My dm and I disagree on what the following passage means:
Restrictions on EarningsWhether a unit generates its listed capital depends on your intentions for the building or organization, and should follow common sense. For example, if you construct a building with a Bar, Common Room, and Kitchen, you might want to use it as a tavern or a headquarters for your adventuring party. If it's a tavern, it's open to the public and generates capital. Otherwise, it's a private building and doesn't generate capital because it's used by only you and your friends. If you start your own cult with Acolytes and Priests, you might decide they sell healing and generate income. If your thieves' guild has Acolytes, you might decide they only heal members of your guild, and therefore don't generate income.
If you intend for your building or organization to generate capital, you must explain to the GM how it does so. You can change the purpose of your building or organization (for example, renovating an old military barracks into an inn or turning your greedy cult into a generous one) and in doing so change the capital it generates. You should choose one idea and stick to it, however, as a business that's open to the public on an irregular basis makes less money, as does a business that frequently changes its purpose. The GM might reduce the capital buildings generate in such situations.
The circumstances is effectively that we have received control of a former tavern, containing a kitchen, bar, common room and storage room. It is the party's intent to build up on this adding rooms and teams to create a law enforcement headquarters and organization, since we were given sort of US marshal style ranks in the same ceremony that gave us the tavern. We intend primarily to use it to earn influence within the city, but other forms of capital as well.
The issue is essentially if the former tavern rooms can be re purposed to support a different kind of organization and still earn their capital benefits. Given that many buildings have rooms that are not directly related to the primary purpose of the building but instead are used in a support fashion, it seems reasonable to have these elements as part of our organization, even if it does not expressly help with enforcing law and order.
He seems to think the quoted passage implies that for instance a kitchen in the garrison would not contribute its capital bonuses to the efforts of the garrison (assuming it was being used to house soldiers), since the kitchen itself would be closed to the public.
I guess what I am asking is what does the quoted statement actually mean. The whole thing is pretty vague, and honestly the downtime rules as a whole sit pretty much in the vague category. I am not trying to override my gm, in the end he can always houserule things to his interpretation, but I'd like to know the actual intent of the rules in this case for my own understanding at least.
Yep. Very vague.
My take on it (as a GM) is that if the building/organisation is intended to make money, then all of the rooms/teams can be used to generate capital. If not, then they don't.
For example, a mansion intended solely for the use of the PCs won't earn capital. Nor will the staff who are employed there. However, if you run it as a high-class hotel, they will.
A garrison to hold hired soldiers won't, in and of itself, nor will the troops housed there. But if those troops are being used as law enforcement (and thus fining criminals, taking possession of stolen goods, and so forth) then both the troops and the garrison which houses them will earn capital.
And the other thing to note is that rooms and teams to not individually earn capital: buildings and organisations do. If a building earns capital, then all of the rooms in that building can contribute. Likewise, if the organisation of law enforcers has a team that is a wizard back at base using divination magic, that wizard still helps the organisation earn capital.
Yep. Very vague.
My take on it (as a GM) is that if the building/organisation is intended to make money, then all of the rooms/teams can be used to generate capital. If not, then they don't.
For example, a mansion intended solely for the use of the PCs won't earn capital. Nor will the staff who are employed there. However, if you run it as a high-class hotel, they will.
A garrison to hold hired soldiers won't, in and of itself, nor will the troops housed there. But if those troops are being used as law enforcement (and thus fining criminals, taking possession of stolen goods, and so forth) then both the troops and the garrison which houses them will earn capital.
And the other thing to note is that rooms and teams to not individually earn capital: buildings and organisations do. If a building earns capital, then all of the rooms in that building can contribute. Likewise, if the organisation of law enforcers has a team that is a wizard back at base using divination magic, that wizard still helps the organisation earn capital.
That is my interpretation. The problem is finding support in the very vague rules to present my dm with.
I cant find any actual line in the rules that explains that its a building/organization that earns capital not rooms or teams. I also cant find any clear definition of what those things are.
For instance. Lets say you have a building that houses a bunk house, a dojo, and a common room for soldiers, but also an alchemist lab, a magic repository and a scriptorium. Can they be seperate 'buildings'? Can they work seperately, if say you wanted to gain influence and magic at the same time? Ive seen people mention you can split up bonuses to make seperate checks. I dont see where in the rules this is worked out, or how it works. I just see a lot of room for 'theres no rule that says a dog cant play basketball' which will be a real pain to work out game to game.
