Cool. Can we game now?
Yes, but only Kligon chess.
Mark - I hear you! I too am a science geek (emphasis on all aspects of physics, from quantum field theory to general relativity, and BTW I get the spherical cows reference), and the Firefly universe is nuts. The solar system would fling itself apart within a few centuries, and the pulse drive *as a concept* is ok, but when they tried to explain it using scientific terms, it just doesn't make sense.
But, you like the TV shows, right? Before you read the description of the pulse drive, you didn't care how they got from planet to planet, right? So hit that big ol' button in your brain labeled SUSPENSION OF BELIEF and try to let it go, eh? ;)
=========================================================================
Now, regarding the shipping issues...
First off, you can't roll the travel times for each item to figure the profit (I know I said you could before, but I hadn't thought it out). The pilot rolls the travel time after starting the flight. The best you can do (and I've only heard from one PC, but you've been nominated to make the decisions as to which items to accept) is pick the item(s) that seem more likely to be profitable (such as the largest load to a region that's generally farthest away).
ASIDE : You could calculate the profit per item by the number of elements it has (so many passengers times cost per passenger, or number of tons times cost per ton, both ignoring "per week") to get some sort of baseline, but the travel times vary so much that's probably not going to help much.
Also, for freight and speculative, let's get rid of the "d6 lots", and only have one lot. You rolled really high for the tonnage of almost all the lots, but you can only carry 100 tons total. That also gets rid of the "destination per lot" problem.
So, your rolls are down to (per kind of item) : Persuasion, Numbers/tons of each item, and Destination per item.
=========================================================================
You said : "it's entirely possible to have travel times to a completely different system be far less than to a location within the same system".
If by system you mean solar system, remember we are rolling by region (Core, Border, Rim). Since the Border and Rim each contain 2 stars, it's entirely possible for a Border-->Border run to take a long time (stars are far apart), and a Border-->Rim run to take a short time (respective stars are close together). Please don't bring up that we'll be making these rolls every 2-4 weeks, when the stars haven't had enough time to significantly change positions, we're ignoring that... :)
=========================================================================
And now for the running costs - I know it makes more sense to have a cost per week, but then you have fuel costs (which would vary by the days the run took), maintenance costs (probably also dependent on the days of travel), food costs (varying by number of passengers), insurance, docking fees, etc. That (for me) is WAY too much to keep track of! I know with your love of numbers you probably wouldn't mind, but I'm trying to make this setting appropriate for a large group of users, and I just can't bring myself to build in all that bookkeeping into the system. I figure on average, 20% per run should suffice. Sure, on a low-profit run not much actual money goes into those things, but that will be balanced out by the next run if it's a big score. Can you live with that?
=========================================================================
Finally, here's your rolls post with all the changes I've suggested :
- Steerage passengers
Persuasion(Networking): 1d4 + 2 ⇒ (4) + 2 = 6 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (3) + 2 = 5
Aces!: 1d4 + 6 ⇒ (3) + 6 = 9 => Success and 1 Raise. We keep 100%.
Steerage Passengers: 1d8 + 1 ⇒ (8) + 1 = 9
Destination: 1d5 ⇒ 5 => Rim 2
Revenue(optional, including middleman and 20% upkeep): 72 / week
- Second-class passengers
Persuasion(Networking): 1d4 + 2 ⇒ (1) + 2 = 3 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (3) + 2 = 5 Success. We keep 85%.
Second-class Passengers: 1d6 ⇒ 6
Destination: 1d5 ⇒ 1 => Core
Revenue: 122 / week
- Freight
Persuasion(Networking): 1d4 + 2 ⇒ (4) + 2 = 6 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (2) + 2 = 4
Aces!: 1d4 + 6 ⇒ (3) + 6 = 9 => Success and 1 Raise. We keep 100%.
Tonnage: 1d10 ⇒ 10 => 100 tons
Destination: 1d5 ⇒ 4 => Rim 1
Revenue: 400 / week
Since all 3 destinations are different, you have to choose which item to take. You can take all items with the same destination (up to 100 tons).
ALL - I'm changing the Debt Hindrance to :
You owe somebody, whether it is a company, or a crime lord. This isn’t just a few credits, it’s a large enough amount that they intend to collect one way or another. The good news is you start game with 5 times the starting cash. However, if it is a minor debt, the party you owe is still giving you time (you must always forfeit half of any money you make), or may be willing to overlook it (for a month) in favor of loyalty, or some boon or favor. However, major debts are long past the point of simply paying them back or making other arrangements. There is a good chance that several bounty hunters are on your tail to make sure that they get the money, from your hide if necessary!
Yeah, this is a mish-mash of Filthy Rich, Poverty, and Enemy, but since several of you have already taken it, I didn't want to change it too much. In the official setting, I've changed it to 3 times the starting cash to make it at least a little more balanced.
In retrospect, it should be represented by both the Rich Edge along with the Poverty Hindrance for the minor version, and with the Wanted or Enemy Hindrances for the major version.
Unless the journey is the point of their travel, passengers expect to arrive at destinations in a timely fashion. They get priority over freight. From a logistics standpoint, does it make sense to accept passengers to both the Core and Rim at the same time? If we're the only ship available I guess that's possible.
Not knowing travel times makes this more interesting. I like it. I'm ready to roll Astrogation and Piloting.
Sorry. The last couple of posts were made more out of silliness than anything else. I'm not sure if that came through.
I can suspend my disbelief, but it's hard when I start analyzing anything. There's something like a tripwire in my brain. If a story or a setting stumbles across it, then I start picking it apart and I honestly can't help myself.
I can live with the 20%. I'll just have to stuff that part of my brain into a closet with a gag on.
As for the pulse drive. I'd always assumed that the big drive that they used when going between planets was a torch drive of some sort. That to me makes more sense the not-a-warp-drive they described in that article.
As for which job. I'd say we take the freight job. It pays the best out of them. I hope y'all will forgive me if I don't roll for the spec cargo and salvage jobs this time.
I'm guilty of not reading things carefully. Can we only choose one job option? And, I'm not going to do the math again, won't Freight always be our most lucrative option?
Perry - I said somewhere that you can only take jobs with one destination. If there are two or more items all with different destinations, you have to choose between them. If two or more items are going to the same destination, you can take them both.
Mark - I could tell you were being silly at the end, but you posted a lot of issues before that...but, no problem, those were things that needed to be clarified anyway. I got a lot of good material to change in and add to the setting because of that!
Perry - let's have you make your Astrogation and Piloting rolls in Gameplay, once everyone's ready.
What's our cargo?
The freight job.
I think he was asking what are we carrying.
Perry - freight will pay more than passengers, *if you can find any*. Speculative cargo pays more than freight, but with a significant chance of taking a large loss...
Understood. I think we could pivot back to Gameplay and describe what it is we are putting into our hold. Then I'll do some rp and roll astrogation and piloting checks.
ALL - while shipping isn't going to be the focus of gameplay, it will probably be your main source of income. But I'm having a hard time with the Firefly 'verse economy.
What would you spend your platinum on?
There's not a lot of better equipment (i.e., weapons, armor, etc.) to buy. You could go for the really expensive Alliance and illegal gear, but if you're caught by the Alliance with it, you *will* go to jail.
Since on an overall average across all regions, a run takes 11 days (so 3 runs a month), what average monthly income in platinum do you think would be fair?
I think I can guess that everyone would like that +4 armor, so 500p. If you want to, think about how many runs or months you think it should take to get that armor.
Remember that the Border and Rim are very low economies, so 500p is a pretty big investment (maybe as much as 3 months total income, just my personal opinion). In other words, don't be greedy... ;)
This is a really, really good question. I didn't get the impression Malcolm Reynolds and Co. were striking it rich. At the huge risk of opening another can of worms, the assumption that we will always have a job seems erroneous.
I would suggest that we are far more likely to find work in the Core, simply because there are more institutions and individuals with goods to move and cash to move them. That we almost always saw Serenity operating outside the Core is more about the reality of filming a TV show in Southern California without a huge FX budget.
I am rewatching the series and the sentiment is that the crew of Serenity simply want freedom. Their margins are paper thin and more often than not their cargo hold is empty and they have very few passengers. That seems appropriate given that area of the system. There's not much work out there.
The Core is where the action is, but we'll have to compete against established freight corporations. We take what we can get - like I have alluded to, Stargazer was previously a garbage trow. Gradually we make a name for ourselves and win better contracts. It gives us a goal other than money.
That begins to answer the original question: what do we expect to spend money on? If we're building a business we need to constantly reinvest in that business. I imagine there are lots of very expensive ship upgrades we would work toward. And eventually we might buy another ship and have to manage a crew of NPCs under our employ.
Btw, GM, if you have a planned campaign that probably does away with the need to answer these types of questions. If not, well, maybe you could shed some light on what we're doing.
I know you pitched this as a Firefly/Serenity game, but you don't have to stick to that setting if it doesn't work for the kind of game you want to run. As for the money issue, the problem most RPGs have is that they handwave a lot of the stuff that affects prices and poses a serious draw on resources.
Let's take a modern example. There a number of European countries that could afford to buy a USN style CVN from the yards, assuming the US would let them. The problem is that they also have to crew and service the dang thing. Really, there are only two nations that would even make use of it in Europe, France and the UK. Most other nations in Europe are more focused on defending their homeland and meeting NATO/EU obligations than they are on expeditionary capability. Buying a CVN may be $10-20 billion, but you also have to pay the crew of 5,000-6,000, that's easily $250 million plus that again in benefits. You have to pay for maintenance, again, easily in the tens if not hundreds of millions. You have to pay for the aircraft, that's $5+ billion easy. You have to pay for maintenance on those aircraft, $10K per flight hour on average for something like an F-35C. Then there's the fuel, which planes guzzle like tomorrow. And on and on it goes until you're paying what you paid for the hull each year to field and maintain the thing.
My point is that there's more to operating a ship than most RPGs account for. Let's take a look at our little Firefly, Stargazer and what we would need to pay for.
- Reactor Fuel
- Rocket Fuel/Propellant
- Food for the crew and passengers
- Environmental Consumables (Filters, emergency air canisters, seals, other stuff that wears out on a regular basis)
- Maintenance
- Spare Parts
- Ship registration and certification
- Administrative Fees (Docking, inspection, cargo certification, software licenses, etc.)
