|
Post by gaston on Sept 3, 2019 17:10:08 GMT
The thing that immediately leaps out when looking at the housing table is the huge leap in the price of an apartment and that of house (5 livres to 300 livres). If this is an indication of size it means that a house could contain 60 apartments. That's either a huge house or the apartments are the size of rabbit hutches There are no SP advantages to having an apartment and with a selling price of 3.75 livres they are not worth the bother of selling. Wouldn't it make far more sense to say that rooms and apartments are rented, rather than bought, and that renting one is a quick rather than weekly action ?? The 5 livres to secure an apartment could be considered a non-returnable deposit extorted by the landlord Also, although the monthly cost for rooms and apartments is considered to be paid in usual support costs, shouldn't this be quantified? Characters may wish to keep on a room or apartment in addition to the main dwelling for role playing purposes - somewhere to store the furniture Auntie Gertrude left to them until they get a bigger place or to conduct clandestine meetings. Indeed, mistresses may demand a love nest as part of the package I'd suggest monthly costs of 1 livre and 2 livres for rooms and apartments respectively - half the support costs of the minimum SL which may have them - unless they are character's main dwelling and already covered by their support costs. Moving on, in a city the size of Paris I can't see anyone having trouble buying the size of house they want. I don't view shortages as credible. Finally, property is considered as part of the estate of a dead person in real life, so I don't see why this shouldn't be the case in Liminal's Paris. I'd like to suggest that they are - but that the state takes 50% of the total value of a dead character's estate in death duties. Taking all the above into account, section 27.1 would look like this 27.1 Houses and larger dwellings may be purchased as a weekly action for cash only (no mortgages) according to the housing table. They may sold back to the market for 75% of cost, or sold to another character for any terms agreed. Rooms and apartments can be rented as a pre-monthly action, the 5 livres cost for an apartment being considered a non-returnable deposit. If the room or apartment is the character's sole dwelling, then the monthly cost in included in normal support costs. Houses or bigger may also be received along with noble estates but such dwellings may not be sold separately. Dwellings may be left in a will as part of a deceased's estate, but the will writers should appreciate that 50% of the total value of their estates will be taken as death duties by the Crown.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 4, 2019 9:23:10 GMT
Mmm...no comments.... Does this mean everyone agrees with me ?
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 4, 2019 9:59:29 GMT
Mmm...no comments.... Does this mean everyone agree with me ?
Or it may just mean that ,as the GM has taken a week holydays, people has also taken this break...
Personally, I0m ok with considering the appartments as rented, as I agree with the reasons you give, and about makin grenting them (and moving) a pre-monthly action, while for larger houses needing the week to move there (as mosre things must be moved, service hired, etc...
About keeping the room/apartment, for other pourposes (be it clandestine meetings, jsut a retire place, whatever it be, I'm not sure it needs a cost ,as it can be assumed with the support costs as if you don't have a house...
Other questions: let's assume a character has a spare house and, instead of selling it, he allows another playcer character (e.g. a regimental comrade who is short on money) to use it (be it as a favor or paying a rent). How will this be treated? Would the second character have the SP benefits of living there? just not the SL loss of living on a room?
About allowing houses to be in the will, I think in most cases they will go to the family, so, at most, to his spouse, but not to other characters as easily as the money...
Another thing is if the next character is close enough in the birth tables to the deceased one as to be considered his brother/sister. In this (rare) case, I'd allow all states (including houses, horses and noble states) to be inherited by them, unless he has sons to be considered his/her heirs. But that's (aside from I guess a rare case) for another rule (wills)...