Does your GM think that ordinary kitchens are open to anyone who wants to wander in and wipe his nose on the dishcloths, or what?
They put those staff only signs on kitchen doors for a reason, it's to keep the public out.
What other downtime rooms must be left open for the typical village idiot to wander in and mess with? The Alchemist's Lab full of volatile chemicals? The prison Cells? The Crypt?
Does your GM think that ordinary kitchens are open to anyone who wants to wander in and wipe his nose on the dishcloths, or what?
They put those staff only signs on kitchen doors for a reason, it's to keep the public out.
What other downtime rooms must be left open for the typical village idiot to wander in and mess with? The Alchemist's Lab full of volatile chemicals? The prison Cells? The Crypt?
Based on the quoted text in my original post, he thinks a kitchen for a building that doesnt sell food, host parties, or something else overtly related to food isnt going to contribute to the capital earning of the building. So if carpenters guild has a kitchen and a bar for staff to use then they dont add to capital checks for the carpenters guild. I dont agree with that position, but the rules are so vaugue I cant find anything in the actual wording to counteract it without simply saying 'thats rediculous'.
The only RAW requirement for your kitchen to generate capital is that you explain to the GM how it does so.
To help you do so, you might point out that Paizo's list of prearranged buildings has like over a dozen separate entries that include a kitchen obviously intended to serve food as part of the building's general operations, rather than as a side business selling food to unrelated strangers. The Academy, for example. The Bardic College. The Guildhall. Etc.
Based on the quoted text in my original post, he thinks a kitchen for a building that doesnt sell food, host parties, or something else overtly related to food [...]
It sounds like you want your building to provide food to guards. That's overtly related to food.
|
I would say that any "building" should be treated as either producing capital or not, flat yes/no. I say building in quotes because I also think that you should be able to break down a building into different parts if you wish them to be treated separately.
Take a shop keeper that also rents out an alchemy lab upstairs. He would likely treat the first floor (his area) as producing capital and one building, and treat the second floor (rented area) as not producing capital and a separate building.
Point being that you should be able to part out rooms in a physical building into sub-buildings that either produce or don't produce capital if it makes sense to do so.
I also agree with Coriat. Some rooms may just contribute to the workers' well being. Not every room needs to be exclusive to producing capital, it could be an indirect production (by keeping the guys who ARE producing capital fed, for example).
The only RAW requirement for your kitchen to generate capital is that you explain to the GM how it does so.
To help you do so, you might point out that Paizo's list of prearranged buildings has like over a dozen separate entries that include a kitchen obviously intended to serve food as part of the building's general operations, rather than as a side business selling food to unrelated strangers. The Academy, for example. The Bardic College. The Guildhall. Etc.
Based on the quoted text in my original post, he thinks a kitchen for a building that doesnt sell food, host parties, or something else overtly related to food [...]It sounds like you want your building to provide food to guards. That's overtly related to food.
Under the "Buildings" section, I don't see the output for each building listed, so, while those buildings DO have things like kitchens in them, there isn't any indication that I've seen that they should be counted in producing capital. From what I can tell, the buildings listed are there to give a sense of what one would expect in a typical version of that structure.
You wouldn't, for instance, build an academy without a kitchen, bedrooms, lavatory, etc...
My position (as Kolo's GM), is that, while a building can be oriented toward a particular capital-generating task, it doesn't necessarily do so for all included rooms. For instance, if you had a two story building, the bottom floor being a storefront for, say, textiles, and the upstairs your personal quarters, the rooms upstairs would have no bearing on your income from the shop.
From what I recall of what my players wanted to do, they're looking to create a headquarters for an elite military/police force (something akin to S.W.A.T.--part of the city guard, but outside the main chain of command), using their troops to do good works in the city (maybe effecting repairs, or in martial action against significant threats), and possibly also use their kitchen space to serve the homeless as a soup kitchen.
My contention is that most of the rooms therein would be devoted to simply supporting their new order, not a place for the public, nor as a producer of goods, really.
We're still in the discussion phase, though some stuff has been planned out, but it doesn't strike be as making sense to have a combination soup kitchen and mess hall--the soldiers and destitute might not mingle well, and the latter represents a hazard of sorts in the event of emergency mobilization. I can't imagine, say, a police station house opening its kitchen for such a purpose. Plus, it offers a too easy way to gain entry to the inner working of such a force for any ne'er-do-wells.