- Taxes (Income taxes, ad valorem taxes, capital gains taxes, social program taxes, etc.)
- Insurance (Cargo, Ship, Worker's comp)
Fuel and maintenance would probably account for most of our expenses. We'd also have to add fees for the parasites (the two shuttles) as well as the fuel and maintenance to get a more complete picture of what we'd need to pay.
If we want to, we can ditch the pricing and just use a roll to see if we come out in the black or in the red on a job. We could even make it a skill challenge to get everyone involved.
As for the setting, I'd be happy helping flesh out a setting with the same feel as the Verse that is more conducive to the gameplay you want to have.
The point I failed to make in my previous question to GM was that this is a forum that is intensely story-driven. If the game is simply an arbitrary application of dicebot to a set of rules, that's not at all engaging.
My interest was piqued by the Firefly setting and the potential for good storytelling. The last thing I want is to be mired down in P&L statements for Stargazer Inc. That's my rl day job I'm trying to escape from here.
Can we reestablish in Gameplay and see where the story takes us?
Posted.
As for the mechanics of it. I say we do it this way.
1. Roll Networking(Persuasion) to see if we can find a broker/client.
2. Roleplay the meeting and seeing if we want to take the job.
2.1. GM, we can roll to see what kind of job it is and where it's going at this point.
2.2. I'd also recommend rolling behind the scenes to see whether or not we have any complications and what kind they are.
3. If we accept the job, then we have a series of complications/encounters that we are faced with. How we handle each one determines if we make or lose money on the job.
4. At the end of the job, tally up our successes and failures to see if we are in the black or in the red.
It streamlines things a bit and also gives more room for the narrative to influence how well we do.
Ok, I think people misunderstood and/or inferred more than what I was asking. I *did* start off by saying that the shipping aspect was NOT going to be the main aspect of the gameplay. Please everyone read what follows very carefully...
All I was asking was how much the players might expect the PC's to earn on a monthly basis from shipping, given that the Border and Rim have such low economies, and there's not a lot of equipment for the players to improve their PC's with. Actually, ignore the economies, just think about the lack of better equipment - so what would you spend your money on?
I did *not* mean to imply that *I* was unhappy with the setting because of the low economy. I'm perfectly fine with the setting being as close to the Firefly 'verse as possible.
Given the low economy, improvements to the ship are probably not possible (since in the SFC they *start* at $50K and just go up from there), nor was I expecting you to get a fleet of ships to start a business, because from this point on, you'd have to pay for the ships with money you earn (and a ship the size of yours would cost $20M just to start with). And role-playing running a business is not my idea of fun.
Speaking of economy, while the Core is richer, it is also completely controlled by the Alliance, and you *really* don't want to spend much of your time there. If it's a destination for a delivery, best to drop it off, find a new job, and get out before anyone notices you. Remember, Emma is a Fugitive, and even tho she has a fake ident card, that doesn't mean she can just walk around freely on an Alliance planet - there are people actively looking for her.
I do have an over-arching plan for the story, and once you land on a planet and transfer your goods, there will be usually be an "adventure" to do something or take care of something. Much like the TV show.
Now, about the shipping mechanics : yes, we are *sort of* hand-waving the upkeep of the ship, but not completely because that is handled by the 20% overhead taken off your profits. If anything, Mark's argument says that this percentage should be bigger! But I'm happy with where it is.
What I don't want to do is have any game mechanic where you *always* roll to see if you come out in the black or red, because if you come out in the red, well...then you have to hope that the next job puts you enough in the black to cancel the red - and what if you end up in the red again? The current mechanics will always give you *some* profit, and you can just choose to never take a Speculative job if you don't want to risk losing your money.
I really don't want to change the shipping mechanics. I'm not interested in roleplaying getting the business (it's just a way to provide you with money), I'd much rather roleplay the adventure you'll find on each planet. And I can guarantee you that there will be complications along the way!
I hope this has put everyone's mind at rest as to the nature of this game.
And if people would please go back to my previous post and read it with a new perspective, and chime in about my original question, I'd really appreciate it.
What would Daisy spend her money on. Well, unlike many in this crew, she's not rich. She would buy another gun or two for sure, possibly some armor just in case but mostly,.. clothes, perfume, Little things to make the ship nicer, things for staterooms for passengers. Things to make her room more bougie...
So, Daisy, how many shipping runs would you think would be fair in order to buy a new gun, or armor (which might cost twice as much as the gun)?
Wow, don't check for two days and there are 47 new posts.
I'm mostly with Mark on the mechanics issue, which is why I suggested a cost per day system way back, but I get ZenFox's point that the shipping is not the point of the game. I'd like something more grounded and relatable, but I can live with a handwaved 20%.
That being said, I think we should be able to roll transport time before accepting a job. Point A to Point B is a known distance, even in an orbital context where the distances change. If we can accurately date a Solar Eclipse from a historical account to May 28, 585 BC, and know it was a Saturday, we should be able to know the distance between two planetary bodies with known orbits.
