What would happen if there were no more checks in UO?

[MoonglowMerchant]

It sure would be difficult to have billions in scripted gold in 60k piles...and buying and selling scripted gold sure would be difficult...

 

[Eh-Tah-Chi]

Will never happen =/

 

[It Lives]

The original team should have seen the problem from the start and did something then. Gold wipe every two years, or less.

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

Will never happen =/

That is pretty accurate...nothing really ever happens in UO.



It is just an idea for discussion. In theory, what would it mean...

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

The original team should have seen the problem from the start and did something then. Gold wipe every two years, or less.

Imagine if there were no checks....

Right now, one character can have 125 million in gold in his/her bankbox. If checks were eliminated, the same character could store 7.5 million.

 

[Nestorius]

I'm all for removing checks, bags of sending, bank boxes, private houses, ridable pack animals, bags of sending, item insurance and recall/gate spells. I'm still on the fence about secure containers.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Why, everyone would play Siege and all would be right with the world!

On a more serious note....People with fortunes would find those fortunes unsustainable.

I don't mean the dupers, the dupers/scammers/scripters/etc., because they would find a way. Storing gold on house signs, or in moving crates, sounds like a viable option, or scripting boatloads of gold onto vendors using pack horses and "trading" via use of the vendor system somehow.

Players legitimately gained fortunes, however, would have a hard time. People who played long and hard and well, and got lucky with the occasional artifact find, and who are legitimately enjoying the fruits of their legitimately-gotten labor.

The ability of people to walk into the game with nothing and work their way up to being millionaires, the Capitalistic American Dream which is far more of a realistic possibility in UO than in real life, would be largely destroyed. People with entrenched fortunes would be greatly favored.

On the non-Siege production shards, I can foresee no good coming of such a change....Luckily the the team seems smart enough to see through this.

-Galen's player

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

Why, everyone would play Siege and all would be right with the world!

On a more serious note....People with fortunes would find those fortunes unsustainable.

I don't mean the dupers, the dupers/scammers/scripters/etc., because they would find a way. Storing gold on house signs, or in moving crates, sounds like a viable option, or scripting boatloads of gold onto vendors using pack horses and "trading" via use of the vendor system somehow.

Players legitimately gained fortunes, however, would have a hard time. People who played long and hard and well, and got lucky with the occasional artifact find, and who are legitimately enjoying the fruits of their legitimately-gotten labor.

The ability of people to walk into the game with nothing and work their way up to being millionaires, the Capitalistic American Dream which is far more of a realistic possibility in UO than in real life, would be largely destroyed. People with entrenched fortunes would be greatly favored.

On the non-Siege production shards, I can foresee no good coming of such a change....Luckily the the team seems smart enough to see through this.

-Galen's player

People with entrenched fortunes would be greatly favored?

I would think it would make it much harder for them and consequently much easier for the average player.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

People with entrenched fortunes would be greatly favored?

I would think it would make it much harder for them and consequently much easier for the average player.

No, it wouldn't.

People with entrenched fortunes also have other resources, such as multiple accounts, houses, and vendors. These resources can be used to store gold.

Would it be easy? No.

Would it be doable? Yes.

Would people do it? Definitely.

Do you really think some player with, say, 100+ million gold is going to actually get rid of gold in order to keep room in his house for display rares and the like? And do you really think people who sell high-end goods would lower their prices when they knew that there were still people out there who could afford their goods at the old prices?

To disprove that notion, look at the US housing market. The market in high-priced, luxury homes is still doing well. Toll Brothers is still making boatloads of money And why? Because despite the economy's troubles, the people who can afford those kinds of homes can still afford them.

-Galen's player

 

[Landicine]

The average player uses what equipment they have and goes out and kills monsters. The average player doesn't come to stratics and complain constantly for the game to be easier. He just plays the dang thing. The average player would probably quit if his hard earned gold evaporated.

I remember the time before checks where 60k piles were so heavy if you weren't careful, you could lose them. I remember people using bugs to steal from other players by exploiting the heavy items. Yeah, I'd love to go back to that.

Why do people complain so much about the imaginary gold economy? Gold wipes, gold shrinks, gold sinks, it is really rather amusing. Such a thing won't equalize things. Those at the top come to the boards and figure out how the changes affect them and respond. They are often pretty smart. If such a change were to come in, I'm betting there would be dozens of ways around the problem. For example:

1. Buy expensive resources with gold before the change.
2. Buy rares before the change.
3. Store gold on vendors and in secures.
4. Spread the gold between more characters, shards, accounts.

