Economy without Accounting

By mrvander, in Game Masters

Obviously, this game really lends itself to characters who want to make a living. The "classes" are even called "careers". In my game, I have an arms dealer, a bounty hunter, a slicer, a mechanic and a scoundrel all trying to make a living aboard the same ship. I also tend to run an episodic game. That is to say we don't play a contiguous timeline. I have done so in the past but this game is going to have indeterminate time passing in-between adventures.

This got me to thinking, it doesn't make sense that the character's finances remain the same from episode to episode. Say during the last adventure the characters acquire 12,372 credits. After time passes and the next episode begins... what did they do? They weren't stagnant so why would they still have exactly 12,372 credits?

Most GM's agree that one must keep the players hungry. This is a natural motivation for characters to willingly take risk and to gain reward. The more reward they already have, the less likely they are to take risk (without meta-gaming.) However, the narrative can become artificial quickly when the GM constantly has to take things away, break things or otherwise just drain PC resources. This is especially true for groups and GM's that don't want to do accounting and figure out what every spaceport docking fee and Corellian Ale is going to cost.

While my solution here is admittedly artificial, it's only meant to be a single roll with an effect that represents the passage of time between adventures with potential gain or loss totally in the player's control. First though, a caveat. Sometimes, the resources are the very hook for a story or a character might want to do some "business" during the game - by all means, run with it. This mechanic is not meant to replace story or narrative play, just to allow more of it if accounting isn't your thing. It's meant to represent the business not seen "on screen". Also, sometimes this may not even be necessary, the players often do a good job of draining their own resources - so know your players and pull this out only when necessary or if you really don't want to keep track of minor costs and deals and just do this once each session.

So here it is:

  • Before the adventure begins and after the destiny pool has been determined, the players determine how much of their capital they have risked during the time between adventures. This can be representative of whatever is suitable for the party. For example, it can represent the costs of purchasing goods to sell elsewhere. Since this is post-destiny pool creation, the players and the GM can both spend a destiny point (GM wants to up the ante.)
  • Next, make a Negotiation roll vs. a chosen difficulty. For the negotiation check, the players pick which character gets to make the roll. Whether or not you allow skilled or unskilled help is up to the GM. Remember this is representative of multiple deals, commerce, transactions, what have you.
  • The difficulty is based on how much risk the party wishes to take using the determined amount of credits. If they choose to roll one difficulty (easy), the negotiated rate is then 0% and only advantages or threats can modify it. For each difficulty die beyond the first, add 5% to the negotiated rate. For each challenge die they add, add 10%. They cannot roll simple (or no) difficulty, that would just mean they chose to partake in no business and just spend money (that's simple!) - ships gotta fly and park, people need to eat and so on.
  • Each net success on the roll indicates they made money. Multiply the amount risked vs. the percentage determined by the difficulty dice and add that much to the coffers. Any net advantages increase the negotiated rate by 5% (or to put it another way, adds 5%). A triumph, while also a success, gives the party an ongoing contact or perhaps cargo to start the game with (a narrative effect from their between session adventures.)
  • Each net failure indicates they lost money by the percentage determined by the difficulty dice. A net threat reduces the negotiated rate by 5% (or to put it another way, adds -5%). A despair, while also a failure, means the party has taken on extra obligation due to their dealings (what it is and how much is determined by the GM.)
  • Advantages or threats without any net success or failure can just mean a small narrative effect such as a lead on a job, a relevant name, etc.

Example pre-game:

The party chooses to risk 6000 credits doing business between adventures/sessions/stories.

Of course, they choose their best negotiator to make the roll. A beginning character, he has two skill ranks and a three Presence. So he has one green ability die and two yellow proficiency dice.

The party chooses a hard difficulty, three purple difficulty dice with one of them upgraded to a red challenge die. So this means each success or failure will be worth 20% (1200 credits). Two purple dice are 5% each and the red challenge dice is 10%.

Roll examples:

3 success - group adds 3600 credits.

1 success, 1 advantage - group adds 1500 credits (the advantage increases the rate by 5% to 25% per success.)

1 success, 1 triumph , and 1 threat - that threat reduces each of those 20%'s down to 15% or 900 credits each. The party adds 1800 credits plus a narrative effect from the triumph as mentioned above.

