On Sun, 20 Apr 2003, Airgedok wrote:
> Seeing as the GB is abstract there is therefore no reason NOT to times
> everything by 12 and make bookkeeping purely integer based. The value
> of the bar is of no consequence.
There is definitely something to this. Twelfths, sixteenths and such
are a nuisance to work with. Even the largely non-metric US has metric
money. =)
But note, just multiplying by twelve might not be enough! If the draft
revision uses several different fractions in different places (I havent read every single page yet), or even worse multiplies them, then to keep all those relative values the same but work only with integers, youd have
to multiply everything by the lowest common denominator of every fraction
in the whole thing, which could easily be 720 or more.
I personally use, and others have suggested, a slight variation of this
scheme, keeping GB as they are but retaining decimal fractions: 0.08 is
almost a twelfth, but more straightforward in computation. This approach
is also adopted by the Sierra computer game: since in the Move Troops
action, the rulebook says spending 1 GB allows you to move 10
unit-provinces (in your own domain), if you move 23 unit-provinces the
computer charges you 2.3 GB, not 3.
There is really no practical difference between these ideas – the only
question is an aesthetic one: whether you want regents` treasuries to be
usually hundreds and sometimes thousands, and usually spend money in
multiples of 10 or 12 (or 240!); or stay at apparently smaller numbers but
sometimes spend less than 1 GB in a way that maintains a constant, small
number of significant digits. In scientific notation, the two would look
identical, except for the exponent.
Ryan Caveney
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.