Monthly Ship Payments

[Greymarch]

Okay, when one of my players mustered out of the Traveller class background he got a ship as a mustering out benefit. But apparently he still needs to pay the monthly payments.

According to pg279 of the main book, he needs to pay 1/240th of the total cost of the ship every month. I chose to give him a Type S Scout ship, which has a cost of 42.578 MCr.

So according to this formula, he needs to pay ~177 KCr every month? If so, a couple of questions:

First, is this even feasible? I haven't looked at too many of the T20 adventures out there, but is there any way that a party is supposed to be able to make that kind of money? Most of the adventure rewards I've been seeing are for like 10 KCr for the party to split up! Can you make that much trading cargo? In a Scout?

Secondly, how and where does he pay this back to anyways? It seems like it would be a logistical nightmare. Even if the corporation had offices at major starports, it would take at least a week for any notification of his payment to reach the head office, and probably longer than that.. depending on how far out he is... in a.. you know... Scout.

I was also wondering if it might be better to give him a Free Trader. Afterall, he wasn't in the Scout Service, but he got it from being a Traveller, so it could have been either.

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi !

Your character should not have to pay loans for the scout ship. Typically a mustered out scout character is allowed to use the ship, but does not really own it and it could be recalled.
So the scout "only" has to make enough money to keep up ongoing expenses.
Other mustering out benefits are indeed subject to loans, like a free trader a merchant may get.

Regarding the pay back practice:
Now, theres a functioning message network in the Imperium. It has a well known delay, but I dont think, thats really a big problem.
Guess there are just little longer relaxation times until a central bank office gets nervous about a bill

Regards,

TE

 

[veltyen]

So he doesn't have a scout ship, he has a courier vessel.

You may want to check the "seeker" vessel. It has a comment about deprecated costs.

You don't need to look at the new price however, just the price that it was purchased for which being pre-game could be anything between inherited from grandparents, to won in a poker game (*cough* millenium falcon *cough*).

From the same reference on pg279 the deprecation function is 10% +(0.5-1)%x(ship age in years). The first thought is how would the traveller have a new vessel, the second thought is that 90 year old badly maintained vessels cost 0% (a freebie!).

So a beat up 80 year old courier vessel that's had the guts run out of it with all original (or cheap reconditioned) parts only has a sticker price of 4 MCr or so and a monthly payment of 18 kCr.

Still a lot of cash, but two high passages (from naive or thrill seeking passengers) a month covers repayments.

 

[princelian]

Because it's J2, a S/C can make a profit over its payment, but you'll have to stick to an advantageous trade route, get very lucky, or have a wiz-bang merchant character in the group. (Those feats that let you know what two of the three value dice are invaluable!!!)

That's not true of the A2 Far Trader, because it costs more and has little more cargo space than the S/C. The Free Trader, with its J1 engines, is stuck doing J1 routes, but it can carry enough cargo that you can make it work without having a brokerage genius on board.

But yes, those payments are a killer. Why do you think so many people skip their payments? Or turn a little piratical? Salvaging one ship can put you way ahead on that mortgage.

 

[Greymarch]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:
[QB] Hi !

Your character should not have to pay loans for the scout ship. Typically a mustered out scout character is allowed to use the ship, but does not really own it and it could be recalled.
So the scout "only" has to make enough money to keep up ongoing expenses.
Other mustering out benefits are indeed subject to loans, like a free trader a merchant may get.

Well the thing is he wasn't a Scout, he was a Traveller when he got it, so I didn't think that applied...

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Greymarch:
Well the thing is he wasn't a Scout, he was a Traveller when he got it, so I didn't think that applied...

You are correct, I think TheEngineer just missed the note that the character was simply a Traveller. The best way to go is probably a used ship as mentioned.

