Etherjammer Design Group ([info]etherjammer) wrote,
@ 2004-04-20 08:46:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Wealth in In Nomine
I have a feeling I'm going to be working on this post for quite some time. Constructive comments are welcomed and appreciated.

Wealth

Wealth in In Nomine is largely a function of a character's Role: specifically, the Status of that Role. However, this fails to take into account both characters with low profiles but large amounts of personal wealth and characters with high profiles but little personal wealth. In addition, this hampers both characters without Roles (who can still amass a great deal of personal wealth) and human characters, who only nominally have a Status trait.

Wealth is a new trait that exists alongside Role and Status, and represents both the character's total assets and his liquid assets. Wealth is ranked from 0 to 6; a character with a Role, or a human with Status, automatically gets Wealth equal to his Status, although he may increase his Wealth by spending points (or receive points by reducing his Wealth!).

  • 0: The character has almost no personal wealth. His total assets are valued at less than $100, and his liquid assets are $20-50.
  • 1: The character has little personal wealth. His total assets are valued at about $1,000, and his liquid assets are around $200-400.
  • 2: The character has low personal wealth. His total assets are valued at about $5,000, and his liquid assets are around $1,000-2,000.
  • 3: The character has average personal wealth. His total assets are valued at about $20,000, and his liquid assets are around $4000-5000.
  • 4: The character has above-average personal wealth. His total assets are valued at about $75,000, and his liquid assets are around $15,000-20,000.
  • 5: The character has excellent personal wealth. His total assets are valued at about $250,000, and his liquid assets are around $50,000-75,000.
  • 6: The character has superior personal wealth. His total assets are valued at over $1,000,000, and his liquid assets are around $200,000-400,000.


(Cautious GMs may introduce higher levels. These characters rate their assets in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars, and have essentially unlimited liquid assets. Be careful when allowing this level of wealth, as characters with access to large amounts of money can often buy their way through even the most cunning obstacles, if only by hiring mobs of faceless NPCs.)

A character with no Role draws no functional distinction between liquid and total assets; his total wealth is equal to his liquid assets. (A character with no Role and Wealth/6 has total assets of around $200,000-400,000.) Such a character who gains a Role (and attaches all of his Wealth to that Role) must wait a number of months equal to his Wealth level in order to accumulate the full total assets. The sole exception to this is Wealth/0, which allows the distinction between total and liquid assets regardless of Role, since the total assets of someone with Wealth/0 are likely carried on their person at all times and do not need identification to be stored.

Wealth costs 2 CP per level; characters with Status who wish to decrease their Wealth gain 2 CP per level, to a maximum of the cost of their Role (if any) and Status. (A character with a Role/1, Status/1 gains only 1 CP for decreasing his Wealth to 0, while a character with a Role/3, Status/2 gains 3 CP for reducing Wealth to 0.) Wealth can only be purchased normally at character creation. During play, a player who wants to increase his character's Wealth must arrange with the GM to increase that wealth through gameplay, much like increasing Role and Status.

A note to GMs: It is advised that you ask players with high Wealth but low (or no) Status, or with low Wealth but high Status, to justify this. It is entirely possible for a Status/1 character to have received a massive inheritance, or for a Status/6 character to suddenly lose all of his assets to a stock market crash, but you and the player should work closely to examine the implications.




(3 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]jeriendhal
2004-04-20 08:48 am UTC (link)
I guess this was the article you mentioned in your blog, EDG?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]edg
2004-04-20 08:50 am UTC (link)
Yup. I thought I'd linked it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]archangelbeth
2004-04-20 11:24 am UTC (link)
A bit too complicated for canon, but I do like it as an alternate rule. Post a link to the mailing list? O:>

(Reply to this)


(3 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…