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 4, 2019 10:05:25 GMT
(posted separatly just i ncase the GM condiseres this should be in another thread, to ese him to move it)
To ease people to see the changes, I'd suggest when we suggest a change i nrules to remark the changes ,be in by boldening them, or by writting them in a different color.
e.g.;
While in this case changes are enough as maybe this not be needed, in other cases they are just a sentence or two, and then is when this really helps.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 4, 2019 10:31:30 GMT
But what if, for whatever reason, a character ends up with multiple extra apartments? He'd effectively be holding them rent free. Perhaps unlikely, but to cover the eventuality I think it would be much better to have the rent for extra rooms and apartments formalised, at 1 livre and 2 livres per month respectively.
Having characters renting houses from other characters could be a nightmare to keep track of and, as you say, opens questions as to who gets the SPs. If one character wants to help out another's accommodation situation, they could agree a price for the house, the purchaser pays what he can now as a deposit (even if it's just 1 livre) and the balance is treated as a loan. (There is already a mechanism for loans between characters). That way the purchaser is considered to own the house immediately and gets the SPs (and responsibility for upkeep) from the time of the purchase.
Well, the whole point of writing wills is so that people can leave their estates to whom they wish, rather than it falling to family members they may not particularly like... This is effectively leaving the estate to your next character, which is specifically against the rules.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 4, 2019 10:52:43 GMT
But what if, for whatever reason, a character ends up with multiple extra apartments? He'd effectively be holding them rent free. Perhaps unlikely, but to cover the eventuality I think it would be much better to have the rent for extra rooms and apartments formalised, at 1 livre and 2 livres per month respectively.
Wasn't you asked for keeping rules simple ?
As per keeping track, that's players' risponsability. As per quesions opened, that's what I was asking the GM...
Of course, your option simplifies it...
Sure, that's why I said this discussion belongs to another rule.
And in an ycase, what's the possibility for this to apply? Let's imagine Hillaume wins some fortune, being still unmarried, and then dies. What's the possibility for his next character to be the first son af an impoverished noble (so that we could assume him to be his younger brother, now the heir) again?
IMHO the possibility low enough as to deserve this prize...
See that if the new character was the second son, he will not inherit (as even in the inheritance went to the family, it wold go to either his father or the now elder brother, as current heir), though if Hillaume fortune was enough and his brother was the son of, let's say, a well-to-do viscount, it could be assumed (for role playing reasons only) to be another brother, while the family has inherited Huillaume's fortune...
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 4, 2019 13:45:31 GMT
Well all this would require is putting '1' before the (1) and a '2' before the (2) in the Monthly Cost column of the Housing Table and 'if sole residence' being inserted after the notes for both (1) and (2) at the bottom of the table. What could be simpler than that ? Well, what's to stop Huillaume leaving his estate to some other character in his will and having his replacement character (whatever his background) inventing some connection to Huillaume and contacting the beneficiary to tell him about it? I'm sure the beneficiary would ensure that at least _some_ of the windfall inheritance he has received found its way to the new character - and this doesn't depend in any way on the new character having lucky character creation rolls... It also has the advantage that no existing rules would be broken.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Sept 9, 2019 20:00:31 GMT
The thing that immediately leaps out when looking at the housing table is the huge leap in the price of an apartment and that of house (5 livres to 300 livres). If this is an indication of size it means that a house could contain 60 apartments. That's either a huge house or the apartments are the size of rabbit hutches There are no SP advantages to having an apartment and with a selling price of 3.75 livres they are not worth the bother of selling. Wouldn't it make far more sense to say that rooms and apartments are rented, rather than bought, and that renting one is a quick rather than weekly action ?? The 5 livres to secure an apartment could be considered a non-returnable deposit extored by the landlord That sounds sensible. My only worry there is that allowing apartments to be rented without spending a week is unfair on the characters who already had to spend time doing that. Those seem reasonable for anyone wanting a second dwelling for RP reasons. I think you're talking about SL restrictions? I see them as an abstraction that also covers where people live. But it's possible we could add areas of Paris (I think you do that in Fontainebleu?) if people think that's worth the slight extra complexity. I'd have to retcon some people who've bought property to put them somewhere suitable but I don't think that's a problem. I'm fine with that as long as the following is taken into account: One may not leave his money to his next characterObviously, "don't take the piss" applies in anything like this. I trust players not to do anything dumb like collude to pass money back and forth so don't feel the need to have actual rules on that kind of thing. Generally I'm good with that, if we take the above comments into account.
