1 hour ago, nameless ronin said:

A lord is supposed to provide for his retainers, but that doesn't mean there's a general system with samurai putting their chop on a bill so it can be forwarded to their lord's chief of accounting. If we're dealing with functional gear, the retainer can likely requisition what he needs from craftsmen employed by their lord - those craftsmen get a wages, so no separate bill required. For other items, if the seller is local payment can be provided on delivery - that will allow the samurai to avoid being involved directly in the money exchange, since a servant will pay when accepting the goods. A lord might make an arrangement with local establishments to "comp" his retainers, or might simply own the place so his retainers get free service. In general though, retainers get a regular stipend or allowance to use as they see fit (it'd be problematic to send the proprietor of a gambling house to your lord to cover your losses, for instance) and if their duties require them to leave their lord's lands retainers will be provided with funds to deal with travel expenses. Exceptions are always possible of course, but the owner of a respectable inn in the Crab lands (probably backed by a local daimyo, so killing the servants is likely to have some consequences at least) isn't going to send a bill across the Empire to get a Phoenix courtier's lord to reimburse him for a meal and some drinks.

I can't recall ever seeing anything that says samurai should not interact with currency, by the way. Actual trade is seen as crass, but samurai can handle their zeni just fine as far as I'm aware.

TL;DR version:

Your Daimiō is not your ******* accountant. In fact he might be paying you a stipend to be his ******* accountant, and he sure as **** doesn't want to have to deal with signing off your every single expenditure of money, much less those of thousands of additional retainers.

1 hour ago, Daeglan said:

On the other hand the Local in keeper will probably send all of the IOUs to the Local Daimyo who will send IOUs from other clans up to the Clan Champion. and the Clan Champions will work out the differences. It is likely that each clan has a stack of IOUs in which comparing things results in things coming out a wash. Not to mention a Lion Samurai travelling in Dragon lands in many ways is a Guest of the Clan so politically the Local Daimyo paying the lodging makes sense. In many ways it is a gift economy.

Champion are actually accountants. Great! They handle yearly the expenses of... *checks notes* two million Rokugani samurai, and maybe 30 million peasants, I guess it's not exactly clear if they are also liable for their commoner retainers or not even if acting on official capacity.

What's the book stating that? Page please?

Also why is that system better than those that were actually used in the real world an why does Rokugan have to work in such a completely unrealistic way without any historical or genre basis?

40 minutes ago, Suzume Chikahisa said:

Basically we would be talking about paper money, with no central control and with multiple issuing authorities. It forces samurai to be even more aware of transational values and all the nitty-gritty details of a credit economy.

And this is supposed to be the simple process that somehow would allow samurai to see money as crass.

The second edition Players' Guide explains (briefly) it's pretty much like this (though koku are minted, not paper money) and that this results in things being a mess. The fifth edition core book mentions currency manipulation as well. I don't think that affects a low ranking samurai's expenses a whole lot though. Samurai are not supposed to care about or ask for prices - most money transactions samurai involved in are the result of a bit of bartering about a "gift" that's exchanged for whatever's being purchased (City of Lies explains this in detail, if memory serves).

edit: to expand, since it might shed some light on how messy this would be for those looking for a better defined Rokugani economy - each family mints their own koku, and they base this on an estimated value of this season's harvests on their lands. So, not only does each family have their own currency (supposedly equal in value), but each of those also fluctuates from one season to the next. The only reason this "works" is that everybody pretends it doesn't not work. Practically speaking, this also means most goods fluctuate in price (or value, depending on how you want to look at it) both over time and between provinces. Downside: published price lists wouldn't make sense. Upside: if you just make something up that seems plausible, you can't really get it wrong.

Just now, nameless ronin said:

The second edition Players' Guide explains (briefly) it's pretty much like this (though koku are minted, not paper money) and that this results in things being a mess. The fifth edition core book mentions currency manipulation as well. I don't think that affects a low ranking samurai's expenses a whole lot though. Samurai are not supposed to care about or ask for prices - most money transactions samurai involved in are the result of a bit of bartering about a "gift" that's exchanged for whatever's being purchased (City of Lies explains this in detail, if memory serves).

