Replacement Trade System

[rust]

And since nothing requires players to buy goods with low profit potential, I still think that the system makes it WAY too easy for players to make money by rolling a few dice and exploiting a defective system than by adventuring.

Indeed.

Almost all of my players have a lot of experience with Traveller and know the
trade system exceptionally well. If I would use the system as written, their
characters would earn the Megacredits faster than I could offer them ways
to spend them.

I have no problem with rich characters, but some players of such characters
tend to develop a habit of throwing money at all kinds of problems instead of
using their characters' skills to find a solution - if hiring a dozen experts or a
small fleet is easy, why leave the yacht and get your hands dirty ...

If money is too easy to earn, characters often "evolve" from adventurers to
adventurers' patrons, reducing their personal involvement as well as their per-
sonal risk, and while this may be nice for a short while, in the long run the old
"no risk, no fun" saying usually proves to be true in Traveller.

 

[tbeard1999]

If money is too easy to earn, characters often "evolve" from adventurers to adventurers' patrons, reducing their personal involvement as well as their personal risk, and while this may be nice for a short while, in the long run the old "no risk, no fun" saying usually proves to be true in Traveller.

I agree completely.

IMHO, roleplaying is a form of dramatic entertainment. And drama requires conflict. Nothing sucks the conflict (and drama) out of a game in my experience than lavishing unearned rewards on players. There's a reason Old School gamers were openly contemptuous of "Monty Haul" campaigns.

And unfortunately, the Traveller rules contain the seeds for the worst kind of campaign killer -- several ways for players to earn staggering amounts of money by doing nothing more than rolling on a table.

And while a referee can find ways to take the money from the players, I resent having to spend time and energy doing so. It also builds player resentment in my experience, never a Good Thing.

My replacement trade system attempts to eliminate that problem -- without requiring referees to become economists and without requiring players to become accountants.

A worthy goal, IMHO.

 

[tbeard1999]

I'm in the crowd that rejects it out of hand due to assumption #1.

I should have been clearer in my post.

Assumption 1 is that the PC ship is able to barely break even on *cash flow*. However, since the bank payments are being made, the PCs are actually making a decent economic profit as the equity in their ship increases.

Like most business owners, their wealth is largely tied up in capital and is not available as cash in the short run.

Adventures provide spending money -- which I submit is a Good Thing.

 

[far-trader]

I agree completely.

IMHO, roleplaying is a form of dramatic entertainment. And drama requires conflict. Nothing sucks the conflict (and drama) out of a game in my experience than lavishing unearned rewards on players. There's a reason Old School gamers were openly contemptuous of "Monty Haul" campaigns.

It's been my experience that generally comes down to the ref and "the book and roll say you get..." so the ref gives it to them.

What should happen is the ref rolls, the book says this, the ref sees it's a problem giving the players that, and the ref gives them something else.

In D&D the treasure table says +5 Holy Avenger, yeah, the party's Paladin would love that, but they're only 3rd level and that kind of power would destroy the campaign. The ref wisely (and quietly) nixes the idea opting for something nice but not campaign wrecking.

In Traveller the spec trade table says Computers for 40% value and the ref can see the players will be able to sell them next jump for a huge profit, but they've just started playing and have small dreams (be nice to get a month ahead on payments and take a vacation/adventure) and suddenly being MCr-aires would wreck that, the ref decides it's something else, just valuable enough to get a month ahead in payments and take that vacation/adventure the players were talking about.

You really can't blame the rules imo. The real campaign killer is the ref who slavishly follows the rules and rolls. I think your own rules could be abused as well through the same good intentions and luck.

Which is not to say I don't like idea (I do). I'm just not sure you're attacking the right problem (for the masses; for you of course it is *).

* I sense you desire to not get trapped in an Accountants in Spaaace! game

 

[Jason]

No to mention the ref who rolls a direct killing blow on a player when they're just fighting some street punks in the warm-up encounter of their first adventrue and decides maybe it was just a flesh wound instead.

 

[rust]

What should happen is the ref rolls, the book says this, the ref sees it's a problem giving the players that, and the ref gives them something else.

Why exactly should I use the tables at all if I make up something whenever
I do not like the result of the dice roll, I could just as well make everything
up a lot faster without tables and dice ...

Ah, and if slavishly following the rules leads to desaster, this is usually a sure
sign that something is wrong with those rules ...

 

[far-trader]

Why exactly should I use the tables at all if I make up something whenever
I do not like the result of the dice roll...

The tables are imo an imagination trigger, not a game requirement. And it's not a case of making something up whenever one doesn't like the results, it more making sure the tables don't throw a wrench in a game.

...I could just as well make everything
up a lot faster without tables and dice ...

Indeed, and that's fine. But I've found I can't maintain that kind of imagination and balance for too long in the heat of gaming*, and a few tables and rules to guide me in both is helpful, as long as they don't rule when/where they would make the game unfun. Which is a lesson I've had to relearn at least once.

* I can plan it out but we all know no ref plan survives the first encounter with the players (always have a plan B, and dice and tables are often it)

Ah, and if slavishly following the rules leads to disaster, this is usually a sure
sign that something is wrong with those rules ...

Not always, but possibly. Generally I find most rules lead to problems at the extremes, which is where moderation may be required. The rules are going to sometimes produce results that aren't good for the game. That's why we have refs, else might as well just have tables and dice instead of the ref And there will be times when the rule and roll should be accepted, even if as Jason noted it kills a character* or perhaps leads to instant wealth. Wealth isn't a bad thing, but it will change the game, and it's darned hard to take back so caution when doling it out is good.

* I'd only do that if they had done something worthy of it. If they went in knowing full well the risks for the possible reward, or foolishly went ahead and did something stupidly dangerous thinking I wouldn't let them die. I wouldn't kill a PC out of hand for a stupid roll of the dice when the result didn't make any sense or wasn't part of the bigger picture. It's a fine line, more often walked by straddling it and erring to both sides by some degree.

 

[rust]

I'd only do that if they had done something worthy of it.

I usually announce it in one way or the other, giving the players a hint that
a specific situation may turn out to be lethal and that their characters are
taking a serious risk from there on.
In all other situations, even an extremely bad roll could only lead to an injury,
but never to the death of a character - "death by accident" does not fit into
my idea of a campaign, so no frozen cows falling down from that landing free
trader and hitting the characters ...

 

[far-trader]

...so no frozen cows falling down from that landing free-trader and hitting the characters ...

Of course not. Unless it was a sneaky attack by someone they crossed in the last adventure just made to look like a freak accident...

:rofl: