Wallet Chains
Trade-off appropriate anti-dip defense

When any talk of dips running rampant happens, implementing some manner of dip defense is also always discussed, and the balance therein is always an issue. Plenty of people say to raise certain stats to prevent it, but I don't feel that the necessity to invest in them is always the solution when it may be a character choice in a lot of regards. This advice is also coupled or followed up with continued rhetoric being spread ICly that suggests making wallets basically useless for their intended purpose.

The Idea is simple and obvious:

Wearable wallet chain object that prevents dips from lifting wallets.

"But HC, where is the tradeoff?"

The following caveats would need to be in place for this Idea to work.

>At a cool price of 15k, you're investing the max amount that a wallet is capable of holding to prevent your wallet from being stolen.

>Because of their nature, you would be unable to wear any object over them, making them always visible and requiring you take them off and leave it vulnerable to change clothing.

>This is also a symbol of wealth that needs to be displayed, which would not only necessitate but also give incentive to mug and rob people who chose to go this route.

At the forefront, I think this idea would work beautifully. An expensive flashy investment to keep dips from completely running rampant while also giving more incentive for conflict. In a similar sense, expensive wearable purse object with similar caveats that only held money, photos, and makeup would also be in the cards, but I'm focusing on current objects only for this post.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.