Trading income

[Bobson]

One idea I haven't heard mentioned is very simple and might address the problem. Just apply the "availability" roll you make to see how many goods are available for purchase to the sell roll as well. This is logical and also makes speculative trade more speculative--if you end up with 60 tons of live animals at a bargain price, but your seller is only willing to buy 10 tons of them, then even if you make a profit, you're forced to either sit tight on that optimal planet for another week or so to try to move them (during which adventure can happen), or you take off and bring them to a less ideal market. Either way, you speculate that someone is willing to buy all of what you have.

I'm not sure if the same availability roll should be made for purchase and sell--I'm sure you could fool around with it some. But it seems like it would solve a problem, and at least introduce some risk into trading, and be extraordinarily easy to implement.

I really like this idea, although it would add even more rolls to trading. It would put more randomness into the profits that can be made, without actually penalizing traders. I might suggest replace replacing the X*1d6 roll with an X*(2d6-1d6) roll, though - otherwise you get the problem where you can know in advance that the target world won't be able to buy all 70 tons of cargo because they cap out at 60.

The other solution I've considered is scaling back the 3d6 table, so that more backwater planets are more rewarding to visit, while the more established ones pay out much closer to the 80%-120% range, but this would be a more substantial rewrite.

It wouldn't actually have to be that bad. Someone suggested a system before where you basically pick a "Base" world value, and add or subtract the difference from that as a modifer to the 3d6 roll. Calculate world value based on population and tech level, for instance, and you're good. Of course, you'd have to figure out what would be positive and what negative, and whether something applies equally to buying or selling or not. So yeah, I guess that could get complicated :/

 

[Bobson]

One idea I haven't heard mentioned is very simple and might address the problem. Just apply the "availability" roll you make to see how many goods are available for purchase to the sell roll as well. This is logical and also makes speculative trade more speculative--if you end up with 60 tons of live animals at a bargain price, but your seller is only willing to buy 10 tons of them, then even if you make a profit, you're forced to either sit tight on that optimal planet for another week or so to try to move them (during which adventure can happen), or you take off and bring them to a less ideal market. Either way, you speculate that someone is willing to buy all of what you have.

I'm not sure if the same availability roll should be made for purchase and sell--I'm sure you could fool around with it some. But it seems like it would solve a problem, and at least introduce some risk into trading, and be extraordinarily easy to implement.

I really like this idea, although it would add even more rolls to trading. It would put more randomness into the profits that can be made, without actually penalizing traders. I might suggest replace replacing the X*1d6 roll with an X*(2d6-1d6) roll, though - otherwise you get the problem where you can know in advance that the target world won't be able to buy all 70 tons of cargo because they cap out at 60.

The other solution I've considered is scaling back the 3d6 table, so that more backwater planets are more rewarding to visit, while the more established ones pay out much closer to the 80%-120% range, but this would be a more substantial rewrite.

It wouldn't actually have to be that bad. Someone suggested a system before where you basically pick a "Base" world value, and add or subtract the difference from that as a modifer to the 3d6 roll. Calculate world value based on population and tech level, for instance, and you're good. Of course, you'd have to figure out what would be positive and what negative, and whether something applies equally to buying or selling or not. So yeah, I guess that could get complicated :/

 

[a strange aeon]

I know exactly what you mean with the d6 roll on availability of goods. What about changing all the 1d6 x 10s into 2d6 x 5's? I think everything stays the same in terms of minimums, maximums, and average, but there'll be 15 ton lots instead of just 10 and 20. This might help mix up the profits as well, and make players hesitate before buying all the goods available, since if they do roll boxcars and buy up 60 tons of something, it'll take them longer to move it.

 

[rje]

MCr2 (or more) per jump is a fantastic income for a group. It does sound like speculative trade is too easy. Nevertheless, if they're having fun with it, let it play out a bit.

Any ideas on what the group wants to DO with all that cash? If they have some possible plans, then that could be a plot hook delivered on a platter for you, the GM.

There's lots of ways to spend cash, even a huge pile of MCr, depending on what they want to do. At some point they're bound to get a little bored with their income level (somewhere around MCr60 per year?)

At some point they'll be thinking "now what?" If they decide that money isn't the end-all be-all of the game, then maybe they'll start to look for a challenge.

 

[Bobson]

At some point they'll be thinking "now what?" If they decide that money isn't the end-all be-all of the game, then maybe they'll start to look for a challenge.

That's the problem - making huge piles of money was entirely incidental to whatever else my group was doing. It was like: "Ok, we need to follow up on this clue at this world 6 sectors away. Here's a path of jump-2 systems that'll get us there. Ok, we take 10 minutes to buy and sell at each planet along the route. We arrive at our destination 7 MCr richer, after expenses. Now, lets follow the plot..."

We actually planned on using it to build a new, larger ship (which could make even more profits trading as well as being significantly more combatworthy), of which we would own a larger percentage than we owned of our current ship, but the game ended before it finished being built.

------------------------

Here's a thought: After I finish converting my trade app to use the OGL data, I can use the library functions I wrote to do an auto-trader. Input a starting value of cash, a maximum cargo space, a broker roll modifier, a monthly expense, and a number of jumps to run for. It'll randomly generate each world, buy as much as you can afford, jump to the next world, sell and buy, and so on. It ought to be able to run a few hundred jumps pretty quickly, so we can generate some extreme-case examples... Look for it some time in late November at this rate

 

[Klaus Kipling]

If they are making 'loads-a-money' running a tramp freighter, encourage them to re-invest it.

Trade in their type A for a shiny 1000 dTon J-3 clipper.

Combat armour with all the whistles and bells can cost 0.5Mcr - ex-military types might want to outfit a merc company or some such.

Buy a second ship, acquire a fleet, become the next Oberlindes.

Build a custom explorer vessel to go after that rumour of some legendary artefact.

If Bruce Wayne wants to use his piles of spare cash to 'do good deeds', perhaps the players could be similarly altruistic/psychotically-weird.

Basically, if the pc's are swimming in it, it is an opportunity to change the game up from the 'standard' Firefly style scams and odd jobs. If cash is no longer a suitable incentive to adventure, then it is up to the ref to find new incentives, not to penalise player success.

 

[rje]

making huge piles of money was entirely incidental to whatever else my group was doing. It was like: "Ok, we need to follow up on this clue at this world 6 sectors away. Here's a path of jump-2 systems that'll get us there. Ok, we take 10 minutes to buy and sell at each planet along the route. We arrive at our destination 7 MCr richer, after expenses. Now, lets follow the plot..."

Wow. Nice work if you can get it! One potential take-away is that your group may be talking about this game for years to come. "Remember when we made all that cash without even TRYING? It was so cool... we invested it in that neat XYZ and were able to do ABC..."

We actually planned on using it to build a new, larger ship (which could make even more profits trading as well as being significantly more combatworthy), of which we would own a larger percentage than we owned of our current ship, but the game ended before it finished being built.

A bigger ship is always a satisfying option.

 

[a strange aeon]

Basically, if the pc's are swimming in it, it is an opportunity to change the game up from the 'standard' Firefly style scams and odd jobs. If cash is no longer a suitable incentive to adventure, then it is up to the ref to find new incentives, not to penalise player success.

I guess I just thought the system would support the Firefly idea more, since that was one of the common touchstones we all thought would be fun. I mean, we just started--we've only done 5 sessions so far. But following the rules as written, the PCs have had their ship for two sessions and they're already making way too much money to be concerned with scams and odd jobs, unless all of their patrons are multimillionaires.

How is the "standard" Firefly style supposed to work? I suppose if ships were much, much cheaper and there wasn't the mortgage to worry about, just maintaining and repair costs, and either cargo storage was so limited as to make crazy profits very difficult to achieve or the speculative trade system entirely altered, you'd capture the feel somewhat.

I guess to put it in perspective--5 tons of mail pays 25,000 and freight pays 1,000 a ton. The book presents these as pretty safe bets, but you'd never make your monthly payment with just these and passengers. This would leave a gap of money that needs to come from somewhere, and a perfect opportunity for adventure hooks and patron encounters. This is my understanding for the premise of a Firefly type game.

I don't mind that characters can make a fortune from speculative trade, but they should also be able to lose a fortune. Otherwise, it's not speculative. It's a safe bet. With the rules as written, I don't see how a reasonable person could lose money, and I think that's an oversight.

 

[BP]

Mongoose Traveller can be used for a 'standard' firefly type game - but the original CT it is based on was not specifically designed for it... Out of the box it can be a poor fit - consider that you are trying to make it fit a rather unique Sci-Fi creation. Using MGT optional rules and extensions this is easier...

First - high broker skills come from an extended career - if your players only get a few career terms (maximum terms) then this is unlikely to happen.
Second - the Firefly crew didn't have any experienced brokers. Consider that Mal shared the take with the crew quite generously (re: see Jayne's recruitement :wink. Mal's negotiations with Patience were less than stellar (and eventually rely on skills of a non-broker direction...).
Also, even if your players own their starship out of char gen - this should be a late late model ship (like firefly class) . Core pg 136 (odd place - end of Common Spacecraft) has a table called Old Ships.

The Firefly universe is quite unique, so some framework changes would be in order to mimick its feel. The trade section is surely one of them...

 

[Marchand]

Another solution might be to ban speculative trading except as something exceptional, to be roleplayed not roll played.

This leaves freight - which is what shippers do IRL, after all.

To make it more interesting:

1) freight rates vary randomly by a small amount; say they start at Cr1000 but vary by (2d6)-(2d6) Cr each week (or bigger dice rolls for more randomness); GM free to vary freight rates of course (for example, after dropping hints to the players about a recession or an outbreak of disease requiring heavy supplies of medicines);

2) the captain has to "bid" for a lot of freight by rolling against Broker skill; ((Pop+TL, for both origin and destination worlds)-(average pop and TL for your campaign x 2)) is applied as a negative DM to the roll - so it's harder to win lots at worlds with big economies, reflecting that the big worlds get serviced by the megacorps, and drawing the PCs to the backwaters...

Again, this is basically a drastically simplified version of the approach in GURPS Trav.

As a footnote, I believe freight rates are pretty volatile IRL, even with our instant global communications - I believe the benchmark index went to 0 this year (i.e. it was theoretically free to ship stuff), and there were freighters sitting idle in ports all over the place. (I have a mate who does cargo brokerage.)

 

[Dave Chase]

Competition.

IF they are doing so good, then the word gets around and others jump in at cut rate prices to get a piece of the action.

Or a strong arm business approaches them with an offer they can't refuse, for some good old fashion protection.

Dave Chase

 

[Zaron]

Word is getting around about those huge profits your crew is making. You better watch out for pirates at the edge of the next solar system. Hmm, maybe you should invest in an escort ship and its crew. Maybe those Megacredits should go toward better weapons and a better gunner. It's a shame that the free trader only has 2 gun ports. Maybe you should be selling off your ship and buying a bigger one.

 

[pankajnagarkoti86]

That's a lovely statue of Gordon... but what's the name of the man sitting on his back?

 

[pankajnagarkoti86]

That's a lovely statue of Gordon... but what's the name of the man sitting on his back?

 

[CosmicGamer]

If you want the Firefly feel, I think you need to throw out a lot of the Imperium/known space to make a smaller known area. Systems would be progressively younger, smaller, have less established governments and industry, and so on as you travel from the core. Although there are colonies, most of the Imperium, even the 'sinward' marches, has been around a long time and colonies are often 'surrounded' by well established systems.

Next, I think you need a trade system that differentiates greatly between the richer, more populated core and the small fringe colonies.

Just MO.

 

[Treebore]

Would you guys like some help with "real" world business? In my experience from starting and running my own company for 10 years...?

First off, high margin profits are not just for illegal/shady goods.

For example, jeans are bought whole sale for about $3. You buy them for $20 to $30 each. Thats up to a 1000% mark up on a perfectly legal trade good. Before costs.

There are THOUSANDS of similar mark ups in this world.

Take software for example.

Lets start with games. Games cost less than $10 per unit. This takes into account the making of the game as well as manufacturing it onto a disc or two. This is about what companies like Microsoft get per game disc. You see them retail for $50 to $70 at your local gaming store. That is a 5 to 700% mark up.

However, you need to be aware of the "typical chain". You have the manufacturer, who is likely also the "wholesaler", then you have a distributor, who buys from the wholesaler, and then sells to either another distributor who handles another region, or to retailers in their region. Then you have the retailer, who is typically the person a consumer buys from.

Each level of this tier system takes a cut, rule of thumb is 30% of final retail for each level of the tier.

Not all business' follow this, but a lot of them do.

So on average, a typical business should be making about 30% on every transaction that they do. This is before costs.

