Who needs stewards anyway?

[far-trader]

To make your J2 Trader be able to run profitably
Can 'bots add to your high passengers like a 'regular' steward can I wonder?

I don't see why not, that's their programmed function

(...Well, discounting the Killbots of the Ship of Blood who's function is to pretend to be steward bots until you enter jumpspace and... )

I had a quick look at your freighter, seems a fair idea to me but I'm biased (since I've done similar). I'll pop in there again later for a closer look.

 

[Commander Truestar]

IMO...

Stewards make pretty good emergency rations if you cook em right....

Marc

 

[Commander Truestar]

If everyone who jumps in-system on your leaky, creaky old ship complains about the powdered food and dirty sheets, potential passengers are going to delay their trips for a few days to see what other options become available.Steve

heh... Written by someone who certainly has not called...say...American Airlines to adjust their travel plans when last minute airline news comes out. Just remember when the swine flu started and it almost took the threat of action from washington DC to get most air carriers to allow flexability.
Now I admit your creaky old ship is not American Airlines but I am betting that most travellers are not adventurers but businessment and "Once in a lifetime" vacationers. So they likely made their plans with a "reputable" vacation planning firm who then stuck them with your ship to increase the profit margin...

Add to that many other real world incidents that are plentiful in the news or the possability that my creaky old ship's steward might just find customers to fill my staterooms so i can leave without you and you might reconsider when your opinions encounter the real world. Truth is often so much more odd than fiction that you would think common sense would rule. But I promise you that it does not here.

Marc

 

[Commander Truestar]

And now a True stroy!!

OK, so my wife and I took a Norwegian Line Cruise that was all inclusive. So we brought a credit card limited to just more than that so we could cover our land excursions but we did not plan on major purchases. Then we hit their on-board art auction....

So they said if we buy a item costing more than $15K we not only get the item but get a free stateroom cruise as well! So we looked and we chacked and we found he would be selling a Picasso starting at $15k in 2 nights that we could be reasonably certain would sell for $30k on land. and we made our plans.

Now, we had also bought a few things my wife really liked and built a reputation for having deep pockets. so when the item came up and we flipped out paddle without hesitation at the $15k starting bid no one gain said us.(there had been 2 items which started at $15k and were contested into the $20's). So we got our painting and our free cruise if we could pay by the end of the current cruise.

BUT...
My $40k limit card was locked safely at home and we had a $20k limit card with us which currently held the costs for the entire trip so far. So the $15k purchase overtopped the card limit and suddenly our shipboard account was frozen!! We could not get anything or even order shore excursions!!! What we needed to do was break the rules in order to re-open our on-board internet account(closed for inability to pay for additional minutes) and contact my brother in law who was house sitting.

Once he got the card out and scanned it and sent us the pic of the card(front and back), we then had to again break the rules and get a ship to shore call to our bank to notify them of the buy so they would not freeze it as "possibly fraudulant". This required using restricted access phones in the purser's offices.

there were a number of other issues to deal with which I feel even a very well programmed and able android or computer would not have been able to handle.

Suffice to say, the final rule we broke was to violate Norwegian's rule about directly tipping their employees and each finished that cruise $100 better off than their bosses knew. In the end our purchse paid for all our losses plus a very healthy gain...which had been teh objective.(and had somewhat the feel of a Classic Traveller Adventure in and of itself!)

So I am certain that even in very general cases a steward is a good thing to have to recommend your services to the Universe.


Marc

 

[far-trader]

Good story Marc Thanks for sharing.

Certainly at the moment attempting to "reason" with (tip, bribe, plead) a computer is impossible and nothing beats dealing with a real person for exceptional circumstances (or even simple special circumstances), but in the far-future...

(note to self, include "tip" and "bribe" modes in Steward Bot programming )

 

[Mithras]

Man, you have money

OK, so my wife and I took a Norwegian Line Cruise ...

 

[Whipsnade]

Marc,

Your story is a great example of why I was always itching to include more steward-centered play in my sessions. Sadly, my players were having none of it.

I like MgT's steward opt-out rule and I will use it if I can't get my players excited about being stewards. What I won't do is present anything like your cruise story to a group that is using a robot steward or is otherwise "outsourcing" the position. The players need to be directly involved if they're to enjoy all the fun in that particular scenario.

