[vicky_molokh]

Q: Wealth seems like a rather expensive trait compared to just buying lots of Signature Gear. What am I paying for?
A: Well, there are many things:

Originally Posted by Kromm

In GURPS, Status = social standing and Wealth = economic standing, and your complete socioeconomic profile – what we would call "social class" in the real world – comes from the two taken together.
[ . . . ]
A TL8 person who chooses to be Poor [-15] starts with $4,000 and not $20,000
[ . . . ]
he's a homeless itinerant or a drifter, and here's the important part: By getting 15 points for Poor, he's accepting and locking in his legal status as "homeless itinerant." It isn't just money that's affected, but others' perceptions of him. If a cop catches him flashing gift goods from rich party members, sees him entering a residence provided by said allies, etc., the cop will intervene. Such incidents should provide approximately -15 points of inconvenience.

There's also the bit about how much gear you start with, but that's actually a secondary effect of Wealth. The primary effects concern your credit rating, social network, relationship with bankers and taxmen, and so on, and the follow-on effects on your social freedoms and mobility. Wealth represents these things first of all. If the GM has no intention of enforcing the ramifications, then low Wealth isn't a valid disadvantage, any more than low Appearance would be valid in a campaign where all the PCs teleoperate giant battlemechs via FTL radio and never appear in the flesh.

Originally Posted by Kromm

As Wealth Level (p. B517) notes, jobs have associated Wealth levels, and those who work at them must spend points to reach those levels. If they don't, what happens is up to the GM. The most logical outcome is that the PC is seen as insufficiently respectable or reliable for the job, and the employer finds some pretext to terminate him or demote him to a job commensurate with his Wealth level. It's entirely possible that the Status associated with the Wealth level of a job is a de facto prerequisite for the job, too; you can't get the job "Knight" without Status 2, and living in a Status 2 fashion requires you to be Wealthy.

And as Finding a Job (p. B518) explains, the Wealth levels associated with jobs are canonically linked to Status levels, and search rolls have a penalty equal to twice that Status level. Thus, while it's fine for a Status 2 character to start with a Status 2/Wealthy job, the GM is within his rights to deny that to a PC with Status 1 or less, or who's Comfortable or poorer, and ask to see him make the search roll . . . at -4.

I guess you could read these rules otherwise, but the above is the spirit in which they were written.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Ah, no . . . capital-W Wealth the advantage is in itself a measure of social connectedness, credit rating, and economic power. It doesn't go away just because you lose money in bad times. You still have the connections and the credit history; you just don't have the cash. Small-w wealth the real-world concept certainly varies, but on the other hand isn't anything but your bank balance.

A knight, lord, or ruler tends to have some of his Status owing to his track record as being the holder of land and commander of troops who, in the worst-case scenario, can loot or tax money to repay debts. This is what Wealth is about in such settings, and why it elevates Status.

Originally Posted by Kromm

[ . . . ]
An adventurer who starts out Dead Broke gets to enter play naked, unarmed, and either looked down upon for his low Status or looked down upon for living below his average Status. [ . . . ] if his job ("adventurer") earns him enough money to gain Wealth levels, he's expected to buy those Wealth levels. If he doesn't, he hasn't made the commitments needed to keep the money and something will happen to it.

Originally Posted by Kromm

The intent of the game design is that the +1 or +2 to Status from Wealth is actual base Status. It isn't an "effective Status" modifier at all. Capital-W Wealth changes your Status. Small-w wealth – including what you can afford to pay as cost of living – affects only effective Status. You seem to be confusing Wealth with wealth. Wealth is a highly complex, abstract social advantage that encompasses about as much as IQ does, including but not limited to starting money, job qualifications, social connections, credit rating, land, and a hidden economic parallel to Status.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Yeah, that's a different take than the game uses. If you win the lottery tomorrow, your Wealth does not change by default. That's just the spoils of war, the way the cookie crumbles, etc. It's no different from making a friend in play, which doesn't require Ally, or finding a magic sword, which doesn't grant you Signature Gear or a gadget built as advantages. Your Wealth only changes if you specifically invest the required capital – taking it out of play – to buy, bribe, and insure your way to a social position where future changes in fortune won't alter the respect and credit accorded to you. This is the big difference between somebody who keeps their winnings as liquid assets and uses them for trips, cars, and homes, and somebody who invests their winnings in nonliquid assets that will continue to make them money in the future. The former only requires cash; the latter also calls for points, which represent the work done to build networks.

Originally Posted by Kromm

To be fair, I wanted to call it "Economic Rank" or "Economic Status," but others felt that was too close to "Rank" and "Status," and probably easily confused given its relationship with the political kind of Status.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Optional Purchase of Wealth: When your PC receives a windfall (treasure, lottery winnings, etc.), enough to boost her Wealth, you have the option to declare that she's investing some or all of her money in the social structures necessary to support higher Wealth. That means things like buying club memberships, opening a secured trading account, paying off debts, starting tabs by making large purchases from prestigious merchants, investing most of the money for the long term, and having her now-impressed banker, newly hired attorney, et al. vouch for her. Then you can spend some earned points on Wealth, which will give her the connections for better jobs at a future date, and possibly some free Wealth-derived Status. Such a course is never required, and you always have the alternative of saying that your PC keeps the cash for spending and uses it to buy gear – but that won't help her future jobs, Status, etc.

Compulsory Purchase of Wealth: When your PC earns a lot of money by working at a job, the choice is made for her. She has come into good fortune the slow, sure way that most societies recognize as respectable. She has been making connections and investments for months or years. As the player, you're required to spend earned points on Wealth . . . unless you can successfully petition the GM to agree that your PC is suddenly out of a job and discredited with nothing but a bunch of money to show for it.

Spontaneous Addition of Wealth: When your PC is rewarded – when the GM decrees something like, "And your reward from the Prince is riches. Everybody now has Very Wealthy!" – she get Wealth and her point value goes up. The Wealth takes the form of the contacts for better jobs, free Status, etc. There may be no extra cash . . . what she gains, in effect, is credit rating. Thus, this is not a windfall or earnings, but a hybrid case where the respect and connections of the latter are bestowed in the manner of the former, without liquid assets necessarily changing hands. Refusing the free advantage is an option, but this might mean gaining nothing; the kinds of authorities who can award social privilege pay little or nothing to do so, and often lack the personal fortune to award a cash equivalent.

Also see Status, Cost of Living (CoL) and lifestyle.