How can pirates work?

[Talon Brightmane]

Yes and no. I can see a such a ship backed by a corporation, government, or wealthy noble. The crew may rotate, but if the vessel is successful, it gets a reputation (which is applied to the crew). This matches the privateer model, though in most cases the ships would not be actual privateers.

Vargr corsairs are a good example here. Since the vargr have no central government, you cannot directly strike back. In effect, the corsairs are a gang of thugs that use the same colors to cause fear in their targets.

The same can be applied to corporate backed raiders used to attack a rival merchant line.

 

[SSWarlock]

In effect, the corsairs are a gang of thugs that use the same colors to cause fear in their targets.

Actually, with their impulsiveness, touchy racial pride, dedication to personal loyalty rather than distant authority, and an almost psychotic desire for personal charisma and power, they remind me of some of the 10th century Vikings.

 

[aspqrz]

Yes and no. I can see a such a ship backed by a corporation, government, or wealthy noble. The crew may rotate, but if the vessel is successful, it gets a reputation (which is applied to the crew). This matches the privateer model, though in most cases the ships would not be actual privateers.

Vargr corsairs are a good example here. Since the vargr have no central government, you cannot directly strike back. In effect, the corsairs are a gang of thugs that use the same colors to cause fear in their targets.

The same can be applied to corporate backed raiders used to attack a rival merchant line.

Well, if they are unsuccessful, sure, no one cares. But, again, it falls apart when you consider the likely response of an 1100 year old trade based and trade protecting Imperial state ... the Pirates are hunted down and their bases destroyed. Even in the "Age of Sail" a la Hornblower, Ramage etc.

The "Golden Age" of Piracy was well over by then.

Yes, again, its because there was lots layered on to the original 3 LBB, but people who demand "canon" be kept in one area where it makes no sense seem to be very good at ignoring common sense in others when it suits them ... which find annoyingly humorous.

YMMV. :lol:

Phil

 

[Zowy]

Beware the Cyborg with the one eyed Beaker :twisted:

 

[Ishmael]

I think what most people forget is that the vast majority of worlds have relatively tiny populations... following the rules ( which have their own problems ) the average world will have under 1,000,000 folk ( about 10% of new york city ). with nearly half having even less, sometimes far far less. ...on an entire planet and not just a city or continent.
Hi-pop worlds will be fairly rare ( Earth's pop 10 existing in about 2.7% of the time ).

Most world simply won't have the manpower or resources to combat piracy. Citizens on hi-pop worlds won't care anymore than the typical american cares ( or even knows ) about piracy of the coast of Somalia.

If we consider that the Imperium exists for the benefit of megacorps ( protecting trade )* , then the Imperium's resources will go toward protecting those hi-pop world's trade routes and not piddling pop 6 (and under) worlds.

If one uses the argument about the Imperium's HUGE armadas, remember that the economic rules are practically non-existent and/or considered 'broken' anyways, so using them to argue for huge fleets everywhere because the Imperium can afford them is just as bad as arguing that the jolly roger will be flying everywhere there is a 'frontier'.

The only reality check we have is our own world...and piracy exists in it.
It must exist in the OTU if for no other reason than to give an excuse for non-military ships to have weapons.

If piracy does not exist in ytu, do you allow merchant and other civilian craft to have military hardware like lasers and missles and the like?
Is the Imperium comfortable with the idea that its common citizens can command greater firepower than its own military ( assuming merchant and privately owned ships far outnumber Imp navy ships. )

* hmmm 'government for industry by industry'. Isn't that what Mussilini said facism is?

 

[zozotroll]

And why would a merchant bother to come to such low pop worlds? Not only will you make little money, but you get wiped by the pirates.

It seems in many games that merchies are just mindless sheep that only exist to be pirate fodder. Post after post claim it is so very easy for pirates to do as they will. The corralary is that it is very hard for a merchie to make it in such an enviroment.

 

[cbrunish]

My God!!! This is a science fantasy/fiction game! I understand the point to make things as real as possible but the point is to have FUN!! When all else fails the game master has the ultimate authority!! If the GM wants pirates then there are pirates. Thats all that matters.

And what is with the semantics? I understand that the English language is used differently in the UK, USA, Canada, and Australia. As an American I use the term hanged or hang. For someone to be "hung" is just humorous. But different cultures use the English language differently.

