Please post your thoughts on this scenario:
GM has a custom campaign world. Three of the players started before any of the other ones. One of them says his character concept is "entrepreneur." He somehow buys all the inns and equipment shops in the whole town over the next few levels. He also forms an adventuring company with the other two players.
Around level 5, other players join the campaign. All new players start in the same town. Plot is that they are shipwreck survivors and have nothing but the clothes on their back. The entrepreneur player takes the role of a NPC who keeps offering to get things for the new players. They are not told that this NPC is his hireling.
When asked about prices, the NPC keeps changing the subject and saying they need a change a clothes immediately as they smell of fish from the ocean voyage. If the new PCs say they are not interested or do not have the money, the NPC offers to extend a line of credit, but again dodges questions about prices. If pressed, the NPC says they have to seek the entrepreneur PC for information.
Going anywhere else in town to buy equipment they are treated with the same as above. They find out entrepreneur PC owns every equipment shop and inn in this town and the next for the next 50 miles.
If they buy anything, they then meet the entrepreneur PC and are billed 10X normal cost or more for everything. The entrepreneur PC demands they pay or be in his debt with interest. If they go on an adventure to earn money, they find the entrepreneur PC and the other 2 original PCs own the adventuring company and get 2 shares each while everybody else gets 1 share.
If somebody complains this is unfair they are told that this is how the real world works and that they are being unreasonable in expecting equal treatment.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not good...
realism and whatnot matter very little in a scenario such as this, and the scenario is very simple: party cohesion is threatened by some PCs basically making the game unbearably annoying. Yes, that's how the real world works. Yes, technicly, those PCs have the right of it. It doesn't make them jerks, and it takes a significant amount of fun out of the game.
Besides..."real world?" People play these games to get out of the real world, so that they don't have to think about these kinds of things. Besides, how "real" can an RPG world be anyway...
How is a PC able to afford every inn and equipment shop in town and able to afford to keep them stocked and keep labor on hand? If he has that much money, presumably the PCs enterting the party have a decent amount of cash as well and even at 10 times the standard price this shouldn't be an issue, unless you are talking about magic items as well, in which case I refer to my opening question.
Also, from my experience, prick players don't last very long in a D&D/PF group when they are outnumbered by those looking to have a communally good time gaming.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, there are two options her:
#1: Talk with the GM. This kind of behavior is, frankly, not cool in many gaming groups. Particularly if you mention how it's just not fun. If he steps in, everything is cool.
#2: If that doesn't work, or he's one giving you the 'that's how it works in the real world' excuse, well, behave like it's the real world. Respond appropriately. My personal response (based on playing Chaotic characters and having seen Westerns with this plot) tends towards the brutal murder of the entrepeneur in question if reasonable argument fails. Possibly in his sleep.
Of course, I'm a trifle vindictive, and have played Vampire LARPs, so my response may be a bit excessive, but I don't think so.
How is a PC able to afford every inn and equipment shop in town and able to afford to keep them stocked and keep labor on hand? If he has that much money, presumably the PCs enterting the party have a decent amount of cash as well and even at 10 times the standard price this shouldn't be an issue, unless you are talking about magic items as well, in which case I refer to my opening question.
Nope, new players start with less than 50 gold pieces.
GM says entrepreneur PC started the same way and invested the money from his first few adventures to buy a small shop and kept re-investing profits until he got a monopoly.
The whole scenario is idiotic. First of all, that's -not- how the real world works, but mostly that's not how a game should work. The DM screwed up in a major and obvious way to begin with by somehow allowing the player in question to acquire that much stuff, and for some reason continues to empower the player to be a huge dick to the other players. Players can't necessarily expect "equal treatment", but they have a right to expect equal opportunities to have fun, and they're clearly not getting it. Nobody on the planet plays D&D/PF for the excitement of getting dicked around with by other players or to experience the wonders of monopolistic price-fixing. While some of the blame lies in the hands of the dickish entrepreneur player, I'd primarily file this under "DM horror story". I don't think I've ever met a DM - even a brand new one - terrible enough to make the face-palming series of errors required to get into such a lousy situation and then too oblivious to what makes a good time to do anything about it. The purpose of a DM is to help everyone (including herself) have a good time, to act as a dickishness facilitator.
