What makes a currency viable?

[Inca]

Using food goods is still essentially barter, but with "goods that have a higher degree of marketability" as they said in the Econ video. It's eminently doable, but I wonder what would be gained by using such a system. You would still have a situation where something like a suit of Power Armor would cost several hundred sacks of rice. A tradesman's "cash register" would be a grain silo. And every time harvest time rolls around, the currency has a cycle of hyperinflation. (If you didn't, that would = poor harvest = famine = spending "money" would lead to starvation.)

Well as far as I know, hystorically there are precedents of using grains of various kinds as means of paying taxes (Egypt, Japan, Russia). I also recall reading a translation of some 14th century spanish text where the price of knight's equpment was quite literally quoted in cows, so your example with power armor is actually valid. Also, as far as I understand, in preindustrial Europe an annual trade fairs would take place right after harvest, so that food producers could exchange excess food for other "stuff". Again, prooving that non-perishable food is a good trade medium/money substitute. I am not saying it's the best solution, but it's better than bottle caps, ammunition, or value points in my opinion. As far as hyper inflation is concerned, I think that psychology of a small community and their sens of value is quite different from "national scale" of post WWI world with it's commodity markets, telegraphs and global transportation. Simply put there is an "inertia of value" if you will-"if I bought a plow for two saks of grain last year-this is my water mark for next several years, unless some very drastic event is gonna alter my preception of plows value"

[CaptainPatch]

Every time I read "non-perishable food" I think "Twinkies!"

Cultures that took taxes in the form of grain generally took other things as well. The primary reason was because there was a distinct lack of currency floating around. When your annual tax amounts to several English pounds, but the money you ever saw at one time in that year was less than a pound -- "...and that only because I 'appened to be at the inn when 'Arry was closing one night" -- it makes it hard to pay the tax collector in cash. So payment was taken "in kind".

As crop yields improved, the value of grain dropped rapidly. Furthermore, as crop yields rose, those with direct access to crops (farmers) started to drop. As ex-farmers shifted to other occupations it became mandatory to start using more actual currency. Being able to pay debts "in kind" did continue, however. Well into the 20th century banks would make farming loans predicated on payment being a portion of the harvest. [My mother's side of the family derived mostly from farming families. The stories I heard were often enlightening.]

[b0rsuk]

Speaking of gold and silver, it would still be very valuable in a post-apocalyptic world. But the trouble is, you can't eat it. So you would only be able to sell it once in a while. To rulers, gang leaders, etc. Not to a random traveler you meet on your way.

Weight would be a problem for grain, yes.

I think the best solution is to have several local currencies, and gold as inter-hub currency. If you had one global (or US-wide) currency, that would imply there's a functioning government. This would encourage to structure the game into several quest hubs. Gold could be used as inter-hub currency, but some hubs would just not accept it.

Interesting implication of local currencies - random encounters (travelling merchants) would quite often be unable to trade with you. You might not want to do quests in some backwater town, but what if you meet a merchant from that town ? Too bad.

[Drool]

Speaking of gold and silver, it would still be very valuable in a post-apocalyptic world. But the trouble is, you can't eat it. So you would only be able to sell it once in a while. To rulers, gang leaders, etc. Not to a random traveler you meet on your way.

Nobody could ever eat gold, but it's pretty much always been valuable. Unless those travelers are never intending on ever visiting anything even remotely resembling civilization, they'll know that they can trade that gold for something edible down the line. Unless you're assuming that everyone's a hermit, you'll be able to trade in non-comestibles.

[Mandemon]

To make any currency, whenever it's coins, bullets, rice, dog poop what ever, it's pretty easy to justify it.

Just have sufficiently powerful organization(merchants, strong city state, fledgling nation) to back it. In Fallout 2, NCR coins were de facto trading currency, since NCR was right around the corner. In New Vegas, NCR money had lost it's value. However, thanks to backing of House and New Vegas tribes, bottle caps were used. Sure there were NCR dollars, Pre-War Money and Legion Denariis, but these worked along side the bottle caps. They had their value and you could do all shopping with them. However, values were shown in the most common currency, the caps.

You can have billions of different currencies, but you can make one de facto trading currency on which all prices are compared to. You might pay in NCR dollars, but price is shown in caps.

It really doesn't matter what the currency is, as long as people accept that it has certain value and someone backs it up.

[paultakeda]

It really doesn't matter what the currency is, as long as people accept that it has certain value and someone backs it up.

And I'll go one further: that and as it IS that there's no reason to belabor the subject. The currency of Wasteland is dollars. What is a dollar? What is used to represent a dollar? Don't care. It's the dollar. It's an abstract concept of money used in the game and is an instrument by which your rangers gain access to goods and services.

The only worry is not what makes the currency viable but that the economy of the game won't be broken (easily).

[Inca]

Is this "let bygons be bygons" kind of answer or you are really worried that something eill be chosen that will ruin the game?

Production of actual "money" is a big deal, from engineering point of view-modern money is a great technological feat, that requires sophisticated well supported technology throughout. Even coining gold or silver is quite an accomplishment.

