mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
It certainly looks like it.
General Why are Players doing the Ship's Accounting?
- Thread starter Spinward Scout
- Start date
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Ok, I never took S7 seriously, especially those ridiculous air freight cargo pallets, so that wasn’t part of my readings. RAW criticism retracted.LBB2.81, p7:
LBB S7, p19:
LBB S7, p22:
LBB S7 says otherwise.
See above if you don't believe me.
The rule says the route will generally (emphasis added) be assigned and determined before the subsidy is granted. Obviously this is to create pressure for a "business model use case" of the subsidized craft which can be evaluated (by the subsidizing government) in an approvals process. This is meant to be a "show your work before we buy" type of exercise which can prove that the venture can be economically viable. Remarkably few people (let alone governments) are eager to finance unprofitable investments.
Again, it depends on the "shape" of the collection of subsidy "in group" of star systems.
With a long string (or ring) of star systems, you're probably "riding rails" in terms of subsidy routing.
If you've got a "cluster" of star systems all nearby to each other (all within 1-2 parsecs of each other?) then a pre-planned "ride the rails" route structure can become an impediment, so a different business plan model of "tramping around WITHIN the subsidy in-group" makes more sense.
So while assigned/pre-planned "ride the rails" fixed routes are generally going to happen in a lot of cases, that isn't the EXCLUSIVE AND ONLY way that subsidy arrangements can be set up. There are other options ... you just need to make a compelling enough business model case to the subsidizing government officials to get your plan approved.
Exactly.
This article might explain the issue.
Imgur blocks access to UK users after proposed regulatory fine
The image-hosting platform - which is widely used to make memes - was facing a fine over its use of children's data.
www.bbc.co.uk
Black Vulmea
SOC-12
Going back to the beginning:
There are a couple of mildly disparaging posts in this thread that basically take the position of, "Who cares? Why bother? Just abstract it away!" That's a perfectly valid approach for many campaigns - frex, I like how wealth is handled in d20 Modern, where money's not really tracked at all - but for me, one of things I enjoy about the "track every credit" approach is that it increases my sense of Being There, in the game-universe, in ways that abstracted wealth doesn't. I don't mind figuring out bar tabs and living expenses because it puts me in my characters' shoes.
In a couple of campaigns I ran, as referee I tracked the adventurers' expenses on a spreadsheet for the players; anytime a question came up on the state of their finances, I could show them the numbers; otherwise, it was in the background.
There are a couple of mildly disparaging posts in this thread that basically take the position of, "Who cares? Why bother? Just abstract it away!" That's a perfectly valid approach for many campaigns - frex, I like how wealth is handled in d20 Modern, where money's not really tracked at all - but for me, one of things I enjoy about the "track every credit" approach is that it increases my sense of Being There, in the game-universe, in ways that abstracted wealth doesn't. I don't mind figuring out bar tabs and living expenses because it puts me in my characters' shoes.
I've never really liked the more abstract method of tracking money and equipment for example having "stock" instead of actual equipment. Or making a lifestyle check to see if you can buy a piece of equipment. It's nice as an abstraction and gives you options when you run up against unexpected obstacles, but it also takes away the satisfaction of being prepared, and reduces problems to a roll to see if you can pull a rope, pole or ladder out of nowhere.
Obviously, but that glosses over the details. How do you hand payday? Everyone gets paid per share, the venture is closed out and everyone does as they please with the profits. Then they start a new round of investing with different shares splits based on who puts how much in? Does that Repeat every time someone wants another Payday?
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Yes, but for somewhat obvious reasons ... because the question is not demanding a One Size Fits All answer.
Best option is to set expectations from the start.
Payday is:
- During every "week of business" between jumps when accounting can be reconciled.
- Once per month, along with the payout of crew salaries.
- In months 3, 6, 9 and 12 of a year, provided financial obligations are "still in the black" that quarter.
- In months 6, and 12 of a year, provided financial obligations are "still in the black" that semi-annum.
- Once per year, paid out while the craft is laid up for annual overhaul maintenance (which has been paid for).
That sounds more like a game of musical chairs.
When the music stops ... there's a payout of profit sharing ... which can happen "whenever" anyone/everyone votes that it's time to divvy up the pot of profits that have accumulated up to that point.
Hrmmm.
Considering that speculative goods arbitrage is "gambling with your own money" ... perhaps a more apt analogy for a profit sharing payday would be "cashing out your chips" at a casino, instead of playing musical chairs. Until you cash out your chips, you're letting the
Bare minimum, "random" payout times ... whenever "someone" in the group "needs cash" to make a purchase ... is probably the least disciplined way of handling things. Conversely, everyone agreeing to "divvy up the pot" of profits in time to arrive at an Industrialized world (or other pick your trade code of choice location) so that partners can make (extravagant) purchases is something that ought to be voted on BEFORE reaching said destination. You've got a week of "idle time" during jump ... you can make a decision then, if necessary, prior to breakout.