I also strongly agree with you that a robot, no matter how technologically advanced or artfully programmed, would never be able to comprehend the need for or assist in the acts of "benevolent chicanery" you described.


Regards,
Bill

P.S. As you note, the story has all the hallmarks of a classic Traveller adventure. While I'd be hesitant to place the players in the role of the speculative art buyer, a fast paced, deadline focused session along the lines of Exit Visa in which the players assist the art buyer would make for a wonderful one-night session or convention scenario. Such an adventure could be easily inserted into many Traveller campaigns.

 

[Max]

I suspect passengers need stewards. If I were locked in a small spaceship for a week with a bunch of strangers I would want a steward for all those little things to keep me from going crazy, like a games cupboard, babysitter &C (you expect to me to use my cargo allotment for that?) It's not just cooking meals and making beds, a steward has to deal with all the problems passengers are going to get into during a week long trip caged up in a small box.

Do you really expect the engineers to explain how the fresher works to someone from a tech 3 planet, or even a tech F planet which uses water instead of shipboard sonics? Who babysits the 6 year old who's parents send him to the lounge while they spend some quality time together? Who keeps an eye on that gunnery-sergeant to ensure he doesn't get to drunk and try to kill someone? Who controls the week long poker game in the lounge?

Try going without a steward on me and I'll have a passenger to commit suicide in their stateroom and not be discovered until the ship makes port, resulting in being held in port by authorities for 4 weeks (with docking fees piling up) while they investigate.

 

[rancke]

I suspect passengers need stewards. If I were locked in a small spaceship for a week with a bunch of strangers I would want a steward for all those little things to keep me from going crazy, like a games cupboard, babysitter &C (you expect to me to use my cargo allotment for that?) It's not just cooking meals and making beds, a steward has to deal with all the problems passengers are going to get into during a week long trip caged up in a small box.

Do you really expect the engineers to explain how the fresher works to someone from a tech 3 planet, or even a tech F planet which uses water instead of shipboard sonics? Who babysits the 6 year old who's parents send him to the lounge while they spend some quality time together? Who keeps an eye on that gunnery-sergeant to ensure he doesn't get to drunk and try to kill someone? Who controls the week long poker game in the lounge?

All that would be a lot more convincing if the rules didn't say that Mid passengers manage perfectly well without stewards and if Real Life didn't have people survive far worse conditions for far longer.

Try going without a steward on me and I'll have a passenger to commit suicide in their stateroom and not be discovered until the ship makes port, resulting in being held in port by authorities for 4 weeks (with docking fees piling up) while they investigate.

Your game, your reality, your rules.


Hans

 

[Max]

All that would be a lot more convincing if the rules didn't say that Mid passengers manage perfectly well without stewards and if Real Life didn't have people survive far worse conditions for far longer.

Except the rules don't actually say that mid -passengers get along perfectly well without stewards. First we have to determine what stewards do on Free Traders before sorting out the rules.

A steward deals with the passengers, all of them, middle, low and high (although not much with the low) not just the high passengers. This is going to be a lot of varied services, from opening the liquor cabinet and canteen to social counseling. The duties of a steward are so varied that it is impossible to provide a comprehensive list compounded by the environment, stuck in jump space for a week.

This leads us to the rule requiring stewards. If you are going to carry high passengers you need steward, no steward means the passenger accommodations on your ship are too poor for anyone to rate them as high. Less than one steward for every eight high passengers means that your passenger accommodations are too low for anyone to consider them to be high. This does not mean that the stewards only interact with the high passengers, they interact with all the passengers (preferences to the high passengers of course) which raises the general standard of accommodation to the point where they can be consider suitable for high passengers. No stewards with only mid-passengers does not mean the passenger needs just disappear, it means that the rest of the crew pitches in the meet those needs (gunners cooks the meals, the engineer spends some of his off-watch baby-sitting &c).