At least that system was commodity money value being theoretically base on rice (in practice while not stated, almost certainly based on the metal value of the coins).

The ridiculously byzantine method Daeglan and UnitOmega are pretending is the textual way the Rokugani monetary system works is a hyper-complex form of fiat money without any kind of backing. It's a credit system without the confidence that would allow it.

I'm still waiting for the page references from the books that support their point. Or at the very least some kind of historical precedent to use such a ridiculous method unlike say, some variant of the fudasashi system.

Because what they are proposing was never used anywhere (at least not in the way they are proposing. Not in Japan, not in China, not in Korea, not in Italy, Germany, Engrand, France nor Portugal, Spain and Italy.

59 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

So if you roll up to an inn, the ideal way is you state your name and rank, have a personal seal ready to affix, and the innkeeper lets you stay the night, gets you a meal, whatever, and he passes the bill up to an actual samurai, who writes it off the innkeepers taxes or adds it to the giant pile of bureaucracy supposed to be going on in Rokugan but rarely detailed, because most players don't care about that stuff. To refuse to take it would be to imply you or your Lord are not good to their word, or do not possess the material wealth (via way of resources produced from the land, etc) to pay and is an insult, which a peasant should not make lightly. However, depending on local customs or just general circumstances, you may not have time for the elaborate song and dance (which Rokugan is full of all kinds of stuff like this). Or perhaps you do not want to raise a fuss with the local magistrate (who outranks a normal starting PC in Status). And maybe the Innkeeper does not think you are actually good for the money, but would not imply so directly, instead arrange something where the magistrate and his boys pop in to see what business you're about and cause a social stink. In this case, you might just slap down some bu, or have your attendant do it for you (keeping in mind, same problem as no cost listed for staying at an inn - if you don't get an attendant there's no like, salary or rarity in finding one involved so if your GM doesn't just let you have one, there's no mechanical framework to get one) to get an immediate result with no faffing about and no paper trail, because you are busy samurai doing busy samurai things.

About the no costs listed thing - see the edit in my previous post. Messy. It doesn't matter though: all that matters is whether your GM thinks you should be able to afford something. The actual values are irrelevant.

About everything else: whether you open a line of credit with the innkeeper or pay in cash, you're involved in a financial transaction. Commerce is taking place. It doesn't matter if you pay personally here and now or your lord pays later: goods or services are being bought. Proper samurai pretend this isn't the case by passing the payment off as a gift or let a servant take care of it so they can pretend not to be involved in the matter. Either way, having this go through your lord (or more likely one of his stewards who is in charge of finances) doesn't make it more nor less proper. It's not who foots the bill what matters. How the transaction is presented matters. If you haggle like a fish wife over the price of a room for two nights, you're not being a proper samurai - whether you pay the price yourself or send it on to be paid for you.

29 minutes ago, Suzume Chikahisa said:

At least that system was commodity money value being theoretically base on rice (in practice while not stated, almost certainly based on the metal value of the coins).

In theory rice, indeed. In practice? Probably as much on silent agreement and suspension of disbelief as on anything else. 😛

25 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

How the transaction is presented matters. If you haggle like a fish wife over the price of a room for two nights, you're not being a proper samurai - whether you pay the price yourself or send it on to be paid for you.

Yeah, that's the outstanding point. It's not the existence of a transaction or coin that matters. Penny-pinching and haggling are dishonorable and unbecoming of a samurai, largesse on the contrary is honorable and a source of glory.

Here, since you apparently lack the ability to read for yourself, and insist on being snippy about it:

The actual major references to money in the text. The only line about how it should work is "support them on their journeys and then to appeal to the local magistrates for compensation". And then immediately followed up by "but they'll be more friendly if you can give them compensation now". Only then all the text before that talks about how samurai don't typically handle money directly because that's not supposed to be their business. It is on you and your GM do decide how your samurai handle this situation - but if I'm adjudicating a scenario, the text I have to reference means I have to say "So officially, most samurai don't handle monetary affairs and would not want to do so publicly. The peasant is expected to give you the thing, and you engage in some politeness judo about how he actually gets compensated for it". It's then on an individual character how he feels about that situation. They may decide they are being pragmatic, and so are funded appropriately to resolve issues immediately.