One question I have is regarding WHEN our game is set? Is this before or after the events of the Serenity movie? If after, I could see some very interesting spindoctoring going on in the Verse, with the Alliance screaming "Fake News" while at the same making it impossible for anyone to get anywhere near Miranda to see whether or not it is really there. I could even see them trying deny Reavers are even real, instead stating they are a propoganda tool created by separatists, leading to laws around even mentioning them or acknowledging their existence as Seditionist Activity.
I decided to make the Transit Time roll after picking a cargo back when there were up to 6 lots each in Freight and Speculative, to save Mark from having to make upwards of 15 rolls.
But now that there are only a maximum of 5 "items", your argument for knowing the travel time given the destination is reasonable, and would allow the group to pick the most profitable item.
Mark - you ok with making 5 more rolls when finding business?
In the setting, I presented Reavers as they were known before Serenity, and I said that the game takes place 5 years after the war ended. According to The Firefly and Serenity Database, the movie took place 7 years after the war ended.
But, I can be adaptable. However, how would doing it your way affect the gameplay in any way, other than as a background?
Anyone else have an opinion?
So, Daisy, how many shipping runs would you think would be fair in order to buy a new gun, or armor (which might cost twice as much as the gun)?
Hmm... tough question. Since this sounds like a lower 'loot' campaign i'd say a cheaper pistol or the like maybe after 1 run, a nice pistol or longarm after 2, good armor after 3 or 4?
I'm good with five rolls.
Thanks, Daisy! Anyone else have an opinion?
Mark - now you'll be able to calculate the exact profit for each item. You ok with doing that, too?
And, please check Gameplay.
I want to amend part of my last long post : I really don't want to role-play getting the business, because that would mean up to 5 role-playing scenes per planet, which would slow down getting to the next planet, where the next adventure is waiting. But if everyone wants to do that, I will.
I think you misunderstood me. It wouldn't be five rolls and then roleplaying each of them. The process I had in mind was something more like this.
1. Roll Networking(Persuasion) to see if we can find a broker or a client that has a job for us. Each attempt takes a certain amount of time, say 1d6 days.
2. Rolls (GM or player) determine what kind of job it is, where it is going, and how big of a job it is.
3. We can either then either role play getting the job or just handwave it. Perhaps include boons or banes depending on how we play it out if we choose to role play it.
4. The job is then set up like an adventure. Profit or loss depends on how we handle things.
Actually, I think I can make this a little more formal.
1. Roll Networking(Persuasion) to see if we can find a broker or a client who has a job. Each attempt takes 1d6 days
1.1. We can spend a raise to either find a client and keep 100% of revenue or to reduce our searching time to 1d4 days.
1.2. A critical failure (1's on both dice) increases the search time to 1d8+1 days even if we use a bennie to reroll.
2. Roll to see what kind of job it is.
2.1. Roll 1d5 to determine destination: 1. Core, 2. Red Sun, 3. Georgia, 4. Blue Sun, 5. Kalidasa
2.2. Roll 1d5 to determine what kind of job it is: 1. Steerage Passengers, 2. Second Class Passengers, 3. Freight, 4. Salvage, 5. Speculative Cargo.
3. Choose whether we play it out or handwave it.
3.1. If we handwave it, then there's no further boons or complications to the job.
3.2. If we play it out, we could get boons if we are successful in our wooing and schmoozing. We could also get complications. Both could come into play during the job or at some point afterwards.
4. During the job, GM decides what events happen (Could be a random table roll or GM discretion.) How well we handle the event(s) in game determine our profit or loss for the job.
4.1. Success add 10% of the job value in profit. Critical successes or creative solutions add 20% of the job value in profit.
4.2. Failures add 10% of the job value in loss. Critical failures subtract 20% of the job value in loss.
4.3. At the end of the job, add up profits and subtract losses. Whatever the result is, that's the percentage of profit/losses we get.
i.e. We take a job that's worth 100p. We have three events happen over the course of the job. We have one success and two losses. That's 10% - 10% - 10% = -10%. We lose 10p on the job.
Doing it this way does a few things.
1. It makes jobs riskier, but also offers a chance to get a better payout.
2. It makes jobs more narrative. It allows each job to have complications and can be fodder for the overall story. The jobs we see happening in Firefly rarely go smoothly.
3. It reduces the amount of rolling we have to do. Finding out what kind of job we have takes two rolls beyond the two needed for looking. We can decide if it's worth it or not, and each attempt only takes two rolls.
4. It gives us an incentive to take planetside jobs, since those don't have the risk of going into the red.
5. It gives other players a chance to affect the outcome of a job. All I'm responsible for is making the initial rolls.
So, let's work an example.
Speculative Cargo
Core
Mark spends 5 days hunting down a job. The broker he finds has a cargo of exotic fruits that they want to sell in the core. They'll take 10% of the revenue. Mark, Perry, and Daisy pay the broker a visit to finalize the deal and see if they can negotiate more equitable terms. Perry covers Mark when he says something stupid, and the broker agrees to 5% of the take if Daisy will accompany them to some swanky event. Swanky event offers more opportunities to pick up jobs to the Core, make contacts, and get into trouble.