To provide a "realistic" rule to replace the one steward for every eight high passengers and no high passengers without stewards consider this one:

At least one steward is required to carry any high passengers.
​

Each crew member can produce 3 service points if there are no stewards on the crew.
​

Each steward produces 40 service points of passenger service at a skill level of 0 and 10 additional service points per skill level.
​

Each high passenger requires 3 service points.
​

Each medium passenger requires 1 service point.
​

If a ship does not have enough service points to meet it's passenger requirements it cannot find anyone willing to accept passage.

​

It's a bit more complicated than the rule in game but you thought it needed sorting. The problem is really not whether stewards do anything but how to quantify what stewards do. The 1for8 rule is pretty abstract but also simple for that same reason, sure it can be broken (how can a 5KT liner get by with 800 mid passengers and no stewards) but for the ships most people are going to use it approximates steward needs close enough.
​

 

[rancke]

Except the rules don't actually say that mid -passengers get along perfectly well without stewards.

No, what the rule says is that if you don't have enough stewards, you won't get any high passengers at all. The GM simply won't roll for them. My original question was how realistic that was. I wouldn't expect High Passengers to be willing to travel by a scruffy Free Trader, regardless of how many stewards it had, unless there was no alternative. And if there isn't any alternative, I wouldn't expect the lack of stewards to affect the decision to board the scruffy Free Trader (Unless, of course, there are two or more scruffy free traders going the same way at the same time AND no regular liners gonig that way at that time).


Hans

 

[Hal]

No, what the rule says is that if you don't have enough stewards, you won't get any high passengers at all. The GM simply won't roll for them. My original question was how realistic that was. I wouldn't expect High Passengers to be willing to travel by a scruffy Free Trader, regardless of how many stewards it had, unless there was no alternative. And if there isn't any alternative, I wouldn't expect the lack of stewards to affect the decision to board the scruffy Free Trader (Unless, of course, there are two or more scruffy free traders going the same way at the same time AND no regular liners gonig that way at that time).


Hans

One thing always puzzled me about the way passenger tickets were priced and how the "laws of the Imperium" allowed for what seems to be ticket scalping (of sorts).

Lets say that monday, the ISS Lollypop arrives in port. It has 6 staterooms available to rent out to the general public. Tuesday, all 6 staterooms are rented out, and the ISS Lollypop informs the public at large that all of its 6 staterooms have been booked by Middle passage paying customers. Now, imagine on Wednesday, a small group of passengers NEED to leave the world and arrive at their destination via the ISS Lollypop.

All six passengers from monday's transaction can be bumped from their berths by passengers willing to pay High Passage. So what if there aren't any stewards aboard. All that these newcomers need to do is cough up an extra 2,000 credits and suddenly, the other passengers are bumped.

Of course, the "legality" of accepting High Passage fees for middle passage trips might cause a few captains to think twice before pocketing the extra cash - but hey, that's life right? None of the player character captains would even DREAM of engaging in that kind of practice right?

 

[Max]

Ah.

You assume the map is the terrain. If the rule is an accurate representation of the situation than only high passengers require the service of stewards and the job of stewards is merely to meet the needs of high passengers above and beyond those of middle passengers.

I assume the rule is merely an abstraction of the general need for passenger care. Under my assumption, all passengers need servicing and the 1for8 rule is just a simple way of producing the needed number of stewards.

Let us consider what middle passage is. Per LBB2 (1977)

In order for starships to fill their staterooms with passengers, middle passage is offered on a standby basis, in the event that not enough high passages are sold. While middle passengers occupy staterooms normally similar to those occupied by higher paying passengers, they do not receive the service or entertainment accorded to the higher paying passengers. In addition, the quality of the cuisine is rather low. A baggage allowance of 100 kilograms is allowed. A middle passenger may be 'bumped' and his stateroom taken by a late ariving high passenger: the middle's ticket is returned, but no other compensation is made. (the middle could then buy a high passage and 'bump' anther middle passenger , if it was felt that immediate transport were necessary.) Middle passage costs CR8,000​

So mid-passage is not a booked form of passage but a discounted passage issued by the starship on an as needed basis to fill empty staterooms. The major distinction between high and mid passages is the standby nature of the passage, the quality difference exists too but might be more a consequence of the standby nature of middle passage (ie 1t for high passengers can be stored before departure while 100kilos can be brought onboard with with middle passenger at the last minute; unless the middle passenger is bumped, in which case it need not be brought onboard at all) than a defining characteristic.

