to be noble.
I've been struggling with the pricing of items based on just ceramic because it seemed so arbitrary, without any real context to make sense. This makes much more sense.
The one problem I have is trading outside of cities. It would likely be bartering, but I don't want to overwhelm my players with too many home-brewed rules.
Also, I would like to use real metal coins as treasure, but make it rare. Not sure what value to place on them.
I'm no historian nor economist, so someone please point out when I'm being dumb. Why would gold be at all valuable on a world like Athas? Sure it's shiny and makes pretty things, but it's useless in making tools or weapons and is extremely heavy. Why would most people eve care about it? It does nothing useful and would require more resources to transport.
Wouldn't coins of iron, copper and brass be more useful? At least then you could melt them down and make something that you could use. Again, if there is a reason why this is a bad idea, please tell me.
It would seem that main water currency with copper, bronze and iron coins would make much more sense.
The more I think about metal coins, I have more questions.
I'm no historian nor economist, so someone please point out when I'm being dumb. Why would gold be at all valuable on a world like Athas? Sure it's shiny and makes pretty things, but it's useless in making tools or weapons and is extremely heavy. Why would most people eve care about it? It does nothing useful and would require more resources to transport.
Wouldn't coins of iron, copper and brass be more useful? At least then you could melt them down and make something that you could use. Again, if there is a reason why this is a bad idea, please tell me.
It would seem that main water currency with copper, bronze and iron coins would make much more sense.
Outside of cities, I tried to make some suggestions, but it mainly comes down to who you're interacting with. Look into how free medieval communes used to work if you want to come up with something for frontier settlements, otherwise, it's largely going to be barter or even just reciprocal/gift economies (basically, you do something for me, I'll do something for you). This latter model is actually very useful for coming up with story hooks.
e.g. "Need weapons? Go kill me some reptars or something and bring back the bones. If you can bring me twice as many bones as I need for your weapons, I'll give you the weapons 'for free.'"
For nomads, you could maybe measure wealth in crodlus/erdlus/eggs or some similar pack animal. If among halflings, maybe they operate on more of a meritocracy and will be willing to help with goods if you are courageous but respectful of their jungles/forests.
As for metal, you're right, gold likely wouldn't be worth as much, gold is worth a lot to us because of its scarcity and mutability. In medieval times it was valuable because of its semi-religious value to the church and to alchemists. Iron, copper, etc. would be much more useful/valuable on Athas in terms of coins but in terms of conversion value, I would probably scale them the way astral diamonds are scaled in normal DnD. Maybe have Iron replace astral diamonds, bronze replace platinum, copper replace gold... etc. It's up to you how to actually value each material, but you're right, gold is not as useful on Athas.
...Residuum on the other hand opens up a whole lot of weird potential in Athas.
:-)
Hmm... like I said, I'm not going to derail this forum but suffice it to say I take a different reading to history and perhaps to ecology as well. To really defend either side of this argument would take... quite a while and I don't know that I'm really up to the task just now. I just wanted to represent and alternative view on this thread. Anyway, my hope is that at least you don't feel humans are doomed to always live in hierarchical societies, given our sapience... and that's all I really have to say on here. Let's get back to water-currency
:-)
I suppose we did get a bit off topic. I guess I can only say that I don't think society is doomed, but I do tend to think that as we develop, the concious decission on how we treat each other will ultimately decide our fate as a species. At current I'm of the mind that where concious desire has failed (not to deminish the advances made) the potentials provided by technological advancement will make some of these issues redundant.
Going back to the topic of water as currency. I do not see a reason why gold would not see great value on Athas. At the same time I could see good reason for water and barter being the preferred medium of exchange beyond the reach of any major settlement or trade route. You can't eat or drink gold after all. Well I suppose you could, but I'm sure nothing good could come of that.
Going back to the topic of water as currency. I do not see a reason why gold would not see great value on Athas. At the same time I could see good reason for water and barter being the preferred medium of exchange beyond the reach of any major settlement or trade route. You can't eat or drink gold after all. Well I suppose you could, but I'm sure nothing good could come of that.