I'm thinking that it might produce some Influence, MAYBE some Goods, but it'd be kind of low on the latter, and wouldn't be earning gold.
As far as the current rules go, a Kitchen is capable of adding to checks to generate
a) gp
b) Goods
It is for the players, as I noted earlier, to decide and explain how the kitchen generates its gp or goods. For a), for instance, the in-building kitchen charges the guards for meals. Kind of like the Academy... er... college where I went to school had a cafeteria for students only, but we still had to pay for the food there. Or the organization provides room and board for the SWAT guys but takes a cut out of their pay to cover such, like many businesses do. Whatever.
For b), Goods, perhaps it is making non-perishable foods and such to store up in case of emergency (extra supplies are often useful for the military) or for barter in case the players are spending Goods on other projects.
Both seem fairly non-controversial and straightforward to me. Or your players might have an alternate explanation, that's cool too as long as it's plausible.
If you want to houserule in some Influence as well (feeding people for free and therefore generating good feelings and favors owed about town), that seems fine as well.
As for the combination soup kitchen/mess hall issues, sure, although that is tangential to income I think. It may be more easy or less easy for the BBEG to sneak into the kitchen to further his nefarious plans, depending on the setup, but that's more in the realm of encounters and adventuring than downtime.
I cant find any actual line in the rules that explains that its a building/organization that earns capital not rooms or teams. I also cant find any clear definition of what those things are.
Earnings: This entry indicates what bonuses the room or team gives to its building's or organization's checks made to generate capital. Buildings and organizations act like characters in that they can attempt a check each day to earn capital performing skilled work (without costing you any downtime). You must pay for capital earned in this way as normal.
Emphasis mine. But the whole passage is needed to clarify that rooms and teams give their bonus to their building or organisation.
Under the "Buildings" section, I don't see the output for each building listed, so, while those buildings DO have things like kitchens in them, there isn't any indication that I've seen that they should be counted in producing capital. From what I can tell, the buildings listed are there to give a sense of what one would expect in a typical version of that structure.
You wouldn't, for instance, build an academy without a kitchen, bedrooms, lavatory, etc...
My position (as Kolo's GM), is that, while a building can be oriented toward a particular capital-generating task, it doesn't necessarily do so for all included rooms. For instance, if you had a two story building, the bottom floor being a storefront for, say, textiles, and the upstairs your personal quarters, the rooms upstairs would have no bearing on your income from the shop.
Buildings dont list their earnings because they earn according to the rooms included. It would have been a waste of print space for paizo to do that as well. Rooms dont earn capital. Buildings do. The quote from Chemlak is where that is written.
A building must justify how it earns capital. A room merely has to support that effort to add its earnings to the building's total.
For instance:
A Bedroom provides comfort and privacy for one to two people, and typically features one large bed or two smaller beds. Many also have furnishings or features, such as chairs, wardrobes, chests, tables, or small fireplaces. A Bedroom might be the sleeping place of a building's owner or a comfortable room for rent.
The first example of what a bedroom might be is the building owners bedroom. If a shopkeep has a bedroom attached to his shop, that bedroom adds to the shops capital checks. That isnt directly related to producing the stuff that the shop produces, but it offers the owner a place to rest, improving his ability to work, saving him money on rent, and allowing him to live closer to the shop.
Similarly, a mess hall for a barracks/police office would bring men in early, improve their work efforts, possibly save everyone money on food, assisiting in the building generating capital.
And just as an aside we wouldnt be using it as a soup kitchen, that was for the previous idea. The kitchen and bar would be solely to support the employees of the police force.
The reality is we wont be using the organization/building to earn gp much. Mostly it will be for influence and labor. Occasional earnings of gp would probably only be to cover the leutenants sallary. Goods would come in occasionally from the efforts of the alchemy lab. We arent trying to get rich here, that would be rather silly given the initial investment will be somewhere on the order of 15kgp, we will literally never earn that back (I think a solid business earns like 15gp a day). This is simply an attempt to use the so called 'reward' you gave the party (the kitchen, bar, and common room) to aid the idea we have (the police force).
