Ship ownership/captains situation?

[Woas]

So as you may or may not know from what I've said in the Starting Traveller From Scratch post, I'm really new to the Traveller game. As I read, reread and... rereread the rules in preparation to a game there are a couple questions I had about Traveller 'gameplay' and was wonder if you fine folks could shed some light and share some insights.

First question I have is how does the ownership of a spacecraft work? I get that the players all make characters and pool their wealth together for a big ship. Either at char gen or during gameplay down the road. But who actually owns the ship if they are all paying equal parts of it?
Or in a typical Traveller game, are the players expected too all pay for a spacecraft equally when one is procured?

And about Captain-ness. I understand that the smaller spacecraft with only a half dozen or so crew members do not require an 'officer' crew position. But every ship needs a captain! Even when Grandpa is out on the rowboat relaxing and throwing a line out, ships always have captains who are responsible for the vessel. Is this something that is best left overlooked?

Anyway, thanks for reading and your thoughts.

 

[Golan2072]

Traveller ships are expensive. Therefore, in most cases they're bought on mortgage from a bank, with ship shares received by players at chargen used to reduce the payments a bit.

If all players contributed the same to the ship (usually in terms of ship shares) they are all equal partners in it - like equal partners in any other business. If one player contributed more ship shares than others, he holds more "shares" in the ship as well, at least legally. How the players manage their business (i.e. their ship) is up to them.

Scout ships are typically received from the Scout Service as "detached duty" ships. That means that the Scouts still own them, but the characters could use them as they see fit for the time being (with occasional missions for the Service, of course).

On small starships the captain is usually the pilot, but the players are of course free to choose any bridge crewmember instead.

Hope that helps.

 

[Pyromancer]

But who actually owns the ship if they are all paying equal parts of it?

In my game, the ship is owned by a small company, and the PCs own stocks of that company according to the ship shares they rolled at character creation. Incidentally, they are also employees of that company and are on its board of directors. But I do run my game from a "weird business" angle.

And about Captain-ness. I understand that the smaller spacecraft with only a half dozen or so crew members do not require an 'officer' crew position. But every ship needs a captain! Even when Grandpa is out on the rowboat relaxing and throwing a line out, ships always have captains who are responsible for the vessel. Is this something that is best left overlooked?

Every ship needs a captain! On some ships, that might just be a formality for the Imperial paperwork and doesn't matter much in day-to-day business, on other ships you might have a tyrant ruling over the crew with an iron fist[1]. But every ship needs a captain!

And without a captain, how could there be a mutiny?

[1]This might not work if crew members are also ship owners.

 

[Woas]

If a player characters is the captain does that grant that player the right to give orders to the other players? Or do you find having a captain be more of a 'face' and not direct Chain-Of-Commanding Officer is a better setup. In the end, we're all friends sitting around a table and playing a game for fun. I don't want people getting resentful cause they are "being told what to do" or have to play in a subservient role and be plotting how to overthrow their captain and then be 'fired' and forced to make a new character.
Well, honestly a game like that sounds like it could be fun, but life is short and we're here to have fun not a headache as the mechanic plots mutiny with the doctor... :twisted: If you ever played the board game Junta! you'll know what I'm talking about.

Another question related to captain/crew. So lets say there are 6 players and three of them have ship shares to put towards a ship. Those three characters all be 1/3 owner, much like brothers or partners own a split of a business venture. Are the other players without shares hired (almost akin to NPC crew) and actually should look to getting paid a monthly wage by the owners (based off the salary list on p. 137) instead of paying for the ship they aren't going to own?

 

[SSWarlock]

As in all things Traveller, there's no single "right" way of doing things.

Whether or not a PC ship's captain is "lord and master" is really up to the players. I've played and GM'd campaigns that were either very militaristic with a clear chain of command or very easy going where the crew shared leadership with the leader position changing when the situation switched from space-based combat to ground action to looking for cargo and passengers. Both had advantages and disadvantages though I've found throughout the years that the second scenario seemed more flexible and enjoyable to the players.

