The basic problem is that trade between cities is totally divorced
from the controlling castle in the area. There is no incentive for a
noble controlling an area to encourage trade with the cities under
his control. In fact there is a disincentive in that encouraging
trade encourages strange nobles to come to your city which might be a
security threat.
If a system of duties were setup on all trades inside a city this
would have a number of benefits. The system could work as a flat % of
the sellers price that would go to the city increasing its taxation
base by that amount. This would have the effect of raising the
priceog goods by that amount.
If you wanted to go to the hassle you could make
it adjustable by the owner across all cities under his control.
The benefits would be:
1) There would be a compelling reason for city rulers to encourage
trade as it would directly increase their tax base.
2) It would encourage rulers to have as many goods as possible for
sale to encorage trade. This broadens the market and encouraging
people to set up mines, harvest lumber, etc. It also makes it more
viable to buy goods instead of developing the skills yourself. This
in turn encorages interaction and mutual reliance.
3) If a ruler builds up the market by having more goods for sale
and/or to buy, it provides more ways of making money other than the
demeaning weave pots, perform common magic that now proliferates. It
encorages people to specialise in certain skills.
4) It encorages more interaction between players. Traders would be
hassling for lower tax rates, info on trade routes, protetction from
bandits, savages, etc. Rulers would be encouraging traders to mount
trading expeditions, keeping the peace with neighbouring rulers who
they trade with, etc.
5) It provides a reason for rulers to work together instead of
ignoring one another or attacking which are currently the main
options available to a mature domain. Trade between different domains
becomes more important and the eight provinces between trading cities
rule ensures that at least at the start rulers will probably be
trading with other rulers.
6) It provides a more realistic rationale for conflict and diplomacy
other than 'Are you going to leave me alone or attack me'.
7) Traders might be encouraged to enter more into the politrics of an
area to protect trade routes. Free cities might have no tax thus
encouraging traders to work against the rise of large kingdoms that
control large areas and therefore dictate the trade and higher taxes.
8) The time limit of trade in rare goods means the trade routes will
be constantly shifting in the medium term. This and the limit of two
traded goods per city means setting up the trade routes becomes very
important. Having your city selling two goods that are only bought by
a city you are at war with means your city will stagnant
economically. When a trade route comes up for grabs it could be
auctioned off to surrounding rulers assuming they have a space free.
Those two goods become very important and another point of
negotiation and diplomatic tension.
Other possibilities include:
A new trade order could be added called smuggle which is the same as
sell but tries to avoid the duty
A new attitude could be put in which gives a lower tax rate to
certain units/factions. Trade concessions
All of the above is just thoughts but the central point is linking
trade into the tax base in a significant manner that means
that individual players and domains are linked together in forced
co-operation.
Andrew Penney
apenney@lpr.com.au
Ph +61 3 9416 0988
Fax +61 3 9419 5292
341A Smith Street
Fitzroy VIC Australia 3065