Cargo is loaded onto the ship and two days out we have a fault in the whatsit that keeps the produce from going bad. Emma can fix it, but needs a part that isn't in the ship's stores necessitating a detour. There we run into some trouble from a PC's past or from a past job/adventure. Once that's dealt with, we are on our way again. Emma fixes the whatsit, but we lose half of the produce in the container.
When we get to Core space, we're ordered to heave-to for inspection. Alliance comes aboard, making life interesting for all of us, especially when one of Mark's daughters takes offense to one of the grunts' remarks. Bribes, smooth-talking, fines, etc. are paid or done and the Stargazer arrives at its destination. Lets say that we had three successes and two failures. That means we get 10% of the cargo's value in profit. Daisy comes in clutch and does a masterful job of selling the cargo to a boutique restaurant chain with stores only in the Core and we net 500p in profits to split.
Mark starts looking for work again, and oh look, that grunt was actually some higher-up's son and said higher-up is commandeering the Stargazer for a trip out to Georgia. He has ties to THE PLOT! and everything!
So, thoughts on using this as our framework for jobs?
GM, I think a sidearm after 2 trips, a longarm after 4, and good armour after 6 is a reasonable target.
Mind you, I am thinking might need other stuff. :)
Mark - that's a very nice system, but it puts too much focus on the shipping. I want the shipping to provide you with income, but for me it is not the main focus of the game. As I said, there will always be something to deal with once you land on the planet and deliver your goods.
However, I can work in in-flight complications. I had been thinking of having to make a Repair roll each flight, and on a Failure some sub-system goes down, and another Repair roll is needed to fix it. But I didn't include it because it seemed like it was too trivial (Roll #1 fails? Oh, roll #2 succeeds, end-of-problem), however I can work a complication into the second Repair roll.
And there will be occasional Alliance boardings, and pirate and Reaver sightings, during the trips to make life a little more interesting.
All that being said, I have some questions and comments about your system :
In step #1, I'm curious as to how the number of days to find a job affects the game in *any* way?
Also, in step #1, I *really* don't want to role-play a discussion with each and every client you roll up until you find an acceptable cargo. To my mind, that just delays the IRL time to get to the adventure that's waiting for you on the next planet you land on.
I see you've changed "in the black or red" as an outcome to "improving or losing some of the profit", so I can't object to that anymore. But that also negates your advantage #4, since you can't go completely into the red. But your system provides *no* way to go completely into the red, which Speculative in the current mechanics does (if the players want to risk it).
In step #1, by picking just one kind of job at a time, that might make you do *more* rolls than the current mechanics. Since Freight provides the most profit with the least risk, you'll probably reject jobs like just 2 Steerage passengers, and roll for another job until you get Freight. Since there's 5 job types, *on average* you'll have to find 5 jobs before it's a Freight job. That's 25 rolls with your system (you forgot to roll for the tonnage in your example), compared to *at most* 15 with the current mechanics.
I'm thinking that labeling the results of the complications as "success" or "failure" might be problematic and subjective. Could you point out all the successes and failures in your example?
I appreciate the thought you've put into this, and I want to hear your answers and rebuttals to my questions and comments, and at this point I am willing to work in some travel complications here-and-there using the current mechanics (possibly influencing your profit depending on defining "success" and "failure" adequately), but so far I'm not inclined to use the entirety of what you've proposed. I hope this isn't a dealbreaker for you.
Harold - thanks for the feedback!
It was my thought, and you did ask for feedback in regards to it.
In step #1, I'm curious as to how the number of days to find a job affects the game in *any* way?
That was a holdover from when I was thinking that we'd have a cost per diem for running the ship. Something like this:
1. Planet-side - 1p/day
2. Space-station berth - 5p/day
3. Inflight - 5p/day
I ditched it and didn't edit the days roll out. But as for how it can affect the game, it gives us a period of downtime that we can use to do things that we might be able to while in flight. That said, I think we can ditch it. I think I just left it in there so that there was a cost to failure on the networking roll.
Also, in step #1, I *really* don't want to role-play a discussion with each and every client you roll up until you find an acceptable cargo. To my mind, that just delays the IRL time to get to the adventure that's waiting for you on the next planet you land on.
That part is supposed to be optional. The idea was that we could choose to try and weasel some extra profit or another boon out of the client, but at the risk of making our lives more complicated. It could also be used to weave in the narrative that you have planned for the main plot. If you don't want to do that, then we just don't have that option. Simple as that.
I see you've changed "in the black or red" as an outcome to "improving or losing some of the profit", so I can't object to that anymore. But that also negates your advantage #4, since you can't go completely into the red. But your system provides *no* way to go completely into the red, which Speculative in the current mechanics does (if the players want to risk it).
I think you misunderstand how the system is supposed to work. You add up successes, add up failures, take the difference of success (double for really clever/well-done successes) and failures (Double for really bad failures), multiply by 10% and that is how much the crew made or loss on the job as a percentage of the job's value. It kinda runs into an issue with speculative cargo, but even that should have a baseline value that we can use for this, like 1p/ton. We still have the risk of losing money on the sale of speculative cargo, but that's in addition to the profit or losses we would have made based on how the trip went.
