MGT trade rules too generous?

[Marchand]

Anyone else finding it's a bit too easy to make money with the trade rules in MGT?

With Broker 2 and a +2 mod from Int, the merchant in my campaign can expect 50% basic profit from each transaction in the trade system (expected roll of 10.5, call it 10, with +4 mod = expected purchase price of 80% base, expected sell price of 120% base, before other mods for trade classification etc.), which seems far too generous. E.g. with luxury goods (basic: 200 KCr), my crew could expect to make a profit of 80 KCr/ton. Or 190KCr / ton with the extra +4 mod for selling to a Rich world.

The only way to justify that kind of profitability would be extreme risk (pirates, misjump etc.) By the random encounters table, running into a pirate is a 1 in 108 chance, and only 1 in 216 for a pirate encounter you can't automatically escape from. I haven't calculated the probability of a misjump, but with any skill in the mix, it will be quite low.

I'm considering switching to something based on GURPS' Far Trader. Has anyone else tried this combination? I've simulated a few cargo runs, and it's giving more reasonable profit rates of c.KCr60 for a Free Trader per run. Which keeps the crew hungry enough to consider those "little jobs on the side", which is the way I want it!

 

[vertigo25]

I don't think that it's the trade rues that are too generous. He has Broker 2 and the Int mod. I would say that would make a very competent trader.

If it's something where you're not wanting him to broker such a large profit, don't rely on the chance of rolls. If it's something that's important to your game plot, fudge it.

 

[CosmicGamer]

I've seen adventurers who had trouble making the ship mortgage payments (total broker DM was only +2). I've also seen adventurers who made some decent money on the side while traveling on an adventure because the expenses for the trip were being paid by a patron (total broker DM was +3 in this one).

Some limiting factors
1) A + 4 modifier is pretty good. Not all adventurers will have such a skilled broker willing to give up his lucrative career to ride around with them. A hired broker with this skill would take 7% of the purchase price and another 7% of the sale price. Using the original posters example, a paid broker working both ends of the deal would get 28,000cr per ton of luxury goods. For a crew paying a broker it would be 160,000cr for the cargo +11,200cr for the broker = 171,200cr for purchase; 240,000cr for selling the cargo - 16,800cr for the broker = 223,200cr for sale for 52,000 in proceeds before other expenses. This would knock down that 50% 'basic profit'.
2) Not every world has high $ merchandise which increases your $/ton. Using the original posters words 'before other mods for trade classification', the only goods available would be common goods and the 1d6 randomly rolled goods. I can't speak regarding what might randomly come up but the highest price common goods are just 10,000cr/ton and profit would be just 4,000cr/ton.
3) Luxury goods are only available in 1d6 ton quantities.
4) 6 tons of 160,000cr/ton cargo = almost 1mil credits. What else are the adventurers hauling? Problem I've seen is that adventurers don't have enough money to fill their cargo bay.
5) There is the 'Dice modifiers from the supplier'. The book suggests that 'especially rich or powerful suppliers can demand high prices'. Favorable trade routes could certainly warrant a GM DM because there would be competing buyers trying to get the profitable cargo.
6) Add in time to find buyers and sellers, time to refuel, time to load the cargo, time for cargo to go through customs, and so on. How many cargo runs can you make in a month? this can reduce the profits/month.
7) Did you remember all the expenses? Refueling, ships routine maintenance, crew expenses, mortgage, life support, and so on. Add in fees for loading, unloading, and storing cargo. Customs fees, import tariffs, insurance on this expensive cargo?
8) Stretch the rule under selling goods that states when finding a buyer instead of a seller 'the same rules apply' (I have not tested this). Perhaps you find a buyer but they are not interested in all your goods. Could be that you roll 1d6 (same as when you buy) to see how many luxury goods the buyer is interested in.

I don't know how accurate any of this is, but my point is that a GM can easily find a way to reduce the overall profits if they need to motivate the characters.

There are also opportunities for adventures based on NPCs taking note of the characters wealth. Steel the characters proceeds after a sale. Competitors sabotaging the characters ship. Gold digging NPC cozys up to a character.

 

[Marchand]

Thanks for these. I should say I like MGT generally and I also think there is a lot to like about the trade rules. It's just a close-run thing for me between the crunch and plausibility of GT: Far Trader and the coolness of MGT's "so, do we risk the illegal cybernetics?"...

Seems the response is 1) a +4 mod is pretty unusual and 2) that the ref can, ahem, tax away some of those profits with ad hoc expenses of various sorts, theft, or whatever.

1) I think the +4 mod partly reflects over-generous chargen. I think what's happened is a 4-strong party allowed for over-specialisation (i.e. my merchant didn't need to worry about, say, trying to roll for engineering skills, as there is an ex-Navy engineering rating in the crew).

2) Agreed. However, I would prefer a trade system that did not require regular ref intervention of this sort to get it to work. I won't crunch through it, but even just running basic cargo in a free trader, with only +2 available in skill and mods, I reckon the crew should expect about 330 KCr return per trade run, before fuel, berthing etc. Seems to me that before long, they are going to have the capital to go for higher-value goods, without ref intervention.

Looking down the trade goods table - how about running 30t of robots (base = 400KCr, expected cost 360KCr) to an Ag world (scoring an extra +2 sale mod)... a cool 3.6MCr return!

Yes to insurance costs - like it.

However, I never liked the idea that you might need to sit around a Class A starport for 6 days waiting to find a broker. Just doesn't seem particularly plausible and risks looking too much like a plot device. "With 5 days to wait, you are approached by a shady character..."

One simple answer would be "good news, you've been left a Far Trader in a will!" Sadly the crew might well realise they're financially far better off sticking with the Beowulf...

 

[rust]

Anyone else finding it's a bit too easy to make money with the trade rules in MGT?

In my opinion it depends a lot on the setting one uses. While it can be quite
easy to "get rich soon" in a subsector with the right worlds, the characters
in our campaign's sparsely settled frontier region find it very difficult to make
any sizeable trade profits at all.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Seems to me that before long, they are going to have the capital to go for higher-value goods, without ref intervention.

Another factor - being rich in Traveller is rarely a bad thing, as there is always a bigger ship for players to buy, with an even more insane mortgage (and crew costs, fuel, etc. . .). Basically, give them enough rope to hang themselves. And yes, they might well find they are way better off with a 200 ton trader than a 10,000 ton merchantman!

 

[Marchand]

So Matt - when do we get MGT: Merchant Princes??

 

[MongooseMatt]

So Matt - when do we get MGT: Merchant Princes??

A little while yet - Scoundrel, Agent and Psion all come first. Oh, and Merchant Prince might not contain _quite_ what you expect. . .