My question is who cares? I don't care about bank balance of the guy with 100 million or the guy with 100 gold. I care that they hunt and merchant and play without cheating. I care when they ask for help or ask for a duel. I care when I hunt besides them or fight against them. I never care about their net worth.

 

[Kith Kanan]

get rid of checks and manage gold like in WOW and DAOC thank you very much !!!

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

I remember the time before checks where 60k piles were so heavy if you weren't careful, you could lose them. I remember people using bugs to steal from other players by exploiting the heavy items. Yeah, I'd love to go back to that.

Me too. Can we get it back to the time where you could steal a bag with blessed items in it too?

Please?

Those were fun times...la

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

Right.
As stated people would convert it to resources.

But the problem isnt the checks. Its that one can store 2 billion on a vendor x what 50 vendors. Thats 1 trillion and that is if you use your own 18x18.

Multiply it out times infinity and there is an easy way to keep trillions of gold.

 

[Azazel of LA]

My question is why would you even ask this dumb question? It would not help at all it would hurt players. You wouldnt be able to buy houses , rares or anything of value. IMO it would kill the game completely. Im an honest player who has busted my butt to get my chars to where they are. I have not cheated and do not purchase gold or items with cash but have managed to EARN 150mil in gold , own a luna house wich runs VERY successful vendors and I would like to think Ive helped out my shard by helping others as much as possable. I dont undersatnd why people want to see the game most of us play and love , ruined , just because a small portion of the community are cheaters. I was gone from UO for a lil while as I got married and had a child (hard to have time to play with all that planning ) and as I was gone they managed to change 2 BIG things that hurt honest players.
1) Bags of Sending - not only does this hurt me the hunter , but it also hurt the people that ran vendors selling powder to refill the bags.
2) Mining and LJing - this one REALLY takes the cake , I have not found a single Frostwood spawn since I came back to UO , mining isnt as bad as LJing , but it makes it MUCH harder for the honest player to accuire the materials they need. And the worse part is the people who are scripting ore and wood are still getting it and Im forced to buy it from vendors wich they prob. own. So in the end , who did this change help out?

I could go on all day but I will leave it at this. I can only suggest stop whining so much on message boards and put some time into working your char and hunting and you too can have nice things in game.

 

[Landicine]

I like your example, Galen. Using a real world example that is applicable is always nice. Basically, you are saying that some rich people would remain rich despite an artificial gold depression? Next you'll be telling me that some clever people managed to keep their wealth during the Great Depression? What they did?

There is also the possibility that if gold's value was killed, barter would be more common. In this case, most "normal" players won't have things of adequate barter value to get the upper end items. What items are worth trading for a cinture or ornament? What about a keep or castle? Other rare items. I'm not going to trade an ornament for any number of potion kegs, ingots, etc. Worst than a barter system is a purely cash system. RL money could possibly become the only way to get certain items since who would sell an item for a pile of ingots when they could have cash?

Bad idea.

 

[Nestorius]

UO is not the European Middle Ages, yet the economy serious does stink of 20th century anachronism in a way that annoys me immensely. In the Dark Ages, wealth was not always stored as currency. Why is UO mined gold different from the gold of coins? Why can't a crafter melt down the gold coins and make a Gold Statue? Or a Gold Chair? Or Gold Ingots? If you want to value gold, value it by weight. Let Player vendors price by stones of gold instead of coin and require the gold to be physically on location near the player when a purchase from a player vendor is made. That will create a reasonable price ceiling that preserves player freedom and respects the spirit of a fantasy role-playing game.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

UO is not the European Middle Ages, yet the economy serious does stink of 20th century anachronism in a way that annoys me immensely. In the Dark Ages, wealth was not always stored as currency. Why is UO mined gold different from the gold of coins? Why can't a crafter melt down the gold coins and make a Gold Statue? Or a Gold Chair? Or Gold Ingots? If you want to value gold, value it by weight. Let Player vendors price by stones of gold instead of coin and require the gold to be physically on location near the player when a purchase from a player vendor is made. That will create a reasonable price ceiling that preserves player freedom and respects the spirit of a fantasy role-playing game.

