fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3389 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3389 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 022 secrets from Secret Submission Post #484.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Is it enough of a deterrent, though? I was talking to a friend, and she had this idea that if you KNEW there were walking piggy banks out there, you just raise one child to be a fighter and then send them out to be the breadwinner.
I mean, you're right that you'd have to be very dedicated to monster killing - but in some games, you basically get rich doing that. So why not raise a kid to be the monster fighter, they go spend 10 years making a fortune, and then come home and retire/invest?

I mean I wasn't entirely convinced - I'm kind of intrigued by the idea of an economy without minted coins that's based on money that monsters drop.

That's like asking, why doesn't every family have someone who is a military contractor? Train one up, they make tons of money. It makes sense!

The point in RPGs and MMOs is that all the player characters are heroes and specially strong and brave. You *always* see the townspeople fleeing the monsters and/or being killed by them.

Yeah, but IRL there are people who join the army because of economic benefits or to get put through college.
But ok, let's say that monsters being way too difficult for the average joe to kill makes it not-lucrative for most people to want to be employed as monster hunters, because they prefer lower-stress jobs.
Would you say it's possible to have an economy where instead of gold, they use some material actually generated by monsters as the monetary standard?
Would the hero team actually cause inflation by being so good at monster killing?

(Original anon replying here, the RPG anon wasn't me.)

"Would you say it's possible to have an economy where instead of gold, they use some material actually generated by monsters as the monetary standard?"

Yes, for the same reason Treasuries in nations need to keep printing new money. Old money wears out over time and is replaced. You would need new money as inflation happens anyway, which it historically does at a low rate year over year.

"Would the hero team actually cause inflation by being so good at monster killing?"

No, if it's just one team.

(hi again! XD)
Hmm, but what you say about inflation... one of the ways that countries deal with inflation when it gets out of hand is creating a new monetary standard. This type of economy, since it's based around something external, wouldn't be able to do that. What type of treasury would you have, in a situation like this?
Then again, a lot of video game economies seem to be pretty primitive.

Thing is, regarding how many heroes there are out killing monsters - why would you have people working as soldiers for the big scary organizations? Wouldn't it makes sense for there to be more "entrepreneurs" in the sense that you join some organization, get a bunch of training, and then go be your own boss and kill monsters with a small team? Though maybe these organizations are just super aggressive about anybody trying to quit, for exactly that reason.

Huh? What says inflation would get out of hand? I said treasuries replace money when it gets too old. I wouldn't think the monster drops last forever. It'd get old over time and need to be replaced, and the influx of new monster drops would keep the level rising slowly over time, probably matching typical inflation indexes.

And not all worlds have big scary organizations to be part of, though. Where would they get training if there are none? Something like an "Adventurer's Guild" exists in some, but they're loosely connected mercs who take contracted jobs and they're rare since - like the entrepreneurs, they would have to somehow supply their own equipment, supplies, travel, on and on - and risk death at the same time. Starting with no capital, that'd be difficult. It'd be much tougher to break into the business than to sit around and make potions.

How many people in the real world are comfortable doing mundane desk jobs, vs. people creating their own businesses-that-involve-risk-of-death?

I meant getting out of hand in regular economic situations, like depression.

In worlds where there are a lot of monsters, though, you'd probably have more people with some form of training just because if you want to trade or leave your town you need protection. Worlds like that would probably be more prone to guilds like that.

Right, and in towns like that probably the Adventurer's Guild becomes like the police and is organized, meaning private enterprise has to compete with a trained, armed force and again wouldn't be as prevalent.

It's not an economics question, it's a psychology question. The reason why you wouldn't have monster hunters everywhere is that people wouldn't take the vast initial investment, the time required, and the risk, when there are other, better reward-to-risk job opportunities available, which there almost always are

Yeah, see, the psychological thing is very much what I was thinking - I just didn't see enough people being willing to risk their lives to make it a real economic issue. But since my friend was arguing so hard against it, I was curious to hear some other opinions.

What DOES bother me thought, is how for example in FMA you could possibly have an alchemist be poor. Their abilities are so versatile, and it doesn't contain danger like monster-hunting. You could open up a building company or something and put everybody else out of a job by building a house in a day.

[ SECRET POST #3389 ]

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics

Re: Video Games Economics