Another option might be a patron. Someone with a paid off ship but no crew and a reason to be interested in the character. Then the patron "gives" the character the ship to use as they see fit as long as they maintain it and remain in contact, with the further caveat that the patron may have certain missions for the character to use the ship for from time to time. Built in adventure hook whenever you need it

 

[TheEngineer]

Urg, T20 Traveller class.
Wrong track, sorry

 

[GKar]

The other problem is that repayments don't cover the running costs of the ship. From what few figures I've managed to run, an adventuring crew of the standard 100t scout can get by on trade IF they don't have to make the repayments.

My advice would be to let the character keep the ship as in one of the scenarios mentioned above (ie. a patron, scout service, won playing poker, etc.) encourage him to sell it for a big profit or head for the edge of the Imperium and skip!

 

[veltyen]

Handwavium also works.

The story is (nearly always) more important then fiscal accuracy.

I have had much success just using fuzzy wording, rather then negotiating individual cargos and keeping track of exact berthing fees.

One way to do this is to avoid numbers at all cost. (apologies for the pun.

) just keep your players informed that they are ahead of payments, or slightly behind payments, or getting close to repossesion, or getting close to paying off. When trading they "did well", "feel slightly stung", "giggle like madmen" and so on. More detail doesn't nessersarily add anything to the story you are trying to tell.

At that point the cost of the ship, crew payments, and so on all disappear from the players landscape.

This also means you don't have to watch for any breaks in the economic system (and there are several) as they also fall off the table.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Greymarch:
I was also wondering if it might be better to give him a Free Trader. Afterall, he wasn't in the Scout Service, but he got it from being a Traveller, so it could have been either.

First of all, make sure your players want to play a merchant campaign. If they don't, don't give them a merchant ship. If they're OK with it, give them a second-hand one. A 40 year old ship that's worth only 20% of the original price. Then let them jump around and make more money trading than they could with a license to print their own money. Then show them why the ship is only worth 20% of the original price and have the jump drive break down on a world with a Class E starport. While they're waiting for the very expensive spare part that's needed for repairs to arrive from a neighboring world with a Class A starport, they'll have time to go on the adventure you've prepared for them on this world.


Hans

PS. Breakdowns should be plot-driven, not random. And the players should know up front that you'll be removing big chunks of money at inconvenient times.

 

[robject]

Originally posted by veltyen:

The story is (nearly always) more important then fiscal accuracy.

I couldn't agree more. Use the receipt of a ship as part of the backstory, or, better, as a plot device.

If they're running all over the galaxy, then the ship would be a gift -- and a curse.

If they're sticking to a bounded area of space -- a subsector or sector -- then it's nice to have one of:

(1) a patron who provided the ship (for his adventurous assignments);

(2) or a world council of barons (ultimately leading up to a Marquis or Count) who subsidize the ship in exchange for a few months of (non-played!) weeks of boring freight and passenger runs, with a few months off duty to run special missions or freewheeling adventure;

(3) or a small Trade Union of vessels that pool their resources to pay the bills and get bigger jobs done;

(4) or a faceless interstellar corporation that owns their ship, leaving them helpless pawns in a star-spanning game of corporate ruthlessness.

...Or something like that. I prefer #1, then #2, then #3, then #4. #4 is great for one-shot adventures, where the players are troubleshooters sent to fix something, rescue someone/thing, investigate a derelict space hulk, infiltrate, hunt down someone, etc.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by veltyen:
Handwavium also works.

The story is (nearly always) more important then fiscal accuracy.

That depends on what your players like to play. If it's the Trading Game, then fiscal accuracy is the story, or at least the most important part of it, with role-playing a very distant second. If it's heedless adventuring then who needs fiscal accuracy? But if it's plausible adventuring you like, then enough-fiscal-accuracy-to-be-at-least-plausible is important.


Hans

 

[SpudmanWP]

Originally posted by rancke:
A 40 year old ship that's worth only 20% of the original price.

Background

According to page page 279 of THB:
"Depreciation: The value of a newly constructed ship decreases by 10% immediately upon purchase. If properly maintained (routine or annual maintenance), the value of the ship will decrease at a rate of 1% for every two years of age. Without proper maintenance this rate of depreciation rises to 1% for every year of age."

