Long Term Subsistence

[Icosahedron]

Somewhere on CotI in the last few days, someone posted their houserule for required 'upkeep', being Soc^2*10Cr.

This sort of thing beats figuring every taxi fare in a game, and I wanted to adopt something similar.

I CANNOT find it now, despite doing a search on every forum I've visited :frankie: (If it's yours, or you know where it is, let me know.)

Having looked at the rule above, I think it's ok for the lower social scales, but I feel that nobility would spend considerably more than a couple of thousand a month. The best formula I've found by trial and error is 2^(Soc-1)*10Cr. This provides some similarity for the riff raff, but gets nobility spending 10 - 100 k per month, or 100k to 2 million per annum.

What do other people do? Formula or something else?

What level of costs are realistic?

 

[aramis]

Canonically, the following is in the MegaTraveller rulebook:

Social Standing x Cr250: The number of credits the character
must spend in a month on upkeep (food, clothing, lodging, and
incidentals). Ordinary purchases (buying equipment, getting
a starship high passage ticket) does not count toward this total.
If the character is unable to keep up the proper rate of
upkeep spending for a year, his or her apparent Social Standing
drops one level. Apparent Social Standing is the Social
Standing perceived by others.

 

[Ishmael]

Somewhere on CotI in the last few days, someone posted their houserule for required 'upkeep', being Soc^2*10Cr.

<<< from an old TML post of mine back in 2003 >>>

Social standing only seems to be used by MT to determine nobility of PC's,
determine how much money the PC's need to spend to keep up appearances and
for some ( but not that many ) interpersonal tasks.
PC nobles are strange in that if they were truly of nobility, they would be
too busy doing whatever it is that nobles do to run things, to be off
galavanting about with a bunch of low lifes out in space. If the nobles were
layabout playboys, ok, but then where is the monthly allowance? The rules
don't mention anything about that so maybe the PC noble is a bastard
child....

" My dad is a duke! "
" Yeah, sure buddy. Too bad your momma was an upstairs maid. "

.... or maybe he is disowned or dishonored.

The Imperial armed forces seem like a good spot for them. What safer place is
there than an umpty thousand ton super dreadnaught's bridge is peacetime? But
it still looks good to the peasants about serving to protect the Imperium
from violent nasties. But travelling is out unless it is a naval campaign.
The marines are for the heroic sons or the chumps... you could actually die
while in the marines.... Most nobles won't want their own sons/daughters to
do that. Look in real life how rich/powerful kept their offspring from 'Nam.
Again, travelling is frowned upon by armed forces ( how about an AWOL PC
noble on the run..... ?)
The best spot is in the palace or the boardroom where they can learn all the
ropes needed to hold power. But then, they wouldn't be out travelling then,
would they.

'Apparant' Social standing can be had simply by buying it. So maybe the
'noble' PC has no blood ties, but is just very rich. The amount of 250cr*Soc
per month seems ridiculously low though. Any fool who can afford 60,000 cr
per year can act,dress and eat and live like the Emperor (?). Ridiculous!
Given that wealth distribution among the various social classes are power
functions and not linear, why shouldn't that be reflected by upkeep costs?
That'd certainly weed out any cheap-ass pretenders. Besdies, palaces with
kilo-acres of perfectly manicured lawns and delicacies flown in from all over
and hand tailored clothes of the finest materials should be outrageously
expensive......

How about upkeep costs being equal to 15cr*2^(soc) per month Crimp?

Not enough to required to actually eat ?? I guess you're homeless and you'd
best hope the local gov or somebody allows soup kitchens........ and that's
even if you really are a king stolen by gypsies. or exiled.....

Joe Average pays 1920cr/mon which is about right for MT rules, but a Duke pays
491520cr/mon for his palace and gourmet foods, etc.

The Emperor pays nearly 2MCr/mon for his digs..........