#1: Talk with the GM. This kind of behavior is, frankly, not cool in many gaming groups. Particularly if you mention how it's just not fun. If he steps in, everything is cool.
That.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, it might be real world, please remind said player about such real world solutions to such exploitive behavior as the French Revolution and Russian Revolution, you know when one class felt they were being exploited by another. I recall it didn't end to well for King Louis or Tsar Nicholas. But hey these players want real world.
New plot: New players find themselves and an entire town being exploited by a self-proclaimed financial ruler who extorts money from the poor to give wealth and power to his friends. The new players must struggle to end his tyrannical rule. Get the torches and pitchforks!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
50 miles is 2 days of travel. Move to better places and say f-u to that player. (personally i consider the setup blatant and disruptive to a negative degree favortism, but that's a different conversation.)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I were the GM, I would just say aloud to the original PCs
"Spending all your time buying up properties, playing merchant and strongarming people into buying your product...hmm sounds like a bunch of NPC mafia characters to me..."
which is what they would become if they didn't start acting a lot more like a party of adventurers. It does all come back to the social contract that needs to exist at a happy gaming table (emphasis on the word happy).
This is a GM problem more than a player problem. A GM that would allow this is probably going to be a GM with other problems.
I'd talk to the GM and if he didn't put a stop to this sort of nonsense I'd leave.
This is just nuts.
But seriously though:
How is a PC able to afford every inn and equipment shop in town and able to afford to keep them stocked and keep labor on hand?
If you have THAT much money and are that good of an investor...why adventure at all? Isn't it time for your character to retire at that point and become a hated NPC?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like I have seen this in a Western movie. It seems to work out great until a mysterious stranger rides into town with a troubled background and somehow defeats a multitude of henchman.
Sounds like the original players are running a "Good Old Boys" club with a sense of entitlement and superiority. How the heck do you own the whole town at 5th level? And being there before someone else joins does NOT entitle them to more shares of anything. They sound like selfish jerks & I would walk - PF is supposed to be a GROUP activity, not some megalomaniac's playground.
What level are the new PC's starting at? Are they meant to be adventuring with the original PC's? Because, no.
Personally, I'd have the proper authorities imprison him for tax evasion and confiscate everything he owns. Player gets to keep the character (assuming he can be busted out of prison) but doesn't get to play kingpin any more.
|
|
Personally, I'd have the proper authorities imprison him for tax evasion and confiscate everything he owns. Player gets to keep the character (assuming he can be busted out of prison) but doesn't get to play kingpin any more.
As a GM? Sure. Assuming you don't just tell him to quit being a dick.
But this post was clearly from a player, who has no such recourse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would not want to play in this game at all.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like the original players are running a "Good Old Boys" club with a sense of entitlement and superiority.
Yep.
I strongly recommend not wasting time on this group.
Well, talk to them about the issues, sure. But absolutely do not sign up and invest time in taking abuse to enable their power fantasies.
But absolutely do not sign up and invest time in taking abuse to enable their power fantasies.
Yeah, there is a whole game system for that. It's called F.A.T.A.L.
Personally, I'd have the proper authorities imprison him for tax evasion and confiscate everything he owns. Player gets to keep the character (assuming he can be busted out of prison) but doesn't get to play kingpin any more.As a GM? Sure. Assuming you don't just tell him to quit being a dick.
But this post was clearly from a player, who has no such recourse.
The tax evasion arrest, etc, should only come after the group gathering to discuss this out-of-character. I figured everyone else had covered the Voice of Reason angle pretty well and didn't think to repeat it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"If somebody complains this is unfair they are told that this is how the real world works"
Allow me my refutation, which also follows how the real world works: Fireball.
Edit: Seriously, posters have already mentioned that this isn't a game worth playing. If someone wanted to be petty about it? Create a Bard and trick the "entrepreneur" into giving you his empire. Once you hit lvl7, Glibness should make this easy. Until then, keep him under Charm Person, such that he is forced to be a friendly guy (the horror).