So from a passengers point of view what does a high passage get them versus a middle passage? A high passage is a guaranteed stateroom onboard a ship at a set time going to a place they want to (or at least in the direction they want) with an expansive cargo allowance and excellent service. A middle passage is a chance to get a stateroom on a ship heading where they want to go at a set time, unless bumped in which case you can take a chance on the next ship with a reasonable cargo allowance and crappy service. Why would anyone pay an extra 25% for a high passage when they could get crappy service and possibly have to find a place to live (I sublet my apartment and got bumped!!!) or not be able to leave the armpit of a planet they are on until the next ship comes through for only CR8,000?


This brings us back to the original question, why should a captain hire a steward when the passenger can get the defining difference of a high passage (guaranteed stateroom) without the steward. This brings us to considerations of how passages are sold. If we consider that (like historical sailing ships) passages are usually arranged through shipping agents it would create problems as these agents would check the ship's crew roster and realize that there was no steward so the shipping agents could not in faith book high passages with the ship. If we consider that passages are sold directly by starship crews to passengers than your scam might work, although it does raise the question of how vouchers are redeemed. Also how does one avoid departing passengers from complaining to starport authorities about the substandard conditions (lock them in their staterooms you've sold high passages for the next trip?) and having starport authorities shut down your scam?

As a side note from an economic point of view stewards are profitable for most merchants. One high passenger pays the salary of a steward and 5 covers the cost of a steward & stateroom which would be used for a middle passage if needed - but on the runs where you can get enough middle passengers to use the steward's stateroom you nearly always get the 5 high passengers. Run a liner and you'll hire 2 stewards just to fill as many staterooms as possible. The only way to get around the passenger tables with most merchant ships is to create a house rule that high passengers will book middle passage if the ship doesn't offer high.

 

[Hal]

Good catch on the difference between High and Middle passage.

 

[aramis]

Actually, Max, no, it takes TWO to pay the steward, since the first only pays the steward's life support.

Cost of a steward is KCr4/mo salary and KCr4/mo for LS... or KCr 4 per jump net. Plus the lost of up to KCr12/mo in post-LS income on the SR he occupies. Net cost of a steward is thus KCr20/mo, or KCr10/jump, and thus he requires 5 passengers to break even, and can service 8.

 

[Wiltshiresaint]

Great thread. I've come to it late, but on the issue of 'bumping' passengers here's my two credits worth.

Of course it's feasible for this practice to take place, and in many cases it will occur if the ship's captain isn't so interested in building a good reputation as a reliable carrier and is more motivated by immediate revenue. Perhaps he doesn´t intend to visit the system again for a good while.

However, any captain who does wanting to build such a reputation could choose to refuse the extra short term revenue and make it clear that "Sorry but with Onedin Lines a booking is a booking", on the basis that next time he's seeking passengers at that port of call, he'll be remembered as reliable and good to his word. This reputation would be equally good with both regular travellers who approach ships direct and shipping agents who book on a passenger´s behalf for a commission. IMTU this would be reflected by the possibility of a positive mod (note just the possibility of the mod, not the certainty) for passenger recruitment.

There's no right or wrong here, just character motivations and longer term aims.

 

[aramis]

Wiltshire: the captain who doesn't bump is likely to acquire a "No HP" policy from the brokers. Sure, extra mids, at the cost of being the LAST ship to be offered a HP. He'll also be held to the last minute for loading HP's to be offered ANY, and without the local brokerage connections, is unlikely to fill any highs on his own...

 

[rancke]

You assume the map is the terrain.

On the contrary, I assume that the map is not the terrain and question how accurate the map represents the terrain.

If the rule is an accurate representation of the situation than only high passengers require the service of stewards and the job of stewards is merely to meet the needs of high passengers above and beyond those of middle passengers.

I assume the rule is merely an abstraction of the general need for passenger care. Under my assumption, all passengers need servicing and the 1for8 rule is just a simple way of producing the needed number of stewards.