This works out to a minimum value of 50% for a non maintained ship to a max value of 70% for a well maintained ship.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Depending on what you're normal campaign background is, Traveller does not really support an adventuring merchant. Reasoning is as follows.

If you stick to the basic rules (And not charge per parsec.) Then without Spec trade anything above Jump-1 can not make mortgage payments. Even with a jump-1 ship you have to jump with a respectible load every other week just to make your mortgage payment.

Attempting to run a campaign like this generally winds down to the player who's character owns the ship, and the GM sitting down with charts, calculators, a map and dice. The ultimate in roll-playing. While that may be fine for solo play or play with just one player and the GM, it isn't very much fun for anyone else along for the ride.

None of the published adventures allow for sufficient payment to keep a ship out of hock in lieu of carrying mostly full loads. (With one minor exception being Michael Taylor's excellent Golden Age 1 and 2, where the party is drafted by the Navy and therefore lets the Navy make the payments for the ship. None of the Mercenary tickets allow enough payment for more than just the ground contingent, the Ship and its crew can apparently just go hang.

As for used ships. If you can get one with the same terms as a new ship, and if you can get one at 50% of book value then a Far Trader, under normal rules can actually make its payments. But as far as adventuring goes you still are in the same situation. (A two week delay puts you behind in your payments.)

By the way these problems exist without things like Battle Damage.

Now people point to things like the Millenium Falcon and Firefly for adventuring Merchants.

Now I don't seem to recall the Millenium Falcon ever carrying cargo in any of the movies, the most he carried commercially was two passengers and two droids. There is reference to Han carrying cargo but no reference to him actually delivering it.

Firefly is a different matter. Traveller economics and Firefly economics are certainly two different things. Serenity's cavernous cargo hold never seemed to be full. When they carried cows the deck area appeared to be full but all that cubbage above the deck was certainly empty and that was the biggest load they ever carried in any of the episodes. (Though there is no reference as to how full the cargo bay was during the "Great Wobbly Headed Doll Caper."

Interstellar commerce can't be built on the amount of cargo that two people can pick up and move about. (Or haul behind a 4 wheeled motorbike.) they only picked up passengers once, well unless you count Safrin, and I am still uncertain if any of them actually paid for the ride.

So if you want to run adventures, come up with a different basis for your game than a Starship the players owe millions of credits on.

 

[mike wightman]

Looking back to CT for a moment the only ship benefit that ever carried payments outstanding was the merchant ship.

Every other ship benefit had the ship "owned" free and clear with only operating costs to pay for.

The economics of Bk 2 are set up so that the type A could make its payments - just.
By indulging in speculative trade real money could be made, enough to pay off the ship and upgrade to an A2 - but I wouldn't do that until you have the full price in cash

The CT definitive adventure IMHO was The Traveller Adventure. The campaign has the players as the crew of a subsidized merchant, but the adventure takes place during the "subsidy holiday" so the players only have to worry about operating costs (although smart ones will continue to indulge in speculative trade, and build up quite a cash reserve in doing so in my experience).

Greymarch, what I would do is get rid of the bit that says the Traveller's ship benefit has to be paid for - assume the ship is owned by someone else and the Traveller has "master" papers for it - so the players only have to find the money to run the ship every month.

This may lead to "small cargo" transport, carrying "passengers" - no questions asked - and the odd adventure along the way

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Looking back to CT for a moment the only ship benefit that ever carried payments outstanding was the merchant ship.

More precisely, the type A Free-Trader. Otherwise you nailed it

Just as BTL notes, there are no adventuring merchants.

If you want to play a merchant game you do it with the type A, any other type of game you want one of the other ship benefits in mustering out.

 

[princelian]

It's my opinion that for any ship beyond the J1 Free Trader, the game designers assumed that you were engaging in speculative trade. That's my opinion because it's also MY assumption - that to be successful paying off your ship, you MUST engage in spec trade.