2 failure, 2 advantages - the sting of bad business is lessened by the advantages and they only lose 1200 credits (each failure becomes -10% instead of -20%)

2 success, 4 threats - break even. Business was just enough to cover the overhead.

1 threat - break even but a small narrative effect like a reputation hit the GM can pull out later ("Oh, I heard about your swindle on Nar Shadaa...")

Obviously, this game really lends itself to characters who want to make a living. The "classes" are even called "careers". In my game, I have an arms dealer, a bounty hunter, a slicer, a mechanic and a scoundrel all trying to make a living aboard the same ship. I also tend to run an episodic game. That is to say we don't play a contiguous timeline. I have done so in the past but this game is going to have indeterminate time passing in-between adventures.

This got me to thinking, it doesn't make sense that the character's finances remain the same from episode to episode. Say during the last adventure the characters acquire 12,372 credits. After time passes and the next episode begins... what did they do? They weren't stagnant so why would they still have exactly 12,372 credits?

Most GM's agree that one must keep the players hungry. This is a natural motivation for characters to willingly take risk and to gain reward. The more reward they already have, the less likely they are to take risk (without meta-gaming.) However, the narrative can become artificial quickly when the GM constantly has to take things away, break things or otherwise just drain PC resources. This is especially true for groups and GM's that don't want to do accounting and figure out what every spaceport docking fee and Corellian Ale is going to cost.

While my solution here is admittedly artificial, it's only meant to be a single roll with an effect that represents the passage of time between adventures with potential gain or loss totally in the player's control. First though, a caveat. Sometimes, the resources are the very hook for a story or a character might want to do some "business" during the game - by all means, run with it. This mechanic is not meant to replace story or narrative play, just to allow more of it if accounting isn't your thing. It's meant to represent the business not seen "on screen". Also, sometimes this may not even be necessary, the players often do a good job of draining their own resources - so know your players and pull this out only when necessary or if you really don't want to keep track of minor costs and deals and just do this once each session.

So here it is:

  • Before the adventure begins and after the destiny pool has been determined, the players determine how much of their capital they have risked during the time between adventures. This can be representative of whatever is suitable for the party. For example, it can represent the costs of purchasing goods to sell elsewhere. Since this is post-destiny pool creation, the players and the GM can both spend a destiny point (GM wants to up the ante.)

  • Next, make a Negotiation roll vs. a chosen difficulty. For the negotiation check, the players pick which character gets to make the roll. Whether or not you allow skilled or unskilled help is up to the GM. Remember this is representative of multiple deals, commerce, transactions, what have you.

  • The difficulty is based on how much risk the party wishes to take using the determined amount of credits. If they choose to roll one difficulty (easy), the negotiated rate is then 0% and only advantages or threats can modify it. For each difficulty die beyond the first, add 5% to the negotiated rate. For each challenge die they add, add 10%. They cannot roll simple (or no) difficulty, that would just mean they chose to partake in no business and just spend money (that's simple!) - ships gotta fly and park, people need to eat and so on.

  • Each net success on the roll indicates they made money. Multiply the amount risked vs. the percentage determined by the difficulty dice and add that much to the coffers. Any net advantages increase the negotiated rate by 5% (or to put it another way, adds 5%). A triumph, while also a success, gives the party an ongoing contact or perhaps cargo to start the game with (a narrative effect from their between session adventures.)

  • Each net failure indicates they lost money by the percentage determined by the difficulty dice. A net threat reduces the negotiated rate by 5% (or to put it another way, adds -5%). A despair, while also a failure, means the party has taken on extra obligation due to their dealings (what it is and how much is determined by the GM.)

  • Advantages or threats without any net success or failure can just mean a small narrative effect such as a lead on a job, a relevant name, etc.

Example pre-game:

The party chooses to risk 6000 credits doing business between adventures/sessions/stories.

Of course, they choose their best negotiator to make the roll. A beginning character, he has two skill ranks and a three Presence. So he has one green ability die and two yellow proficiency dice.

The party chooses a hard difficulty, three purple difficulty dice with one of them upgraded to a red challenge die. So this means each success or failure will be worth 20% (1200 credits). Two purple dice are 5% each and the red challenge dice is 10%.

Roll examples:

3 success - group adds 3600 credits.

1 success, 1 advantage - group adds 1500 credits (the advantage increases the rate by 5% to 25% per success.)