Actually, you also assume that the servicing must be perfurmed by professionals rather than an off-duty grease monkey. And I think that both are unrealistic assumptions. Passengers will WANT service, no argument there, but I don't think they'll NEED it desperately. And even if they did, whatever amount of care is enough to prevent Mid passengers from going postal (I think later rules made it one steward per 50 mid passengers?) would also be enough to keep High passengers from doing the same.

So mid-passage is not a booked form of passage but a discounted passage issued by the starship on an as needed basis to fill empty staterooms. The major distinction between high and mid passages is the standby nature of the passage, the quality difference exists too but might be more a consequence of the standby nature of middle passage (ie 1t for high passengers can be stored before departure while 100kilos can be brought onboard with with middle passenger at the last minute; unless the middle passenger is bumped, in which case it need not be brought onboard at all) than a defining characteristic.

Or Mid Passage is the standard ticket voucher issued by sundry organizations, good for a standard mid passage trip in a single stateroom and High Passage is a special priority voucher that allows the holder to legally bump an ordinary passenger (Who can then bribe the steward to bump another ordinary passenger; to avert trouble the steward will tell this next bumpee that he's being tossed out in favor of a Priority passenger).

As I said above, I suggest that the rules conflate two different issues: One is standard of fare and service, where high passage is better food and better service than mid passage, and the other is High Passage what I would dub a 'Priority Passage Voucher' that entitles you to jump the queue.

This brings us back to the original question, why should a captain hire a steward when the passenger can get the defining difference of a high passage (guaranteed stateroom) without the steward. This brings us to considerations of how passages are sold. If we consider that (like historical sailing ships) passages are usually arranged through shipping agents it would create problems as these agents would check the ship's crew roster and realize that there was no steward so the shipping agents could not in faith book high passages with the ship.

There's no mention of shipping agents in the rules. If shipping agents routinely provided tramp merchants with passengers, I'd expect the rules to reflect that (in the form of a commission). I still don't see why a free trader captain can't just post a notice that on Day xxx-yyyy, his ship will depart for Nextworld. Indeed, on worlds with a low level of traffic that could well be the only way to get passengers.

If we consider that passages are sold directly by starship crews to passengers than your scam might work, although it does raise the question of how vouchers are redeemed.

You apply to a representative of the issuing organization the next time you're in a starport where there is such a representative.

Also how does one avoid departing passengers from complaining to starport authorities about the substandard conditions (lock them in their staterooms you've sold high passages for the next trip?) and having starport authorities shut down your scam?

You don't. The question is, why should the starport authorities care? "You took passage on a Free Trader and you expected the service to be as good as on a regular liner?!?"


Hans

 

[Max]

1. Aramis, the 2 high passages covers expense of steward only works if you are not paying life support for the empty stateroom, a varied rule but LBB2 says you pay the 2K/stateroom occupied or not. The 2 High covering the cost of the steward is a better rule of thumb in designing starships, but if you are flying a custom built merchant you are probably not a tramp merchant. In a similar vein it occurred to me that travelers (players) often have fewer free staterooms, so the last paragraph about stewards being a worthwhile choice only works if you have 4 or more staterooms available for passengers and the steward unless traveling in extremely low populated areas.

2. Sorry, Hans wasn't intended to be addressed directly to you alone, I should have made clear that I was addressing the general "you, the reader" and not the specific "you, Hans" (and also started "You can assume..." ). My apologies, I was so pleased with myself for remembering the map/terrain line I didn't see what else I was saying, sometimes I'm too clever by half for my own good.

Actually, you also assume that the servicing must be perfurmed by professionals rather than an off-duty grease monkey. And I think that both are unrealistic assumptions. Passengers will WANT service, no argument there, but I don't think they'll NEED it desperately. And even if they did, whatever amount of care is enough to prevent Mid passengers from going postal (I think later rules made it one steward per 50 mid passengers?) would also be enough to keep High passengers from doing the same.

It depends on how the passenger base is determined. If the universe is one in which interstellar travel is commonplace (which it has to be to support all the liners) then the passenger base is pretty much a cross-section of society while if it is rare (implied by the first 3 books) then the passenger base is going to be a restricted one and not include little old ladies on package tours. A restricted passenger base (the elite who travel the stars) is not going to NEED much service but it will certainly WANT lots of service while the unrestricted passenger base is going to NEED a fair amount of service (explaining how to change the entertainment channel for the upteenth time to one of the aforementioned little old ladies). When catering to the common-man you don't have to idiot proof everything (hairdryer not designed for use underwater) but you do have to cover the low end of the average range, which on a starship in jumpspace for a week means dealing with alot of different needs.

So what need is there for a dedicated crew member to meet these needs? I imagine the need is as much on the part of the crew as the passengers. A passenger who needs something that only the crew can provide is going to seek out the crew until that need is fufilled, even if that means some idiot passenger interupting tuning the jump field to ask for some aspirin. You aren't going to allow passengers onto the bridge every time they need to request some service (hijacking) and having the passengers pop into engineering is probably not a good idea either. Mind you it is not that the crew won't meet the needs of the passengers but that they are not on call all the time to meet those needs, and if they are on call it interferes with their jobs. Nonetheless it is reasonable to assume that in the case of only middle passages with no steward thatthe crew is in fact spending their off duty time servicing the passengers but it is probably not a sustainable model for long term operation of a starship as the crew will get resentful of having to do duties beyond that they were hired for. How long will a gunner (not much to do during jump) put up with acting as steward in her free time before she atarts thinking that stewards' make much more than gunners and if she were a steward who doubled as a gunner she'd make lots more money?

Or Mid Passage is the standard ticket voucher issued by sundry organizations, good for a standard mid passage trip in a single stateroom and High Passage is a special priority voucher that allows the holder to legally bump an ordinary passenger (Who can then bribe the steward to bump another ordinary passenger; to avert trouble the steward will tell this next bumpee that he's being tossed out in favor of a Priority passenger).

This would be reasonable if the rule for high passages began "In order to allow travelers with pressing need for immediate travel to secure reserved space..". The problem with the view of middle as ordinary passage is the rule for middle passage which begins "In order for starships to fill their staterooms with passengers, middle passage is offered on a standby basis, in the event that not enough high passages are sold." The quality differential can mostly be explained in terms of the standby nature of middle passage - baggage is limited to what can be boarded with the passenger at the last minute, perishable food is only ordered for guaranteed (high) passengers, entertainments are arranged on the basis of guaranteed passengers. The question is whether you want to accept the quality difference as a side-effect of the standby nature of middle passage or not, not that either one is "correct" since we are beyond the rules but Occam's Razor favors the first.

There's no mention of shipping agents in the rules. If shipping agents routinely provided tramp merchants with passengers, I'd expect the rules to reflect that (in the form of a commission). I still don't see why a free trader captain can't just post a notice that on Day xxx-yyyy, his ship will depart for Nextworld. Indeed, on worlds with a low level of traffic that could well be the only way to get passengers.

No mention of captains posting departure times and selling tickets direct either. The berthing costs rule however covers landing fees and handling fees, which presumably covers cargo handling and there is no reason to assume does not cover passenger handling as well. If shipping agent fees are part of berthing costs then the rules already cover them. Historically shipping agents were common and could be found in even very small ports where the bartender/inn-keeper/postman was also a shipping agent, on less visited planets the agent could charge a miniscule fee because people wishing to travel or ship cargo would stay in his hotel, drink in his bar and store goods in his warehouse. High traffic worlds doubtless get by with agents charging a small fee through volume.

Shipping agents would be common on even less visited planets because people wishing passage to other stars are not going to waste time at the starport hoping that a ship comes in heading in the direction they want to go (high-traffic worlds would be different). Unless a business is really wealthy it will not station someone at the starport on the off chance that a starship wanders in and will use a shipping agent to let them know that they can ship cargos. A ship that has a regular route could no doubt have it's own agents but a tramp would have to use a local shipping agent to get news that it is even landed to people who aren't hanging around the starport. Or you can assume that people wishing to travel between the stars or ship cargo spend their days at the starport checking out the arriving ships to see where they are going instead of using an agent at the starport, even on a high traffic world where the wait might be days instead of weeks or months this seems unlikely. Pretty much it would be that shipping agents have to exist unless star travel is so common you can pop down the spaceport and find a ship leaving for your destination in the immediate future on any given day.

You apply to a representative of the issuing organization the next time you're in a starport where there is such a representative.

Works fine if your ship is on a regular route. How does a tramp which never lands on the same planet twice cash in the voucher from Podunk when they never land on Podunk again? You might create a rule that vouchers are only issued by large interstellar organizations but then you have to explain why the Podunk army buys so many low passage vouchers from them for its grunts. Easier to accept that the vouchers are redeemed by a local agent who pays the ship owner and has arrangements for getting repayment herself.

You don't. The question is, why should the starport authorities care? "You took passage on a Free Trader and you expected the service to be as good as on a regular liner?!?"

Because the starport authorities have to live on the planet and deal with the people who the tramp merchant abused. And listen to the complaints from government authorities when the starport officials do nothing so the complainers go to their government. And deal with the nutjob who hangs arround the starrport with a sign protesting the conspiracy of starport authorities and traders against passengers. And listen to the complaints of the merchants on regular runs who complain about how this one tramp merchant has ruined the carefully cultivated image of luxurious star travel.

Since the economics (scarcity of middle passengers versus number of staterooms on small merchant ships) favor the use of stewards and high passages, high passage will be the standard for small merchants. While it may not be as luxurious as a liner it is high quality (especially compared to middle passage on the same vessel). Once it becomes established as the standard then those with an interest in the status quo (starport authorities, established merchants, travel agents - basically everyone who is associated with starships but doesn't travel on a starship to new planets) will have an incentive to punish those who threaten that status quo.

 

[rancke]

1. Aramis, the 2 high passages covers expense of steward only works if you are not paying life support for the empty stateroom, a varied rule but LBB2 says you pay the 2K/stateroom occupied or not.

I don't mind accepting Book 2 as evidence of how things work in the OTU, but I most certainly do not accept that it's the only valid evidence. What edition, btw.? TTB specifically states that it's each occupied stateroom that cost life support; it also makes it clear that the cost is actually per warm body, as double occupancy is permitted, but requires twice the LS cost.

Be that as it may, it's hard enough to justify life support costs when there are people around to eat caviare and pâté de fois gras, drink champagne, breathe specially imported jasmine-scented mountain air and bathe in asses' milk; to charge Cr2000 with no one actually consuming consumables is, IMO, patently... um... not plausible.

The 2 High covering the cost of the steward is a better rule of thumb in designing starships, but if you are flying a custom built merchant you are probably not a tramp merchant.

I'd say that if you're flying a new ship, you're probably not a tramp merchant. Any sort of old ship can be a free trader, provided it's configuration allows it to earn more money than it costs to operate it.

It depends on how the passenger base is determined. If the universe is one in which interstellar travel is commonplace (which it has to be to support all the liners) then the passenger base is pretty much a cross-section of society...

A cross-section of the part of society that can afford to pay the equivalent of 50,000 dollars for a simple round trip to a neighboring world.

...while if it is rare (implied by the first 3 books) then the passenger base is going to be a restricted one and not include little old ladies on package tours. A restricted passenger base (the elite who travel the stars) is not going to NEED much service but it will certainly WANT lots of service...

As I stated.

...while the unrestricted passenger base is going to NEED a fair amount of service (explaining how to change the entertainment channel for the upteenth time to one of the aforementioned little old ladies). When catering to the common-man you don't have to idiot proof everything (hairdryer not designed for use underwater) but you do have to cover the low end of the average range, which on a starship in jumpspace for a week means dealing with alot of different needs.

I see no reason to suppose that a starship passenger on a tramp merchant will NEED any more service than any passenger on a South Sea tramp steamer did.

So what need is there for a dedicated crew member to meet these needs? I imagine the need is as much on the part of the crew as the passengers. A passenger who needs something that only the crew can provide is going to seek out the crew until that need is fufilled, even if that means some idiot passenger interupting tuning the jump field to ask for some aspirin. You aren't going to allow passengers onto the bridge every time they need to request some service (hijacking) and having the passengers pop into engineering is probably not a good idea either.

So simply leave them alone in their cabins and the passenger lounge.