@nameless ronin I think we're now accidentally talking past each other about semantics. To me the issue is not "do we here in the real world define it as commerce" because of course we do, the issue is do samurai think of it as commerce because "commerce" is a dirty word. At some point, there is probably some value compensation. The thing that matters is did anybody get insulted, and did anybody openly engage in "Commerce", because then social attributes get involved. Because yes, Samurai do all kinds of crazy things to save face, and engage in outright fiction so nobody has to admit they did the thing you're not supposed to do. Or if you're a Yasuki or Ide you don't care and you just throw some koku around, you have stuff to do.

2 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

Here, since you apparently lack the ability to read for yourself, and insist on being snippy about it:

The actual major references to money in the text. The only line about how it should work is "support them on their journeys and then to appeal to the local magistrates for compensation". And then immediately followed up by "but they'll be more friendly if you can give them compensation now". Only then all the text before that talks about how samurai don't typically handle money directly because that's not supposed to be their business. It is on you and your GM do decide how your samurai handle this situation - but if I'm adjudicating a scenario, the text I have to reference means I have to say "So officially, most samurai don't handle monetary affairs and would not want to do so publicly. The peasant is expected to give you the thing, and you engage in some politeness judo about how he actually gets compensated for it". It's then on an individual character how he feels about that situation. They may decide they are being pragmatic, and so are funded appropriately to resolve issues immediately.

@nameless ronin I think we're now accidentally talking past each other about semantics. To me the issue is not "do we here in the real world define it as commerce" because of course we do, the issue is do samurai think of it as commerce because "commerce" is a dirty word. At some point, there is probably some value compensation. The thing that matters is did anybody get insulted, and did anybody openly engage in "Commerce", because then social attributes get involved. Because yes, Samurai do all kinds of crazy things to save face, and engage in outright fiction so nobody has to admit they did the thing you're not supposed to do. Or if you're a Yasuki or Ide you don't care and you just throw some koku around, you have stuff to do.

Relevant point "on their lord's land" which completely invalidates what you've been stating. If you want to extend that to other clan's lands in opposition to what is stated on the very text you have quoted that's your choice.

Me I prefer to use methods that have actually historical basis and that actual human beings have used.

Well, I'm not playing a historical RPG, and at the moment, my text is ambiguous on the nature of inter-clan commerce. Alas, I must improvise.

And if anyone wants to be "why don't you just improvise historically", two points. One, shouldn't have to do outside research to run something not historical anyway. Two, the book notes in several other places that it is not always true to historical fact. The rules of Bushido are much more clear and demanding than historically accurate, and so taken much more seriously. The book says handling money is not socially adroit or honorable, I can't tell a super honorable player character "just give him some money, even though the book says you should not want do that".

18 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

@nameless ronin I think we're now accidentally talking past each other about semantics. To me the issue is not "do we here in the real world define it as commerce" because of course we do, the issue is do samurai think of it as commerce because "commerce" is a dirty word. At some point, there is probably some value compensation. The thing that matters is did anybody get insulted, and did anybody openly engage in "Commerce", because then social attributes get involved. Because yes, Samurai do all kinds of crazy things to save face, and engage in outright fiction so nobody has to admit they did the thing you're not supposed to do. Or if you're a Yasuki or Ide you don't care and you just throw some koku around, you have stuff to do.

So if you put your chop on a piece of paper instead of handing over some coins, samurai don't think of it as commerce? Because to me this seems to be a pretty explicit indication that you intend for renumeration to be awarded to the seller or service provider. It's an IOU, which is the same as admission of debt.

12 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

So if you put your chop on a piece of paper instead of handing over some coins, samurai don't think of it as commerce? Because to me this seems to be a pretty explicit indication that you intend for renumeration to be awarded to the seller or service provider. It's an IOU, which is the same as admission of debt.