Basically, if we have more failures than successes, that percentage goes negative and it becomes a loss. The biggest change is that we risk a loss on all jobs instead of just speculative cargo.
In step #1, by picking just one kind of job at a time, that might make you do *more* rolls than the current mechanics. Since Freight provides the most profit with the least risk, you'll probably reject jobs like just 2 Steerage passengers, and roll for another job until you get Freight. Since there's 5 job types, *on average* you'll have to find 5 jobs before it's a Freight job. That's 25 rolls with your system (you forgot to roll for the tonnage in your example), compared to *at most* 15 with the current mechanics.
Er, not really. It's just 15 if we take out the time to actually look for the job, and that can be changed in a few different ways.
One is to limit the number of jobs available on station. Basically we roll when we arrive and that's the number attempts to find a job that we get before we have to move on.
Another is to change the distribution of the jobs. Right now, it's an even 1/5 chance of getting each job type. Depending on what we think is realistic, we can change it to be more like this.
Roll 1d10 for the type of job.
1 Steerage Passengers
2 Second Class Passengers
3-7 Freight
8-9 Speculative Cargo
10 Salvage
We could even combine the two if we wanted.
I'm thinking that labeling the results of the complications as "success" or "failure" might be problematic and subjective. Could you point out all the successes and failures in your example?
1. There's an issue with the cargo containers. Emma rolls repair and fails. This necessitates a detour and leads to the loss of some of the cargo.
2. The crew is successful in securing the needed part to fix the cargo container.3. Emma succeeds on her repair roll this time.
4. We fail to navigate an inspection by the Alliance, and have to smooth things over with a bribe and some fast talk.
In a sense, it is subjective because what constitutes a success or a failure is going to depend on what kind of complication we're dealing with. When we know where we're going and what we're hauling, that's when we (or you, rather) figure out how things could go wrong. Could there be a stowaway? Maybe a bounty hunter shows up. Officious clerks, up-n-coming crime bosses, rabid reavers, arrogant alliance, bitter browncoats, psychotic passengers, and whatever else we can think of could be a problem that we have to overcome. Success or failure is largely dependent on our rolls and how we mitigate the risk. Solutions that we come up could lead to more complications in the trip. Such as we have a part that's about to break. We could turn back and try to make it to a station, look for other ships that we could buy a part off of, or look for unclaimed salvage that's on the way that may have the part we need. Each option carries varying amounts of risk, but also offer varying amounts of reward.
Each option could also carry its own complications. In our above example, there's relatively little risk beyond lost time and profit in limping back to the station. There's a chance that any ship we find and hail will either not be interested in helping or have nefarious intent with regards to our ship. Salvaging the part could bring a huge risk of running into reavers or pirates that are little better than them. It could cause the alliance to come knocking if we don't try securing salvage rights, but it could also net us more than just the part we need in the form of more cargo, extra supplies, information, and maybe even a hook for one of the planet-side adventures that is planned.
I appreciate the thought you've put into this, and I want to hear your answers and rebuttals to my questions and comments, and at this point I am willing to work in some travel complications here-and-there using the current mechanics (possibly influencing your profit depending on defining "success" and "failure" adequately), but so far I'm not inclined to use the entirety of what you've proposed. I hope this isn't a dealbreaker for you.
Not at all. I appreciate the feedback and I can see where I didn't make some of what I was trying to convey clear. I was trying to come up with a system that fits into the ethos of Savage Worlds and also provide opportunities to weave whatever plot you have into the jobs we get to pay for our way from one place to another.
The problem I have with the current mechanics is that even with the streamlining already done it's a lot of work upfront and I can see that being an issue for me if every time we look for a job I gotta roll a whole bunch of dice and do a lot of look ups to make sure that I have everything right. I'll do it if you want to go that route, but I can already see it being a big drag on my motivation to post.
As for not wanting to make shipping jobs the focus of the game, I'd like to counter with this. A good number of the adventures the crew of the Serenity get up to in Firefly are a direct result of or related to those shipping jobs that they take. The first episode with the salvage job, the joining of Simon and River Tam on the crew, that episode with the guy turning into a reaver after a reaver attack, the episode we met Saffron in, and the episode where Serenity is dead in the water after an explosion in her main systems are all examples that I could think of off the top of my head. For that matter, I see it as a missed opportunity to not work into parts of the plot into the jobs we take on. Have past mistakes come back to haunt us. Have our backgrounds catch up to us. There's zero reason that the jobs we take on couldn't be a part of the larger plot of the game. It'll take some work, but not that much, I think. If it makes sense for a plot point to show up on a job, then let it and watch the chaos happen as we deal with it.
Anyway, that's my two cents. I'll work on getting a more refined version of the system up later today. I wanted to answer some of your questions before I worked on that.
"You add up successes, add up failures, take the difference of success (double for really clever/well-done successes) and failures (Double for really bad failures), multiply by 10% and that is how much the crew made or loss on the job as a percentage of the job's value."
Oh, I thought that final number was multiplied *by* the job's value, so a -10% on a 100p job would net you 90p. You're saying it would net you -10p? And, now we're back to "I don't like a system where there's *always* a chance of going in debt"....
"Er, not really. It's just 15 if we take out the time to actually look for the job."
