Economy and Assets

[Geras]

How would folks feel about greatly reducing the amount of resources that assets provide, and compensating those hurt by that with silver.

My issue with resource assets is that when the item is produceable in game, this just undercuts the players producing that.

And when it's something only purchaseable on grid, then it undercuts a gold sink.

Thoughts?

[Starstarfish]

How would we determine who was hurt by an asset existing?

I admit that having an interesting asset resource from your domain is an easy source of noble RP that might not otherwise happen, so the idea that would go away, would be a sad.

[PositronicJune]

Hunters are common enough of a character concept that they could probably have their own mini-guild, but that unfortunately doesn't seem to be a viable way to make money, as they're undercut by assets.--Full disclosure, I have a hunter character.
By 'compensating those hurt by that', you mean compensate people who hold the nerfed assets? Compensating the people undercut would be excessive I think.

The system could be rebalanced to encourage purchasing from players without removing it entirely or touching resources that can't be obtained elsewhere, so there's no need for nobles with unique resources to worry.

[Starstarfish]

From what I can tell, people tend to have assets for leathers/furs but few have them for meat and that people more frequently are happy to buy meat. Perhaps having some of the hunted meats have a unique flavor appraise might encourage more vanity sales?

There are also crafts that folks with high Husbandry can run that help out NPCs with aggressive critters that pay silver, but I'm not sure if people are aware/seek those out.

[PositronicJune]

I haven't encountered (as far as I can recall) that quest.

Different hunted meats having a different appraise text seems like a good idea, though there are already recipes for venison dishes, etc. There's just not a distinction between wild and domestic meats (cow/bison, goat/mountain goat, pig/boar, all the kinds of bird).
Making the skins less interchangeable would be good for hunters, but maybe a pain for crafters. Currently, besides deer skins crafting into suede leather, all skins craft into generic leather. There's no reason to hunt a crocodile when you could hunt something that doesn't fight back and yields more, besides getting to roleplay an australian or Florida resident I guess. Wolverines have valuable pelts lore-wise I believe, but mechanically they yield generic 'unidentifiable skin'.

[Geras]

By 'compensating those hurt by that', you mean compensate people who hold the nerfed assets? Compensating the people undercut would be excessive I think.

To be clear yah, I mean compensate folks with nerfed assets.

I'd be fine with limiting substantial material redemptions from assets to nobility too if that would seem more ideal?

What I think is less ideal is like a woodworker with a lumber asset for example. So it removes a gold sink or interaction with logger players.

[BlackSoul566]

Probably what would be more ideal is if merchants had had some more financial incentives. This however is not the solution I'm my books. In regards to lumber, there could be a lumberjack skill, which would have a percent chance based on your skill in it to not consume a charge with your axe, when gathering lumber, as well as a percent change to gain fine wood logs instead of common wood logs. And lastly, a small chance of getting one or two wood scrap, at some of the higher levels.

[BlackSoul566]

Perhaps also different cuts of meat, preserved meat and sausage. These are all things that should/could fall under husbandry rather than cooking.

Edit: I think that just two, per different type of meat would be fine. You could have common and premium cuts, and then failure during the craft would make meat scrap, for use in the sausage recipe. But also, you could add bacon as a recipe where you take preserved meat and add even more salt.