Venturer Questions

Just maintaining the military-industrial complex.

Clearly I need to begin work on Venturer Oligarch Tycoon.

So, now that I’ve been on a couple economic adventures, the math and ramifications thereof are becoming clearer to me.

Maximum profit I can make is a function that looks like QPT(Y-X)-C where Y is the percentage sale price, X is the percentage purchase price, T is percent remaining after tax, P is the actual price of the goods, Q is number of loads, and C is flat costs like wagons and henches. So, what’s interesting to me about looking at it like this is that it produces a string of things that I want to be very high or very low, and trying to minmax one of these things has consequences on the others.

For example, the obvious choice is to maximize Y, because selling at a high price is good. Because prices are the same for all merchants in a market, if we don’t like our Y, we have to move. Larger markets have 10% higher prices, but are also generally far apart. Smaller markets are an option, but limited merchants and loads means we risk not being able to sell our entire package- an upper limit on Q. Plus, if we go really small, there’s a 10% price drop! So trying to get the best price for the goods you’re selling is actually kinda tricky.

Now then, the next logical choice is to think about X, because buying cheap is good too. Because we haven’t bought a good yet, every good is a potential purchase. Thus, if Bigby’s rivals hadn’t died before completing their research, casting Detect Invisible Hand would give you 30 options for X. (Note: I’m taking Mathmatical Statistics II right now, and I briefly considered actually doing the math to find out what the density formula for lowest number of 30 normally distributed rolls would look like, but I really can’t be bothered.) Hopefully, out of 30 4d4 rolls, you’d get a 4 somewhere, right? Of course, you can’t actually know all 30 prices. In fact, you usually actually only get like six merchants your first week (and what party ever wants to spend more than a week in town?) and then you can spend a reaction roll to convince each of them to tell you about a second good, so if we were really serious about minimizing X, it’d be more like the lowest of 12 rolls.

This brings us to our next issue: Because we can’t ask a merchant about more than two goods (The one he arrives with and the one we convince him to deal in) there’s a fundamental link: The lower X goes, the lower Q goes. Thus, maybe we find out that grain is selling at 10% of normal price because the city is flooded with grain right now, but the guy selling the grain only has four loads. (Which, for reference, is 80 bags of grain for 4 gold, so if nothing else you should buy it and tell him to send it to the last starving village you visited, hero.) This also brings me to a related note about the difference between X and Y: If your DM treats bargaining as additive, it gets really, really good for small numbers. If you can go from 30% to 20%- Hurray for your “10%” actually slashing off a third of the price! (Or go back to that poor grain merchant and see if you can’t persuade him to just give you the grain so he can clear out his warehouses and buy something worth his time; and besides, it’s all going to that starving village.)

So, moving right along, let’s talk about Quantity and Price real quick. The obvious relationship between these two is that your adventurer has limited money, so the higher the base price, the fewer goods he can buy. Thus, 2000 gold is either two crates of opals or ten crates of tools.

What’s interesting about this relationship is that Quantity is limited by market forces, whereas Price is the player’s choice. Thus, if I’ve got 2000 gold to spend, I can walk up to the poor sod with his 80 bags of grain and buy all of it and had 1996 gold gathering dust, or I can try to convince him to deal in, say, elephants, knowing that even if elephants are like steeply discounted, I still won’t have to buy very many before I’ve hit my 2000 gold limit. So as it turns out, Quantity is almost irrelevant because we can control base Price so well.

But wait, a few long, long paragraphs ago, we found out that the main downside to minimizing X (Purchase Percentage) was that it cost us in lowered Q! But we just found out we give a near-zero quantity of excrement with regard to Q if P is sufficiently high! Thus, my conclusion is that the optimal strategy for merchanting is to investigate a large number of high priced goods (for whatever definition of high priced your adventurer is using right now; a level 3 adventurer will probably be able to max his venturecard on tools or glass, while an 8th level adventurer will pretty much only care about gems and silk), then purchase the one with the largest discount.