You left out the roll for the tonnage or number of passengers. That makes 4 rolls per try, and with an average of 5 rolls before you get Freight, that's 20 rolls (ignoring your suggestions above). And with the current system, if you get Freight, you can stop right there if you want to. You can even make it the first roll to check, since order doesn't matter, and with your Persuasion you'll probably get it. 3 rolls, and done (altho for variety you could still roll for other items).
And, I'm going to be really honest here, and tell you that due to health reasons, I struggle with creativity (I alluded to this in my first Recruitment post). I've had to prep quite a lot to be able to provide interesting adventures with occasional plot twists, but I'm kind of dreading *having* to come up with the multiple complications per trip that your system needs to work. That's why I said I would be willing to work *occasional* complications (repairs, Alliance, pirates, Reavers) into the trip in an earlier post.
Also, if we go with the current system, I'd suggest that you come up with a "template" of the rolls in a Word document, like :
{dice=Networking(Persuasion)}d4+2; d6+2{/dice}
{dice=Steerage Passengers}d8{/dice}
{dice=Destination}d5{/dice}
(with {} replaced by [], of course) and repeat for the other items. Then you can copy-and-paste all that into your post, and add re-rolls for Aces where needed. You can also keep tables in the document for price/item and what the Destination number equates to.
I tend to preview my rolls so that I can add in extra rolls as needed. I find that it's fair less likely I'll miss something.
To be perfectly honest, we could reduce this to only three rolls if you really don't want to fool with the cargo hauling part of it.
1. Roll networking
2. Roll destination
3. Roll profit
Save speculative cargo as a thing we have to seek out if we want a potentially bigger payday with more risk.
As for getting rid of the job type, well in the grand scheme of things there's not much of a difference between the jobs besides the profit we get if we're not going to be doing anything besides picking up the cargo/passengers/salvage and delivering it to its destination. If that's the case, why over complicate it? Why not make it as simple as possible to resolve. Roll to see if we find a job. Roll to see where it's going. Roll to see how much we make. That's all we really need to get what you seem to want out of it.
My proposal was centered around the idea of making the jobs more a part of the narrative and giving them some element of risk when we failed at something. That doesn't seem to be what you want to do. You seem to want a system that we plug in die rolls and get out a destination and cash for the players. If that's the case, then things like what kind of job it is and how much we are hauling become superfluous. All we need in that situation is to know if we have a job, where it is going, and how much we get paid. Speculative cargo becomes its own thing because it doesn't fit into the model that you seem to want. For that we can just roll to see if we find anything, roll to see how much we pay, and then we try to find a buyer. Impose a cost for holding onto it, or a time limit if it makes more sense, like produce or meat, and that will give us an incentive to sell it as quickly as possible instead of hanging onto it until we can turn a profit.
I guess what I'm getting at is that the system you set up doesn't match what you say you want. It's too complicated for what is essentially a job roll in Pathfinder, and what I am reading makes it clear that is what you want, essentially.
I'm not saying I don't like your proposal, I'm saying that I personally would have a hard time coming up with all the complications it requires.
I guess what I'm realizing is that while I do see the shipping as just a means to get income, the current rules provide you with different specific things to haul, which I thought would add at least some variety and detail to the game for the players (and I can think of several complications that could arise from hauling passengers...).
How about this :
Networking(Persuasion) to find a job
Job Type: d4 (+1 per Raise on the Networking roll)
- Lower numbers are lower-profit items; 4+ is Freight
- OR, the players can choose to take a Speculative job
Roll for tonnage/passenger count (Networking Raises affect these, too)
Job Destination: d3 (Core/Border/Rim, since there's only one item going to one destination)
This keeps the job type and travel time factors, but with only one Networking roll. And you wouldn't have to calculate the total profit beforehand, I can do that once you deliver the goods.
The only thing I'm having a problem with is : what happens if you fail the Networking roll? Try again tomorrow? Fly to another part of the planet you're on and try again? Go to another planet in the same solar system you're in (which wouldn't use the pulse drive) and try again? If the days it takes to get a Success don't matter, why roll at all, since you're *eventually* going to get a job? (I'm sort of tongue-in-cheek playing devil's advocate here - rolling can get you Raises.) I looked it up, and Pathfinder's Day Job roll does exactly this - it's not a roll to see IF you get money, it's a roll to see how much money you get.
Counter-thoughts?
TBH I have not followed all of this. Is it possible to have this discussion in parallel with what's happening in Gameplay?
Definitely. I'm trying to post both here and in Gameplay every day. Please note, I only post in the mornings (EST), so probably only one post on most days.
In that case I would recommend never missing an opportunity to build your world to give us all something to play with. One thing I resisted at first but have learned to appreciate in pbp is the Society model of pushing the story. Like in this case, it's not like we're going to say No to this guy. Go ahead and make that introduction at the ranch and leave it to the players to backfill rp. That doesn't always work but it is situationally appropriate and effective. Just my $.02
I'll leave it up to the other players - do you want to do things this way? As I understand it, you'll be making posts about *how* you got there after I post that you're there. Or if you choose not to go, post why.