Mind you it is not that the crew won't meet the needs of the passengers but that they are not on call all the time to meet those needs, and if they are on call it interferes with their jobs. Nonetheless it is reasonable to assume that in the case of only middle passages with no steward that the crew is in fact spending their off duty time servicing the passengers but it is probably not a sustainable model for long term operation of a starship as the crew will get resentful of having to do duties beyond that they were hired for. How long will a gunner (not much to do during jump) put up with acting as steward in her free time before she starts thinking that stewards' make much more than gunners and if she were a steward who doubled as a gunner she'd make lots more money?

Let the players decide that for themselves.

This would be reasonable if the rule for high passages began "In order to allow travelers with pressing need for immediate travel to secure reserved space..".

It would have been even more reasonable . I think it's perfectly reasonable anyway.

The problem with the view of middle as ordinary passage is the rule for middle passage which begins "In order for starships to fill their staterooms with passengers, middle passage is offered on a standby basis, in the event that not enough high passages are sold."

Any way you look at it, the Book 2 rules (and its descendants) are unreasonable; for one thing they omit the one sort of passage that by rights should be the most common: double occupancy. The rules expressly states that double occupancy is possible, then arbitrarily restricts it to military and private ships. There's no reason why this should be so and every reason why it shouldn't. There are plenty of real world examples of what people will put up with in order to save money, and paying Cr5,000 instead of Cr8,000 saves you the equivalent of $9,000.

The question is whether you want to accept the quality difference as a side-effect of the standby nature of middle passage or not, not that either one is "correct" since we are beyond the rules but Occam's Razor favors the first.

What I want are reasonable, self-consistent rules that don't impose senseless arbitrary restrictions. Or rather, I want a reasonable, self-consistent underlying worldview. I've nothing against simplified rules for ease of play as such. What I object to is assuming that they are exact, literal representations of "reality" rather than simplifications.

No mention of captains posting departure times and selling tickets direct either.

No, if you prefer, you can assume the text speaks the literal truth: That passengers present themselves for transport to the next destination. Hey, if you insist on literal interpretation of the text, you don't get to pick and chose.

The berthing costs rule however covers landing fees and handling fees, which presumably covers cargo handling and there is no reason to assume does not cover passenger handling as well.

I think there is. If you assume those passengers present themselves because they somehow learned about the existence of the ship, the notice board is a likelier option because it would cost little or nothing and in any case a flat fee, whereas the referrals would cost a fee per passenger.

Of course, one could assume that the fee was paid to the agent by the passenger. But in any case, the agent would have a motive to direct passengers to the tramp merchants regardless of the state of service aboard. Each successful referral is another fee earned. Obviously, if there is a choice, an agent would direct his clients to the ships with stewards. But as I pointed out before, if these high passengers are prepared to get aboard a tramp in the first place, why would the lack of a steward make them change their minds?

Works fine if your ship is on a regular route. How does a tramp which never lands on the same planet twice cash in the voucher from Podunk when they never land on Podunk again? You might create a rule that vouchers are only issued by large interstellar organizations...

I do indeed assume they are issued by large interstellar organizations.

...but then you have to explain why the Podunk army buys so many low passage vouchers from them for its grunts. Easier to accept that the vouchers are redeemed by a local agent who pays the ship owner and has arrangements for getting repayment herself.

Even easier to assume that Podunk buys its vouchers from a suitable large interstellar organization.

Because the starport authorities have to live on the planet and deal with the people who the tramp merchant abused.

Why would that be a concern? Odds are they'll never interact with any of those poor abused passengers ever again. And if they might, how does that concern work out in real life? Is airport security unfailingly polite to the passengers they process? After all, they have to live on the same planet.

And listen to the complaints from government authorities when the starport officials do nothing so the complainers go to their government.

And complaining to the government always leads to government action in the real world?

And deal with the nutjob who hangs arround the starrport with a sign protesting the conspiracy of starport authorities and traders against passengers.

Just send the courteous starport guards to remonstrate with him.

And listen to the complaints of the merchants on regular runs who complain about how this one tramp merchant has ruined the carefully cultivated image of luxurious star travel.

"You took passage on a tramp merchant and expected the service to be as good as on a regular liner? Don't make that mistake again! Next time, use Oberlindes!"


Hans