Earnings: This entry indicates what bonuses the room or team gives to its building's or organization's checks made to generate capital. Buildings and organizations act like characters in that they can attempt a check each day to earn capital performing skilled work (without costing you any downtime). You must pay for capital earned in this way as normal.If the room or team's Earnings entry says "capital" and a number, it can contribute a bonus on the building's or organization's skilled work check for any type of capital (gp, Goods, Influence, Labor, or Magic). If the Earnings entry lists specific types of capital, it can contribute a bonus on its building's or organization's skilled work checks only for capital of those types. You can apply each room's or team's bonus to any one listed type or capital each day or divide it among multiple listed types of capital. For example, an Alchemy Lab can generate only gp, Goods, or Magic, and not Influence or Labor. One day you could use all +10 of its bonus on the building's capital check to generate gp, on the next day you could use +5 on a check for generating gp and +5 on a check for generating Goods, and so on.
A room that is part of a building contributes that that buildings earnings. An owner can divide the earnings of the building into seperate checks, so for instance, one could have the kitchen producing goods and the storefront producing gp, but the justification need only be for the building as a whole to produce captial, not each individual room. All rooms contribute to the buildings earnings.
Keep in mind also that all rooms come with a staff of basic workers
For a room, the Earnings amount already subtracts the cost of having unskilled employees to do the basic work for you. For example, the Earnings listed for having a Bar already account for the wages of a bartender and servers.
So there are people running the kitchen and bar automatically. Just because it serves the employees of an organization primarily, doesnt mean it isnt earning capital.
Think of the many 'cop bars' that are either officially or unofficially associated with police forces, and principally serve cops. Those places would still earn capital. So does the employee cafeteria on the 8th floor of my office. It serves food for which employess pay (albeit as a discount), which serves to make a modest profit directly, but it also shortens the breaks employees take for lunch (no travel time) improves employee morale (cheaper food) and makes catered events/meetings cheaper to manage. All of this contributes to the earnings of the company as whole, not directly (its a bank), but indirectly.
If you want to houserule in some Influence as well (feeding people for free and therefore generating good feelings and favors owed about town), that seems fine as well.
No real need to do that, as it can be handled in the rules. You still generate goods with the kitchen, and you can then 'convert' those goods into influence. Base rule is 3 Goods can be traded for 1 influence. GM can allow a 2-for-1 if appropriate. This makes sense, as yes, a kitchen's donated food can build influence in this way, it doesn't make sense for it to be as good at making influence as it is at making goods.
The rules also state that you CAN mix and match what a building generates, so that common room can make Influence, while the kitchen makes goods. The problem is that there's a sort of 'bug' in the rules when doing this, because it doesn't describe how to handle he actual dice roll (or the take 10).
Example Building:
Common Room gp or Influence +7
Kitchen gp or Goods +4
Storage gp +2
The rules say you can split these up separately, and have the Kitchen earn Goods, and the Common Room earn Influence. However, if you just to this as written:
Kitchen 10+4 = 14 => 1 Goods
Common Room 10+7 = 17 => 1 Influence
Storage 10+2 = 12 => 1gp 2sp
the 10's get counted for multiple times, meaning you can earn MORE splitting the rooms than treating the building as a whole. Free extras.
The way I've houseruled this, is that you roll once for a building, and apply the results of the roll to the production you choose (splitting as necessary. In this case, taking 10, it could be done as follows:
Kitchen 6 + 4 = 10 => 1 Goods
Common Room 3+7 = 10 => 1 Influence
Storage 1+2 = 3 => 3sp
This limits it still to a single roll per building or organization, but allows the rooms to perform what they do best.
If you want to houserule in some Influence as well (feeding people for free and therefore generating good feelings and favors owed about town), that seems fine as well.No real need to do that, as it can be handled in the rules. You still generate goods with the kitchen, and you can then 'convert' those goods into influence. Base rule is 3 Goods can be traded for 1 influence. GM can allow a 2-for-1 if appropriate. This makes sense, as yes, a kitchen's donated food can build influence in this way, it doesn't make sense for it to be as good at making influence as it is at making goods.
The rules also state that you CAN mix and match what a building generates, so that common room can make Influence, while the kitchen makes goods. The problem is that there's a sort of 'bug' in the rules when doing this, because it doesn't describe how to handle he actual dice roll (or the take 10).
