Mortgage Errata?

[BP]

Core pg 137 indicates that Mortgage is '...1/240th of the cash price each month for 480 months...' and '...total financed price equals 220% of the cash purchase price.'

So did they leave out the 20% down payment or mean 200% instead of 220%...

Core pg 105 mentions the Architects fee of 1% the 'final cost' of the ship - so 1% of 100%, 200% or 220%?

As I posted on another thread how I dealt with mortgage payments:
Mortgage monthly payments didn't make any real sense - instead players made payments Quarterly or Annually (with small fees for annual payments). And were late if past 1 year and a Quarter (if paid at main bank) - so time to call out for the skip tracers...

This meant players had up to 1 year to get back to a system their bank dealt with. These branch locations had to be within 1 Quarter (3 months) of the main bank on the X-Boat money route...

I'm sure others have dealt with the issue of 'how payments are made' within the Traveller 'banking system'...

 

[AndrewW]

Core pg 137 indicates that Mortgage is '...1/240th of the cash price each month for 480 months...' and '...total financed price equals 220% of the cash purchase price.'

So did they leave out the 20% down payment or mean 200% instead of 220%...

I take that to mean whatever part is financed. Excluding any down payment, ship shares, ect.

 

[cbrunish]

Core pg 105 mentions the Architects fee of 1% the 'final cost' of the ship - so 1% of 100%, 200% or 220%?

Should be based on the final cost (before discount) of the ship. Which would be 1% of 100%. Not all ships are financed. Actually the whomever builds the ship would pay the fee.

The way I see it, the ship manufacture contracts an architect to produce the plans for a ship. They pay the architect then produce the finished copy of the ship. The 220% price is only if the ship is financed. I'm sure large corporations and governments do not need to finance a ship.

Hopefully this helps.

 

[BP]

Core pg 137 indicates that Mortgage is '...1/240th of the cash price each month for 480 months...' and '...total financed price equals 220% of the cash purchase price.'

So did they leave out the 20% down payment or mean 200% instead of 220%...

I take that to mean whatever part is financed. Excluding any down payment, ship shares, ect.

The problem is that, as far as I can find, Core does not actually mention the 20% down payment anywhere. So either I'm missing it (entirely possible - hopefully probable) or the 220% should be 200% or the players have to come up with 20% on their own.

I understand how CT handled it - and given the minimal mention of architects fee - it appears that Core simply copied the CT rules and left out the complete explanations...

In CT:
* cash price = final cost (from design)
* down payment = 20% cash price
* purchase price = cash price - down payment (financed by the bank)
* financed price = 220% of cash price

20% or 0% of a space ship cost is no small change! For those without CT or a background in it, the mortgage would just appear wrong. And, of course, MGT may have chosen to eliminate the down payment for game play/balance reasons.

I'm wondering what page(s) this is clarified on - or - if this is either an editing mistake (should have stated 200%) or a rule errata (should have 20% down payment)?

 

[BP]

Core pg 105 mentions the Architects fee of 1% the 'final cost' of the ship - so 1% of 100%, 200% or 220%?

Should be based on the final cost (before discount) of the ship. Which would be 1% of 100%. Not all ships are financed. Actually the whomever builds the ship would pay the fee.

The way I see it, the ship manufacture contracts an architect to produce the plans for a ship. They pay the architect then produce the finished copy of the ship. The 220% price is only if the ship is financed. I'm sure large corporations and governments do not need to finance a ship.

Hopefully this helps.

When I played CT the Architect was paid by the purchaser for new designs - the shipyard required the plans and 20% down.

The 1% was from the final cost. Standard Designs (discounted 10%) did not require an architect's fee by their very nature - just 100 Cr for the existing plans.

The only reason for bringing this up is to ensure it is financed or not - it wasn't in CT - MGT doesn't indicate it in the mortgage, so I assume it is not (but I have a CT biased assumption complex :wink: ).


Speaking of errors/ambiguities - HG pg 55 mentions construction times for standard civilian ships at 1 week per 5.0 MCr, while Core pg 105 mentions 1 day per 1 MCr (business days per HG?)...

 

[cbrunish]

I have not seen any down payment in the core rules. Im assuming because of ship shares that would be the down payment. But it seems that the characters get the shaft with this. Considering that ship shares only give you 1% per share. It would take 20 shares to equal 20%.

If a merchant rolls for a ship 5 times then they only get a total of 25% for the ship. In CT, the merchant would get the ship free and clear!! But it would be 40 years old.

Now if the character wanted a 40 year old ship they would get from 4 to 24 shares (core rules pg 136) but on pg it states that they can only get up to 10 shares for an old ship. Personally I would give the characters 5 ship shares for every 10 years of the ship. It would really suck to get a ship 40 years old for only a 4% discount. This way it would give the character(s) 20% discount.

 

[BP]

I have not seen any down payment in the core rules. ...
If a merchant rolls for a ship 5 times then they only get a total of 25% for the ship. In CT, the merchant would get the ship free and clear!! But it would be 40 years old.

Now if the character wanted a 40 year old ship they would get from 4 to 24 shares (core rules pg 136) but on pg it states that they can only get up to 10 shares for an old ship. Personally I would give the characters 5 ship shares for every 10 years of the ship. It would really suck to get a ship 40 years old for only a 4% discount. This way it would give the character(s) 20% discount.

Yep - I cannot find mention of a down payment either - just that quirky 220% when in fact its only 200%. (Please note my Core book is the Pocket Rulebook edition which is missing footnotes - such as those on pg. 136 about structure and 2 of the upgrades)

To me the 1% seems kinda low, but on the whole it's probably a better balance = character's will have a motivation to work harder to make ends meet. Likewise with the Merchant not getting a ship outright - that does seem rather extra-ordinary now that I think about it (when I played CT I thought it was great, though). The exception of the scout makes sense if the campaign is more about exploring than surviving and profiting...

The max 10% and possible only 4% for a 40 year old ship does seem rather low... granted ships may last a long time and hold their value though. But 96% of their value after standard loan periods does seem rather excessive. I like your higher percentages. How about going with 4% +1d6 per 10 years - so that would yield your 20% min for 40 year old ship, with 40% possible.

Since the standard loan period is 40 years, I would allow an automatic 40% for ships older than 40 years - with same rolls to max of 80% discount. I would also add double the Old Ship table rolls after 40 years or a new table with more negative items (i.e. the loan is over - so maintenance may slide and 80% discount could come with some major repair problems).

 

[cbrunish]

The max 10% and possible only 4% for a 40 year old ship does seem rather low... granted ships may last a long time and hold their value though. But 96% of their value after standard loan periods does seem rather excessive. I like your higher percentages. How about going with 4% +1d6 per 10 years - so that would yield your 20% min for 40 year old ship, with 40% possible.

Since the standard loan period is 40 years, I would allow an automatic 40% for ships older than 40 years - with same rolls to max of 80% discount. I would also add double the Old Ship table rolls after 40 years or a new table with more negative items (i.e. the loan is over - so maintenance may slide and 80% discount could come with some major repair problems).

I like it!

 

[BP]

Your inspiration.. Thanks!

And I like the idea of characters starting out with an older vessel - especially since most characters are chronologically mature when they start on their adventures.

Of course, none of this solves the dilemma of the 'missing' or misstated 20% finance charge. Personally I never put much stock in the original CT down payment - since it is quite excessive. I understand justification of the shipyard wanting moneys up front - but they should come from the financing (otherwise they wouldn't start anyways - the first payment probably not covering labor...).