Preferred option: Quit the campaign and don't play with these jerks anymore.
Vindictive option: Play along with it. The first time the adventuring group is in combat the exploited PCs should announce to the racketteers that they're going to from this point forward receive an equal share of the loot or they will switch sides and help the enemies they're in combat with slaughter them. Maybe kill one of the racketteers to get the point across. Hopefully they will see the error of their exploitative ways and come to see things in a new light. If not then kill them.
Then take their stuff.
Yeah this is a bit of a GM problem for catering to this player.
I'm kinda thinking that you could try a combination of Rathendar and Gignere's ideas. Join the campaign, have one of the new characters suggest they all leave town as soon as possible and go to another town he doesn't control. At which point one of the new players can say "What a great idea. If the person in control is a dick we can just leave." Then as a group all the new players can just stand and walk out the door.
|
|
Honestly, in a game such a this, trying to be vindictive will just escalate everyone's frustration anyway...making the people making you miserable, miserable, will not make you feel better (this has actually been demonstrated multiple times, maybe not with conclusive experimental evidence, but the correlations are strong enough that it makes little enough difference). I'd suggest just leave. There are plenty of adventuring groups out there that aren't dicks...
If civility doesn't work...no one's forcing you to stay
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nah. Its pretty obvious that they became the mob.
I'm cool with a mob game.
Step one. Kill the boss and take over his empire, by any means necessary.
Step two. Run things your way.
Also, note that you're not playing a D&D game about adventuring, but are playing a game about racketeering and mob business.
What's the most natural response?
To look for a better offer elsewhere obviously.
This goes beyond the "in-game" reality.
In other words, the "new" players can (and should) pick up their dice and books, and find a better gaming group.
Kill, that's what would happen in the real world.
While I don't think I'd continue playing with these folks, if I decided to do so, I'd use the system to break the system.
Assuming that the "entrepreneur PC" doesn't escalate with violence, it shouldn't take much for a PC to pick up some feats in crafting and establish some contacts with traders elsewhere(perhaps even as a backstory thing) to bring in supplies at a relatively reasonable cost. Bonus if your character has ties that the other PC couldn't subvert with money, such as parents who are traders or something like that. Said PC could now supply other new adventurers with gear at a much lower cost, while still making a profit to use to slowly push the other PCs out of business. After all, if the other player is selling things at 10x normal cost, you could easily undercut him at 2x normal.
Alternatively, perhaps the PC has ties with an order of paladins or justiciars who would take a dim view of such exploitation, or is the nephew of a lord of whatever nation they're in and appeals to him for aid. Or maybe it's time to become Robin Hood, utilizing contacts versed in conventional crime to strike at one fat target. The other PC suddenly finds his supply caravans or warehouses hit by a band of fed up folks versed in stealth.
And if that fails, the GM and PCs are obviously interested in their own fun at everyone else's expense and it's time to find a new group.
Kill, that's what would happen in the real world.No, it's really not. If entrenched economic exploitation isn't something you buy into, then you leave. That's the simple way to deal with not liking the particulars of a locale.
For those advocating violence, I have to wonder if you would do the same if it was entirely NPCs that were making money off of the PCs. Would it matter what use they put the money to? Most paladins would actually support a system that taxes them heavily to then spend the money on community development and defense, and others might too. Not everyone can defend themselves the way PCs can, so set-ups like this may actually serve the common people quite well. For those that don't need it, just leave.
I think that commoners have to defend their family more from hunger and less from monsters.
Please post your thoughts on this scenario:
There are a number of ways to beat this guy at his own game.
1) Point out the WBL chart on page 399 of the CRB and that it should apply to all joining characters after the campaign has started (you are entering the same the level as him, right?). Also point out that when this player joined the game, there was no DB running the island making massive charges so no, it is not in fact the same situation.
2) Invest in crafting skills. Take your 50gp and set up a hut and a business. Produce items cheaper than he can. Form a Union of all the workers not getting a share of his mighty profits, and an alliance of all the people he is ripping off. Get together and explain to him in clear terms this isn’t going to be permitted.