I’d say that a sustainable business model based on buying precious goods at a fraction of their worth is a silly artifact of poor rules design, but that’d be really rude to Alex, particularly because for the past three years I’ve driven past a Cash 4 Gold on the way to work so I have to admit that the rules seem to model reality well. I guess the only thing to do now is to start the party’s low-level henches on learning to twirl signs.

  1. LMAO Cash 4 Gold
  2. Great analysis
  3. When contemplating mercantile ventures, it is worthwhile to factor in the additional revenue you can make from passengers and shipping contracts. Even in markets where arbitrage opportunities don’t exist, there’s money to be made from shipping passengers and goods. These systems provide a steady revenue stream for venturers.

Could you elaborate on that? I’ve glanced at the passenger rules several times and they just don’t seem worthwhile from my Venturer’s perspective.

Hypothetical: The Passenger Gods bless me, and I roll max on everything. My two stops in class 4 (3 with mercantile network!) towns each yield 4 passengers, 8 shipping contracts, and 12 loads per contract. 164gp maximum. Since I only stayed for one week in each place and thus only picked up half of them, I get half of that. Since I visited two places, I double it. 164 gp anyway. If I want to travel quickly, that means half-capacity wagons, which means I’d need 10 wagons to transport that many people. (I’m assuming that the “Free Passage for Merchant Representative” means another 200-stone passenger, but the 164 gp is the real point.) Ten wagons and 40 horses that’d cost well over 3k, meaning that in order for these month-long trips (1 week in each location, plus travel time) to pay for themselves, I’d have to spend over a year doing this.

Of course, that assumes I’m going hardcore passengers, but the fewer I take, the less money I have. If I only own one wagon, I can pick up a maximum of one passenger to fill up my extra space, but he only generates 20 gp. Given that my main mercantile adventures tend to generate a few thousand (5000 this run and like 6000 on my last one, I think. I’ve only done two so far, with the first being an incredible success where I bought armor from dwarves for 30% and sold for 100% and tripled my money, and the second being a more boring success where I bought rubies for 80% and sold for 110%.)

Adding on less than 200 gp to a trip that generates thousands on a reasonable, low-profit day doesn’t seem worth the extra bookkeeping, even at only 5th level.

Passengers only work out better than cargo when they’re paying for a specific destination, as near as I can tell, since they each pay for your entire cargo space, irregardless of them taking up no more than 200 stone. (so that you can then still fill the space with cargo, and get paid twice or more for the same space)

Rare as hen’s teeth, though.

And I’ve managed to gloss over that “free passage for rep” clause everytime I’ve read that paragraph. Thanks for bringing it up. That does complicate things, doesn’t it?

And, to elaborate upon myself, passenger and cargo transport, as it’s static income, really relies on your ability to get where you’re going quickly.

It’s 1 GP per 10 stone in either case, on any distance land or sea that is under the maximum distance for the associated Class I trade route. Functionally, you only profit if you get to your destination before your costs overwhelm your contract price - if your costs for the length of your journey are under 1GP/10 stone, you’re good.

Given that restriction, then, the shipping of cargo or passengers is essentially insurance against the vagarities of the arbitrage rolls. Or as just a fill-up for crappy rolls on merchants/load available when you’re picking up cargo, perhaps.

I guess it’s less that I can’t see how it makes a profit and more that I can’t see how it makes a meaningful profit.

Like, I already said that at 5th level I’ve made several thousand GP on each mercantile adventure, so at present I’m tempted to disregard the opportunity for an extra 20 gp per adventure as not worth the bookkeeping. I can thus only imagine that as my wealth grows exponentially when I reinvest the thousands I’ve made that the static revenue of passengers will become even less significant.

Additional questions:

-What constitutes “Joining” a mercantile venture? Is it being physically present (IE: A PC travelling with the caravan) or contributing capital or both or either?

-What happens if multiple PCs (Or one PC and his henches) attempt to search the same market for merchants?

