| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
 Posted - 04 May 2010 : 13:43:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Riverwind
In the 3E Waterdeep sourcbook they give the following stats on Waterdeep:
Spending Limit: 100,000gp
Assets: 663,300,000gp (3,316,500,000gp in summer months.)
Does anyone know what those numbers mean? Thanks.
The assets are the total amount of gold coin in the city at one time. The spending limit is the most amount of money a PC can spend on a single item. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
 |
|
|
Blueblade
Senior Scribe
USA
804 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 15:57:20
|
And my memory may be faulty here, but I think the "resource limit" is the maximum amount of gp a starting PC who is a member of that noble house can spend on equipping themselves for adventure. (Weapons, mounts, tents, traveling servants, gold-plated toothpicks...)
However, what you're driving at, Riverwind, I don't think will work. Just because there are X amount of gold pieces available in Waterdeep at any given time, doesn't mean a certain amount of them are easily freed for ponying up for the costs of a bigger army. Waterdeep is all about mercantile trade and getting richer, not spending money on an army that can be used to oppress merchants (who would react with "Things are fine with me right now, and we need a bigger army why, exactly? Buzz off, bud, I'm trying to get rich here!").
I agree with Thauramarth: doubling the tax rate would lead to revolt or widespread cheating (with resentment, hence little citizen cooperation with the soldiers) or a lot of merchants (and the wealth they control) leaving the city...or ALL of those results. You'd be ruining Waterdeep to garrison it.
I think Ed and all the TSR and WotC designers gave us a horse, and you're trying to turn it into an ox, without really showing us how you're going to do that. (Yeah, yeah, "magic," I know, but show us the spell, man! Ed's made a living doing just that, so I know it can be done.)
BB |
Edited by - Blueblade on 04 May 2010 16:10:35 |
|
|
|
Blueblade
Senior Scribe
USA
804 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 16:01:58
|
Re. this: "supply-side economics in real life has been a horrible failure."
Riverwind, my response to this is: Huh?
What does that have to do with Baleful Avatar's point on taxes? It's as if he said "The sky is blue" and you replied scornfully, "You know nothing about potatoes!"
I had to wade through YEARS of economics in my undergrad days, and I don't see how that one-liner of yours relates supply-side economics to what BA posted.
Explain, please? Or was this just a "B** baffles brains" moment?
BB |
|
|
|
Malcolm
Learned Scribe
242 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 16:05:30
|
Heh. I'm liking your James Bond secret agent force idea for Waterdeep more and more, Blueblade. I think it beats Riverwind's U.S. Army for Waterdeep notion all hollow.
Avoids the heavy taxation, avoids frightening the free-traders in the streets, avoids alarming rival cities...yep, wins hands down.
Riverwind, if you REALLY want to defend Waterdeep, I'd say find some youngsters with great aptitude for the Art, and (secretly) raise them as staunchly loyal to Waterdeep and to be awesome battle-mages, and there's your army. About twenty of them. Then get them bodyguards. Done. |
|
|
|
Broken Helm
Learned Scribe
USA
108 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 16:07:20
|
I'm still waiting for Riverwind to respond to the points our lovely THO made two pages back. She trounced quite a few points he made, and he's just moved on without a word.
Riverwind? |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 16:16:48
|
| And notice how he's completely stopped posting in the Waterdeep's Navy thread? It's even fallen off the first page of the forum. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Baleful Avatar
Learned Scribe
Canada
161 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 16:24:40
|
Riverwind, I think you entirely missed my point.
You responded: "So because your rivals would not want a larger army you wouldn't build one?"
My question, rephrased, is: in the sentence you posted, that I've just quoted, who exactly is "You"?
My point was that I didn't see anyone in Waterdeep who would want a larger army enough to go to all the trouble of assembling one. Who exactly is going to "push" for a larger army? In this thread, there has been some discussion of taxes. You think the rate is way too low (compared to real-life modern New York, which I don't think is a valid comparison at all), and so nobles and possibly others can "easily" afford it.
Well, yes, but who's going to MAKE them afford it? If you go around the streets demanding donations/contributions at swordpoint, you'll get battles, all right, but not much of an army. And again, who's the "you"?
THAT'S what I'm curious about. Just who is going to do this?
Well?
 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 17:09:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Riverwind
quote:
Originally posted by Blueblade
...and none of Waterdeep's rivals would want one, either.
You point out that (from your point of view) Waterdeep's population is undertaxed. I think those tax levels are why the place is a popular trading center, and anyone raising them courts resistance.
So because your rivals would not want a larger army you wouldn't build one?
Not when it would alienate most of your allies, spread unsurety and make everyone with money nervous. A medium army would leave Waterdeep even weaker than it was if it lost its diplomatic position.
And it seems like you are dead set on being right about this without really discussing it outside of a modern day logic that says that Waterdeep is doing is idiotic. And since when is it uncommon for society to be idiotic? That's what history really is, a chronology of idiocy and glimpses of clear though that any one reading it now could see in a second. |
|
|
|
Riverwind
Learned Scribe
133 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 20:30:29
|
| Wow. The last four/five posts are acting like I'm attacking them or something. Sorry gentlemen, I'll return to my normal once in a while lurking around here. Thanks for the fun thread, I wish I had portrayed my side better. See'ya on the streets of Waterdeep. |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4686 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 20:59:06
|
River, some hold their views dearly.
As to army size in time od peace I really do not see a problem with it as I indicated in the past. This in part driven by other factions within the city.
Yes the army could be increased in size and paid for with taxes. Doing so however would tend to change the culture. Low taxes is one reason that Waterdeep is a major trading center. Having a larger army might also dampen the accepted illegal trade that is part of the economy.
Yes a small army could take out the Watch and the Guard if they get though the gates, or portal in. They however could never hold the city. The Guard in effect has a reserve of at least 10,000 that could be activated for time of war. In two days, perhaps less the invading force would be defeated. The defenses normally does not require men when there are mages to take the place of thousands of men. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Malcolm
Learned Scribe
242 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 21:06:18
|
We're not attacking you, Riverwind, we're asking for specific explanations of parts of your replies to us, or your posted comments.
Which is, ahem, what these threads are FOR, yes? |
Edited by - Malcolm on 04 May 2010 21:06:50 |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4686 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 22:06:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Malcolm
We're not attacking you, Riverwind, we're asking for specific explanations of parts of your replies to us, or your posted comments.
Which is, ahem, what these threads are FOR, yes?
Err as a group, it clearly appears you are attacking. Nothing any one user posts, however the collected posts has some appearance of applying peer pressure, at least to my eyes. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Thauramarth
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
729 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2010 : 23:02:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Riverwind
Wow. The last four/five posts are acting like I'm attacking them or something. Sorry gentlemen, I'll return to my normal once in a while lurking around here. Thanks for the fun thread, I wish I had portrayed my side better. See'ya on the streets of Waterdeep.
No offense to the posters referred to, but I did get a sense that things were starting to get a bit personal here...
Don't do that mate - I disagree with you on almost everything  , but this has been one of the most lively substantial threads in a long time, and very enlightening, too, if only for some insights provided by THO and others.
It's editon-neutral, it's "fluff" rather than crunch - what more could you wish for on a Realms discussion forum? |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2010 : 00:57:37
|
Okay, since it seems like we're heading into terrain that might be fraught with difficulty, I think it might be time for all involved to take a break from this scroll, so I'm temporarily sealing it for the rest of the week.
We'll review the possibility of reopening it then. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
Edited by - The Sage on 05 May 2010 00:58:42 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Waterdeep's army
Topic Locked