 

[Ishmael]

And why would a merchant bother to come to such low pop worlds? Not only will you make little money, but you get wiped by the pirates.

to make a buck, of course.
fewer traders visiting there means there is a smaller supply for a given demand thus a higher price can be charged and thus a higher profit margin. Of course this is an aspect of prices and costs that Trav trade rules haven't gotten into ( that I'm aware of, anyways ).
The same reason pirates would probably exist... for the money that can be made, which is proportional to the risk involved. Anyone who figures the risk to be greater than the gain won't bother anyways.
( lo-pop worlds won't have lots and lots to trade so merchant fleets wouldn't bother going there anyways ).

So subsidized merchants won't go there, but maybe desperate hard-luck free traders might, eh?

Why did merchant ships visit the new world in the golden age of piracy?
For the profit that could be had if the trip was successful.

Why is it that we assume that the Imperium will squash piracy on one hand, yet the Imperium doesn't get involved in actual war unless the Imperium's rules of war ( no nukes, etc. ) are violated?

 

[zozotroll]

In the golden age of piracy, ships where cheap enough compared to cargos that you could take to the boats and row away if needed. Not so in trav, in any of its versions.

And if the crew is that hard luck, then going there makes little sense, as they cant make enough to meet mortgage payments. It would seem likely that noone would actualy go there, unless they felt a great need to lose thier ship, either to the pirates, or the banker.

 

[Ishmael]

And if the crew is that hard luck, then going there makes little sense, as they cant make enough to meet mortgage payments. It would seem likely that noone would actualy go there, unless they felt a great need to lose thier ship, either to the pirates, or the banker.

So we go from no pirates anywhere to pirates in every system? No.

Such conditions won't last long either. We can predict how many by using classic predator/prey models with traders being prey and pirates being predators. Even with pirates being hunted by other bigger predators ( navy ) there will have a point of balance.

Too many pirate attacks, and traders will avoid that place, and prices/profit margins will rise until its worth the risk to someone to go again. Less traders will make it less worth a pirate's time to hang out in a system, at which time traders are more likely to go there again as the system becomes safer again. If pirates hang out in too great of numbers, bigger predators ( navy ) will begin to pass through to hunt them. And when the hunting bads too few pirates to make keeping a squadron there, the navy will leave and slowly pirates will return ( assuming there is prey for them again ). And if there are lots and lots of traders and not so much navy, pirates will 'reproduce' ( more pirates ) until navy comes in to bring the number of pirates down again.

Think of traders as cows who feed where the grass/trade is.
Think of pirates as rouge wolves who hunt the cows
Think of the navy as the rancher who wants to kill the wolves to protect his cows.
------------------------------------------
None of the versions of Traveller ( that I'm aware of ) take demand/supply into account for pricing. Because of that, the rules won't allow for better profit margins when trading with a world that has much more demand than supply. Fewer traders going there means the supply will be low.

Lots of things people do make little sense, yet they do them...lotteries, for example.
If a crew is losing the ship to the bank, they'll try something desperate, right? Of course the same arguments against pirates work to eliminate smuggling too...so no smugglers in Trav either....the navy would get them ( have to protect all that LEGAL trade ) and they'd either die, or be locked up which in game terms is just as bad...roll a new character.

Still have to explain why the Imperium would allow civilians to carry the same/similar weaponry on privately owned ships as full military ships.

If pirates don't exist, why are traders armed?

 

[zozotroll]

Tradewars?

I just want something that over the long term makes sense. Never any pirates make little sense, as does pirates everywhere. And canon does not help, as the huge fleets mean that there is enough wealth to cover every system with enough force to totaly stop pirates. Which does not really make sense either.

I do get tirred of smart pirate/stupid merchie arguments. If merchies where really that stupid they all would have gone out of buisseness years ago, even without pirates to bug them.

 

[cbrunish]

I think that the Traveller history tells the tale well. During the long night, pirates were plenty until trade had stopped. With the trade stopping so did the pirates.

And when comparing the Traveller Universe, the closest comparison to be made is the Terran Age of Discovery during the 1500-1700's. Land travel and ship travel was slow. This allowed piracy to flourish. Although much was state sponsored (Britain against Spain).

The Imperial Navy can not be everywhere. Even with colonial forces piracy will be able to work. But as it was pointed out when piracy gets too good, then either the merchants will stop coming or the Navy will get stronger. Then the pirates move on to another system(s).

 

[Ishmael]

Tradewars?