I don't even know if you literally put the chop to it, or just flash it and give your name, rank and serial number. How they get compensation properly is not enumerated, just that compensation in some form occurs.

I have been told that one of the classic examples of the way this works is basically if you "buy" a good from say a merchant in town, you take the thing (or accept it as a gift whatever) and the merchant jots it down in their ledger, and when tax season comes, they point out they basically already "paid" the lord by giving their retainer something of value and knock the appropriate value off the taxes. He is not physically exchanged anything for it, but economic remuneration is given. Is that commerce? I dunno, I think it's just a legal exchange so you didn't take something you don't own without permission. Fines are noted as a sample punishment, for instance, so that isn't "commerce". Probably. An exchange of gifts is also not commerce, even if maybe you exchange gifts of an equal value at the same time for some economic or political benefit. Probably.

3 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

I don't even know if you literally put the chop to it, or just flash it and give your name, rank and serial number. How they get compensation properly is not enumerated, just that compensation in some form occurs.

I have been told that one of the classic examples of the way this works is basically if you "buy" a good from say a merchant in town, you take the thing (or accept it as a gift whatever) and the merchant jots it down in their ledger, and when tax season comes, they point out they basically already "paid" the lord by giving their retainer something of value and knock the appropriate value off the taxes. He is not physically exchanged anything for it, but economic remuneration is given. Is that commerce? I dunno, I think it's just a legal exchange so you didn't take something you don't own without permission. Fines are noted as a sample punishment, for instance, so that isn't "commerce". Probably.

Sure, but I listed a handful of different ways transactions can be handled as examples several posts back. This is just one possibility, and one that doesn't apply outside your lord's provinces. Why would this be the standard, particularly when travelling?

There are several things people conveniently seem to forget about in various places in this discussion. some things to remember is that..

a Lion clan samurai doesn't give a fritter about what the Crab Daimyo might think about a Crab peasant.. she's not going to strike a Crab peasant dead without "just cause" because that would reflect poorly upon herself and her own Daimyo. (BTW, the Lion clan Samurai would most likely site reasons of honor for this, a unicorn clan samurai would site their compassion.. either way, Bushido is not in favor of randomly killing people, even if you have the right to do so.)

Samurai do not pay for goods or services.. but samurai are meant to be compassionate and will "leave tips". Samurai will also fight threats and dispense justice for the town without any thought of recompense. It's not as if a proper samurai visiting a town does nothing for the town.. Ronin are generally considered a different issue.

Samurai in their own domain is not significantly different from Samurai in other domains because, ultimately, all Samurai are assumed to be serving their Daimyo, and all Daimyo serve the Emperor. In the case of "warring clans" it would kind of depend on whether the war is sanctioned or not. If unsanctioned, a samurai travelling in his opponent's domain would be just like any other samurai, but if the war is sanctioned than the samurai may be attacked or, more likely, taken hostage under the terms of the war.. not because of any action of the samurai themselves.

Keep in mind that imperial law might limit who can travel by what routes, but it doesn't generally restrict what samurai may be where. It's the Bushido tenet of courtesy that causes samurai to ask before entering another lord's domain. At the same time, Samurai are expected to act like samurai at all times and in all places, so there is functionally no difference between a lion clan samurai in dragon lands, and a dragon samurai in dragon lands. (either samurai would be expected to defend the town from bandits, for example. and either samurai could expect to be fed by the town.) However, if the matter of travelling in another lord's domain ever comes to that lord's attention, then they may ask samurai's daimyo to answer for the samurai's actions.. at which point the samurai's daimyo must have a really good reason, or be willing to suffer a loss of face, or be willing to tell the samurai to commit seppuku. The best way to avoid such a thing happening is to make sure the peasants are going to run off to the domain's lord and tell him about the samurai whose causing problems (so tip the peasants generously and treat them compassionately)

I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that "buying things" shouldn't be looked at in a vacuum. Like everything in Rokugan, Etiquette and Bushido should always be considered. Samurai don't draw blood at every breach of honor because honor is not the only tenet of Bushido.. nor do samurai take things from peasants simply because they have the right to, because Bushido is against that sort of thing.