If you're reasonably careful and have a map of the subsector that has accurate trade codes, you can make a killing by taking advantage of huge variations in cargo values. Buying finished goods on an In world and then travelling to a Ni world, you're going to get a good price on those goods. Turn around and take raw or semi-finished materials back to the In world, and you make another killing.

I've had CT/MT groups make steady beyond-their-payments money without more than Broker-1 by taking advantage of some of those BIG modifiers.

As GM, you have to ensure that the party has enough of a stake to:</font>

• set up their initial trading,</font>
• survive the inevitable dry spell/trade fluctuations</font>
• pay upkeep on the ship</font>

But as GM, you have to either accept that the party has a ton of disposable money (several MCr in a relatively short period of trading if they have any luck at all, especially if they have good trading skills), or you keep hurting their ship so they are on the razor's edge of bankruptcy. Both approaches have their drawbacks.

The final point is that with spec trading, a starship means wealth eventually. I could dig out any of my ship's logs from campaigns I actually got to play in (I haven't played a game except as GM for ten+ years....) and show you.

(I kept meticulous trade logs in a ledger book. Destinations, what we bought cargoes for and what we sold them for, records of the status of the ship, etc. It was a lot of work to keep it updated, but after that Imperial audit I was very very careful! When being audited, it's also best if you didn't actually record you landed on an interdicted world....)

 

[chrisr]

Make it an old knackered ship, with regular breakdowns and lots of 'history'. Very low repayments and start the campaign with a charter, like the 'Kursis Charter' scenario in the Linkworlds Cluster. Fuel and overheads paid for long enough for the characters to build up some operating capital.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by princelian:
If you're reasonably careful and have a map of the subsector that has accurate trade codes, you can make a killing by taking advantage of huge variations in cargo values. Buying finished goods on an In world and then travelling to a Ni world, you're going to get a good price on those goods. Turn around and take raw or semi-finished materials back to the In world, and you make another killing.

Which means that the trade system is playable but unrealistic. That's fine if all you want is playable, but it sucks if you're looking for verisimilitude.

Please note that I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with playability or that, if I have to choose between playability and realism, I won't choose playability. I'd just really like BOTH playable AND realistic.


Hans

 

[princelian]

I disagree on the realism. Accuracy may be an issue, but it's very realistic.

</font>

1. World A makes Doomahitchies (I've mentioned these invaluable commidities before).</font>
2. World B, three parsecs away, needs Doomahitchies (well, who doesn't?
   
   ).</font>
3. There are no J1 routes between World A and World B. There is a J2 route, however.</font>
4. Megacorporation Gigantic Merchant Ships don't usually go to World B because its Pop code is less than 6 or 7 or so.</font>
5. Tramp Merchant Captain buys Doomahitchies on World A for 90% of their value.</font>
6. Tramp Freighter has J-2 and a hold full of Doomahitchies.</font>
7. Tramp Merchant Captain rolls worse on his sell roll, but because the value code was -5 on World A and it's +9 or World B, he gets 150%, making 0.67 Cr per Cr he invested.</font>
8. World B makes the raw materials needed to make Doomahitchies, but they don't have the Industrial base to make Doomhitchies themselves.</font>
9. There's no modifier for the raw materials (or it's the same modifier on both worlds), so the profit margin is slim-to-none on the return trip.</font>
10. But there's those Doomahitchies again, and World B's market isn't saturated with them yet, so another trip with a 14 differential between trade code values, and the TMC makes 50-350% profit on more Doomahitchies.</font>

This is no different than the Golden Triangle of trade during the colonial period or any number of examples during the early rail period. It's probably still true in situations where the corp doesn't control all aspects of Doomahitchie production from raw materials to distribution.

Now, on the Spinward Main, there's a few dozen subbies eating up all the good cargoes, it might be harder to make a profit, but I also assume there's more cargoes.