No aspect of UO can be anachronistic, by definition.

Why? Because UO is not a representation of the real world during any historical era. Rather, it is a representation of a self-contained fantasy world that plays by its own rules. Medieval Europe also didn't have fireballs, magically-powered floating robots, or dragons.

What you may mean is "UO's economy breaks the spell for me," the same way that modern talk used to break the spell for me before I got used to it. Or the same way people running around in Star Wars Galaxies with names like "Pimpmaster" used to bother me.

And that's really just a matter of preference.

For some reason, a surprising number of us seem to think that UO is supposed to represent the Middle Ages in Europe.

No, it's not.

-Galen's player

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

So many worthless posts, too.

HEY!!!...la

 

[Nestorius]

No aspect of UO can be anachronistic, by definition.

Why? Because UO is not a representation of the real world during any historical era. Rather, it is a representation of a self-contained fantasy world that plays by its own rules. Medieval Europe also didn't have fireballs, magically-powered floating robots, or dragons.

What you may mean is "UO's economy breaks the spell for me," the same way that modern talk used to break the spell for me before I got used to it. Or the same way people running around in Star Wars Galaxies with names like "Pimpmaster" used to bother me.

And that's really just a matter of preference.

For some reason, a surprising number of us seem to think that UO is supposed to represent the Middle Ages in Europe.

No, it's not.

-Galen's player

The standard of measurement for all fantasy mmprog genera harkens back to the original Dungeons and Dragons (Richard Garriot's Ultima series was an attempt at computerized D&D) and D&D and Ultima both point and refer to the Dark Ages between the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the Middle Ages.

 

[XaeviusMenate]

It sure would be difficult to have billions in scripted gold in 60k piles...and buying and selling scripted gold sure would be difficult...

[EDIT- a bill gold takes up about 1,000 items, but 1 billion gold in stack-form would take up nearly 17,000 items....basically, only the super-rich would be able to afford all the extra castles required to put all their stupid gold into.]

It's not necessarily that, could you imagine transferring 667 piles of 60,000 gold to someone to purchase an Inquisitor's Resolution, and either expect them to trust you with the gloves beforehand, or trust them to actually give them to you after giving the last of the gold?

We need more effective gold-sinks. Doing away with checks would just madden the playerbase, especially when their banks exploded with gold and could no longer store anything at all upon the removal of said checks. also, moving the gold would cause it to rubberband to said over-loaded bank, and drop on the bank floor.

Angry, angry customers would be the result.....

 

[Extra Value Meal]

get rid of checks and manage gold like in WOW and DAOC thank you very much !!!

This! And somehow everyone missed it.

 

[Doomsday Dragon]

Hell yeah do it I am completely in favor! /end sarcasm

Then again every spec of gold I ever earned I spent on items of some type so I am always broke but totally rich.

I invest all my gold into things I need or want as fast as I can earn it and if this type of change ever happened I wouldn't even feel the effects of it.

If anything I would be better off than many during this type of a change. But these types of drastic changes only hurt the game not make it better.

 

[FrejaSP]

It sure would be difficult to have billions in scripted gold in 60k piles...and buying and selling scripted gold sure would be difficult...

It would be very hard to trade a house without checks as you can't carry the money.

Maybe make it so new made checks only can be max 100k gp, that would make it hard to make trades for several mills but not impossible, just make the trade window count the checks and tells how much gold in the trade window.

Also make it so if you remove old 1 mills checks from your bank, they will drop in your backpack as 10 x 100k checks.

It would be much better for the economy in UO.

 

[Tek]

Hmmm I think it would defiantly change a lot of things in the UO economy-

-Less hunting for gold would occur instead of actual loot since storage and movement of gold would be more difficult.

-Alternatives to gold such as gems would be used as players (ie diamonds are worth around 150? gold each) players would purchase gems to stack in thier banks from jewelers and either trade the gems to other players or convert them back to gold when needed.

-Managing vendors would be far more difficult since removing gold from vendor would not go into checks but piles of gold in the bank.

-Player run auctions would more than likely cease to exist since managing gold from the sales would be extremely difficult to maintain.

-Players would result more to trade of items for items instead of vendor selling for ease and equivalent value.

