Should Coins Have Weight Associated With It?

That argument assumes that the value of crafted items are certain to be higher than what people can carry with no alternatives. As well as assuming a value for gold that has not yet been set.

If it takes you a day to earn 100 gold in 1 scenario.. that 100 gold is going to be worth a lot based on the effort it took to get it. If on the other hand the same effort gets you 10,000 gold.. that 10,000 gold would be worth only as much as the original 100 would've been as that value is based largely on the effort.

Also, if people are only willing to pay 100g for a high value item.. well that item then is only worth 100g. Everything is only worth what its purchaser will pay for it.

The argument also does not take into account a couple of other things.. 1: Limited real estate. Most people won't just up and move if there's no where to move to. 2: Large cities are meant to have that effect by design from the start. Anyone looking to turn a lot of profit will already want to put up shop in high traffic areas anyway.

 

Yea, it all depends on the value of the coins, which could be anything; though multiple denominations would help.

We're also going to have to go back to town for any number of reasons, including repairing our gear, selling items, putting items in banks, seeing skill trainers, possibly getting food. I don't see inventory-based gold as adding trips to town, because we're going to be going to town anyway ; unless its overwhelmingly heavy to the point of being an issue.

 

Oh my, just imagine how you are encumbered with all the gold and have to escape enraged dragon. How much gold would you throw away?

 

Coins had weight in Ultima Online and it didn't make the game more fun. In fact, it only made it more frustrating and the developers had to come up with things like bank checks to get around that frustration.

 

The idea of not having weight attached to coins is ridiculous.

 

If I had a gold coin for every time I've been compelled to say this isn't UO...

What the UO example is conveniently leaving out are the economic conditions leading to mass inflation to the point were people had 1 million gold to spend on buying horse pucky. It wasn't frustrating to carry gold without the mass inflation brought about by several factors including but not limited to duping bugs.

 

Depending on WHEN in UO you're talking about, the weight of carrying gold wasn't a big deal because you could recall everywhere. Open a moongate to a bank, pull out your gold and walk back into it to get to the vendor you wanted. Plus checks for player to player sales and automatic debits from your bank to buy from player vendors.

 

Which reminds me that weighted currency would lead to an inflation buffer too.

 

Realism and immersion is being brought alot into this discussion. I think terminology needs be changed slightly. I am for Encumbrance to be associated with carrying gold, not quite weight. This allows for different methods to come in existence to allow for transport.

Think about the encumbrance value of a full cup of hot tea you carry compared to when it is completely cooled down.

I think after awhile, carrying alot of gold should be like carrying a hot cup of tea.

edit: even in the lore, don't the satyrs have the ability to sniff gold. Carry to much and you should have risk.

 

..... you'd be over-encumbered and couldn't move?

 

I vote for weight!

 

I wasn't going to say it...

 

No the Boston Tea party occured because they felt they were being forced to pay for something that was considered a necessity and that they were not consolted before the additional tax was put into effect. No way to compare that to this topic.

 

IF weight winds up being assigned to "coin" I would just hope that coins of different worth be assiged to the game so that a 10,000 gold coin treasure would not have to weigh 10,000 gold coins.

That should be enough to make people on both sides of this discussion molified.

 

(warning sarcasm ...)

Ok, pre adventure check list…
- Suit of armor, check
- Two handed sword, check
- Spare sword, check
- Mace for certain situations, check
- Spare pole arm for others, check
- Extra sword in case I want to dual wield, check
- Extra armor, check
- Selection of hats, check
- 500 regular arrows, should be enough for a couple of wolves, check
- 200 of each specialty arrow, check,
- 200 of each reagent, enough for a hours’ worth of spells, check,
- 50 of each potion, check
- 1000 gold…. Dang, a thousand gold coins should be too unwieldy… can’t imagine carrying a pouch full of a thousand gold coins… that just breaks my immersion…

 

This is funny. (More Sarcasm)
Don't forget 60 loaves of bread.
You cant come out of those woods until you've slain at least 1400 spiders in one trip. How will you be able to brag to your friends that you got to level 150 the fastest if you have to make a trip back to town?

 

Nah, I said as much 6 pages ago. Didn't do any good then, shouldn't do any good now. People like to bicker anyway.

My suggestion was 1000 coins per 1 unit weight. Double if in correct container and not loose change...

With higher denominations with much higher value to weight ratio.

In R16 my char can carry about 250 units, maybe a more normal one would have about 40 units for loot.

 

... see this is why you make pre-adventure check lists... I forgot to include all the food items I need to carry now...

 

The OP makes some very good arguments and is the only reason, I suspect, that the poll is so evenly balanced (as of my vote, anyway). I always favor fun over realism and at the end of the day I come down against this idea. I think it nets out to less fun and will be a shock to the system of most players who are used to more transparent currencies. Encumbrance is already a difficult issue to manage, adding coin to it will only complicate it further.

 

I voted yes, but would like to option to store most of me gold in thee bank/hurrah...../salute