Handling each speculation as it's own operation does seem to be the option with the least long term questions. Everyone is issues shares based on the amount they pay in, then profits are payed out by shares after the freight is sold. Say one share per 100 or 1000Cr payed in. Repeat again every time there's new speculation.Yes, but for somewhat obvious reasons ... because the question is not demanding a One Size Fits All answer.
Best option is to set expectations from the start.
Payday is:
Different groups of people will have different expectations on turnaround times for the distribution of profit sharing.
- During every "week of business" between jumps when accounting can be reconciled.
- Once per month, along with the payout of crew salaries.
- In months 3, 6, 9 and 12 of a year, provided financial obligations are "still in the black" that quarter.
- In months 6, and 12 of a year, provided financial obligations are "still in the black" that semi-annum.
- Once per year, paid out while the craft is laid up for annual overhaul maintenance (which has been paid for).
That sounds more like a game of musical chairs.
When the music stops ... there's a payout of profit sharing ... which can happen "whenever" anyone/everyone votes that it's time to divvy up the pot of profits that have accumulated up to that point.
Hrmmm.
Considering that speculative goods arbitrage is "gambling with your own money" ... perhaps a more apt analogy for a profit sharing payday would be "cashing out your chips" at a casino, instead of playing musical chairs. Until you cash out your chips, you're letting themoneycredits "ride" as you keep playing/placing bets ... until you decide to leave the table and cash out your winnings (assuming you have any).
Bare minimum, "random" payout times ... whenever "someone" in the group "needs cash" to make a purchase ... is probably the least disciplined way of handling things. Conversely, everyone agreeing to "divvy up the pot" of profits in time to arrive at an Industrialized world (or other pick your trade code of choice location) so that partners can make (extravagant) purchases is something that ought to be voted on BEFORE reaching said destination. You've got a week of "idle time" during jump ... you can make a decision then, if necessary, prior to breakout.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
To be fair, each lot of speculative goods "is its own gamble" for profit/loss.
The trick is, you kind of need to have a "slush fund" of credits available to take advantage of any arbitrage opportunities that come along.
So a different way of handling things is to say that there's a shared "pot" of funds reserved for speculative goods trading (say ... MCr10 ... for the sake of illustration purposes, to start with). Once the "pot" of funds ... overflows ... to a pre-determined amount (say ... MCr20+), then and only then will there be a payout to the shareholders who have invested in that "pot" of shared funds.
The idea is to ensure that there is always a reserve of funds available to buy up (for resale elsewhere at a higher price) any speculative goods that may turn up at any time. The quantity of funds in the reserve will necessarily fluctuate, potentially quite dramatically, depending on the nature (and quantity) of speculative goods arbitrage going on.
Because in the speculative goods arbitrage game, the old saying (very much) applies.
You have to SPEND
On the other hand, it solves the player-knowledge vs character knowledge problem.
Yeah, of course the guy who's been in the club for a few years and memorized three editions of the rules knows to bring a 121" pole* along. Does the first-level fighter he's running on that characters first dungeon crawl know it, though?
Conversely, is a 3-term Navy technician with Electronics-2 somehow going to forget to bring his electronics toolkit out on a job, even if the player controlling him is a biology major who has never actually changed a light bulb and wouldn't know a soldering iron from a test probe?
-----------------
*for the things you wouldn't touch with a 10' pole.
Last edited:
Yeah, it does solve some problems, but it sometimes problems, and solving them are the fun. When you can abstract everything down to a die roll that takes away alot of the fun.
and that is the crux of RPGs for me: that balance point of role-playing vs roll playing. RPGs by definition are an abstraction, and veer from mostly abstraction with rules light games to closer to simulation for crunchier games such as T5. And I've always struggled with the money side of things, ranging from penny-counting to the abstract wealth based on social level.
And sorry for the digression. I like the various ideas here that have come up. In my college days we the players kept track of all the credits, after all, it was OUR credits to spend
My current group sadly does not like that level of detail, so I handle it behind the scenes mostly as plot points and the NPCs (aka me) track things as necessary.
There should be a gear check if the Player doesn't remember or know. And EDU or INT would work. if there isn't the necessary skill.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
If one of the players owns the ship, they should do the accounting. If they are traveling on a ship, the referee should do it.
Similar threads