-Rare items (event, scrolls, equipment, artifacts, etc) would be harder for players to obtain from other players since the value would exceed the amount of gold in a bankbox (capped at 7.5 million) and sellers wouldn’t want the hassle of dealing in large sums of gold piles.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

The standard of measurement for all fantasy mmprog genera harkens back to the original Dungeons and Dragons (Richard Garriot's Ultima series was an attempt at computerized D&D) and D&D and Ultima both point and refer to the Dark Ages between the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the Middle Ages.

*sighs*

Both Ultima and D&D base their worlds upon that model.

This isn't the same as taking place in that time period, however.

Neither D&D nor Ultima had Catholicism, for example. In fact, both mostly avoided it, though Ultima did have a Christ figure (The Avatar). Most D&D campaigns had polytheistic religions.

The 2nd edition of Ultima I had space travel. The 1st edition of Ultima II had time travel and space travel. The current setting for D&D Online has monorails, I have been told.

So, "based upon" is not the same as "takes place in."

-Galen's player

 

[Nestorius]

Why the Norse runes then?

Wait... I agree with exactly what you just said. Never mind.

 

[FenrirsFangs]

If the game survived the transition it would probably be better. The problem is, would it survive the wave of anger? I keep hearing how these items are worth sooooooo much that it would be soooo hard to get them.

When I bother to run a vendor I calculate the cost based on how much time i spent getting the item. THAT ITEM. and even subtract the gold I looted sometimes just for the hell of it. then i sell it for a hair above what I could have made just farming gold in that amount of time. THAT is an items worth. NOTHING I repeat NOT ONE G*d D@373d thing in this game is worth more than 500k PERIOD Why dont I have a vendor all the time? because I prefer to play solo, I get more done that way. If i play with others i spend hours chatting, it's horrible. playing solo means i don't get sellable stuff as often because i don't do champs. However until the nerf I sold bags of sending for 20k and I considered that raking the customers over the coals. I made a Million easy. They are THAT easy to get.

They did a piece on public radio about the guy that is behind all of this. I am not kidding. It's ONE GUY that accounts for most of it, he is the lynch pin for an entire corporation that farms gold in EVERY MMO. pretty much, there is nothing they can do, to stop it. the only way to suppress gold farming is to stop making gold. This is a corporation that holds tens of thousands of accounts, like EA is gonna kill that level of income, come on. it's not a bunch of little geeks laughing at how clever they are this is a huge serious corporate entity. this is national public radios url, they should have the story archived.www.npr.org, I think it was on talk of the nation, i'm not sure.

IF YOU WANT THEM GONE WE HAVE TO DO IT NOT EA!
WE THE PLAYERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ECONOMY NOT THE GM'S
WE ALLOW THE PRICES TO BE RUN UP OUT OF GREED.


1. RUN YOUR VENDOR WITH REASONABLE PRICES
2. DONT STOCK IT HEAVILY STOCK IT FREQUENTLY SO THAT PLAYERS AND NOT THE WHOLESALERS GET TO DO THE SHOPPING.

for the most part thats it. the more players that have a chance to see and buy your goods at a reasonable price the fewer customers they can force to buy gold for cash so that they can afford the overpriced items on the vendors

Personally, I don't value anything in this game over 500k but some people do.

just a thought, maybe charge by time but double or triple it. and I seriously believe that nothing should ever be more than 5 million, 5 million being 10 times the maximum item value of 500,000.

there is no reasonable argument I have ever heard that can justify charging FIFTY FRICKIN MILLION for a stupid scroll that really doesnt make much differance. I have 150 str 150 dex and 33 INT. I got a +25 scroll to get to the cap on str and dex. 140 str and 140 dex + 28 int works just about as well. I guarantee it. they AREN'T WORTH FIFTY MILLION.

in retrospect i should have titled this post war and peace, brevity, I have to remember brevity.

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

get rid of checks and manage gold like in WOW and DAOC thank you very much !!!

How do they manage gold in WoW and DaOC??

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

People with entrenched fortunes would be greatly favored?

I would think it would make it much harder for them and consequently much easier for the average player.

No, it wouldn't.

People with entrenched fortunes also have other resources, such as multiple accounts, houses, and vendors. These resources can be used to store gold.

Would it be easy? No.

Would it be doable? Yes.

Would people do it? Definitely.