No wonder most nobles are also board members of megacorps and other big money
ecomic powers. Wanna bet that they get into pissing contests about who can
spend the most just to show they can...... keeping up with the Jones's on a
super-mega scale.

as a solitary gamer, I haven't had to use such a rule in centuries

I prefer it to the official rules because income distribution in real life follows a power curve. The official rules make monthly spending of a soc-15 laughably low.

 

[aramis]

Actually, most of what "Nobles Do" is stay out of the way of the few grumpy old nobles in charge, and learn what the grumpy olds nobles in charge do. Most imperial nobles are neither enfeofed nor entitled, and therefore are socialites, not governors.

 

[Merxiless]

I always used to rule as written, 250Cr, X Soc.

If you want a money sink, have the laser turret destroyed.

We focus more on the plot than the money...kind of like Star Trek. They get drunk, we don't see the money, or those people standing in a pay line.

Sure there's negotiation for the mission, but I don't want to manage "You spent 56 Cr on drinks, and another 25 Cr on the holovideo games at the bar, and cr3 for a sammich.

rofl. I left D&D for Traveller.

 

[Gadrin]

Gurps Traveller has a Cost of Living Table based on Status level (the equiv of SOC ) for each month.

Average Individual = Cr 500/month
ArchDuke = Cr 30,000

I know GURPS credits and CT credits are different as the prices of starships are different.

 

[Icosahedron]

Thanks for the replies, guys. It's interesting to see what others do, and good to get some values from people who are familiar with different versions of Traveller.

Merx, that was my thinking too, I don't want to figure out everybody's bar tariff, but OTOH, money is very important in Traveller and forms a major goal, so I don't want to simply ignore incidental expenditure - it's an important factor in everyone's lives, at least equal to major purchases.

Ishmael. I like the way you think, we really must get our heads together sometime. You figured on the 2^soc function too. Soc^4 was the best I could get otherwise, but it didn't quite fit.

I use CT mainly, and this fits more with Gadrin's value of 500/month for Mr Average, (from LBB4 army payscales) rather than 1920/month. (is this something that changed between versions?) Hence my use of (soc-1). My *10 just gave round numbers like the original post I saw. That was another thing I couldn't get with the Soc^4 function.

I certainly don't think spending across the social classes is linear in real life.

 

[Renaissance Man]

From Aramis,

Actually, most of what "Nobles Do" is stay out of the way of the few grumpy old nobles in charge, and learn what the grumpy olds nobles in charge do. Most imperial nobles are neither enfeofed nor entitled, and therefore are socialites, not governors.

This makes sense to me. In any given noble family there are going to be dozens of nobles by birth running around with nothing to do, getting into trouble. Especially if you're dealing with the custom of primogeniture.

I don't put much stock in "apparent" soc either. Soc is more than money. You may look like you're higher or lower soc depending on how much you spend on upkeep, but this does not a noble make. There are probably plenty of Knights and Barons running around with less money than a Soc-9 merchant. Aristocracy can find themselves without land or holdings, basically with cap in hand - it happens all the time in RL.

Soc is only very slightly about the money you openly spend - it's about the culture you've been brought up in, the family name you hold, and most of all, your access to a particular grade of legal and economic privileges. A prodigal scion of a wealthy noble family might look like a pauper, but if he can comb his hair and spend a little of his hidden wealth on some fine clothes, he can go to the right party and make the right impression for that Carousing + Soc task. More important than his upkeep bill is the fact that he can engage Count so-and-so in a deep conversation about the wisdom of investing in Imperial bonds given the slackening demand for manufactured goods in the subsector. Or the particular high notes and fore-taste of the vintage they're drinking.

 

[Icosahedron]

I've done some more thinking about expenses, taking Ishmael's figures into account, and I reckon my figures were a bit low and his were a bit high.

I definitely like the 2^Soc*k formula.

I'm now thinking 2^soc*10.
It's a nice round formula and fits nicely with other CT material (and MTU). At this rate, we have:

Soc 8 Cr2560: You could enjoy LBB3 'High Living' (Cr900) and have enough left over to buy clothing and possessions to match the lifestyle.

Soc 7 Cr1280: You could perhaps enjoy LBB3 'High Living' (Cr900) but it wouldn't leave much for other expenses. You are more likely to have 'Ordinary living'.

Soc 6 Cr640: You could have LBB3 'Ordinary Living' (Cr400).

Soc 5 Cr320: You could live at LBB3 'Subsistence Level' (Cr300).

Soc 4 Cr160: You could live at LBB3 'Starvation Level' (Cr120).

Soc 3 Cr80: You could afford dismal lodging only - you'd need to beg or steal food (or live off the land) but you could have a roof.

Soc 2 Cr40: You couldn't survive without help. IMTU you would be an internee in a Welfare workhouse. Otherwise, you might be a squatter, a backpacker, or living on a pal's settee.

Soc 1 Cr20: You are not even earning the Welfare handout (Cr30 IMTU) so presumably you are a vagrant. You will still need to beg around a credit a day to survive, though.

Soc 0 Cr10: You have no social standing - you are literally not a citizen. This is probably the lot of a slave or prisoner who has no personal possessions but may earn a few cents in tips or favours, perhaps. If you are a vagrant on these earnings, you will need to make survival rolls!

Nobility gets expensive. A knight will need to spend around a quarter million per annum to maintain his lifestyle, and a duke will spend 4 million.
To live like a king, you would spend 15 million each year, and the Emperor will spend double that amount.

The bottom end seems about right, but the top end is beyond my experience

How does it sound to you?

Thinking about 'apparent soc', this concept might apply to nobles, who are still 'really' nobles, even if impoverished, but the social level of commoners is set largely by income and any 'apparent soc' is real. Would you agree?

Edit: RM doesn't agree. I'll have to think about that.

 

[aramis]

I use CT mainly, and this fits more with Gadrin's value of 500/month for Mr Average, (from LBB4 army payscales) rather than 1920/month. (is this something that changed between versions?) Hence my use of (soc-1). My *10 just gave round numbers like the original post I saw. That was another thing I couldn't get with the Soc^4 function.

I certainly don't think spending across the social classes is linear in real life.

One small problem with using military pay as a basis: you are then excluding the needs for food and housing, which, in most military services, are covered by the services, not the soldier's pay. In fact, an E1 could not live on E1 pay if they didn't get housing and food. But they don't have to. they have that $400/month as spending cash.

Cr250*soc7 is 1750/month. Which, when coupled with the salaries and lack of need for starship crews to pay upkeep, puts a steward making essentially enough to support self 1 month a year plus a full time spouse.

The other thing is that couples probably should get a break.

Oh, and Major Bigwigs are not just paying their own upkeep, but that of their staff and family. Makes a HUGE difference in their expenses.

 

[Renaissance Man]

Does Soc A+ automatically mean you're a noble?

If not than even Warren Buffet would be soc-9. And his "upkeep" is way higher than that.

 

[aramis]

Warren Buffet is Soc 8, with an apparent soc of about 15. He's no nobleman, and unlikely to ever be accepted by them.

But he could keep that apparent soc for years just by spending a far lot less than he does, but keeping the goods he's got.

 

[Icosahedron]

One small problem with using military pay as a basis: you are then excluding the needs for food and housing, which, in most military services, are covered by the services, not the soldier's pay. In fact, an E1 could not live on E1 pay if they didn't get housing and food. But they don't have to. they have that $400/month as spending cash.

<snip>

Oh, and Major Bigwigs are not just paying their own upkeep, but that of their staff and family. Makes a HUGE difference in their expenses.

Good points, Aramis. That makes me much more comfortable with 1200 for Soc 7.

The bigwigs' dependants thing is true, but I wanted to use this formula to determine character expenditure - exactly where it goes is irrelevant to me, it is still a necessary upkeep of that level of lifestyle.

Warren Buffet is Soc 8, with an apparent soc of about 15. He's no nobleman, and unlikely to ever be accepted by them.

But he could keep that apparent soc for years just by spending a far lot less than he does, but keeping the goods he's got.

Yes, I'm seeing the effect of apparent soc. Perhaps I'll use the term effective soc. A nuance, but it fits better in my head.

Not sure that he could retain that effective soc without associated expenditure. Who will pay for the staff in his home/garden, who will pay the maintenance/fuel on his yacht/private jet?

At best he would be a recluse, but then what was the effective Soc of Howard Hughes when he was living the life of a vagrant in his penthouse? Soc 1 or Soc 15?
I agree, Soc should lag behind spending - in both directions.

 

[aramis]

Good points, Aramis. That makes me much more comfortable with 1200 for Soc 7.

The bigwigs' dependants thing is true, but I wanted to use this formula to determine character expenditure - exactly where it goes is irrelevant to me, it is still a necessary upkeep of that level of lifestyle.



Yes, I'm seeing the effect of apparent soc. Perhaps I'll use the term effective soc. A nuance, but it fits better in my head.

Not sure that he could retain that effective soc without associated expenditure. Who will pay for the staff in his home/garden, who will pay the maintenance/fuel on his yacht/private jet?

At best he would be a recluse, but then what was the effective Soc of Howard Hughes when he was living the life of a vagrant in his penthouse? Soc 1 or Soc 15?
I agree, Soc should lag behind spending - in both directions.

He can't keep all the toys; their maintenances are the bulk of his expenses. He can, however, maintain much of the lifestyle sans toys, keep technical ownership of the toys by loaning them to friends for costs of upkeep, etc.. It's about spending so that people notice. Y'know, the $500 suit that is never more than 2 years old, and youve got 6 of them... the $200 cuff-links... the latest cellphone and computer...

 

[casquilho]

At the Knight Level I have made the cost based on the life style they want to say they live, not their "title". Above Knight I figure there are some automatic obligations.

I did this because in our real world someone could be made a knight for something they have done and it does not come with anything that changes their status as far as money and life style.

For example, a music star or a scientist who invents something great could get a knighthood that has no money or land. Just the right to call themselves "Sir" or "Lady".

So bottom line is, I figure a Knight might be found at various levels.

Daniel

 

[far-trader]

Somewhere on CotI in the last few days, someone posted their houserule for required 'upkeep', being Soc^2*10Cr.

(If it's yours, or you know where it is, let me know.)

Sounds like mine, I'm sure I've posted it here somewhere, but not lately to my knowledge

The reasoning behind it had to do with making more of high Soc compared to low Sco (i.e. a Baron of Soc 12 should be more than twice as wealthy/spending than a middle class average Soc 6)

I think I came up with the Cr10 as a simple number and based on the long term subsistence rules in CT.

 

[Icosahedron]

Maybe it was a resurrected thread?

Yeah, I wanted something non-linear, too. I just can't find any comparative info about how much real-world nobles/billionaires spend (which ain't necessarily the same as what they earn) to compare the different formulae with.

 

[atpollard]

Maybe it was a resurrected thread?

Yeah, I wanted something non-linear, too. I just can't find any comparative info about how much real-world nobles/billionaires spend (which ain't necessarily the same as what they earn) to compare the different formulae with.

Ted Turner said that you cannot spend more than 400 million dollars per year on yourself without buying something that you already have.

That should give you an upper limit of 130 to 200 MCr per year. (Soc F?)

 

[far-trader]

For what it's worth (little imo ) I was going through some notes and apparently Striker sets annual per capita income at:

[(TL minus 4) x Cr2000]

How to go from that to individual spending is the tricky bit.

 

[far-trader]

Does Soc A+ automatically mean you're a noble?

Nope, it's Soc B for Noble, but yes it is automatic. There are no Soc above A that are not Nobles. At least not in the OTU Imperium. Soc is more about political power than wealth. One can be extremely wealthy and have a low Soc, or (though less likely) exceedingly poor with a high Soc.

Which has me rethinking basing the upkeep spending limits based on Soc. But what else is there? A percentage of net worth? Actually, I like that...