1. What constitutes "Joining" a mercantile venture? Is it being physically present (IE: A PC travelling with the caravan) or contributing capital or both or either?

For what purpose are you asking? I don't think I understand the question.

2. What happens if multiple PCs (Or one PC and his henches) attempt to search the same market for merchants?

Each adventurer may independently search the market for merchants. Each adventurer must pay the toll separately. Each merchant transacts with the adventurer who found them. The Reaction Rolls to persuade a merchant to buy or sell a particular type of merchandise use the CHA and proficiency of the adventurer who found them. (This prevents a character with CHA 18 and Bargaining from dominating the trade of an entire town.) There are approximately 20 times as many merchants total in any given market as the number listed, so in actual play a typical adventuring party is unlikely to "use up" all the merchants. That is, no one adventurer can corner more than 5% of the market personally.

THAT SAID, I've always felt these rules are incomplete. One thing I regret not putting in the rules is some sort of minimum threshold of cash or cargo capacity that a character has to own in order to qualify as a merchant in the eyes of those he would transact with.

As an optional rule, you could append the following to the ARBITRAGE TRADING section, following the sentence "This represents harbor fees paid to the harbormaster of a port, guild tolls at the city gate for caravans, etc." 

"An adventurer is considered to have entered a market to buy or sell goods only if he arrives with either enough wealth and cargo capacity to be taken seriously by the merchants within the market. The Minimum Wealth and Cargo table, below, shows the minimum holdings of wealth and the minimum caravan or ship cargo capacity that an adventurer must hold to enter a market of each class. (Note that wealth can be in the form of inventory for sale)."

"If an adventurer does not meet these minimums, but still wishes to buy or sell in the market, he can do so, but many fewer merchants will be interested in transacting with him. When determining the number of merchants and loads of merchandise available to him, roll on the Market and Merchants table as if he were in a market of minimum size for the character's actual wealth and cargo capacity."

"EXAMPLE: Marcus arrives at Aura with a small sailing  ship (10,000st cargo capacity) carrying a full cargo of common metals (100 loads, total value 20,000gp). He has an additional 25,000gp in gold coin. Aura is a Class I market, so normally an adventurer can transact with 2d6+2 merchants, interested in 6d8 loads each. However, Class I markets have a minimum wealth of 45,000gp and minimum cargo capacity of 20,000st. Marcus has the wealth but not the cargo capacity. Since Marcus only has a cargo capacity of 10,000st, he instead will roll on the Market and Merchants table as if he were in a Class II market. Had Marcus arrived with two small sailing ships he'd be able to exploit Aura's Class I market fully."

Market

Class

Minimum
Wealth

Minimum

Cargo

I

45,000gp

20,000st

II

15,000gp

6,750st

III

6,750gp

3,000st

IV

2,250gp

1,000st

V

675gp

300st

VI

270gp

120st

 

Re: “Joining.” I’m asking for the purposes of XP division. My party tends to be pretty busy, so sometimes players offer to invest their extra money in my Venturer, but not actually go on the road trip. Other times, characters are interested in traveling with the caravan and working together against random encounters, but are not otherwise interested in the mercantile adventure. Should “Investors” and “Bodyguards” collect a full share of mercantile XP as though they were equal partners in the endeavor?

Re: Multiple characters searching.
Does that apply to henches, too? Can I bring my eight henches into a city with me and buy/sell nine times as many goods? (Of course, none of my henches has bargaining yet, so that’ll cut into profits)

Weight Limits:
Actually, combined with the above, that would really nicely solve my issue of “Why would I ever trade in not-diamonds?” If I have to have cargo capacity, but I can use my minion swarm to fill that cargo capacity, then grain becomes something I might conceivably buy.

How would the weight limits interact with a Venturer’s special market-class-enhancing class feature?

Also can I just apologize for continually nitpicking, mention that I’m really amazed that my posts keep getting long, well thought out responses from the developer, and say how much I love ACKS?