The other question you have to ask you self is doing all the commerce going to add anything to the game? I dont think so. We arent playing Spreadsheets and Ledgers. We are playing Legend of the 5 Rings with Samurai who think Commerce is dirty. Also the reality is the Daimyo probably doesn't deal with Commerce Either. The bills go to his office and merchant class working in his office handle it. the Daimyo just "signs off" on it all by his bureaucrats stamping his chop on the day to day stuff and details. The Daimyo is just the director who says what is to be done. the Bureaucrats deal with how it is to be done.

4 hours ago, Suzume Chikahisa said:

Champion are actually accountants. Great! They handle yearly the expenses of... *checks notes* two million Rokugani samurai, and maybe 30 million peasants, I guess it's not exactly clear if they are also liable for their commoner retainers or not even if acting on official capacity.

What's the book stating that? Page please?

Also why is that system better than those that were actually used in the real world an why does Rokugan have to work in such a completely unrealistic way without any historical or genre basis?

Wow you dont know how Bureaucracy works do you? The Daimyo and Champions have accountants that deal with that stuff. As others have pointed out there is a huge Bureaucracy that the Samurai conveniently ignore the existence of. When someone sends a bill to the Daimyo the Daimyo probably never actually sees it. What they see is what the accountants show them which is the result of doing all the math.

1 hour ago, Daeglan said:

Wow you dont know how Bureaucracy works do you? The Daimyo and Champions have accountants that deal with that stuff. As others have pointed out there is a huge Bureaucracy that the Samurai conveniently ignore the existence of. When someone sends a bill to the Daimyo the Daimyo probably never actually sees it. What they see is what the accountants show them which is the result of doing all the math.

Their accountant are the samurai. They can't ignore the bureaucracy, because they are the bureaucracy. They are the accountant doing all the math.

Just now, Suzume Chikahisa said:

Their accountant are the samurai. They can't ignore the bureaucracy, because they are the bureaucracy. They are the accountant doing all the math.

You are making an assumption. And again you can play Spreadsheets and ledgers if you want. The rest of us dont seem to find that to be fun. Rokugon your way if you want. But remember it is a fantasy world and I am not sure keeping track of the money etc is going to add fun.

8 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

You are making an assumption. And again you can play Spreadsheets and ledgers if you want. The rest of us dont seem to find that to be fun. Rokugon your way if you want. But remember it is a fantasy world and I am not sure keeping track of the money etc is going to add fun.

I don't think anyone is arguing in favour of adding a significant amount of bean counting to the game. There's a question regarding how samurai handle their day-to-day expenses - which is actually a good topic for discussion since it possibly pertains to roleplaying - but none of the opinions offered would require any sort of bookkeeping anyway. Nobody is saying lords don't provide funds for their retainers. GMs can assume the money is there or rule it isn't if the situation warrants that, but nobody has to spend time balancing their in-game budget. The only question is how the money changes hands; where it comes from is perfectly clear.

16 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

I don't think anyone is arguing in favour of adding a significant amount of bean counting to the game. There's a question regarding how samurai handle their day-to-day expenses - which is actually a good topic for discussion since it possibly pertains to roleplaying - but none of the opinions offered would require any sort of bookkeeping anyway. Nobody is saying lords don't provide funds for their retainers. GMs can assume the money is there or rule it isn't if the situation warrants that, but nobody has to spend time balancing their in-game budget. The only question is how the money changes hands; where it comes from is perfectly clear.

Exactly. It's not like Pendragon has onerous rules for upkeep, and the like. With all that L5R originally borrowed from it this would seem like a no brainer (and, honestly, the rules on page 229 are perfectly serviceable by themselves, looking in detail at the economy/gear chapter, the major problem is that, as always been the case, the coinage lacks granularity, which leads to very inflated prices for even the most mundane of items, there is distinct lack of services which coupled with the lack of income rules is not very pratical for the GM).

The coinage issue is probably beyond hope again. Hopefully Emerald Empire will handle the other two issues.