Do you really think some player with, say, 100+ million gold is going to actually get rid of gold in order to keep room in his house for display rares and the like? And do you really think people who sell high-end goods would lower their prices when they knew that there were still people out there who could afford their goods at the old prices?

To disprove that notion, look at the US housing market. The market in high-priced, luxury homes is still doing well. Toll Brothers is still making boatloads of money And why? Because despite the economy's troubles, the people who can afford those kinds of homes can still afford them.

-Galen's player

Ok, lets take your examples one at a time.

First, multiple houses. You are certainly correct that people with multiple houses could store more 60k piles of gold. However, what would they do with it? Without checks, they would basically have houses full of 60k piles that couldn't be used for much at all. Yes, you could move 20k or so at a time with a pack animal, but can you imagine how many trips you would have to make to buy something that cost 20 million gold? It is doable, but not practical.

Next, multiple accounts. You are correct in that people with extra accounts could store more gold. However, they would still be limited in that only the gold in their banks would really be useable. Six characters on one account would allow for the storage of 45 million gold. With a second account, one could store 90 million. With a third, one could store 135 million. With three accounts now, someone could store 2.25 billion in their banks. So while you are correct that multiple accounts would allow more storage, it would still be a significant reduction when compared to the current situation. How much scripted gold did they delete last time???

Finally, vendors. Yes, vendors can be used to store gold. Without checks though again you can't do anything with that gold. So what if a vendor has a billion gold on it. Try using that gold to pay for something....that is a lot of trips at 20k per trip.

I don't think you could make any argument which contradicts the idea that eliminating checks would reduce the overall amount of gold in the game. That much is incontravertable.

With less overall gold in the game, gold would be worth more. In other words, it might actually be worthwhile to gather gold by playing the game since dupers and scripters wouldn't be constantly flooding the UO economy with more gold than an honest player could ever achieve.

Thus, the average player would be better served while the uber rich would be hurt.

 

[Extra Value Meal]

How do they manage gold in WoW and DaOC??

Gold does not take on a physical form so it cannot be duped.

 

[Emil IsTemp]

Well if you read the Pub54 notes:

"Player vendors are now capped at holding two billion gold from sales. If you try to go over this cap you will receive an error message, no gold will be taken and the item will remain on the vendor"

Not sure how many vendors you can cram into a castle.. but with two accounts, and a balloon ride to imagination land, you can store billions and billions.

I have maybe 400k currency to my name.. what do i care?

 

[Theo_GL]

Imagine if there were no checks....

Right now, one character can have 125 million in gold in his/her bankbox. If checks were eliminated, the same character could store 7.5 million.

Ok, now imagine there are no vendors.

If I could only store 7.5 mil gold - then once I reach that level (and I'm far past it) I would have NO incentive to sell anything. Why? What would I do with the money? So I'd drop my vendors and never sell anything.

Do you want an economy with no viable means to exchange value aka currency? This would kill the use of gold.

Nice try. Bad Idea.

 

[Tek]

Another issue with this concept is gold is too easy to get from hunting and other means. Then with the hassle of managing gold in piles this would cause gold to devalue to the point where people would simply sell ‘rare’ items for cash only. We are seeing this more and more now as the value of gold continues to drop.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

I don't think you could make any argument which contradicts the idea that eliminating checks would reduce the overall amount of gold in the game. That much is incontravertable.

And there you have it....You have made up your mind that your proposal would reduce the amount of gold in the game (which it wouldn't, because money always finds a way, and given time the super-rich would find some creative use of vendors and house signs, similar to how they store gold on the house sign now; that's right, people are already circumventing the logical limits of gold storage now), and that this would be a good thing (which is debatable along many vectors, not the least of which is that there's a lot of people who have earned their gold honestly, and a lot more who would love to be able to reach the heights that your proposal would cut them off from, while leaving those already at those heights comfortably entrenched).

You've made up your mind, and reality doesn't really matter after that. Biggest guns, loudest voice.

*shrugs*

-Galen's player

 

[MoonBeam[TBD]]

The original team should have seen the problem from the start and did something then. Gold wipe every two years, or less.

a gold wipe would be harsh for those like myself who dont get to hunt alot (due to real life) and the money i currently have took years to get .. and no i never bought gold !
SO if that were to happen i'd have to close my 3 accounts cause i wouldnt be able to play the way i like anymore.. and i dont remember the last time i collected gold and with the bags of sending sucking monkey toes i'll never be able to get money .