Joining: In order to earn XP for mercantile ventures, you must both go on the venture AND get a fiscal return. A passive investor can earn a return, but not XP. An adventurer who serves as a caravan guard can earn XP from wandering encounters and whatnot, but not from the venture.

You can feel free to change that for your campaign of course, but it has to function that way in-world or things will not make sense. (E.g. caravan guards level up faster than soldiers; passive investors level up without any real risk; etc.)

Searching: Yes, henchmen can search. But the henchmen would be responsible for the interactions, etc. If I were the GM and a henchmen was put in charge of inventory or wealth that was disproportionate to his level I might throw some Loyalty rolls in there, too to see if he demands a cut of the deal or whatnot.

Weight Limits: Yes, it does solve that problem. As I said, it’s something I really regret not including in the rules.

The Venturer’s market-class feature would improve the market class by 1 level. If he has sufficient wealth and cargo capacity to utilize the market’s full class, it improves that class. Otherwise, it improves the class of market he can utilize based on his wealth and cargo capacity. (E.g. if Marcus had been a Venturer in my earlier example, he could have traded at Class I instead of Class II).

It’s not nitpicking, its exploring issues that rise up in actual play! This is how ACKS got developed in the first place, through interaction with players. It’s great and it makes the game better. Thank you for asking the tough questions!

Actually, I’m really appreciating your questions (and Alex’s answers), because they’re given me things to think about for my own games. The value/weight chart for mercantile ventures suggests what size ships would be seen in the various ports, since anyone who can will want to bring in a ship of with at least that much cargo capacity, in order to be taken seriously. Merchants going to smaller markets will want to be as close to the minimum as possible to reduce costs (so a merchant sailing between a class III and class IV market will want to be right at 3k stone), while one sailing between two markets of the same size will want whatever is most efficient within that range (a merchant sailing between a pair of class III markets will want to be somewhere between 3k and 6750, depending on what sort of ship they can afford to crew).

Interesting. What’s the genesis of those numbers?

Except for Class II, it’s 2.25 GP per stone (or 1 stone per 2.25 GP). Class II is 2.31 GP per stone (2.25 would be 6,667 stone, so it’s rounded to the nearest 250).

I thought at first that it might be based off the Total Investment required to create that size of a market. Class VI requires 10k GP, which is 37.037 (repeating) times the GP requirement to effectively use the market. Class V is also 37.037 times, but then it goes to 33.33 times for Class IV, 29.63 for Class III, 41.67 for Class II, and 55.56 for Class I, so the required investment becomes a bit steeper when going from V to IV and from IV to III, but once a venturer is able to effectively trade at Class III, it becomes easier to grow to Class II and I.

Using the 37.037 ratio between infrastructure and liquidity and the 2.25 ratio between liquidity and cargo space, it would shift slightly to:
Class VI - 270 GP, 120 stone
Class V - 675 GP, 300 stone
Class IV - 2025 GP, 900 stone
Class III - 5400 GP, 2400 stone
Class II - 16875 GP, 7500 stone
Class I - 67500 GP, 30000 stone

Compared to the official table, this one’s a bit easier to get up to Class III, gets a little harder at Class II, and requires 50% more investment to effectively handle Class I markets.

And this is one of the MANY reasons I love ACKS and Autarch as much as I do. Instead of getting the “you’re over-thinking it” or “you’re playing my game wrong” response, we get these really well-considered and thought-through responses that maintain an internal consistency.

It's based on the average number of merchants x average number of loads per merchant x average value of a load, then rounded off to a pleasantly round value.

Avg. Merch. Avg. Loads Avg. Value Avg. Cargo
9 27 $43,740 19440
6 14 $15,120 6720
5 7.5 $6,750 3000
2.5 5 $2,250 1000
1.5 2.5 $675 300
1 1.5 $270 120

 

Does this apply when looking for mercenaries too? I mean you could be looking to hire cargo capacity. Shouldn’t only the wealth side matter when looking to hire mercs?