I just want something that over the long term makes sense. Never any pirates make little sense, as does pirates everywhere. And canon does not help, as the huge fleets mean that there is enough wealth to cover every system with enough force to totaly stop pirates. Which does not really make sense either.

I do get tirred of smart pirate/stupid merchie arguments. If merchies where really that stupid they all would have gone out of buisseness years ago, even without pirates to bug them.

I don't think anything will make sense in the long term. Things like this are why I don't use canon at all and am against making the rules conform to canon. Canon has too much wackiness with issues like this.

It seems to me that the main argument against pirates is the huge fleets. But I also think that using the existence of huge fleets as proof of wealth with ability to purchase huge fleets is backwards too. Maybe I need to think more about how much wealth actually is available to build fleets. Too bad no version of Trav had decent rules for that. Pocket Empires? House-ruled TCS/Striker? Home-grown rules?

I get tired of the same old arguments too, actually. I'm just arguing because I didn't feel like lurking. I kind of hoped my application of the same 'anti-' reasons to eliminate smuggling showed how absurd I think it all is. Maybe I should learn to use emoticons.

imtu, there are no pirates simply because the ships are too expensive for a non-affiliated group to purchase them. Tradewar privateers, I guess, with ships owned by a huge corporation...but independent pirates?..nope.

I'm still waiting to hear if people who are against piracy still allow non-military ships to mount turrets and ship-to-ship weapons.

 

[atpollard]

And why would a merchant bother to come to such low pop worlds? Not only will you make little money, but you get wiped by the pirates.

There is an outpost owned by DeBeers near the Arctic Circle where a small number of people live and work (at very high wages). Supplies are delivered by very expensive convoys driving on the frozen rivers (during a short period of time) or by ultra expensive private aircraft charters.

Why would anyone bother to go to such a place?
Because they produce DIAMONDS and pay a fortune for supplies.

A low-pop world in Traveller is probably someplace similar.

 

[zozotroll]

I want there to be pirates as well. I just want them to make sense within the setting. I dont want to write up my own, so I need to change Trav, and particularly SM a bit to make it work.

And I get ideas for what to change from threads like this. But, you have to wade through many many posts with very simplistic approaches. The idea that the navy just stays in orbit, particularly patrol craft, and never guard the approaches that merchies come in on jars me.

Besides, it is much funner to argue about pirates in any trav setting to whineing about why a certain systems 4th ed sucks on rocks.

 

[Talon Brightmane]

Actually, with their impulsiveness, touchy racial pride, dedication to personal loyalty rather than distant authority, and an almost psychotic desire for personal charisma and power, they remind me of some of the 10th century Vikings.

I actually had a similar mental image.

 

[Talon Brightmane]

The easiest way to have "pirates" is to apply the term to what is more closely armed robbery of a private vessel. Overall, it is not that different form an old west train robbery.

Those that specialize in this type of robbery are either desperate or fromer privateers/comerce raiders. Pros hit planned targets (such as the special cargo the PCs were not told about), while desperate "pirates" just hope for the best.

Most merchants will use the term piracy as a hold over from the Rule of Man, but legally it is closer to grand theft and armed robbery. Because the threat does exist, merchants can carry weapons. However, if an incident occurs there would be a investigation into the actions of the private vessel (similar if an individual shot someone while defending himself from an attacker).

 

[aspqrz]

My God!!! This is a science fantasy/fiction game!

Those who rail most vehemently against change would, I strongly suspect, rail even more vehemently against any suggestion that Traveller (sans JDrive and MDrive) is anything but the hardest of hard science fiction.

:lol:

Phil

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon;
Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@pacific.net.au

 

[aspqrz]

The easiest way to have "pirates" is to apply the term to what is more closely armed robbery of a private vessel. Overall, it is not that different form an old west train robbery.

Those that specialize in this type of robbery are either desperate or fromer privateers/comerce raiders. Pros hit planned targets (such as the special cargo the PCs were not told about), while desperate "pirates" just hope for the best.

Most merchants will use the term piracy as a hold over from the Rule of Man, but legally it is closer to grand theft and armed robbery.

Which is what I said. There is no Piracy.

:lol:

Phil

 

[zozotroll]

Highway robbery doesnt seem to fit very well either.


Grand theft starship seems a little clunky as well.

Perhaps legaly it will be something else, but I bet if we ever get there we will still call it piracy.

Much as most people refer to shell fragments as "shrapnel" even though no shrapnel has been made for almost 100 years.