1 success, 1 triumph , and 1 threat - that threat reduces each of those 20%'s down to 15% or 900 credits each. The party adds 1800 credits plus a narrative effect from the triumph as mentioned above.

2 failure, 2 advantages - the sting of bad business is lessened by the advantages and they only lose 1200 credits (each failure becomes -10% instead of -20%)

2 success, 4 threats - break even. Business was just enough to cover the overhead.

1 threat - break even but a small narrative effect like a reputation hit the GM can pull out later ("Oh, I heard about your swindle on Nar Shadaa...")

As a note, I think the only way though ought to be able to lose *more* money than they risked would be with a Despair result. (And that would, of course, only be *one* possible use of a Despair).

Basically, if you get a Despair on top of enough failures and threats to eat your entire stake (the amount you risked in the beginning), you can go into the negatives. (Repairs and refueling after that particular debacle cost a *lot*.) Absent a Despair result, though, you shouldn't be able to lose more than what you risked. You may not make a profit. You may not even break even, but you don't lose *more* than what you put into a venture unless something goes spectacularly wrong.

Obviously, this game really lends itself to characters who want to make a living. The "classes" are even called "careers". In my game, I have an arms dealer, a bounty hunter, a slicer, a mechanic and a scoundrel all trying to make a living aboard the same ship. I also tend to run an episodic game. That is to say we don't play a contiguous timeline. I have done so in the past but this game is going to have indeterminate time passing in-between adventures.

This got me to thinking, it doesn't make sense that the character's finances remain the same from episode to episode. Say during the last adventure the characters acquire 12,372 credits. After time passes and the next episode begins... what did they do? They weren't stagnant so why would they still have exactly 12,372 credits?

Most GM's agree that one must keep the players hungry. This is a natural motivation for characters to willingly take risk and to gain reward. The more reward they already have, the less likely they are to take risk (without meta-gaming.) However, the narrative can become artificial quickly when the GM constantly has to take things away, break things or otherwise just drain PC resources. This is especially true for groups and GM's that don't want to do accounting and figure out what every spaceport docking fee and Corellian Ale is going to cost.

While my solution here is admittedly artificial, it's only meant to be a single roll with an effect that represents the passage of time between adventures with potential gain or loss totally in the player's control. First though, a caveat. Sometimes, the resources are the very hook for a story or a character might want to do some "business" during the game - by all means, run with it. This mechanic is not meant to replace story or narrative play, just to allow more of it if accounting isn't your thing. It's meant to represent the business not seen "on screen". Also, sometimes this may not even be necessary, the players often do a good job of draining their own resources - so know your players and pull this out only when necessary or if you really don't want to keep track of minor costs and deals and just do this once each session.

So here it is:

  • Before the adventure begins and after the destiny pool has been determined, the players determine how much of their capital they have risked during the time between adventures. This can be representative of whatever is suitable for the party. For example, it can represent the costs of purchasing goods to sell elsewhere. Since this is post-destiny pool creation, the players and the GM can both spend a destiny point (GM wants to up the ante.)

  • Next, make a Negotiation roll vs. a chosen difficulty. For the negotiation check, the players pick which character gets to make the roll. Whether or not you allow skilled or unskilled help is up to the GM. Remember this is representative of multiple deals, commerce, transactions, what have you.

  • The difficulty is based on how much risk the party wishes to take using the determined amount of credits. If they choose to roll one difficulty (easy), the negotiated rate is then 0% and only advantages or threats can modify it. For each difficulty die beyond the first, add 5% to the negotiated rate. For each challenge die they add, add 10%. They cannot roll simple (or no) difficulty, that would just mean they chose to partake in no business and just spend money (that's simple!) - ships gotta fly and park, people need to eat and so on.

  • Each net success on the roll indicates they made money. Multiply the amount risked vs. the percentage determined by the difficulty dice and add that much to the coffers. Any net advantages increase the negotiated rate by 5% (or to put it another way, adds 5%). A triumph, while also a success, gives the party an ongoing contact or perhaps cargo to start the game with (a narrative effect from their between session adventures.)

  • Each net failure indicates they lost money by the percentage determined by the difficulty dice. A net threat reduces the negotiated rate by 5% (or to put it another way, adds -5%). A despair, while also a failure, means the party has taken on extra obligation due to their dealings (what it is and how much is determined by the GM.)