I can see a good reason for water and barter being the preferred medium of exchange in the major settlements and on the trade routes. Aside from the fact that the DSCS tells us that water is as good as currency itself (Specifically, it is written that "In most communities water is as good as currency"), it is also logical. The water found in major settlements is tightly controlled. People can't just head over to the well and get water. The sorcerer kings control the wells. They have no reason to give people water for free. Which means that water will have a strong value no matter where you are. It is just worth more out in the wastes, far away from any source of water. Of course, only real water, not currency that represents a value of water in the city states, will be valued in such locations.
I can see a good reason for water and barter being the preferred medium of exchange in the major settlements and on the trade routes. Aside from the fact that the DSCS tells us that water is as good as currency itself (Specifically, it is written that "In most communities water is as good as currency"), it is also logical. The water found in major settlements is tightly controlled. People can't just head over to the well and get water. The sorcerer kings control the wells. They have no reason to give people water for free. Which means that water will have a strong value no matter where you are. It is just worth more out in the wastes, far away from any source of water. Of course, only real water, not currency that represents a value of water in the city states, will be valued in such locations.
I can see the reasoning, but in the case of city-states which have more or less readily available water source water as currency becomes problematic. One main issue is that water is rather cumbersome compared to coinage and the other being that need of water through trade is not equal. For instance many nobility and major merchant houses typically have ready access to there own wells that may negate the incentive to accept water as a medium of exchange. I have no doubt that water may see exchange along side coin and barter, but the convenience of coinage as a standard medium of exchange would likely make it the preferred medium in city markets and shops. Otherwise you end up having issues with storage and transport with large quantities of water in and out of markets that may or may not be potable.
I can see the reasoning, but in the case of city-states which have more or less readily available water source water as currency becomes problematic. One main issue is that water is rather cumbersome compared to coinage and the other being that need of water through trade is not equal. For instance many nobility and major merchant houses typically have ready access to there own wells that may negate the incentive to accept water as a medium of exchange. I have no doubt that water may see exchange along side coin and barter, but the convenience of coinage as a standard medium of exchange would likely make it the preferred medium in city markets and shops. Otherwise you end up having issues with storage and transport with large quantities of water in and out of markets that may or may not be potable.
I am sorry, would you mind providing me a quote that says that nobles have access to their own private wells? I don't see anything in the 4e DSCS to support that idea. Additionally, the DSCS explicitly states that you are wrong on this. It explicitly states that in the city states water is often traded for goods and services. It is simply that in the city states people don't carry most of their water around in the form of water, but rather in ceramic pieces (which I would argue are actually the ceramic coins of the city states themselves, based on the language of the DSCS) which represent some value of water from the wells/reservoirs owned by the sorcerer kings.
I am sorry, would you mind providing me a quote that says that nobles have access to their own private wells? I don't see anything in the 4e DSCS to support that idea. Additionally, the DSCS explicitly states that you are wrong on this. It explicitly states that in the city states water is often traded for goods and services. It is simply that in the city states people don't carry most of their water around in the form of water, but rather in ceramic pieces (which I would argue are actually the ceramic coins of the city states themselves, based on the language of the DSCS) which represent some value of water from the wells/reservoirs owned by the sorcerer kings.
Nobles having wells is referenced a few times in the DCSC. The following which includes a general reference followed by two specific references are not the only ones, but are easy to find.
page #12
The aristocrats of Athasian society usually control farmland and water through hereditary titles that the sorcerer-king granted to their ancestors long ago.
page #144
Most noble villas have their own cisterns.
page #164
The noble houses own all the springs, so anyone who wants water must purchase it from them
Yes, water is a tradeable good. I did not say it wasn't, but what I did say is that I think coinage would be preferred. Beyond this I wasn't intending bring the ceramic piece debate from the survival days thread here so I thought it prudent to exclude any mention of ration tokens/ceramic pieces. Instead I opted to refer to coinage vs. water which I did.
