Shattered Kingdoms

How is NOT using your money to contribute to the economy (eg spending it) beneficial? Your logic fails.

zryych: One person has 20% of your economy in their bank account. They don't put any of that 20% back into circulation. What happens to your economy? Effectively 20% smaller.

Rennus: My knee-jerk reaction is to say that I had plans for a character I had 5 months ago, too, but I didn't log in at all to do anything with them, and he got inactivity-deleted. If you aren't active enough to keep the money (and the hours necessary really ARE ridiculously low) then I'm going to say you aren't really in a place to hatch any plans.

But, your idea is still a good one nonetheless. Even if a monthly hour count isn't tolerable, a "Presence" marker on your score screen that indicates "Well-Known" for above the marker active, "Participant" within 10% of the activity marker, and "Completely Unknown" for below hours.

My knee-jerk response to this is that I am the leader of a faith with maxed out coffers, member of an active faction with (to my knowledge) maxed out coffers and a known character to many parties. This is not a matter of 5 months but 6 days of a shortened month when I was occupied with issues IRL.

However as I said, that was a knee jerk reaction. I thank you for your support and evolution of the idea I presented. All I am asking for is some of warning if something is going to be lost.

In a real world scenario, savings are generally invested which contributes far more to an economy. Simply consuming resources as quickly as you can only allows for minimal spending and and a rather stagnant economy.



No, wealth is not a zero-sum game. If I find a nugget of gold and produce a coin from it and then just bury it in the ground, absolutely nobody else's wealth has been affacted and the economy is no smaller than it was originally. The problem here is that, unlike in the real world, money cannot be continually produced. I have at least come across obsidian and gold ore, the problem is that no body has the ability to turn this into coinage.

There actually is a finite wealth in the game, just like the real world.

Of course you can keep printing money, but the value goes down when you do it. So there isn't infinite money.

And if you like, just pretend your money was invested and you lost your [REDACTED].

I never said there was an infinite supply of money. I said that money and wealth are continually produced and are not set as some fixed amount over time. Producing wealth and printing money are two seperate things, as printed paper may be used as money but can haredly be considered wealth. But as you did point out, adding more of a good, including money into cirrculation decreases the value of it, but your earlier point was that saving money was economically bad, yet if everyone were to do as you suggested and spend, spend, spend, everybodies money would become that much less valuable.

You're talking about this in a basic econ 101 cliff note context. Look at it like this: the bank your savings account was in goes bankrupt, and there is no insurance or liability for it (the best circumstance related to a character keeping it, since bank's can't spend money in SK to make it back, which makes this the most realistic context). The bank (bank) owes you (Pyrathia) that money, it cannot be paid to you (Pyrathia) and was not paid to anyone else for another debt. That money has effectively left the economy, and with wealth generation is still detrimental and will not be made up for a long time (in this case, waiting for inactivity stuff to knock the account out)

Another concept: 20% your country's currency is put into another country's bank system (Pyrathia's money leaving Pyrathia and being invested in Inactivity). Even with consistent wealth generation, it would take a long time to make up that 20% loss for your country.

Two real world contexts, and very bad ones, thank you .

Rennus, of course, no hard feelings by the knee-jerk reaction. I don't know your hours specifically, it's just initial impression. It could be an entirely crappy situation, which it sounds like it is. I think it's fair to ask to be warned about inactivity.

I can think of the bank in a variety of ways, but it most certainly is still there and has not gone bankrupt. If it had, everyone with money in the bank would be effected, not just those without enough hours.

The problem is that people seem to be getting the idea that a person NOT engaging in an activity is harmful to others, which is simply not true. If a person goes even more extreme than "hoarding" their own wealth, and destroys it, it in no way takes away from the wealth of others. If I burn down my house (don't call the fire department, don't try to collect insurance, just burn it simply because I'm a fire-loving warlock), I have not made others less wealthy, only myself. I have in fact, made everyone who owns a house slightly that much better off, because I have taken one house out of the market making them that much more scarce. If a character sits on their own obsidian in a bank, or simply destroys it, they have not taken other peoples wealth, but made every holder of obsidian have money that is worth that much more because it is now more scarce. There is a reason that the government has started making money look more collectible, so that people precisely will take money OUT of circulation, keeping that which remains more valuable. If everybody in the world that owns US dollars, especially all the foreign government reserves suddenly dumped their money onto the market (i.e. spent it), every single person who still had dollars would become immensely poorer.

You've quite probably effected their property values negatively.

Um, no. If anything, I've effected their property values positively. As you noted, the more of something there is the less valuable it is. The more scarce something is, the more valuable it is.