  • Advantages or threats without any net success or failure can just mean a small narrative effect such as a lead on a job, a relevant name, etc.

Example pre-game:

The party chooses to risk 6000 credits doing business between adventures/sessions/stories.

Of course, they choose their best negotiator to make the roll. A beginning character, he has two skill ranks and a three Presence. So he has one green ability die and two yellow proficiency dice.

The party chooses a hard difficulty, three purple difficulty dice with one of them upgraded to a red challenge die. So this means each success or failure will be worth 20% (1200 credits). Two purple dice are 5% each and the red challenge dice is 10%.

Roll examples:

3 success - group adds 3600 credits.

1 success, 1 advantage - group adds 1500 credits (the advantage increases the rate by 5% to 25% per success.)

1 success, 1 triumph , and 1 threat - that threat reduces each of those 20%'s down to 15% or 900 credits each. The party adds 1800 credits plus a narrative effect from the triumph as mentioned above.

2 failure, 2 advantages - the sting of bad business is lessened by the advantages and they only lose 1200 credits (each failure becomes -10% instead of -20%)

2 success, 4 threats - break even. Business was just enough to cover the overhead.

1 threat - break even but a small narrative effect like a reputation hit the GM can pull out later ("Oh, I heard about your swindle on Nar Shadaa...")

This is awesome stuff. My current game is continuous but if I ever do an episodic one I will definitely keep this in mind.

My group had about a week of time that was hand-waved between the first episode and the second. I ruled that the group had taken on odd jobs over the course of the week to break even, and left the credits total the same from the end of the first episode to the start of the second. Less bookkeeping.

My group had about a week of time that was hand-waved between the first episode and the second. I ruled that the group had taken on odd jobs over the course of the week to break even, and left the credits total the same from the end of the first episode to the start of the second. Less bookkeeping.

I agree, but it makes less sense the more that's done. But if nobody cares... more power to ya.

My group had about a week of time that was hand-waved between the first episode and the second. I ruled that the group had taken on odd jobs over the course of the week to break even, and left the credits total the same from the end of the first episode to the start of the second. Less bookkeeping.

I agree, but it makes less sense the more that's done. But if nobody cares... more power to ya.

Right, if you only have time gaps every once in a while it can be handwaved no problem but it starts becoming very noticable if you are actually doing an episodic campaign where every game session time has passed.

I like it. Gives a sort of Firefly feel, where at the beginning of each episode there was something going on...maybe they were short on money at the beginning, or maybe the ship was broken, or maybe they had some cargo to deliver from the onset.

As long as everyone agrees, this sounds like a great mechanic. Sort of gambling, too...the loot lust players out there would have dollar signs in their eyes in hopes this nets a positive result.

Edited by Rookhelm

Thanks for the work. I will give this a try. I sure could have used it in my last game. Cheers!

For extended downtime I just have each character roll a Force die at the beginning of the session. For each Light Side point generated they gain 1d00 credits. For each Dark Side pip generated they lose 1d100 credits. Characters going below 0 credits increase an obligation by 1 point.

I think this is a good detailed house rule, although I would let the players choose what skill role they were going to make. Perhaps in the break they decided to gamble instead of negotiate. It provides some detail and a little record keeping but keeping in the spirit of the game.

For a quicker way of dealing with it though, I think Happy Daze idea is good too. Very quick and dirtly. Of course you would have to have the character narrate both rules.

Salcor

I think this is a good detailed house rule, although I would let the players choose what skill role they were going to make. Perhaps in the break they decided to gamble instead of negotiate. It provides some detail and a little record keeping but keeping in the spirit of the game.

For a quicker way of dealing with it though, I think Happy Daze idea is good too. Very quick and dirtly. Of course you would have to have the character narrate both rules.

Salcor

That's a good way to look at it. Every group is different and what they do with their money might be different. I suppose I only chose Negotiation because of the primary means of work my group partakes in.

Just as a side note, I'm from the Chicago area and have been a hockey fan all my life, I can't help but see every post by HappyDaze as a post by a smiling, lumbering left winger who used to wear #55 and pronounced Dah-Zay...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ric_Daz%C3%A9

http://blackhawks.nhl.com/club/player.htm?id=8459515

Edited by mrvander