Example Building:
Common Room gp or Influence +7
Kitchen gp or Goods +4
Storage gp +2The rules say you can split these up separately, and have the Kitchen earn Goods, and the Common Room earn Influence. However, if you just to this as written:
Kitchen 10+4 = 14 => 1 Goods
Common Room 10+7 = 17 => 1 Influence
Storage 10+2 = 12 => 1gp 2spthe 10's get counted for multiple times, meaning you can earn MORE splitting the rooms than treating the building as a whole. Free extras.
The way I've houseruled this, is that you roll once for a building, and apply the results of the roll to the production you choose (splitting as necessary. In this case, taking 10, it could be done as follows:
Kitchen 6 + 4 = 10 => 1 Goods
Common Room 3+7 = 10 => 1 Influence
Storage 1+2 = 3 => 3spThis limits it still to a single roll per building or organization, but allows the rooms to perform what they do best.
If the room or team's Earnings entry says "capital" and a number, it can contribute a bonus on the building's or organization's skilled work check for any type of capital (gp, Goods, Influence, Labor, or Magic). If the Earnings entry lists specific types of capital, it can contribute a bonus on its building's or organization's skilled work checks only for capital of those types. You can apply each room's or team's bonus to any one listed type or capital each day or divide it among multiple listed types of capital. For example, an Alchemy Lab can generate only gp, Goods, or Magic, and not Influence or Labor. One day you could use all +10 of its bonus on the building's capital check to generate gp, on the next day you could use +5 on a check for generating gp and +5 on a check for generating Goods, and so on.Most of the time, it's simplest and quickest to just apply all the gp bonuses from all the rooms in each of your buildings and take 10 on the roll. Other times, you might want to generate other types of capital to construct new rooms, recruit new teams, and make upgrades.
The rules state that most of the time it is easiest to make a single capital check, but that you may divide the bonuses by room or even within rooms for seperate checks.
This can potentially be 'munchkined' since for instance, if a room produces 6 gp, influence or goods, you could split it 2, 2, and 2, and get the d20 3 times. But remember a couple things. First of all you can only split within a building, so that is at most 5 checks, one for gp, one for goods, one for labor, one for influence and one for magic (assuming rooms or teams earn each of those kinds of capital). In addition, that 10 from the d20 represents exactly 1gp if you are talking earning gp, and at most 1 goods, labeor influence or magic (that you still nead to pay the earned cost to actually have). Even taking the time to 'game' the system to its maximum, yields negligable results. Hardly more then a simple profession role. And these buildings/organizations cost literally thousands of gp to build. No one is getting rich off the downtime rules.
The real befits in lie in the connection it creates to the game world (a player with a tavern in sandpoint has a much more personal reason to protect it). And with the fact that we are FINALLY offered a mechanical means by which non-skilled/non-magical characters can accomplish things in game. For instance, a fighter who has a successful inn can use his capital to boost social checks he normally isnt good at. The most famous merchant in town (lots of influence) can throw his name around town and get people to what he wants even if he is a bafoon and as diplomatic as a brick wall. These are things that happen in the real world and in fantasy worlds but up until now were next to impossible.
If you want to houserule in some Influence as well (feeding people for free and therefore generating good feelings and favors owed about town), that seems fine as well.No real need to do that, as it can be handled in the rules. You still generate goods with the kitchen, and you can then 'convert' those goods into influence. Base rule is 3 Goods can be traded for 1 influence. GM can allow a 2-for-1 if appropriate. This makes sense, as yes, a kitchen's donated food can build influence in this way, it doesn't make sense for it to be as good at making influence as it is at making goods.
The rules also state that you CAN mix and match what a building generates, so that common room can make Influence, while the kitchen makes goods. The problem is that there's a sort of 'bug' in the rules when doing this, because it doesn't describe how to handle he actual dice roll (or the take 10).
Example Building:
Common Room gp or Influence +7
Kitchen gp or Goods +4
Storage gp +2The rules say you can split these up separately, and have the Kitchen earn Goods, and the Common Room earn Influence. However, if you just to this as written:
Kitchen 10+4 = 14 => 1 Goods
Common Room 10+7 = 17 => 1 Influence
Storage 10+2 = 12 => 1gp 2spthe 10's get counted for multiple times, meaning you can earn MORE splitting the rooms than treating the building as a whole. Free extras.
The way I've houseruled this, is that you roll once for a building, and apply the results of the roll to the production you choose (splitting as necessary. In this case, taking 10, it could be done as follows:
Kitchen 6 + 4 = 10 => 1 Goods
Common Room 3+7 = 10 => 1 Influence
Storage 1+2 = 3 => 3spThis limits it still to a single roll per building or organization, but allows the rooms to perform what they do best.