|
|
|
Post by Alain Andre Durant on Sept 10, 2019 0:34:32 GMT
The thing that immediately leaps out when looking at the housing table is the huge leap in the price of an apartment and that of house (5 livres to 300 livres). If this is an indication of size it means that a house could contain 60 apartments. That's either a huge house or the apartments are the size of rabbit hutches There are no SP advantages to having an apartment and with a selling price of 3.75 livres they are not worth the bother of selling. Wouldn't it make far more sense to say that rooms and apartments are rented, rather than bought, and that renting one is a quick rather than weekly action ?? The 5 livres to secure an apartment could be considered a non-returnable deposit extored by the landlord Remember that a house is property you own and that it has some small portion of land. The privilege of security, of the landlord not being able to kick you out for whatever reason (like a liaison mistress creating a bad reputation as a house of ill-repute), is part of that increased cost. And then the land is also part of the cost. Perhaps the problem is more in the scaling of the SP. Perhaps an initial SP gain upon purchase and then a monthly gain, similar to titles. I've toyed with this idea myself. Make monthly maintenance food and clothing and property separate. ConCon could then be revised to eating at better places so you are seen by better people and wearing better clothing to be seen as having disposable income. Just like in our lives, houses are sold to cover debts to creditors. Why would the State take a part of the estate? As an Estate Tax? This is possible. Some states do indeed do this.
|
|
|
Post by Alain Andre Durant on Sept 10, 2019 0:40:26 GMT
Other questions: let's assume a character has a spare house and, instead of selling it, he allows another playcer character (e.g. a regimental comrade who is short on money) to use it (be it as a favor or paying a rent). How will this be treated? Would the second character have the SP benefits of living there? just not the SL loss of living on a room? About allowing houses to be in the will, I think in most cases they will go to the family, so, at most, to his spouse, but not to other characters as easily as the money... Another thing is if the next character is close enough in the birth tables to the deceased one as to be considered his brother/sister. In this (rare) case, I'd allow all states (including houses, horses and noble states) to be inherited by them, unless he has sons to be considered his/her heirs. But that's (aside from I guess a rare case) for another rule (wills)...
Good questions. Not leaving stuff in wills was indeed to prevent people from leaving things to their new character giving the new character a great advantage over other new characters. I think it is against the spirit of the rule to allow characters to leave things to other characters because it could again create an advantage to the receiving character. However, it does happen in real life. Perhaps some kind of limit of what could be inherited?
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 13, 2019 5:41:21 GMT
No, the SL restrictions are fine. It's the rule which says that there could be shortages where certain types of houses are concerned.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 13, 2019 7:06:12 GMT
So we're OK with this apart from houses being left in wills (though since this is coupled with a 'Death Tax' which means players would be able to leave less in total in their wills anyway I don't really see a problem...)
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Sept 13, 2019 9:42:26 GMT
So we're OK with this apart from houses being left in wills (though since this is coupled with a 'Death Tax' which means players would be able to leave less in total in their wills anyway I don't really see a problem...) I only meant the comments about not leaving anything to your next character. Leaving houses is fine, with the death tax.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 15, 2019 7:16:52 GMT
Ah, OK. It's just that Housing Changes are listed under 'Long term projects/Uncertain' in the current 'Roundup of Changes for 1.2 of the Rulebook' list.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Sept 15, 2019 9:47:52 GMT
Ah, OK. It's just that Housing Changes are listed under 'Long term projects/Uncertain' in the current 'Roundup of Changes for 1.2 of the Rulebook' list. The Wills stuff can be implemented now. That's more about whether to put locations in!
|
|