I say leave it up to the players but nudge them into choosing a leader by giving them time limits to act when it hits the fan. Some player groups take the hint while others just insist in acting in chaotic fashion.

 

[Pyromancer]

If a player characters is the captain does that grant that player the right to give orders to the other players?

Absolutely not!
But it grants his character the right to give orders to other players' characters (if they are crew).

And (in my experience), as long as the captain consults his crew on important matters (as any reasonable captain should do) and gives reasonable orders, there should be no problem.

And if the captain gives unreasonable orders, the board of directors can always vote another captain. But honestly, this never was an issue in my games.

Another question related to captain/crew. So lets say there are 6 players and three of them have ship shares to put towards a ship. Those three characters all be 1/3 owner, much like brothers or partners own a split of a business venture. Are the other players without shares hired (almost akin to NPC crew) and actually should look to getting paid a monthly wage by the owners (based off the salary list on p. 137) instead of paying for the ship they aren't going to own?

In my game: Definitely yes. Of the six PCs, there is only one without shares, and he is the only one who has his paycheck guaranteed at the end of the month. The others actually have to work to make a profit.

 

[tneva82]

If a player characters is the captain does that grant that player the right to give orders to the other players?

Well I would say this is up for players to decide via bit of a roleplaying ;-)

Seriously I think there are many ways to work this out.

In our group ship captain is the Baron-Admiral(okay crazy title but his title is Baron and his military rank is Admiral). One can certainly say he has the highest rank AND he owns biggest share of ship shares. However generally decisions are done by common decision.

However he IS bit of a tactical genius(he kept rolling tactics constantly...) and has some leadership as well so generally what he decides is generally accepted.

Oh and he also happens to be the pilot of the vessel(well he DID join navy and specifically flight...).

But that's when there's character who is just obvious captain.

But playwise while there's some good humoured ordering around he doesn't abuse his situation(afterall it IS friendly game we are talking about ). And when it comes to ground combat the infantry guy has quite a bit of commanding presence as well. Can be quite a fun when those 2 start to arque about what to do Tactic wise the Admiral is probably right but then again the infantry guy has "bit" of hands on experience so he has weight on his ideas as well.

Payment wise we aren't yet quite sure how THAT one goes since ATM money is spent on constantly improving cargo quality to get even more money. Maybe best quess is "everybody can take bit of money if need as long as it doesn't go unreasonable and let's worry about splitting money when retirement starts to look like prospect and until then keep money together to make more money". Works well enough since prospective trade can be quite profitable if you have enough money to buy every single expensive item possible(since biggest profits comes from those).

 

[klingsor]

I would assume that legally you must have a master. He may not be the owner (in reality they are just employees) but they are legally responsible if anything goes wrong. Hence the fairly stringent requirements for the job – unless of course the ship is flagged out to some third world country. Which is irrelevant but does beg some interesting questions as to the safely of non-imperial ships – pay two million credits for the upgrade you need or pay a few thousand to the inspector to get it certified as fit to fly.

So the captain must have certain skills – I would guess Pilot-1, Navigator-1 at an absolute minimum to be legal. With a group of PCs it is not that important – until something goes wrong then he might find himself in court.

 

[ZobMan]

Legally, I'd have thought there would need to be somebody who was responsible for the actions of the ship. For example if it flies dangerously or undocks without permission etc, you'd have thought the imperium would want to know who to blame/fine/imprison/execute. I'm not sure how this could be done without a named captain.

 

[Paladin]

Of our party 5 of 6 members have ship shares. However, the "captain" of the ship was determined by the person that rolled an actual ship during the mustering out phase at the earliest term. The others are more of vested crew that have thrown money in for a share of the profit/expense. The captain in not the best pilot on board in terms of skill, IIRC the best pilot is currently the engineer or one of the gunners.

Everyone is responsible for helping on the the ship and at this point any profits have been soaked back into improving the ship or buying more cargo so it's not been a major issue in terms of solving income. There was one incident of split decisions on what to do and it was done by voting based on ship shares. The captian is tied with another player by percentage, so the 3 others with shares swung the vote. Thankfully it wasn't a MAJOR issue, but I can see it being an interesting "discussion" in some groups.

