[DF 8] On Gemstones and Carats

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Stripe

There's no way I can do that math.

It's very possible to create a "cheat sheet", using Excel or Calc, for a variety of standard gemstone types and sizes. It's just not something I've gotten around to yet, in part because gemcutting would be anachronistic in my primary setting.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

I do maintain that larger lumps of amber should be worth somewhat disproportionately more

Is it really that large pieces of amber are worth more, or that the cost of adding the shaping and polishing to make it gem quality is largely independent of size (big ones need more work, small ones need more intricate work)? On the other hand, a large piece suitable for making a large "gem" is likely to be more rare than a large piece only suitable for making a lot of little gems, but I don't know enough about amber to say much about it.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Is it really that large pieces of amber are worth more, or that the cost of adding the shaping and polishing to make it gem quality is largely independent of size (big ones need more work, small ones need more intricate work)? On the other hand, a large piece suitable for making a large "gem" is likely to be more rare than a large piece only suitable for making a lot of little gems, but I don't know enough about amber to say much about it.

I'm thinking necklages of merely polished amber beads, as the "baseline item".

[panton41]

Originally Posted by PseudoFenton

Point. However I'd still raise the game and go with titanium, nothing gets more practical and hard-wearing that that! You can ever colour it without chroming so it'll keep any choice colour alterations from wearing off. But at least I can see the wavelength your on now, so I'll stop sidetracking the thread...

Compared to steel titanium is ludicrously expensive and for the purposes of a DF game unknown on Earth until 1791. (And it took even longer to be easily refined and to find a practical use.)

[PseudoFenton]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Is it really that large pieces of amber are worth more, or that the cost of adding the shaping and polishing to make it gem quality is largely independent of size (big ones need more work, small ones need more intricate work)? On the other hand, a large piece suitable for making a large "gem" is likely to be more rare than a large piece only suitable for making a lot of little gems, but I don't know enough about amber to say much about it.

I'm by far no expert on the subject, but "flaws" in amber are unusual in the way they're handled as some prefer that aesthetic. Whilst inclusions can make a piece significantly more expensive, subject to number/ size/ commonality and "pleasing form".

A tiny piece of amber with a fly in it for example will be worth more than the norm for that size, but not massively so - but a moderately sized clear piece with a large and rare specimen positioned centrally and in an easy to identify shape (so not all on top of itself) is worth multiples of cost more! I know, I've tried to buy some in the past.

So even though its a relatively inexpensive "gem" for the most part, there are factors that can really affect the cost beyond size/clarity.

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

Compared to steel titanium is ludicrously expensive and for the purposes of a DF game unknown on Earth until 1791. (And it took even longer to be easily refined and to find a practical use.)

Oh obviously! I'd never get a studded jacket made with titanium studs unless I suddenly gained more money than my current level of sense (so lots) or I suddenly gained some sort of superpowers and a sig-gear motorbike... like Ghost Rider or something. It doesn't stop the metal being cooler, it's just often less justifiable.

In a world where dwarves have mastered the art of making titanium, I'm sure they'd be dwarven kings coated in the stuff whilst especially wealthy Dire Boar war-riders would stud leather jackets with it to look extra badass.

[panton41]

Originally Posted by PseudoFenton

In a world where dwarves have mastered the art of making titanium, I'm sure they'd be dwarven kings coated in the stuff whilst especially wealthy Dire Boar war-riders would stud leather jackets with it to look extra badass.

That's largely the role of "mithril."

[PseudoFenton]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

That's largely the role of "mithril."

Titanium by any other name is still just as cool.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

It's very possible to create a "cheat sheet", using Excel or Calc, for a variety of standard gemstone types and sizes.

Just made one, specifically aimed at the OP :D It uses the exact rules from DF8, even though they're questionable for semiprecious gems.

Can't use it in GDocs as GDocs does not support drop down boxes and images, so you'll need to download it and open it in Excel to use it;

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B9v...19sRmJGZzk4STQ

To download go to the GDocs file menu and pick Download. :D

Usage: Click on the orange box next to Gem to pick your gem type from the dropdown list.
Click on the orange box next to Shape to pick the shape of your gem (see the pictures at the bottom of the sheet for examples of everything except Polished Sphere to see what I mean).
Enter the Diameter of your gem and pick your units from the dropdown box (supports Inches and CM)

Sheet gives you volume, weight in ounces, grams, and carats, and gives you the value according to DF8.

I'm working on an alternate to the gems table, splitting it up into precious and semi-precious and calculating the value of each differently. This version has a separate gem quality table, giving you quality ranges from Poor to Flawless (multiplies cost from 1/5x to 5x that indicated by weight).

[cmdicely]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Just made one, specifically aimed at the OP :D It uses the exact rules from DF8, even though they're questionable for semiprecious gems.

Can't use it in GDocs as GDocs does not support drop down boxes and images

Google Docs may not support importing those from Excel, but it definitely supports drop-down boxes and images.

EDIT: Did a quick conversion to a native Google Spreadsheet of the working part of Bruno's spreadsheet (there's more in Bruno's that doesn't connect to the actual calculation part, and that's not included) -- minus the images for now.

[Blind Mapmaker]

That's a neat spreadsheet, Bruno. Many thanks. Makes it much easier to visualize what the gems actually look like for those of us who never deal in carats.