7 hours ago, Suzume Chikahisa said:

Relevant point "on their lord's land" which completely invalidates what you've been stating. If you want to extend that to other clan's lands in opposition to what is stated on the very text you have quoted that's your choice.

That will probably (as ever) depend on context.

A low ranking samurai who's not expected?

Currency will ease the way because whilst no peasant wants to say "bugger off" to a potential guest with a short temper, a hand-and-half scimitar and the legal right to remove his head with very little social consequence, food, sake and firewood does cost him time, effort and money to acquire.

Yes, they have a duty to aid you, but it's not fair to assist you now at the cost of discommoding the next guest, who (a) is more important than the courier in front of them and actually works for their lord, (b) they actually like because they're civil to peasants and (c) actually bothered to have them notified in advance they were coming.

If, on the other hand, you have the cash right now, the innkeeper can replace everything from the market before it closes, and no-one is in any way inconvenienced.

By comparison, a high ranking samurai (say, an ambassador) who's in another clan's territory on recognised business by that clan probably has " and provide the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary " or some similar verbiage on their travel papers, meaning they have the same defecto permission to claim stuff to be billed later to the regional magistrate as a local samurai would; they're an expected guest of the clan.

10 hours ago, Suzume Chikahisa said:

You choice, but if there is setting info claiming that (and unfortunately John Wick tended to spew bull like that), you better have the receipts for it.

I personally prefer to use solutions that have basis in reality and have been in historical use, because not even billeting has worked like that.

Local samurai explicitly don't in both 2E and 3E. Literally, everything they need they simply ask for, and stamp the ledger... which gets presented to the lord, who, unless he's an honorless dog, accepts the receipt in lieu of payment of taxes in coin. Which is why inkeepers tend to be highly polite but firm about getting a chop BEFORE service - unless the samurai is drunk or violent, in which case, placate them until the dōshin can come and "escort them off to bed"... or if bad enough, to seppuku. Heck, it's even in 1E. Now, in cities, coin was expected. And most would know the approval chop for those entering; travel papers are also a system of visas.

Using this right of support when it's not for a need is an honor hit. Paying one's way for one's needs at home is an honor gain.

Likewise, samurai's view of prices is often skewed. If they pay, they often pay too much or too little. That they paid at all is enough.

And this is based upon several histories by respected historians. It was less common in the Tokugawa and later eras.

Heck, there were entire decades where no local coin was in common use...

16 minutes ago, AK_Aramis said:

, in cities, coin was expected.

Again, that's a scope and scale thing, I guess.

In a local village, the 'lord' is pretty obvious. He's the one with the big fortified house on the hill, the karo is in the building next door, and the kitchen boy can run out the back door of the inn, check whether either of them have heard of you, and be back to give the innkeeper a heads-up before the tea is brewed.

In Otosan Uchi, the "Doji-Sama" who your papers says will cover your expenses could be any one of thousands and take days of effort for the innkeeper to track down.

That's another issue with samurai away from home - once you get a fair distance from home, the cost of actually recovering the money could be more than the debt is worth.

I realise the idea of a peasant trudging all the way up to the High House Of Light with a bill for a couple of cups of sake from Friendly Traveller Village is deliberately ridiculous, but it's clearly not going to happen, hence not bringing the money with you but still demanding the sake is (essentially) robbing the innkeeper.

Also, some trades involve other samurai (I'm thinking artisans, smiths, kobune captains, etc.) and others almost require a cash exchange (illegal ones like bribing officials or purchasing forgeries, but also stakes in gambling houses, "hand gift" practices and likely any pre-arranged sales of bulk goods). It's not all innkeepers and street vendors.

9 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

Also, some trades involve other samurai (I'm thinking artisans, smiths, kobune captains, etc.) and others almost require a cash exchange (illegal ones like bribing officials or purchasing forgeries, but also stakes in gambling houses, "hand gift" practices and likely any pre-arranged sales of bulk goods). It's not all innkeepers and street vendors.

Indeed. "I'll stamp a receipt with my personal chop and you send it to my lord to pay" is hardly a viable option when the thing in question is not something you want them (or a putative future magistrate reading the records) to know about, because it's either illegal, embarrassing or both.