The general opinion appeared to be "we don't like it, but we can't think of anything better." I'm putting some thoughts here, not so much in the hope of a solution but to try and define the problem; what do other people think?
No, on second thoughts, I'll write something meaningful here when it isn't 1 in the morning. But feel free to do so yourself...
1) Simple approach - everyone who doesn't have Income or something with mechanical effect to sell in downtime (if people are buying it off NPCs or other PCs there's a market for it from NPCs too - so 'casting blessings', 'healing', 'casting spells', 'teaching spells', 'tracking people', 'guarding people and generally looking hard' might well count if players signal demand by asking for these things in downtime) doesn't get any IC money. They spent it all on the costs of living. The bar is free now so the argument that was used last time I suggested this doesn't apply ('but they need money to exchange for drinks'). If they need money for potions etc then they can do extra work for people who have money (like linears, bodyguarding, downtime actions in aid of their cause). The income skill now gives you five shillings per week per level.
Downside: Mages. We would have to do something about the cost of spell research. I don't think mages tend to want to interact with the economy anyhow, so I'd like to see the back of monetary costs for spell research / learning library spells. Make the standard thing either 'you owe a Journeyman a minor favour, like cleaning out the lab thoroughly at some point' or when you make Journeyman 'it's your job to look after the lab you're using - if you need a different lab for a different colour you swap with another Journeyman, on the understanding that they can then come and use your lab or pass on the favour to someone else'. You can always bribe people instead of doing things, which is why it used to be based on money.
Downside: Alchemists have a harder time bootstrapping themselves and selling potions. OTOH there would be less money in the system by quite some way and we could bring potion costs right down, because even a few shillings would be a big deal for people. Maybe apprentice alchemists get some herbs included in their Guild membership which is folded into Cost of Living. Maybe it becomes conventional (i.e. NPCs will do it) for people, especially high-up alchemists, to invest in younger alchemists by offering them a loan, because they know that they'll be able to pay it back with interest once they get going.
Upside: Very little administrative faff, vastly fewer money physreps floating around, the money that people have they will care about more (rather than accumilating and forgetting about it) because they've had to actually earn it (whether with XP or with activity).
2) 'Scrap money altogether' approach, a bit more complicated.
Everybody has a 'wealth level' which is calculated from a variety of factors, including the Income skill and marketable skills that they have (again, market demand based on PC demand). Items (including potions) have a value in the same units as the wealth level.
You may bring shillings to the interactive in accordance with your wealth level. If you don't have the physreps we'll hand them out *and collect them in*. You may give other people shillings or items; they have to turn in the shillings at the end of the interactive also.
If you have an item with a value, you can cash it in for a boost to your wealth level equal to the item's value, which is effective for the next week only. If someone gives you shillings, they also boost your wealth level for the next week. You can't accumulate wealth over your base wealth level for a long period because if you are suddenly capable of not spending the wealth then you should buy another income skill to represent this newfound ability. If you give someone shillings, or buy an item in downtime, your wealth level is decreased by that amount for the next week.
Possible alternative arrangement is that your wealth level gradually decays to your original wealth level after boosted, say by one shilling a week - this makes selling things a more attractive proposition.
Upsides: If we set the wealth level low enough, reduces the number of shillings in play. Also there is no need to take your shillings home because you won't be hording them anyway, so we won't lose them all - if you don't book it in at the end of the interactive, you don't have it. People can't build up Vast Piles Of Wealth and break things thereby (I've heard lots of people worrying about people building up 1000sh and then buying lots of alchemical ming and ruining something - you couldn't do that just with money physreps any more, you would have to actually find, buy or make and hoard items).
Downsides: You can't hoard vast piles of money any more by spending frugally, which some people probably enjoyed doing. Because money drains away, alchemists no longer specifically get hugely rich off PCs. It requires administrative effort - we need to give out and count in the shillings every week, and have some mechanism in place for people who have to leave early or dash off straight away afterwards, and somehow not interfere with clearing away too much, and for dealing with people who honestly forget and leave their shillings in their pocket and then whine about it. More thought needs to go into the 'wealth function'.
3) Build a 'real' economy, complete with paying money for certain standards of living, paying rent or upkeep on property, decent sources and sinks for money which are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they're still balanced, NPCs who will do things for you for certain wages, etc etc. I thoroughly oppose any system which involves paying for standard (i.e. not flangy or a magic item) weapons and armour, and clothing and accessories, however realistic that might be, because having to find the physreps sucks badly enough without being restricted by your character's money too. This would be some work but kind of neat and also it would solve the age-old problem 'um, what *is* my house like anyway? is it reasonable for me to have a town house / an apartment / a manor in the country / a rat-infested hovel? What if I need to buy a base for my organisation / hire NPCs? Can I really dine on caviar every night without income skills?'
Given that people seem to think it would be easier to fix the alchemy system if the economy wasn't broken, I thought I'd have a go at patching it. - Joey
4) Similar to Jacob's wealth system but with money: There is a limit on how much money you can have depending mostly on how many income skills you have. I think 30 shillings is about right for someone with no income skills. I'm not sure about the other limits.
advantages: There's much less money in the system.
disadvantages: There's no point in selling stuff because you can't keep the money.
Alternative: The limit only applies to the money you get each week from income skills etc. not to money you earn by selling potions, scrolls, other things.- This makes things much more difficult to keep track of.
Better alternative: You can have as much money as you want but if you're above your limit then you don't get given any at the beginning of the interactive.
disadvantages: mages without income skills are going to have problems with enough money for research and scrolls.
so what do people think? and where should boundaries be? how much money should someone really rich have?
I think the marketable skills thing should be irrelevant, because it sucks to give people extra advantages just for having more XP. Other than that I would like something like 2; I see the first two "disadvantages" listed there as advantages. --Lmm
I think that while we could rework the economy to make it vastly better, I'm not sure that we should. The most important thing is that everyone has fun, and I don't think hacking around with the economy is likely to be conducive to this since not everyone wants to play the numbers game and not many people want to have to deal with an entirely new economy to worry about. --Valtiel