forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Good afternoon all,

In my re-reading through of the Core Rules, I've noticed an odd errata that is bothering me. On page 34 it states that "The game ranks the average economic status of a folk in five tiers: Poor, Frugal, Martial, Prosperous, and finally Rich." Additionally, on pg 120 the "poor" standard of living is more fully fleshed out, and it is even present in the table of what certain standards of living can afford. However, I have never encountered a culture or a character or a temporary effect that utilizes the "poor" standard of living. I looked in the Core, Horse-lords, Rivendell, Lake-town, and Erebor (all of which introduce new cultures), as well as Heart of the Wild (which contains variants of cultures.) Still no mention of the poor standard of living. I even searched through Darkening of Mirkwood to see if maybe a drought or plague temporarily reduced a culture's standard of living, but no luck there either.
I had a suspicion that maybe Dunlendings, or Dwarves of the Grey Mountains would be "Poor" but they are marked as "Frugal."

What should be made of this? Is this an unintentional mistake, or perhaps a cryptic hint that we will see an incredibly poor culture in the future?

Could be future proofing for a later culture but also likely that it gives LMs an option to reduce someone's standard of living below that of their culture if circumstances in a campaign prompted the need. Also, it's a useful guide to describe specific individuals or hamlets that may be poor as opposed to the standard level of the culture they may be long to.

Interesting. It seems as though the Wild Hobbits of the Anduin should have a Poor standard of living if anyone does (as might the Woses), but they are given as Frugal as well.

I've seen effects that reduce Standard of Living for the remaining Adventure Phase if the player lose money in gambling in Ruins... Company of the Wain if I remember correctly.
I reduced all my players to Poor, then they surrendered to a group of bandits who robbed them of all valuables.

I think it is nice to have the description available and use it in the game...

Indur Dawndeath wrote:I've seen effects that reduce Standard of Living for the remaining Adventure Phase if the player lose money in gambling in Ruins... Company of the Wain if I remember correctly.
I reduced all my players to Poor, then they surrendered to a group of bandits who robbed them of all valuables.

I think it is nice to have the description available and use it in the game...

Ah, thank you! I do see references to poor on pg 77 of Ruins of the North, and on pg 80 I see the Standard of Living reduction spelled out. How did it affect gameplay when you lowered folks to Poor, out of curiosity?

Otaku-sempai wrote:It seems as though the Wild Hobbits of the Anduin should have a Poor standard of living if anyone does (as might the Woses), but they are given as Frugal as well.

Frugal means not having luxuries or money to pay for anything while traveling, but you have enough to live comfortably, though simply.

Poor means you're struggling to survive. Not only can you not pay for anything while traveling, you also can't pay for starting equipment! Clearly, this is not suitable for a starting adventurer, and doesn't describe the wild hobbits' lifestyle. I wouldn't expect it to describe the Woses, either—they're (apparently) not struggling to survive; they're just primitive. Woses would be Frugal as well.

No permanent culture would be Poor or it would disappear. At most, Poor is a temporary condition.

mirkwoodfalcon wrote:How did it affect gameplay when you lowered folks to Poor, out of curiosity?

Frankly, I don't see how it would, unless you were to take away all that character's equipment as well, which wouldn't really be fair.

Stormcrow wrote:Poor means you're struggling to survive. Not only can you not pay for anything while traveling, you also can't pay for starting equipment! Clearly, this is not suitable for a starting adventurer, and doesn't describe the wild hobbits' lifestyle. I wouldn't expect it to describe the Woses, either—they're (apparently) not struggling to survive; they're just primitive. Woses would be Frugal as well.

No permanent culture would be Poor or it would disappear. At most, Poor is a temporary condition.

I see what you mean; I was viewing it purely in monetary terms.

Otaku-sempai wrote:I see what you mean; I was viewing it purely in monetary terms.

I can see in certain circumstances how a character could run out of funds and be unable to pay their way. Additionally, a character's clothes and equipment could become worn etc but that would only give the appearance of a drop in Standard of Living. Perhaps such things could effect certain encounters though.

mirkwoodfalcon wrote:

Indur Dawndeath wrote:I've seen effects that reduce Standard of Living for the remaining Adventure Phase if the player lose money in gambling in Ruins... Company of the Wain if I remember correctly.
I reduced all my players to Poor, then they surrendered to a group of bandits who robbed them of all valuables.

I think it is nice to have the description available and use it in the game...

Ah, thank you! I do see references to poor on pg 77 of Ruins of the North, and on pg 80 I see the Standard of Living reduction spelled out. How did it affect gameplay when you lowered folks to Poor, out of curiosity?

They immediately went after the bandits with sticks and staffs to reclaim the lost property. They managed to steal back some of the equipment, but not any money, so they remaind poor.
Later they got a reward for helping Ceawin, and everybody spend their treasure to regain missing armour and pocket money, so I'd say that they really hated being poor!
It was flavour mostly, not so many mechanical effects, but they had to cope with being without armours for a while...

I'll use the reduction again, if a situation warrants it, because it was fun seeing the creativity when they were crafting makeshift weapons and foraging for food