As for the last bit, we don't need to debate whether the ceramic pieces are in fact coins or not in the RAW. However, one way or another, the campaign setting is explicit about the fact that the ceramic pieces that represent water are valuable enough that they can be used as currency inside the city states. In the context of this thread, as what the original poster wants is to have ceramic coins that represent wealth as water, my interpretation of the RAW in the DSCS is appropriate. He can interpret the ceramic coins of the city states to be the ceramic pieces that represent water value. Metal coins can also still be used as per the RAW. They can be an alternative form of currency used by merchants that worry about sorcerer kings suddenly devaluing, or outlawing, the ceramic coins of any given city state.
Interesting. Thank you for the quotes on the nobles having their own wells. I had missed that. I am sure nobles would still value ceramic pieces that represent a certain water value. Even if they have their own well or cistern, that well isn't infinite. The more of the sorcerer kings water they can use, the less of their own water they have to.
As for the last bit, we don't need to debate whether the ceramic pieces are in fact coins or not in the RAW. However, one way or another, the campaign setting is explicit about the fact that the ceramic pieces that represent water are valuable enough that they can be used as currency inside the city states. In the context of this thread, as what the original poster wants is to have ceramic coins that represent wealth as water, my interpretation of the RAW in the DSCS is appropriate. He can interpret the ceramic coins of the city states to be the ceramic pieces that represent water value. Metal coins can also still be used as per the RAW. They can be an alternative form of currency used by merchants that worry about sorcerer kings suddenly devaluing, or outlawing, the ceramic coins of any given city state.
You are correct. In this case your interpretation is appropriate. I suppose there's a lot of ways you could add depth to this.
Like maybe one way to handle this is to take your interpretation of bits being the ceramic pieces mentioned in the rewords section and say something like each type of bit represents a pint in the city-state it is issued, but has a 'global' value based on the general confidence of the issuing state to back the coin up. So you could say for instance that maybe Balic bits represent a pint of water in its city, but because most of the city-states water supply comes from a short rainy season it's value in other city-states becomes equivalent to a cp bit. Or maybe Urik's bit is equivelant to a gp bit in other city-states since there's a great deal of confidence in Urik's ample water supplies. It's not really that realistic, but just an idea.
Another way to handle this could be to have each type of bit representing a certain quality of water. Something like a pint of stagnant undrinkable water (used for industrial purposes or slaves) being a cp bit, while a pint of crystal clear water with a desirable taste is represented as a gp bit.
Interesting. Thank you for the quotes on the nobles having their own wells. I had missed that. I am sure nobles would still value ceramic pieces that represent a certain water value. Even if they have their own well or cistern, that well isn't infinite. The more of the sorcerer kings water they can use, the less of their own water they have to.
As for the last bit, we don't need to debate whether the ceramic pieces are in fact coins or not in the RAW. However, one way or another, the campaign setting is explicit about the fact that the ceramic pieces that represent water are valuable enough that they can be used as currency inside the city states. In the context of this thread, as what the original poster wants is to have ceramic coins that represent wealth as water, my interpretation of the RAW in the DSCS is appropriate. He can interpret the ceramic coins of the city states to be the ceramic pieces that represent water value. Metal coins can also still be used as per the RAW. They can be an alternative form of currency used by merchants that worry about sorcerer kings suddenly devaluing, or outlawing, the ceramic coins of any given city state.
You are correct. In this case your interpretation is appropriate. I suppose there's a lot of ways you could add depth to this.
Like maybe one way to handle this is to take your interpretation of bits being the ceramic pieces mentioned in the rewords section and say something like each type of bit represents a pint in the city-state it is issued, but has a 'global' value based on the general confidence of the issuing state to back the coin up. So you could say for instance that maybe Balic bits represent a pint of water in its city, but because most of the city-states water supply comes from a short rainy season it's value in other city-states becomes equivalent to a cp bit. Or maybe Urik's bit is equivelant to a gp bit in other city-states since there's a great deal of confidence in Urik's ample water supplies. It's not really that realistic, but just an idea.