I extrapolate from our hystory. If Wasteland is a true wasteland than we are probably in pre industrial society. The biggest asset in such society is firtile land, grazing grounds, water access, because everyone gots to eat and sip H2O.

Mining gold is an enormous endevour, and is easily tramped by some scavenging finds which can create overnight Warren Baffets.

Grains of all asorts on the other hand are limited by the available firtile fields. Yes you are getting rich during harvest, yes there is a brief period of inflation, but it is all within our hystorial expectations, this is how things were done before. Mongols and Plain's indians measured their assets in the number of horses they owned (since they did not groe crops), live horses do not "go bad)", their number is limited by the available grazing grounds-you want to be wealthier-capture more grasslands.

Food does not depend on modern technology, bu it is essential and will always be produced, in numbers proportional to the population.

I know I sound like a broken record, but I think this maybe perfect currency

[krellen]

I have the perfect idea: let's just have "currency" be a toggle option at the beginning of the game. Heck, make it a text field; players can fill in whatever their ideal form of currency is and play the game just how they please!

[Drool]

I extrapolate from our hystory. If Wasteland is a true wasteland than we are probably in pre industrial society. The biggest asset in such society is firtile land, grazing grounds, water access, because everyone gots to eat and sip H2O.

Speaking of broken records: Wasteland is not Fallout. Unless California is wildly worse off than the Nevada desert, food and water shouldn't be an issue.

[CaptainPatch]

A little bit late for me to be pointing this out, but....

Ranger Center (former prison) has a Machine Shop. The #1 use of prison Machine Shops was/is to stamp out auto license plates. All they need is a die stamp and instead of punching out slugs (blank disks), they could be punching out coins, to the tune (possibly tens) of thousands every day. No lack of sheet metal either in that an automobile's hood (bonnet) and trunk (boot) are already just about the right gauge for making coins.

[Inca]

No brken record here, Drool. I am not saying it's Fallout kind of situation, I am saying, that firtile land and access to water is in short supply even now. According to wikipedia (the greatest source of knowledge of all time ) only 15% of US soil is arable. In case of nuclear conflict, I venture to guess, this percentage would drop further. In the particular location of W2 (devasted California) pre war about 27 percent was farming land of wich 9 were delibarately irrigated (which would probably not be the case after war). Basicall only 1/5 of California could be used for crops (in best case scenario). With furtilizer factories gone, they may have to resort to 3 field rotation, meaning that in prewar ters only 6% of the land could be cultivated.
This makes land a valuable resource. End of PSA.

[Inca]

A little bit late for me to be pointing this out, but....

Dear CaptanPatch, with suspension of diesbelief etc. this could of course pass, but IRL...there is so much wrong (technically) with this idea, I don't know where to start.

I already got accused by a fella in Power Armor topic of showboating, so I am not gonna get into details of this money producing scheme, but I think you dot to try harder.

[Drool]

I am not saying it's Fallout kind of situation, I am saying, that firtile land and access to water is in short supply even now.

And my point was that the first game featured a river, a bay, and a farm with 30' broccoli. Food and water were not in short supply. I don't think they're missing fertilizer.

[CaptainPatch]

The agricultural protocol for farming after a nuclear fallout event is to 1) Wait 6-18 months before prepping the land, 2) Scrape 2-4" of the topsoil away to remove any radioactive particles lying around. [Care must be taken to not spill any of the scraping near soil to be planted, or to deposit it anywhere where it could seep into the water table.] 3) lay down 18" of _clean_ soil on the plots to be planted. [Where the clean soil is to supposed to come from eludes me.] The theory is that if there was still any radioactive particles still on the scraped areas, then 18" is deep enough that the plant roots hopefully won't be affected.

More than likely, much of the arable soil in the Wasteland sat idle for a long time. According to the usual WL policy, that was definitely long enough for the surface radiation to seep into plant roots and the water table. Either plants would die, or be mutated.

Drool: The large plants were at the Ag Station. It is never directly stated that the size relates to radiation effects. But since it was an Agricultural Station, there is a distinct possibility the size relates to Genetic Modification from _before_ the war.

Inca: What's wrong with Ranger Center minting its own fiat currency? They would simply be serving as more durable RangerBucks (or whatever it might be called).

[Drool]

Drool: The large plants were at the Ag Station. It is never directly stated that the size relates to radiation effects. But since it was an Agricultural Station, there is a distinct possibility the size relates to Genetic Modification from _before_ the war.

I... er... huh. Well, shit. I never considered that. I just always assumed that it was randomly convenient mutation.

[paultakeda]

Is this "let bygons be bygons" kind of answer or you are really worried that something eill be chosen that will ruin the game?

It's a, "I don't care how money and economy are explained to the degree people want to explain it in this thread to justify viability."

It's the game currency. It's a Zelda rupee. Whatever.

Production of actual "money" is a big deal, from engineering point of view-modern money is a great technological feat, that requires sophisticated well supported technology throughout. Even coining gold or silver is quite an accomplishment.

And if this were a banking/mercantilism game this would be a big deal for Wasteland 2. As it is not, it is not essential except for those who want to explore it out-of-game as an armchair economist discussion.

