Money in fantasy works when concrete numbers anchor a single reference point in the reader's head, not when the prices are realistic. Pick one purchasing-power anchor, like the cost of a loaf or a night at an inn, and let everything else hang off it. The point of fantasy money is to make stakes tangible, not to simulate medieval economics.
This is for the writer who is two chapters into a draft, has just had their MC pay three silver for a meal, and is now staring at the page wondering whether three silver was a sane amount or whether they have just casually priced lunch at what should be the cost of a small farm. There are no universal rules here, and the very best fantasy writers have done this every possible way, including the way where money basically never gets mentioned. But there is a craft logic underneath the choice, and once you can see it, you stop having to relitigate every price your characters pay.
My feeling about fantasy money is that we tend to treat it as one of two completely wrong things. Either we treat it as economics, which it almost never is, or we treat it as flavor, in which case it stops doing any work in the scene. The good middle is to treat money the way you treat any other concrete detail: as a stakes engine. A price in a fantasy novel is doing the same job as a wound count or a remaining-mana number; it tells the reader what the character can and cannot do next.
Why fantasy money breaks immersion when it goes wrong
Fantasy money breaks immersion almost exclusively at one specific failure point, and that point is internal contradiction within visible range. The classic example, which I think every fantasy reader has hit at least once, is the book where a meal at a roadside inn costs about the same as a sword, which costs about the same as a horse, which costs about the same as a small house. None of those individual prices is wrong in isolation, because there is no "right" in a made-up world. But the moment you can see two of them on the same page and the ratio is broken, the spell collapses and the reader starts auditing.
Look at how A Song of Ice and Fire handles this. George R. R. Martin gives you gold dragons, silver stags, and copper pennies, and he is rigorous about the ratios. A gold dragon is a small fortune in the wrong hands. A silver stag is what you tip a stableboy. A copper penny is, well, a penny. By the second book you have absorbed the hierarchy and you can feel, viscerally, when Tyrion is being generous and when Bronn is being cheap. Martin barely ever names exact prices for anything more abstract than that, and he does not need to, because the texture is already there. Compare that to a book where the same character can casually drop "a hundred gold" for dinner in chapter three and then "ten gold" turns into a life-altering sum in chapter twelve. The reader is not going to be able to articulate what bothered them, but they are going to feel that the world stopped tracking itself.
Tolkien sits at the other end of the same spectrum. In The Lord of the Rings, money basically does not appear, and the world is no thinner for it. The Hobbits eat, the Rangers travel, Bilbo's gold is a folkloric blessing rather than a functional fund. The lesson there is that you can simply opt out. If the story you are telling does not turn on what anything costs, do not put a price on it.
Concrete numbers, not realistic numbers
The single most useful frame I have ever used for fantasy money is that what you want is concrete numbers, not realistic numbers. The reader is not a medieval economist. They do not know what a sword should cost in a pre-industrial village, and if you go look that up you will find the answer is "wildly different depending on the century, the metal grade, and the local guild structure", which is exactly the kind of detail that will help you zero readers. What the reader needs is one anchor they can hold up against everything else in your book.
My advice, then, is to pick the anchor first and only then start pricing things off it. The simplest anchor in fantasy is a loaf of bread or a night at an inn. Brandon Sanderson does this beautifully in Mistborn. Boxings and clips have specific values in the Final Empire, but you do not have to remember any of them; what you remember is that a skaa worker earns a clip a day, a noble eats food a skaa would never see, and Vin's whole life is being priced out of every room she walks into. The currency is doing emotional work because it is consistently anchored to one thing: the skaa cost of living. Everything else, including the noble extravagances, hangs off that.
I think the trap a lot of newer writers fall into is trying to make the anchor itself realistic. They look up the price of a real medieval longsword, fall down a Wikipedia hole about gold weights, and then arrive at numbers that are technically defensible but that no reader will accept because the anchor is in the wrong place. You can write 'a decent inn room for the night will run you about a silver, lad, two if you want the room to actually be warm' in chapter two and the reader will then happily price an entire economy around it for the next four hundred pages. They will not stop and ask you to defend the silver. They will simply hold you to it.
When to use real prices and when to wave them away
Here is a craft heuristic I trust, and I think it is more useful than any economic logic. Use real prices when the scene's stakes turn on the price, and hand-wave when they do not. A heist needs prices. A poverty arc needs prices. A swordfight does not need prices. A coronation does not need prices. 'How much for the cure?' the apothecary smiled a small thin smile and named a sum that would feed Maren's family for half a year is doing more work for the scene than 'how much for the cure?' the apothecary said. 'Three hundred and forty silver, plus a copper for the cork.' The first version lets the reader scale the cost to the character's whole life; the second version makes the reader pull out a calculator.
You see this play out across the genre. In The Name of the Wind, Patrick Rothfuss is meticulous about money, because Kvothe's whole arc through Tarbean and the University is a poverty arc; every talent and drab matters, every tuition payment is a small disaster, and the reader needs to feel the texture of being broke. In Dungeon Crawler Carl, Matt Dinniman effectively abstracts most of the economy into crawl credits, because the book is not really about commerce, it is about survival inside a hostile system, so the currency mostly tells you how thin Carl's margin for error has gotten, not what bread costs. Both approaches are right for the book they are inside.
