Question: Value of Land in Forgotten Realms - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Question: Value of Land in Forgotten Realms

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
yortradd
Jan 26, 2010 11:32:00
Background:
I'm running a FR campaign that takes place at the border of Cormyr and Sembia just a couple miles west of the Vast Swamp. Party is level 2.

The king of Cormyr would like to build up that area, since Wheloon is now a prison city. There is a Lady of Loudwater appointed by the king with control of a village, Loudwater from PHB, and the surrounding lands.

I am currently awarding the party 50 gold for each slaver they kill. Also the lady has sent them on a quest to return some stolen items and avenge the killing of a mage in the village.

Dilemma:
The lady would like to reward the party with land rather than gold. She has lots of land, but not much gold.

Question:
If the lady is willing to pay 50 GP for the head of a slaver, how much should she offer in land instead. I was thinking a straight up 1 gold piece for 1 acre of land with the understanding that land that is not developed within 10 years reverts back to the crown.

I'm thinking the characters can take the land and give it out to the slaves they free or loan it to them until they start to bring in a profit, then charge them rent so that the party can eventually retire.

Anyone else have any ideas on this?
#2
da_chicken
Jan 26, 2010 12:18:26 Historically, Kings and Queens don't sell. They always own everything in their domain. That's why it's their domain. The British Empire was all the land that was owned by the King or Queen of England. You can see why they were so wealthy.

In the Feudal era, they would grand Lordships to specific regions, typically in return for promising to manage the land and go to war should the King ask (or send someone in their stead). The Lord is also typically responsible for collection of taxes (we'd call it rent) from those persons working the land or living on it. Of course, peasants were not legally allowed to move or leave, either. They were required by law to stay there and work the land and pay taxes. You can see why the name "landlord" came to be used for people renting property.

Personally, I don't see a ruler wanting to divide their land into sizes smaller than 1 square mile (640 acres) just to make it easy for herself, although she'd probably have them report to another nobleman. If the players want land and the Queen is indulgent, given them a parcel but expect an annual tax to be paid and give them a minor title. Anything above the tax rate the land earns is profit for the players. Land is a responsibility. It's usually a PITA for adventurers.

If you want to use modern ideals of land ownership, then 1gp per acre seems low. I mean, a horse is 75gp. I'd probably say 100gp per acre is closer for land that's fertile, with a water supply, and monster-free.
#3
Seeker95
Jan 26, 2010 12:43:45
Historically, Kings and Queens don't sell. They always own everything in their domain. That's why it's their domain.

In the Feudal era, they would grand Lordships to specific regions, typically in return for promising to manage the land and go to war should the King ask (or send someone in their stead).

THis is my suggestion as well.

Grant a tract of land to be managed the party, and the approriate titles to reflect that station. Have the party be responsible for collecting the taxes, keeping it clear of monsters, and otherwise managing the property. For ease of game-management, have the taxes and costs offset exactly. Use the area for adventure hooks and conflict opportunities. What do the PCs get out of it? A title of respect and authority, a place to live, and a really big back yard.

And make sure you add in some treasure (as they clear it) that equals the gold they should have received, assuming the money was already coming from a parcel.
#4
yortradd
Jan 27, 2010 11:28:40 What I really want to do is make the party feel like this is their home, so that they have a vested interest in seeing it prosper.

What I don't want to do is make them Knights of Cormyr while they are still 2nd level, though I would not be opposed to Knighting them if they accomplish something significant.

The Lady of Loudwater would not really be giving up control of the land. The party would still have to pay taxes on what the land produces. If the land produces nothing, the land would go back to the crown. Any land within 15 miles of Ludwater falls under her control. If the party just wants some land, all they would have to do is take land 16 miles north of Loudwater.

What I'm trying to do with this crazy idea is convince the party to accept land in lieu of gold for killing bad guys that they would probably kill anyway. The advantage for the Lady of Loudwater is that the party will be more likely to pour gold into upgrading their land by building a headquarters, and helping freed slaves to set up their own farms and perhaps eventually other enterprises such as a smithy, mill, or brewery.

So far, the party has not done anything to warrant receiving a title, though I could probably justify giving them some small parcels of land as reward for completing various quests.

As to the parcel size, I think 160 acres is or was a standard size in the western parts of the United States back in the 19th century, though I would think that areas near the village might be divided into smaller parcels.