I know I sound like a broken record, but I think this maybe perfect currency

You are confusing the concept of good with currency. You are proposing a barter system, which is fairly complex. There is a reason why money, fiat or otherwise, exists: because barter systems are extremely volatile compared to a standard currency.

If you want to propose that food is a basis for a currency, say "calorie dollar", and that a particular food good is worth x food dollars based on nutritional statistics, then sure, that's an interesting idea. Roman soldiers were paid in salt, but even that salt was based on the price of salt, not the intrinsic value of salt. A good is not currency.

None of this matters for the implementation of a currency, called $, in a game. It is a representation of an accepted standard and is probably physically present as fiat money, for game simplicity's sake only. It could be gold dollars or silver dollars as well and even actually mean value by weight of a rare material. Whatever. As long as the economy works around the $ representation and it cannot be easily broken by in-game manipulation, it doesn't matter what $ represents.

So no, it's not bygones and knowing this doesn't ruin the game; it doesn't enhance the game, either. You may want to know and we may all want to discuss this ad nauseum, but it has little worth as a game system implementation of economy except that it exists as the standard representation of accepted currency.

[Inca]

paultakeda,

I simply do not have friends interested in RPGs, so I come here to discuss something I am very interested in with like minded people. Talking about this world, makes it so much more interesting to me, to play it later, especially if some of the game mechanics we discuss ad nauseum here will make it into the game.

I enjoy some robust economic model in a game, though of course it should not take over the main aspects of a cRPG. Like many people pointed out here, this game is not a combat simulator, or economic simulator, or relationship simulator, or survival simulator, or city simulator. That said, there is nothing wrong in bringing those aspects into the game in some "light" version.

There were several quite addictive (to me) games out there with a passable supply/demand model, like Space Rangers, X3, Pirates!, Mount and Blade. Trading aspect of those games was fun, though neither of them were true old school RPGs. I understand the general requirment of an RPG to be a skill based game, and "huggling" skill or "barter" skill should factor in strongly in the outcome of transaction. But what could be implemented is that local prices could be generally affected by supply and demand, and on top of that, you profits could be further increased or reduced by the "huggling" skill, charisma, or "speech".

Now I see that some are just fine with WASTEBUCKS (copiright Emmy Lou ), some want to find a viable currency. As far as I understand first camp is not affected if second camp gets their way (as you pointed out it will not ruin the game for you or enhance it for you). So I say let us discuss this ad nauseum, we may come up with some interesting idea.

Finally, though you made a statment that "good is not currency" you also recalled that salt (a good) was a currency. Reverse is also true, as there are currency markets now, where "currency is a good", I do not feel that there was a confusion on my part. It just appears that you consider fiat money as the only true currency, which historically is not the case.

[paultakeda]

So I say let us discuss this ad nauseum, we may come up with some interesting idea.

No argument there.

Finally, though you made a statment that "good is not currency" you also recalled that salt (a good) was a currency.

No, I said Roman soldiers were paid a salary comprised of salt. Salt was not currency, they were paid a good which had value in accepted Roman currency, which was based on precious metals, and could either be bartered with another good/service or sold for its value in the currency.

Currency is an accepted standard of exchange. While a good can be a currency, it is a poor base as goods can have value in one place but little value in another. A universally valued good is hard to find and typically this defaults to rare material (gold and silver being the famous ones). This is a money that has intrinsic perceived value by all involved in the economy.

Fiat money is a valuation divorced from any intrinsic value represented in the physical representation of that currency. It is my estimation that by 75-100 years after a nuclear holocaust in the 1990s the concept of fiat money would be an accepted currency.

It may be backed by food or precious metals or something else, but I think the concept of fiat money is easily accepted by society as we have been used to it for hundreds of years. Granted, the first few years after the nuclear exchange would reduce the economy of survival to goods, that's to be expected. But we are dealing with a period of recovery. Ranger Center has established itself as the dominant power center of the area but it is certainly involved in trade with surrounding communities.

So what is the accepted standard of currency? I argue it is not a good. Some standard is in use. Is it fiat? No idea. But it is standardized. It could be a gold standard. Probably not; there isn't enough gold in the area to back it up. It's possible that old dollars, the stuff made prior to nuclear exchange, is, as a perishable good when exposed to elements, is the base for a fiat new dollar; that's an interesting idea.

The position I have in this armchair discussion that has no in-game effect is that it may or may not be based on a good of intrinsic value but the currency used to represent that value is not the good itself; in other words: not bullet casings or food. My secondary position is that I believe it is fiat money, but I am not opposed to a money that has intrinsic value; I just don't know what it could be except that it is not a good.

[Inca]

What little we know about the game seeting tells us that rangers will venture into the presumably devestated California, so even though ranger center might have had established a modern currency system, the place where tha majority of the game will take place will have no use for "Ranger Rubels".

[paultakeda]

What little we know about the game seeting tells us that rangers will venture into the presumably devestated California, so even though ranger center might have had established a modern currency system, the place where tha majority of the game will take place will have no use for "Ranger Rubels".

Sure, but games always start with you broke. You'll be using California Coppers.