3) Borrow as much as you can. Get the best gear you can. Go adventuring, and get him to sub you for a share in the proceeds, then give him a tiny fraction saying that the adventure ‘was not as lucrative as you thought it would be’. If he sends agents to verify, they get killed by the monsters on the adventure. Shame. If his PC goes with you, even more of a shame (never go adventuring with people who owe you money). Keep this up until you are as powerful as he is. Then explain that you would like to ‘re-negotiate’ the terms of the agreement.
4) Gank him.
Edit: 5) Walk and find another GM. Make sure they know why, though.
In all of these circumstances, the moment he starts whining, just point out: “That’s the way it works in the Real World when you have a ruthless monopoly. People get upset.”
It is almost always only pointless and painful to try and solve out of game problems with in game solutions.
The issue here is the group dynamic. Scenarios like the one described are pretty common for a group where the players are immature (this doesn't necessarily correlate with age).
Player A is being a jerk obviously. Is it the case of a dominant personality simply being enabled by a passive GM or is the seperate treatment something he seems to enjoy as well? If its the former you have at least some prospect you can talk to the GM about it and set up some story time and space for yourself and the other new players. If its the latter theres nothing you can do but put up with it, walk away or just be an ass until the game inevitably implodes.
It should be pretty easy to tell whether its scenario A or B. If the GM seems inclined to box you within player A's fantastic economic model then its B.
If you try this, you will likely fail. The in-game approach is unlikely to work for numerous reasons, not least of which being that the 'company' has a far stronger position. Root for the underdog all you like, but it's going to get kicked to the curb 9 times out of 10.
Oh I agree, the in-game approach is fundamentally wrong and probably won't work because the GM is on the other player's side. It's easier just to shrug and say: "Sorry, don't care if it's real life or not, it's not the game we came here to play. See ya."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for the monopoly, he's pricing 10x the normal price? Why aren't there any other entrepreneurs who see this as a profitable market, enter it and start undercutting him? Are there no NPCs at all that decide to react to this by starting new businesses, or travelling merchants who see a way to make some great profit and head over to that town?
There's no way the player could get a long term monopoly on those things AND use such high prices without others deciding to start up new businesses. The PC can't keep buying up those new businesses either without firing some of his employees since supply would simply start to exceed demand and he'd eventually start to run a loss instead of a profit. Those people he'd have to fire after having bought them out would simply use that money to start a new business again, and so on.
Now if the entrepreneur PC used realistic prices, 1-10% above market or so, then I could see it being possible for a while, but 1000% of the market price? No way the world would not react to that by creating new competition in order to grab a share of his market.
That will depend entirely on the setting. In most of the fantasy settings I've seen, real world threats like starvation and plague take a backseat to death by random wandering monster even when dealing with commoners.
I think that commoners have to defend their family more from hunger and less from monsters.
Because most settings do not assume that commoners spends 10 times more than what they earn.
Normal setting (per month)
Commoner's revenue is 20 gp
Commoner's costs for obtaining revenue is 10 gp
Profit 10 gp
Commoner's costs for living 5 gp
Commoner will have 5 gp left at the end of the month
This setting
Commoner's revenue 20gp
Commoner's costs for obtaining revenue 100gp
Profit -80go
Commoner's costs for living -50 gp
Commoner will soon lose all the money he accumulated in the past and die starving/revolt.
Now, you can argue that maybe his revenues or his costs are a bit different, but if he can make a live selling at standard price and buying at ten times the normal price it means that he is filthy rich. Filthy. And commoners are not know for that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always get perplexed when gamers approach a problem like this as with in game responses like "take some crafting feats and set up a competing trading system..."
Look, first of all, I don't want to take feats to combat other PCs, either violently or through manipulating imaginary markets.
Second, if the GM is favoring some PCs over others, the problem has nothing to do with the in game economy. There's a much more critical dynamic at work here, and it's entirely outside of the game system.
Finally, I don't play Pathfinder to become a trader or merchant. Perhaps some people do, but if I wanted to do that, I'd play Monopoly.
Talk to the GM, if the GM doesn't immediately apologize and crush the PC mafia, then find another group that actually wants to play a cooperative fantasy adventure role playing game.