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

I don't think you could make any argument which contradicts the idea that eliminating checks would reduce the overall amount of gold in the game. That much is incontravertable.

And there you have it....You have made up your mind that your proposal would reduce the amount of gold in the game (which it wouldn't, because money always finds a way, and given time the super-rich would find some creative use of vendors and house signs, similar to how they store gold on the house sign now; that's right, people are already circumventing the logical limits of gold storage now), and that this would be a good thing (which is debatable along many vectors, not the least of which is that there's a lot of people who have earned their gold honestly, and a lot more who would love to be able to reach the heights that your proposal would cut them off from, while leaving those already at those heights comfortably entrenched).

You've made up your mind, and reality doesn't really matter after that. Biggest guns, loudest voice.

*shrugs*

-Galen's player

Ok, let me try this again.

Yes, people can and would be able to store gold in houses, on vendors, on house signs etc...

What I tried to explain to you in the previous post was that gold wouldn't be very "functional".

The gold that would be "functional" would be the gold in the bank because you would be able to go to a vendor and purchase something with that gold.

The gold in a house in piles, or on a house sign, or on a vendor wouldn't be "functional" because to use it, you would have to transfer it to the bank and that would be a real pain in the arse with a large amount of gold.

Do you follow me so far?

So, in theory it would be possible to take all those checks for one million gold and put that money on a vendor or a house sign or in piles, but why would anyone spend the time and effort to accumulate 2 billion gold when the most they could easily use would be 7.5 million?

Now, let me address something else you said. You mentioned people earning their gold "honestly".

The only way for anyone to have earned their gold "honestly" is if they have never sold anything to another player. Because if a player has ever sold anything to anyone, then they have scripted gold in their bank account.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF GOLD IN THIS GAME WAS ACQUIRED THROUGH CHEATING.

If you don't believe me, think about this...

The next publish caps vendor gold at 2 billion. THAT IS BILLION WITH A B.

If they are capping vendor gold at 2 billion, that tells me that there are currently vendors with over 2 billion gold on them.

Do you know that if you started UO today and farmed one million gold every day "honestly" from monsters it would take FIVE AND A HALF YEARS to farm 2 billion gold.

This is why I laugh at people with one hundred million gold, or two hundred million gold who think they are rich and don't want to lose their checks.

If an "honest" player has one hundred million gold now and doubles that in the next year, he will actually be poorer than when he started because in the same time cheaters will add billions of gold to the economy further reducing it's "real" value.

Look, you have nothing to worry about. EA is not going to take anyone's checks. The illusion of wealth will continue.

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

Imagine if there were no checks....

Right now, one character can have 125 million in gold in his/her bankbox. If checks were eliminated, the same character could store 7.5 million.

Ok, now imagine there are no vendors.

If I could only store 7.5 mil gold - then once I reach that level (and I'm far past it) I would have NO incentive to sell anything. Why? What would I do with the money? So I'd drop my vendors and never sell anything.

Do you want an economy with no viable means to exchange value aka currency? This would kill the use of gold.

Nice try. Bad Idea.

You could take your gold and buy something instead of just collecting it?

 

[Nestorius]

Even though we are not cutting off the rate at which gold is generated, by getting rid of checks and giving gold always location and mass, we are still slowing down the 'velocity' of the rate that the gold is spent which should reduce the price level. Its an interesting idea that I support.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity_theory_of_money

 

[Lord Kotan]

It sure would be difficult to have billions in scripted gold in 60k piles...and buying and selling scripted gold sure would be difficult...

They can keep it on a vendor?

 

[MoonglowMerchant]

They can keep it on a vendor?

Yes, but as I have already explained, twice, gold on a vendor wouldn't do anyone much good.

 

[Aboo]

It sure would be difficult to have billions in scripted gold in 60k piles...and buying and selling scripted gold sure would be difficult...

I remember when there were no checks. I even remember when there were no bank boxes. I would NOT choose to go back to that.

 

[Loqucious]

I would quit this game! Ooops...........I thought you said chicks.

 

[Spree]

I remember using house deeds to store gold before checks, but you had to look out for thieves since they where not blessed. Back then uo gold sold for over $400 a million too.