I can see this getting out-of-sync really fast. If I post that you're there at the ranch, and Perry is talking with the guy, and some players post that same day their ret-con, then the next day I post more conversation with the guy, but then other players post on that day their ret-con, the story will be badly out of order. But if the players don't mind re-arranging the posts in their heads, I'm fine with it.
OTOH, what if things progress to a point where I need to know what PC's are at the ranch, or the group needs to make a decision, but not everyone's posted their ret-con yet?
Mark - regarding my suggested new system : you also wouldn't have to roll the travel time, the pilot can do it after his Astrogation and Piloting rolls, again because there's only one thing going to one place.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll leave it up to the other players - do you want to do things this way? As I understand it, you'll be making posts about *how* you got there after I post that you're there. Or if you choose not to go, post why.
I can see this getting out-of-sync really fast. If I post that you're there at the ranch, and Perry is talking with the guy, and some players post that same day their ret-con, then the next day I post more conversation with the guy, but then other players post on that day their ret-con, the story will be badly out of order. But if the players don't mind re-arranging the posts in their heads, I'm fine with it.
Unless there is a good reason why my character should interact with the NPC who is conveying the message to go to the ranch, don't make me do it.
It's tried and true, and much better than asking players waiting at the end of a hallway if they want to open the door. As a technique it can be very powerful to clue players into performing certain mundane tasks. For example, if an npc is in some way important, describe their appearance, otherwise don't. Do the same with any setting object. This will especially save Emma from wandering too far off.
And you can still give us the option to not do something by hiding the next piece of narrative in a spoiler. You'll never get more than one beat ahead because wherever you stop will require some action or response on our part.
Unless "how we got there" is important, hand-wave it. You are offered horses or a wagon for conveyance, and the short journey to the ranch is uneventful... Your introduction of the ranch setting and key NPCs should not be dependent on who declares they are there. Dialog can be generically offered to "You," and anyone who wants to be there can then respond. If a specific person is critical, like the Captain, assume I am there - this is a game and we all have roles to play. I promise I'm not going to be a dick and say I don't want to participate.
Regarding dialog with NPCs: stick to what they know and end it when there's nothing more to learn. Usually one or two rounds of interaction is enough. Stick to your cadence and don't let us slow you down. Trust me - I will post every day and so will others. Whatever you post is what's happening now; we can catch up anytime. Rule of 2 should always reign. If the game is waiting on any one specific player to do something and it goes 48 hours, bot them. We won't mind. Again, just my two cents.
I formally give my permission to bot if I am needed for something and have not responded for 48 hours.
I try to get something up daily, but I do have days where I cannot respond, or cannot muster the mental fortitude to post.
Unless I post otherwise though, assume that I will always accompany the boss.
If you need to push the story along, GM, please do so.
As for the whole shipping thing, I didn't think you didn't like it, if that helps ease your mind. I did think it wasn't what you were looking for.
Sorry, I would flesh this out, but I'm drained. I'll post my thoughts after I've had a chance to read and digest what we've got.
And yeah, feel free to bot Mark if you need to.
Mark - the more I think about it, the better I like my last proposal. My objections about what to do if you fail aren't that important, and with your +2 you'll only fail about 25% of the time, so just re-roll immediately. Also, you're likely to get Raises, which increase the chances of getting a high-paying Freight job. And after Succeeding, you're only making 3 more rolls. Also, you don't have to do any calculations. Finally, it does add some variety and detail to the runs.
And, you get to be creative with describing the item being shipped. Heck, you can even describe the passengers if you want.
Unless you or anyone else have a strong objection, I'd like to go with this.
Perry - telling the players that a guy shows up and just takes them to a ranch to me removes their PC's agency, or control over the situation. And just look at how almost every PC got engaged with the story in just that first interaction with an underling, some of them adding little details that just add to the story!
How about this : if the PC's keep up this level of response time and details, let's do it that way. But if player response times fall, I can understand that interacting with the underling is less important than the discussion with the boss, so I'll try it your way. But I want the players to tell me if they think they're being railroaded into anything, ok?
And with two players already saying "bot me as needed", I'd like to turn this around and ask everyone : at what "speed" do you want this game to go / can you handle? I'd feel uncomfortable botting multiple PC's just to keep the pace of the game going. The point is for the players to be doing the posting, that's where the fun of the game is.
Altho, like you said, if that PC's decisions/actions are critical to the story moving forward, I will bot them after 2 days.
I thought posting once a day was plenty fast, I'm in a couple of games where the GM posts once every few days. I was also in a game where players posted multiple times per day, which was way too fast for me, and I felt frustrated because I couldn't contribute to things that had already happened. So I want to find a balance that everyone's happy with.
So, everyone : what's your typical number of days between posts (once per day, once every other day, etc., or, if you can post multiple times per day, say that)? I know we're in the heady rush of a brand-new game, but what's your posting rate in other games that have been going on for a while?
I try for once a day.
So If there is no statement from me after 48 hours, and I am holding something up, feel free to BOT me.
If I am going to be unavailable for a duration, I will generally post stating such and requesting bot as needed.
Speed of posts, I am happy with once per day, as this seems to be the accepted normal.
I hope that clarifies my thinking on the speed and botting from me.