In Cradle, Will Wight goes even further in the other direction. Across twelve books I genuinely do not remember a market scene that hinged on a specific price; what I remember is scales, the soulfire currency, which is doing the same narrative job as money without ever pretending to be commerce. That is fine, because Lindon's arc is about cultivation gates, not affordability. The story did not need the prices, so the prices got out of the way.
The copper-silver-gold question, and why I think it is fine
There is a periodic argument in fantasy writing circles that goes something like: stop using copper-silver-gold, it is medieval-Europe brain, invent your own. I respectfully disagree, in the sense that I think the convention is one of the most reader-friendly tools the genre has and we should be wary of breaking it for the sake of novelty alone.
Copper, silver, and gold gives the reader a hierarchy on contact. They know, before you have said a single word about exchange rates, that gold beats silver beats copper. That is real cognitive savings. An invented currency forces them to do translation work every time it appears, and unless the currency itself is thematic, like Mistborn's clips or Red Rising's color caste, you are paying that cost for nothing. Aleron Kong's The Land and Travis Bagwell's Awaken Online both use system-currency abstractions that work because the books are litRPG and the system is the point; outside that subgenre, I think a copper-silver-gold scheme is usually the right call.
What I would push back on, hard, is the temptation to compound the system with subunits. Twelve pence to a shilling to a pound is a real currency that real humans used and it is also, I think, a structural disaster in fiction because nobody can keep it straight in their head while they are also tracking a sword fight. One scale, three tiers. Copper for small daily things, silver for serious purchases, gold for life-altering ones. That is plenty of resolution to tell almost any story you might want to tell.
Mythril, soul-coins, and currencies that do not exist in our world
The harder version of the money question is the one that comes up the moment your world contains a substance, energy, or essence that does not map onto any real-world good. Mana crystals, qi pills, soul-coins, divine favor, dungeon credits, whatever your system gives you. The instinct is to price these against the gold standard and then patch the obvious problems. My advice is to skip the gold standard entirely and price them against what they let the character do.
A mid-grade mana crystal in your world is not worth thirty gold; it is worth one extended duel, or one healing of a non-lethal wound, or one day of sustained scrying. The reader can scale that. If a mid-grade crystal can heal a wound, and your MC is bleeding out from a wound, then you do not need a single number to make the cost of that crystal weigh on the page. Aleron Kong does this well with The Land's loot drops; Travis Bagwell does it with Awaken Online's gear; Will Wight does it with Cradle's scales. They are not asking you to convert; they are asking you to feel.
This also lets you sidestep the classic mythril costs more than gold but a full set of mythril armor exists problem that fantasy readers love to argue about. If mythril is rare and a full suit exists on a named character, you are not telling the reader that the named character has the equivalent of a quarter-million dollars strapped to their torso. You are telling them this character occupies a tier the rest of the cast does not. Mythril is not a price tag, it is a class marker. Treat it that way and the math stops being an opponent.
The reason any of this matters, in the end, is that money in fantasy is one of the most direct levers you have for making your reader feel the inside of your character's life. Hunger is abstract. A copper that the character does not have, when they need a meal, is not. If you have already decided that your story is going to involve any of the human textures that money normally touches, then you may as well treat fantasy money the way you would treat any other promised detail: anchored, consistent, and quiet about itself most of the time, but absolutely present when the scene calls for it. That is, I think, the whole craft of it.
Common questions about money in fantasy
How do you write fantasy currency without making it confusing?
Anchor the whole system to one familiar purchase the reader will see early in the book, like a bowl of stew, a night at an inn, or a day's wages for a working person. Price everything else relative to that anchor and never violate the anchor later. Readers do not need to understand the economy of your world; they need to feel whether a given price is cheap, painful, or impossible for the character paying it.
Should fantasy use copper, silver, and gold, or invent its own currency?
Copper, silver, and gold is fine, and in some ways better than an invented currency, because the reader recognizes the hierarchy instantly and stops having to translate. The mistake is layering subunits on top of it, like ten pence to a copper or twelve halfpennies to a shilling. One linear scale across three tiers is plenty of resolution for any story I have ever seen written.
How much should things cost in a fantasy novel?
Whatever amount makes the scene land. If poverty is the point, give a real number the reader can hold up against the character's wages. If the price does not matter to the scene, hand-wave it with cheap, expensive, or a small fortune. Money in fiction is a tool for setting stakes, not an accounting exercise, and the price only needs to be precise when imprecision would rob the moment of weight.
Do readers actually notice when fantasy money is inconsistent?
Readers notice inconsistency when prices contradict each other within visible range, especially within the same chapter. A sandwich and a horse costing the same gold piece will get noticed; the exact cost of a sword two hundred pages ago will not. Consistency at your chosen anchor is what matters; precision in every minor transaction is not. Most readers will forgive any price you give them as long as it does not crash into another price you already gave them.
Is it okay to never give prices in a fantasy novel?
Yes, and for a lot of stories it is the right call. Tolkien barely tells us what anything costs in Middle-earth and the world feels none the poorer for it. But if your book has a poverty arc, a heist, a merchant character, or a litRPG-style loot economy, vague pricing will start to hurt you, because those are exactly the scenes where the reader needs to feel the weight of a number, not the word expensive.
by Jacob Tam · May 18, 2026
I run IlorisNovel, a platform for writers of web fiction. If this kind of craft writing is your thing, the rest of the blog lives here.