[Basic] Tech Levels, Statuses, and Costs of Living

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The general formula is that status 0 has a CoL of $600 and income of $600 + 10% of starting wealth for an average character, and this gets multiplied by the wealth multiplier for a wealth level equal to status. If starting wealth is more than $6,000 or so, it will tend to be possible to afford to live above your status.

I'm curious, where are you getting your formula? Was it derived from the numbers or spelled out in a supplement?

As it is, I based my tables on the raw numbers given in the Basic Set; Cost of Living for the Status is listed in the Equipment chapter, and Monthly Pay Per Tech Level is in Campaigns (IDHMBWM ATM, so I can't give actual page numbers).

And anyway, I was looking mainly at, "What Status can I live at given my Wealth level, by the RAW?" TL8's currently makes sense; I'm living at Status -1 myself on a Poor income - as are most of my coworkers (we're making minimum wage) - renting an efficiency (I've discovered I don't live well with others).

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

I'm curious, where are you getting your formula? Was it derived from the numbers or spelled out in a supplement?

Derived from the numbers.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

I don't really see how in GURPS you can have Status without material wealth, either your own wealth, or else being "kept" by someone higher up, e.g. the wife or concubine or even slave of a wealthy man.

It seems to me that in GURPS, Status is very much derived from the level of material wealth that you personally display (the whole Cost of Living thing),

Except that it's perfectly possible to have an display enormous wealth and yet lack more than modest Status. It's also possible to have status as, say, the rightful heir to a throne in exile, but have no particular wealth although you'll be penalized for it.

[Polydamas]

I wouldn't expect Struggling people to live at Status 0 in poor societies; this is why there are stories about artists' garrets, students pawning their books and shirts, and rooming houses with dubious stews.

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Realistically people do have more disposable income as TL increases.

That depends. Average people in some TL 2 societies (say Attica in 450 BCE) can have more income and property than average people in some TL 4 societies (say a backwards part of India in 1850). In agrarian societies (TL 1-4 or 5) it is common for people to have property worth a few years' income, but in poorer societies that gets them less durable goods, and in lower-tech societies they have less kit to chose from. A Polynesian chief may have lots of disposable income, which he can spend on moving rocks, wood carving, pretty stones, rare and tasty fish, a large household, and not much else. The idea that someone in a late 20th century could divert most of his income from food and housing and clothing to adventuring kit with no social consequences (as Status 0 CoL $600, Average income a few thousand a month implies) makes me scratch my head too.

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Except that it's perfectly possible to have an display enormous wealth and yet lack more than modest Status. It's also possible to have status as, say, the rightful heir to a throne in exile, but have no particular wealth although you'll be penalized for it.

It seems that this calls for Courtesy Status. People with less wealth and power than their background suggests usually get less respect and influence than their background suggests.

[scc]

I think people might have the way the system works out backwards. It's not that past TL7 that a person at Status -1 working in a Status -1 job can afford a Status 0 CoL, it's that a Status 0 person only needs to work in a Status -1 Job to cover his CoL