 

[Baeron Gredlocke]

One could take a page from GT:Free Traders. That book states that the "Captain" and the "Mates" (Naval equivalent: XO, 2nd Officer etc) must have a certain set of skills to qualify for a masters or limited masters (ships <= 2000dton) patent. Same for engineers etc.

As for ownership I would seperate ownership from command. Have the PC set up a company of owners with percentage of ownership based on ship shares. Now whenever money is made, it is handed out on that base to the owners. Whenever costs come up, each owner must pay a part based on the percentage. If he does not pay, the others can "step in", pay and get some of his shares. That is the way combined ship ownership has been handled IRL.

The captain than can be one of the owners (Owner aboard) or a "hired hand". In either case he is the "master under god" aboard the ship and can only be fired while underway if the Owners have a replacement. And even than he has a contract "for the voyage" and gets payed.

To balance the power of the captain simply remember that he is also responsible for EVERYTHING. He will always receive some blame (and possibly punishment) when crewmembers do something illegal, his reputation is on the line when the crewmembers get too rowdy in startown, he must keep the books etc.

Separating ownership from command is wise, especially if the group upgrades to larger ships: refer to the floorplan of the Broadsword, where the owner gets a private suite that is somewhat seperated from the rest of the ship.

Also wise if your campaign uses an NPC patron as the ship owner and one of your PC's is the ship captain.

I've always liked the idea of a ship under 200dtons being more of a communal operations effort, ala Serenity.

 

[Solivagus]

I've always liked the idea of a ship under 200dtons being more of a communal operations effort, ala Serenity.

I've always liked that idea too, though thats maybe not the best example.. :lol:

Wash: Can we maybe vote on the whole murdering people issue?

Mal: We don't vote on my ship because my ship is not the rutting town hall!

 

[B_Steele]

You can always have the player group be part of a 'ownership company' that adds their shares all together and they become a sort of management council for the ship.

You could easily have entire rp sessions based on making ship decisions.

-Bry

 

[Pyromancer]

You could easily have entire rp sessions based on making ship decisions.

Or you could have the captain shouting panicked orders on the bridge, as the Imperial toll ship comes closer, the pilot flys evasive maneuvers and the engineer squeezes the last drop of speed out of the engines while the gunner and the doctor hastly try to hide the contraband before the inevitable boarding action.

Guess what's more fun?

 

[B_Steele]

You see....I never said how the decisions were being made.

Some of my best rp sessions have been the ones where I as gamemaster didn't have to do anything, just sit back and watch the player characters debate and argue.

-Bry

 

[rust]

Guess what's more fun?

Depends somewhat on how often you have done it before ...

After thirty years of playing Traveller, the "captain shouting panicked
orders ..."-thing has somewhat lost its attraction, and now political
or economic decisions have somewhat gained attraction ...

 

[Pyromancer]

After thirty years of playing Traveller, the "captain shouting panicked
orders ..."-thing has somewhat lost its attraction, and now political
or economic decisions have somewhat gained attraction ...

I only started with Traveller two years ago, so I still don't have enough of the "captain shouting panicked orders ..."-thing.

 

[Baeron Gredlocke]

I've always liked the idea of a ship under 200dtons being more of a communal operations effort, ala Serenity.

I've always liked that idea too, though thats maybe not the best example.. :lol:

Wash: Can we maybe vote on the whole murdering people issue?

Mal: We don't vote on my ship because my ship is not the rutting town hall!

Haw! If my PC's had come up with those lines without having seen that, I would be *delighted*

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

I use the rule that by LAW there must be a Captain.

WHO that captain is and which PC it is depends entirely on the group, but someone has to be on the paperwork as the Captain.

Even in Firefly, Mal was the Captain, but not the Pilot/Astrogator.

 

[Elysianknight]

I guess this is up to your group. We haven't specified a captain (we got a far trader), and ownership is communal. The characters set up a private company, of which they are all equal partners, no matter how many ship shares we put in.