Conversation Rate of G$ To Real World Dollars

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Yes it does: I thought that was the proper number. Have the numbers been updated as books continue to come out?

On Kromm's recommendation, I have been using 2004 dollars in my current project.

[acrosome]

Frankly, I find it so glaringly obvious that the GURPS economic model is medieval that my mind boggles that someone could possibly think otherwise.

The GURPS model is, basically, really bad at modeling a modern economy- especially one that includes even a tiny bit of socialism. To model something like retirement in GURPS you basically have to re-write your character with different ads and disads and declare that "they retired." How else are you going to model (in the US) Social Security and IRAs? How did you model them while you are paying into them? How do you differentiate someone who saves a lot versus someone who lives hand-to-mouth and will have to work until the day they die? (Answer: You really can't.)

So, GURPS is really bad at this.

It can barely handle the concept of taxes, so it can do medieval ok. In medieval you either have a big pile of money or you don't. There is no social welfare. There are no IRAs. Simple. That's what GURPS (and almost every other RPG system) does acceptably well.

Don't get all pedantic with me and bring up the Inca and the like. You know what I'm saying. Don't be a bore.

I have LONG proposed that GURPS should not have used the dollar sign ($), if only to avoid all of this confusion. If the system has pretensions of generality it should have, well, used the generic currency sign (¤), or maybe something like the lozenge (◊). Since the lozenge is a diamond it is at least intuitive that it is a unit of value. Or perhaps- humorously- since the conversion factor is supposed to be $1 = 1 loaf of bread, just go all-in and call them "loaves", using L as the currency symbol? :) This would have the benefit of resembling the pound sign (£), which derives from libra, Latin for pound. If you really want something historical, base it on the denarius (X̶). You could probably replace that one with an asterisk.

Any of this would at least make it obvious that there is not meant to be any modern real-world equivalent.

[Nemoricus]

Originally Posted by acrosome

To model something like retirement in GURPS you basically have to re-write your character with different ads and disads and declare that "they retired."

Why does GURPS need to explicitly handle retirement? As always, you pay for effects, and fluff it as necessary. For a character retiring in play, how often does that happen? For that matter, how often are player characters working in a field where retirement doesn't mean that they're out of the campaign?

How else are you going to model (in the US) Social Security and IRAs? How did you model them while you are paying into them? How do you differentiate someone who saves a lot versus someone who lives hand-to-mouth? (Answer: You really can't.)

Why do these need to be explicitly modeled? I've always assumed the income for jobs is "after tax" and that the price of goods includes sales tax and the like. What game benefit do you gain by tracking them separately?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by acrosome

Frankly, I find it so glaringly obvious that the GURPS economic model is medieval that my mind boggles that someone could possibly think otherwise.

The GURPS model is, basically, really bad at modeling a modern economy- especially one that includes even a tiny bit of socialism. To model something like retirement in GURPS you basically have to re-write your character with different ads and disads and declare that "they retired." How else are you going to model (in the US) Social Security and IRAs? How did you model them while you are paying into them? How do you differentiate someone who saves a lot versus someone who lives hand-to-mouth and will have to work until the day they die? (Answer: You really can't.)

So, GURPS is really bad at this.

It can barely handle the concept of taxes, so it can do medieval ok. In medieval you either have a big pile of money or you don't. There is no social welfare. There are no IRAs. Simple. That's what GURPS (and almost every other RPG system) does acceptably well.

Don't get all pedantic with me and bring up the Inca and the like. You know what I'm saying. Don't be a bore.

I have LONG proposed that GURPS should not have used the dollar sign ($), if only to avoid all of this confusion. If the system has pretensions of generality it should have, well, used the generic currency sign (¤), or maybe something like the lozenge (◊).

I'm not seeing these things on my keyboard. Also I can't imagine for a moment why anyone would want to model paying into their IRA in a roleplaying game.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by acrosome

I have LONG proposed that GURPS should not have used the dollar sign ($), if only to avoid all of this confusion. If the system has pretensions of generality it should have, well, used the generic currency sign (¤), or maybe something like the lozenge (◊). Since the lozenge is a diamond it is at least intuitive that it is a unit of value. Or perhaps- humorously- since the conversion factor is supposed to be $1 = 1 loaf of bread, just go all-in and call them "loaves", using L as the currency symbol? :) This would have the benefit of resembling the pound sign (£), which derives from libra, Latin for pound. If you really want something historical, base it on the denarius (X̶). You could probably replace that one with an asterisk.

This is the first time I've ever heard that there was such a thing as a "generic currency sign"—and I'm a professional copy editor and have edited a lot of economic papers and books. Did the sign even exist when GURPS 1/e was written?

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Nemoricus

Why does GURPS need to explicitly handle retirement? As always, you pay for effects, and fluff it as necessary. For a character retiring in play, how often does that happen? For that matter, how often are player characters working in a field where retirement doesn't mean that they're out of the campaign?

Retirement is easy. Assign a wealth level and an Independent Income percentage. Then you have money coming in once a month in a set amount. For example, in the United States, with current Average starting wealth $20,000, you could take II 10 and get $2000/month to represent Social Security.

[Nemoricus]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Retirement is easy. Assign a wealth level and an Independent Income percentage. Then you have money coming in once a month in a set amount. For example, in the United States, with current Average starting wealth $20,000, you could take II 10 and get $2000/month to represent Social Security.

This is exactly the sort of thing I was referring to. Representing a retired character in game is simply a matter of applying existing traits with the appropriate interpretation.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Nemoricus

This is exactly the sort of thing I was referring to. Representing a retired character in game is simply a matter of applying existing traits with the appropriate interpretation.

Yes. That's what I created Independent Income for, when I was writing GURPS Steampunk; it was there not only for gentlemen of leisure, but for the old sergeant's "shillin' a day—bloomin' good pay; lucky to touch it, shillin' a day."

[Anthony]

Personally, I think it would work better if both the cost of living and the job table went away; your wealth level defines your adventuring-available income and anything else is background.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Personally, I think it would work better if both the cost of living and the job table went away; your wealth level defines your adventuring-available income and anything else is background.

Not in my campaigns, it's not. A lot of my campaigns give significant time to "daily life." For example, in my current fantasy campaign, one of the PCs just bought an inn that she's going to convert into a residence, and another is assessing the suitability of three young women as possible wives. And all five PCs brought back a lot of valuable goods from their voyage and I'm making them pay cost of living while a larger ship is built for their next voyage.