...
If the room or team's Earnings entry says "capital" and a number, it can contribute a bonus on the building's or organization's skilled work
Right, it's that specific munchkining of multiple d20's I described avoiding, by still using a single d20 per building or organization and splitting it amongst the separate earnings checks for that particular building. It does allow a little munchkining still, by being able to split them so as to minimize rounding loss on earning trade capital, and yes, as the rules state, it is EASIER to simply pick one and go with that.
Hi, I'm one of the players in this group and this is what I told yeti the other night. One of the crux of the issue was how the kitchen, for example, could be used to produce anything. my explanation was that we are specifying the kitchen was being used to supplement supplies for any troops we may acquire, and so was directly contributing to our organization. Because it is directly contributing to an organization that is in fact doing good for the community (ideally), there is no reason why its bonuses should not be contributing to anything we produce. it just makes sense that are paramilitary soldiers would be able to produce more of any kind of capital because they would be properly fed, cleaned, trained, and entertained, and would be able and inclined to work harder, perform acts of charity, maximize ability with minor jobs, and all around the better contributors to society. That directly equates influence, labor, and goods. everyday we would be able to come up with possible reasons for any good, telling them today refill the lauders, tomorrow help the poor, and the next day assist is road maintenance. we would be paying them for anything they do, but it is more efficient as we provide better perks for them.
The only room I admitted would be difficult to explain in the context of contributing to the organization were our personal quarters. Just about everything else either is directly supporting our paramilitary group or is being used in its most obvious role. just like in normal office buildings, a business would be inclined to create everything from a rec room, or kitchen, 2 private parking or just a park for employees to hangout, all of which is designed to increase productivity. Even research areas devoted to maximizing product placement can be equated on some level to magic research.
Hi, I'm one of the players in this group and this is what I told yeti the other night. One of the crux of the issue was how the kitchen, for example, could be used to produce anything. my explanation was that we are specifying the kitchen was being used to supplement supplies for any troops we may acquire, and so was directly contributing to our organization. Because it is directly contributing to an organization that is in fact doing good for the community (ideally), there is no reason why its bonuses should not be contributing to anything we produce. it just makes sense that are paramilitary soldiers would be able to produce more of any kind of capital because they would be properly fed, cleaned, trained, and entertained, and would be able and inclined to work harder, perform acts of charity, maximize ability with minor jobs, and all around the better contributors to society. That directly equates influence, labor, and goods. everyday we would be able to come up with possible reasons for any good, telling them today refill the lauders, tomorrow help the poor, and the next day assist is road maintenance. we would be paying them for anything they do, but it is more efficient as we provide better perks for them.
The only room I admitted would be difficult to explain in the context of contributing to the organization were our personal quarters. Just about everything else either is directly supporting our paramilitary group or is being used in its most obvious role. just like in normal office buildings, a business would be inclined to create everything from a rec room, or kitchen, 2 private parking or just a park for employees to hangout, all of which is designed to increase productivity. Even research areas devoted to maximizing product placement can be equated on some level to magic research.
I think even personal quarters (bedrooms) could be explained in the context of 1: Saving the owners/leaders money on lodging ('earning' gp). And its similar to the 'prestige' of the 'corner office'(influence). The boss has the fancy comfortable bedroom, or office or what have you. Not to mention having the owner/manager of the business living on the premesis is bound to be a boon for any organization. You have the boss always within a short walk to the quarters (prior to the age of cell phones this is a big deal) even out of business hours.
As you mentioned, other then gp, no room/team 'produces' captial like a factory produces products. It makes them cheaper (allowing earned cost vs purchased cost) and allows them to be attained faster. I dont think its a big stretch the say that a fancy bedroom would assist in the gathering of influence.
If you want to houserule in some Influence as well (feeding people for free and therefore generating good feelings and favors owed about town), that seems fine as well.No real need to do that, as it can be handled in the rules. You still generate goods with the kitchen, and you can then 'convert' those goods into influence.
It's worth noting that there's little incentive to do this deliberately: earning 3 goods to turn into 1 influence costs 30 gp and a certain amount of time invested from your business, whereas buying influence rather than earning it is the same 30 gp and the building can still be earning in the meantime.