The land on Cormyr's border is empty. I think, but I'm not positive, that a horse is worth a lot more than an acre of land. If the lady was able to ensure that the area is monster free, then the land might have more value. Currently there are problems with both monsters and slavers and potential problems with Netheril.

Two games ago, The lady gave the party 350 GP for the slavers they captured and killed. I'm thinking a plot of 160 acres or 320 acres would be a good reward for the party and would definitely save the lady some money. It might even generate money in the future, because right now the land surrounding Loudwater is mostly empty.

Maybe I'm crazy to think the King of cormyr would approve the scheme, and also I might be crazy for thinking the party would even be willing to accept the land considering how much of a drain on their time and money it could ned up being.
#5
canamrock
Jan 27, 2010 13:05:33 If they're killing slavers, perhaps there's a different way to end up giving them the land. Assuming these slavers aren't entirely random, there should be some centralized area(s) they congregate. They can start off with a a duty to clear out one or several of those areas, which ought to take several levels. Once they've done the major sweep, their reward beyond the direct payments is being tasked with protecting and developing the land there at the Crown's grant. At first, it's essentially a sheriff's role, but as they earn favor, they can eventually gain the stance of petty nobility, knights in the service of the Crown having earned the right to take more profit from the land they've carved out for them.

As for the size, several square miles seems like a big but appropriate piece to be given out per player, perhaps a contigious area that ends up being maybe a dozen square miles. That's enough to build up a reasonable town and the farms to support it and their own interests. Ideally, if you go with the idea I presented above, the slavers controlled a trade-friendly area (costal with a natural harbor, large river, wide valley base, etc.), which makes it easier to help stir up development. Really, though, what players would find interest will likely determine a lot of whether you want to make this an easier, mostly hand-waved affair, or increasingly the focus of the story.
#6
makrothumeo
Jan 27, 2010 13:09:34 I would say that they are not interested in "the land" per se, but rather in the income from the land...as Canamrock said, you have them clear out an area, the Lady moves in serf families, maybe you have the party hire protection for the land when they're ready to move on, and in return the Lady gives them 1/2 the after-tax income from the serf farms (or all of it, in return for making her serf's lives better, whatever you come up with.)