However, not all business' are "typical". Now a days fewer and fewer of them are following this "typical" model. More and more are going for higher profit margins, which is why you see costs jumping.

Also realize when you see a 10 cent increase in fuel your going to see an overall 30 cent increase in the retail prices you pay.

Now obviously this isn't a cost jump you will see in each and every item.

A candy bar is not going to jump 30 cents in price, simply because people will likely stop buying them if they are seen/perceived as too expensive. So the candy bar will go up maybe 5 cents. This is because candy bars are bought by the box by retailers. So that 30 cents was an increase for the box of candy bars, not for each candy bar, so the cost increase is spread out over however many candy bars are in that box.


So the bottom line of what I am telling you is that you may think a 400% profit margin on trading is so good it has to be illegal, but it isn't. It is entirely possible to find these kinds of deals on a regular basis.

This breaks down for Traveller for one simple reason.

The Trade system in Traveller is set up to be simple enough for people to actually use it.

So we are trading off realism to get ease of play.

Some people already say the Trade system in Traveller is complex. Now imagine what it would have to be like to be as realistic as possible for millions of situations.

So I suggest the system just be accepted as is, as simple as it is, because if you want realism the rule book on trade alone would become a manual. A manual hundreds, if not thousands, of pages thick. For each planet.

So just accept for being as simple as it is, it actually works pretty darn well.

 

[atpollard]

... While true for those who succeed, the flip side of real world business is that 80% of all new businesses fail within the first 2 years.

The trade rule breaks down when the player can say yes/no to a good/bad deal, but the 'house' cannot. Using the trade codes for worlds to buy and sell, a character should be able to make a good profit MOST of the time, but there should still be a CHANCE for a deal to go badly for the Character. The simplest way to do this with the existing game mechanic, would be to make all rolls binding. If you say that you want to sell it, then it will be sold at whatever price is rolled - if that means that you loose money on the deal, then so be it.

 

[DickTurpin]

No one ever commits to buy/sell something without setting a price first. The rules as written give the price at which the NPC is willing to make the trade; the player can take it or leave it. If that NPC is not willing to make the deal the player needs then the player is free to spend a week looking for another.

Of course there are reasons why a player may opt to sell at a loss: There could be a much more lucrative deal available and he needs to empty the cargo hold, he may have freight or passengers that need to be delivered immediately, etc.

There could even be other reasons that the player may face the prospect of trading at unfavorable rates. A totalitarian government may set prices, the planet may be owned by a single company with a single sales department, a criminal syndicate may control off-world trade, or a strong trading guild may regulate prices.

The above scenarios should be fairly rare occurrences however, usually as part of the game scenario being played. If overused it can suck all the fun out of the game for the players; you might as well just email them with the information of where they went and what they traded and save everyone the trouble of getting together to play.

 

[Galadrion]

Another thing to consider is that the starship financing rules are way out of line with reality. "Twenty percent down and one two-hundred-fortieth of list over forty years" (the standard model) amounts to an APR of just under 5.75% - roughly in the neighborhood of a 30-year home mortgage these days.

The problem with that is that it's the wrong model. Starship purchase in the 3I is more analogous to an independent trucking contractor financing a big rig... and the current rates on that are running between 11% and 17%.

Now, I understand that people like the current model because the numbers are fairly simple (no having to plug things into a mortgage formula), but there's a quick, even simpler fix. Twenty percent down and one percent of list per month over forty years works out to pretty close to 14% APR - much more in line with reality - and means that an independent starship crew is going to need to hustle to make their note each month.

Me, I like to keep the mortgage formula handy, because then I can plug numbers in when things change. Suppose the group has had a particularly profitable year and decides to renegotiate their loan? With those formulae, I can work out what their current principle balance is, and they can negotiate for a new loan to pay off the old one - maybe with a shorter length as well - while bringing down their monthly commitment. (I generally encourage them to put down 20% of the new loan's value as part of the negotiation. It helps to retire the debt faster. I'll have other requirements as well - a good track record on making timely payments, a healthy operating fund after the new loan goes through, and so forth. It's not good business for the bank to let their clients run themselves out of business, after all. The bank makes more if their clients are with them long-term.)

 

[FreeTrav]

Galadrion, you might want to copy your post over to this thread, which is also starting to get into the subject of financing...

That said, are you sure that the best analogy is big rig trucking, rather than (oceanic) shipbuilding?