Another way to handle this could be to have each type of bit representing a certain quality of water. Something like a pint of stagnant undrinkable water (used for industrial purposes or slaves) being a cp bit, while a pint of crystal clear water with a desirable taste is represented as a gp bit.
These are good ideas both. The latter idea gives a basis for dividing coinage into varying values within city-states while the former opens up very plausible trade schemes between states without having to have characters (or hypothetically, NPC's) constantly trading in their coins each time they reach a new polis or worse, having their money be valueless outside the coin's specific city-state. In short, it creates ample liquidity.
I might add that, given this sort of situation, a tax being levied on the use of outsider coins by the SK's seems equally as plausible to offset influx of low-confidence currency. Using the pieces of eight example (but modifying it to a pieces of ten), perhaps the use of a Balic coin in say, Raam (not actually taking the specific geo-politico-economics of either polis into account) would count for 9/10ths of its normative value in Balic, with the remaining 1/10th going to the government because (hypothetically) Balic coins are not as reliably backed (for whatever reason). This of course would only apply within official/legitimate, i.e. taxable exchanges. Free markets, black and grey markets, and under-the-table exchanges (like the Elven markets, desert markets, or the Arena Market in Crimson Legion-era Tyr) would be a different story. This wouldn't have to be the case in all city-states either, you could have agreements between allied city-states to allow for equivalent exchange rates. Likewise, outlier settlements/colonies of a given polis could have their currency pegged to that state's currency.
Another thing that this opens up in a more concrete way, which was touched upon earlier, is the potential for currency speculation by merchant houses (and to a lesser extent by nobles).
So, let's collect the info we have so far:
Ceramic pieces are backed by water within city-states.
They are divisible into bits.
Within their home polis, they have a standard value.
Outside of their home polis, they may or may not be taxed by other SK's (based on market confidence).
The value of differing types of ceramic pieces is tied to the potability of the water it represents.
The value of ceramic pieces globally (that is, amongst all the poli of Athas) relies primarily on confidence in a given polis' ability to redeem its ceramic pieces, i.e. the reliability of their water supply.
Well... seems we more of less have this all worked out, now we just need to find a water value to peg coinage too and then we can begin the task of assigning specific exchange rates for city-states, which in turn will provide a basis for in-game trade relations.
It might also be pertinent to investigate how metal coins might be used. Iron coins would be obviously be of relatively lower value in Tyr, likewise with Gold goins in Balic (due to the mine in Walis). Gold would still be valued more than Iron however, as Walis is the only known gold-mine in all of Athas, whereas it is alluded to that there may be other, less prolific iron-mines beside Tyr's. I have never seen any information on Silver mines, which could indicate that Silver is rarer on Athas than Earth. If this were the case, it might out-price Gold.
I wanted to add something for anyone who happens to find this thread in the future:
Look in the 2E Dark Sun Dune Trader accessory. It has AMAZING information on prices, price fluctation, costs of doings business, hazards, and all manner of other logistics for dealing with trade in Athas. While obviously it is not exhaustive, (it does not account for many sites outside of the Tyr region), it gives ample base-line examples to work from and some fairly edition-neutral rules for adjusting costs based on scarcity, as well as major trade routes and goods-distribution maps. Check it out, if I had realized this when the preceding thread was started, I could've saved myself a lot of time and energy.
There was even a section that mentionned adventurers could cause devaluation if they show up with Ancient metal coinage from a trip to ruins, and as such these coins have little value. Yet, there's plenty of metal weapons in old ruins and they can still be traded for lots of ceramics. Same with trading gems.
I would reinstate silver and gold coinage as higher denominations replacing ceramics. A DS ceramic is worth one D&D gold piece, while a DS silver piece made of actual silver could be worth a hundred ceramics, and a DS gold piece made of actual gold could be worth a thousand ceramics, or similar numbers.
Remember that this was the system we ran on in 2e and 3e.