Edit--This way you don't need knighthood's or the kings approval or any of that--just a tidy way for them to make an income, and you always have a "hook" to pull them back in need.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 yortradd Jan 26, 2010 11:32:00	Background: I'm running a FR campaign that takes place at the border of Cormyr and Sembia just a couple miles west of the Vast Swamp. Party is level 2. The king of Cormyr would like to build up that area, since Wheloon is now a prison city. There is a Lady of Loudwater appointed by the king with control of a village, Loudwater from PHB, and the surrounding lands. I am currently awarding the party 50 gold for each slaver they kill. Also the lady has sent them on a quest to return some stolen items and avenge the killing of a mage in the village. Dilemma: The lady would like to reward the party with land rather than gold. She has lots of land, but not much gold. Question: If the lady is willing to pay 50 GP for the head of a slaver, how much should she offer in land instead. I was thinking a straight up 1 gold piece for 1 acre of land with the understanding that land that is not developed within 10 years reverts back to the crown. I'm thinking the characters can take the land and give it out to the slaves they free or loan it to them until they start to bring in a profit, then charge them rent so that the party can eventually retire. Anyone else have any ideas on this?
#2 da_chicken Jan 26, 2010 12:18:26	Historically, Kings and Queens don't sell. They always own everything in their domain. That's why it's their domain. The British Empire was all the land that was owned by the King or Queen of England. You can see why they were so wealthy. In the Feudal era, they would grand Lordships to specific regions, typically in return for promising to manage the land and go to war should the King ask (or send someone in their stead). The Lord is also typically responsible for collection of taxes (we'd call it rent) from those persons working the land or living on it. Of course, peasants were not legally allowed to move or leave, either. They were required by law to stay there and work the land and pay taxes. You can see why the name "landlord" came to be used for people renting property. Personally, I don't see a ruler wanting to divide their land into sizes smaller than 1 square mile (640 acres) just to make it easy for herself, although she'd probably have them report to another nobleman. If the players want land and the Queen is indulgent, given them a parcel but expect an annual tax to be paid and give them a minor title. Anything above the tax rate the land earns is profit for the players. Land is a responsibility. It's usually a PITA for adventurers. If you want to use modern ideals of land ownership, then 1gp per acre seems low. I mean, a horse is 75gp. I'd probably say 100gp per acre is closer for land that's fertile, with a water supply, and monster-free.
#3 Seeker95 Jan 26, 2010 12:43:45	Historically, Kings and Queens don't sell. They always own everything in their domain. That's why it's their domain. In the Feudal era, they would grand Lordships to specific regions, typically in return for promising to manage the land and go to war should the King ask (or send someone in their stead). THis is my suggestion as well. Grant a tract of land to be managed the party, and the approriate titles to reflect that station. Have the party be responsible for collecting the taxes, keeping it clear of monsters, and otherwise managing the property. For ease of game-management, have the taxes and costs offset exactly. Use the area for adventure hooks and conflict opportunities. What do the PCs get out of it? A title of respect and authority, a place to live, and a really big back yard. And make sure you add in some treasure (as they clear it) that equals the gold they should have received, assuming the money was already coming from a parcel.
#4 yortradd Jan 27, 2010 11:28:40	What I really want to do is make the party feel like this is their home, so that they have a vested interest in seeing it prosper. What I don't want to do is make them Knights of Cormyr while they are still 2nd level, though I would not be opposed to Knighting them if they accomplish something significant. The Lady of Loudwater would not really be giving up control of the land. The party would still have to pay taxes on what the land produces. If the land produces nothing, the land would go back to the crown. Any land within 15 miles of Ludwater falls under her control. If the party just wants some land, all they would have to do is take land 16 miles north of Loudwater. What I'm trying to do with this crazy idea is convince the party to accept land in lieu of gold for killing bad guys that they would probably kill anyway. The advantage for the Lady of Loudwater is that the party will be more likely to pour gold into upgrading their land by building a headquarters, and helping freed slaves to set up their own farms and perhaps eventually other enterprises such as a smithy, mill, or brewery. So far, the party has not done anything to warrant receiving a title, though I could probably justify giving them some small parcels of land as reward for completing various quests. As to the parcel size, I think 160 acres is or was a standard size in the western parts of the United States back in the 19th century, though I would think that areas near the village might be divided into smaller parcels. The land on Cormyr's border is empty. I think, but I'm not positive, that a horse is worth a lot more than an acre of land. If the lady was able to ensure that the area is monster free, then the land might have more value. Currently there are problems with both monsters and slavers and potential problems with Netheril. Two games ago, The lady gave the party 350 GP for the slavers they captured and killed. I'm thinking a plot of 160 acres or 320 acres would be a good reward for the party and would definitely save the lady some money. It might even generate money in the future, because right now the land surrounding Loudwater is mostly empty. Maybe I'm crazy to think the King of cormyr would approve the scheme, and also I might be crazy for thinking the party would even be willing to accept the land considering how much of a drain on their time and money it could ned up being.
#5 canamrock Jan 27, 2010 13:05:33	If they're killing slavers, perhaps there's a different way to end up giving them the land. Assuming these slavers aren't entirely random, there should be some centralized area(s) they congregate. They can start off with a a duty to clear out one or several of those areas, which ought to take several levels. Once they've done the major sweep, their reward beyond the direct payments is being tasked with protecting and developing the land there at the Crown's grant. At first, it's essentially a sheriff's role, but as they earn favor, they can eventually gain the stance of petty nobility, knights in the service of the Crown having earned the right to take more profit from the land they've carved out for them. As for the size, several square miles seems like a big but appropriate piece to be given out per player, perhaps a contigious area that ends up being maybe a dozen square miles. That's enough to build up a reasonable town and the farms to support it and their own interests. Ideally, if you go with the idea I presented above, the slavers controlled a trade-friendly area (costal with a natural harbor, large river, wide valley base, etc.), which makes it easier to help stir up development. Really, though, what players would find interest will likely determine a lot of whether you want to make this an easier, mostly hand-waved affair, or increasingly the focus of the story.
#6 makrothumeo Jan 27, 2010 13:09:34	I would say that they are not interested in "the land" per se, but rather in the income from the land...as Canamrock said, you have them clear out an area, the Lady moves in serf families, maybe you have the party hire protection for the land when they're ready to move on, and in return the Lady gives them 1/2 the after-tax income from the serf farms (or all of it, in return for making her serf's lives better, whatever you come up with.) Edit--This way you don't need knighthood's or the kings approval or any of that--just a tidy way for them to make an income, and you always have a "hook" to pull them back in need.