Re: (TFT) Announcing myself and a question

[ErolB1@aol.com]

>     I always assumed that the extra costs for
> expensive magic items was a surcharge that was
> added to account for the cost of increased
> security.  I mean, if you have an item that
> already costs $55,000 a simple locked door just
> does not cut it.

Yeah, but... In that case, the increased cost should be linear with time: A 
70 week item should increase cost by 70%  rather than doubling it. Besides, 
that's one hell of a lot of security - enought spent on security to buy a new 
item every couple of years. 

>    I've never looked into how those numbers
> were derived.  But after I got the formula for
> how the costs work out, I never needed to bother
> with them.

Yes, *a* formula is given in the Codex - but this formula does not match up 
with the tables in AW. I want to know how the numbers in the table were 
derived. Specifically, I want to know the assumptions behind those numbers, 
because I suspect those assumptions affect other parts of the system, and I 
want to make changes without producing economic gibberish.

I want to avoid a house-rule version of the infamous "Murphy's rule" where 
downing a liter of wine nets you $1.

Erol K. Bayburt
Evil Genius for a Better Tomorrow
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"