That's why they included the 'GM can allow 2:1 conversion if deemed appropriate'. The 3:1 is deliberate, to discourage this. They really didn't want a Kitchen generating influence as efficiently as a Common Room could. If that was the case, why have so much variety in the rooms available at all?
So here's how I see the options you have with this buiding:
A.) Building makes just Influence. For this, only the Common room applies, with a +7 modifier to the earning check. Taking 10 means a result of 17, so 1 influence at a cost of 15gp per day. (NOTE: In this case, it is better to roll than take 10, as the odds of earning 2 Influence - 13 or higher - is far greater than the odds of earning 0 Influence - 1 or 2)
B.) Split production (using my 'fair' interpretation on how to split the dice roll). Common room uses 3 of the Take 10, Kitchen uses 6, and Storage uses 1. This earns:
- 1 Goods for 10gp each
- 1 Influence for 15gp each
- 3 sp.
C.) Option B then trade goods at 3:1 every third day for extra influence. The net result would be:
- 1.33 Influence/day for 18.75 gp each
- 3 sp/day
D.) Option B then trade goods at 2:1 (GM special approval) every other day for extra influence. The net result would be:
- 1.5 Influence/day for 16.67 gp each
- 3 sp/day
So yes, trading is not as gp efficient, but it is more time efficient. That's called a compromise, and should go into your decision making process (this IS running a business afterall).
I will say this, though. With this specific example, you'd probably be better off sticking with Option A, and rolling for it every time. The net result of this, based on the dice roll odds, are:
- 1.3 Influence/day for 15gp each.
So yes, trading is not as gp efficient, but it is more time efficient.
Unless I am missing something, straight up purchasing influence without earning it takes no time, while earning capital does take time, making it impossible for earning capital and then trading it to be more time-efficient than purchasing capital.
Say a party needs 20 Influence for whatever purpose.
The "Earned Cost" for Influence is 15 gp per. This means that they can buy it immediately by spending twice this cost, 30 gp per (the "Purchased Cost" of Influence).
Or, they can dedicate their Kitchen to making goods for 45 days (ish), spending only the Earned Cost instead of the Purchased Cost, which for Goods is 10 gp per unit. They will need 60 goods to trade for 20 Influence at 3-1.
Therefore, the cost of simply purchasing Influence immediately is 20x30=600 gp. The cost of earning Goods and trading it is 10x60=600 gp, plus 45 days of your kitchen being busy, plus 45 days of having to wait for your Influence to be ready.
Of course, straight up purchasing is far faster. The idea of downtime buildings and organizations are that they work passively while you are gone doing your adventuring. Planned properly, you shouldn't ever really have to.
So yes, trading is not as gp efficient, but it is more time efficient.Unless I am missing something, straight up purchasing influence without earning it takes no time, while earning capital does take time, making it impossible for earning capital and then trading it to be more time-efficient than purchasing capital.
Say a party needs 20 Influence for whatever purpose.The "Earned Cost" for Influence is 15 gp per. This means that they can buy it immediately by spending twice this cost, 30 gp per (the "Purchased Cost" of Influence).
Or, they can dedicate their Kitchen to making goods for 45 days (ish), spending only the Earned Cost instead of the Purchased Cost, which for Goods is 10 gp per unit. They will need 60 goods to trade for 20 Influence at 3-1.
Therefore, the cost of simply purchasing Influence immediately is 20x30=600 gp. The cost of earning Goods and trading it is 10x60=600 gp, plus 45 days of your kitchen being busy, plus 45 days of having to wait for your Influence to be ready.
Nowhere in my description or example did I describe a scenario where it would be wise to depend only on a Kitchen to generate influence. If you want to generate influence, you best be using a room that generated influence. Anything else will always be wasteful. The concept of converting is for the odd times when you need to get as much influence as possible, or you need just a couple and don't have an actual influence generating structure, but a lot of stockpiled goods or labor.
The concept of converting is for the odd times when you need to get as much influence as possible
Converting unwanted stockpiles, e.g. from an adventuring reward, is fine, but this one is not right.
Purchasing influence = as much as you can afford, immediately and with no need for any checks or anything, costing 30 gp per influence.
Earning goods and converting to influence = a limited amount of influence per day depending on your check, costing 30 gp per influence.
The latter offers no benefits whatsoever and in fact only slows you down.
Barring any DM imposed limits on the amount of capital you can purchase, it is always going to be more effective to just buy the capital than to convert it from a working source.