PDA

View Full Version : Pathfinder Value Points [Crossroads]



Admiral Squish
2014-05-23, 11:57 AM
Value Points
Created for the Crossroads: The New World (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?345327-Crossroads-II-I-m-on-a-Mammoth) setting

In the crossroads setting, unlike traditional pathfinder settings, there is no singular currency that spans the entire world and is equally valued everywhere. In different places, payment may come in cocoa beans, bank notes, metallic coins, shells, beads, crafts, or any number of other materials and currencies. As such, there’s no one ‘default’ unit of wealth. In its place, all items have a value, expressed in value points, or VP, which makes for much more flexible trades. A single value point is worth approximately as much as a gold piece in traditional pathfinder. Value points are an abstraction, an artificial construct of value that does not actually exist in the game world itself. Nobody will mention how many value points an item is worth, or brag about how many VP they have in furs, or ask for a number of value points in payment. Usually, the value points necessary will be converted into the local currency, but in some places the trading is more intuitive than that.

Trading
When making a trade, both parties make an offer of an item, a collection of items, or an amount of currency, the total value of which is expressed in VP. Whether or not either character will accept the offer, haggle, or walk away from the trade is up to the character in question, but as a general rule of thumb, most traders will accept a trade if the offer is worth VP greater than their offer.

Value is a very flexible thing, depending on supply and demand. A village in the midst of a terrible famine has a low supply of food and a high demand for it, and a canny trader could sell it for a dramatic profit in such a place. However, they would likely have very little demand luxury goods, and a trader carrying gold or silver would probably be out of luck in such a village. As such, GMs may adjust the effective VP of an offer up or down by up to 25%, depending on the situation and the offer.

Haggling
There are two main forms of haggling that can make a deal go a little better for a trader with a quick tongue and a friendly demeanor. The one looking for the better deal is referred to as the negotiator, and the other trader is referred to as the target.

The easiest way to get a good deal is to be on good terms with the trader in question. To do this, the negotiator can make a diplomacy check to improve the trader’s attitude toward them, as with a normal diplomacy check. The grid below indicates how the target’s attitude affects the value of the negotiator’s offer.


Trader’s Attitude
Value Change


Helpful
+10%


Friendly
+5%


Indifferent
0%


Unfriendly
-5%


Hostile
-10%


Some will be aggressive, attempting to sell their goods as though they were more valuable than they actually are, either exaggerating the value of their goods, or pointing out nonexistent flaws in their opponent’s. The negotiator using this tactic makes a bluff check, opposed by the target’s sense motive check. If the negotiator’s bluff is successful, they increase the effective total value of their offer by 5%, plus an additional 5% for every 5 points they beat the opponent’s sense motive check by. If the target’s sense motive is successful, they realize they are being played, and the souring of the mood causes their attitude toward the attacker to drop at least one step. The negotiator cannot attempt a new bluff check against that target for the next 24 hours.

Feats:

Expert Haggler
You’re experienced in trading and haggling, and are more skillful at getting a good deal.
Prerequisites: Cha 13
Benefit: When haggling or being haggled, you can roll your bluff or sense motive check twice, taking the higher result.

Admiral Squish
2014-05-23, 12:02 PM
So, this is the wealth system that will be used in the crossroads setting. I tried to create something simple that would prevent having to invent an artificial currency for the new world. I also wanted to make it so that haggling was a simple, quick operation, that could be done without having to follow a dozen steps and do fancy mathematics.
anyways, let me know that you think, let me know if I missed anything or need to clarify.

Mith
2014-05-23, 03:15 PM
The chart can also be used to make any social confrontation run a lot smoother in general. I like it! So the disposition is predetermined based on what the individual thinks of the PC based on race (since if you are from a enemy nation, they likely will not like you at all, and won't deal or cheat you royally unless you are really good.)

Steckie
2014-05-23, 04:44 PM
Trading
When making a trade, both parties make an offer of an item, a collection of items, or an amount of currency, the total value of which is expressed in VP. Whether or not either character will accept the offer, haggle, or walk away from the trade is up to the character in question, but as a general rule of thumb, most traders will accept a trade if the offer is worth VP equal to or greater than their offer.

Why would a trader accept an offer for a trade of equal VP?
If a trader's goods are valued at 100 VP, he needs to sell them for more than 100 to make a profit. After all he needs to take his costs (carts, personel, horsefeed,...) into account and still make a profit for himself.
I seem to remember pathfinder's trade system being that you buy items at 100%, but sell them at 50%.
The thing is, it's easy to go questing with a couple Thousand gold in your pocket (wich isn't very realistic, but it's a commonly accepted part of the game). It's not that easy to go questing with 50 beaver pelts strapped to your back.

I think that the end result will be that players will be forced to own several bags of holding to haul around various tradegoods.
This isn't a bad think, just as long as you make sure that bags of holding are commonly sold throughout Vespuccia. For players that is, i wouldn't give every farmer a bag of holding to bring his maize to the market, that will take away some of the atmosphere.

Admiral Squish
2014-05-23, 05:20 PM
I'm thoroughly confused by your post, Mith. Can you clarify for me?
The trader's disposition toward you depends on all sort of things, how nice you are, how rich you seem, race, species, location, the language you speak... It's just the diplomacy chart, I just assigned value shifts to the categories.

Good point, Steckie. I changed it to greater than their offer, the DM can determine the exact margin of how much is enough.
I considered going with a standard buy at 100% sell at 50%, but with no standard currency players will likely have to shift their valuables through a couple different forms over a long journey, and losing half your wealth with every such transaction seems problematic.
As to the gold/hides issue, I don't think it's particularly unreasonable to expect players to haul around valuables. There's three things to keep in mind here. One, players will do whatever they have to to keep their money. If they have to get an armored wagon for their hoards of gold, they will totally do that. Two, player wealth is significantly reduced in crossroads. So, while a 10th-level player in PF would be hauling around 62,000 gold, something like 500 pounds, less what they've turned into items already, a crossroads character of the same level would have between 31000 and 20500 VP. And three, nobody says you have to carry around pelts. You can carry your wealth in literally any form you can imagine. You could carry it around in a cart full of beaver pelts, or you could carry it in bullion, or in paper currency, or in a magical geegaws, or a single really fancy magic sword. It all depends on how many eggs you want to put in one basket, what you think will trade well where you're going, and how easily you want to be able to turn it into other things.

Yeah, bags of holding would probably be pretty common, but honestly, they're common to every adventurer I've ever made/seen.

Mith
2014-05-24, 02:33 PM
I'm thoroughly confused by your post, Mith. Can you clarify for me?
The trader's disposition toward you depends on all sort of things, how nice you are, how rich you seem, race, species, location, the language you speak... It's just the diplomacy chart, I just assigned value shifts to the categories.

I was just thinking of this being the standard chart for all social actions, not just trading. I just am not the best at wording things when tired.

Admiral Squish
2014-05-24, 05:16 PM
I was just thinking of this being the standard chart for all social actions, not just trading. I just am not the best at wording things when tired.\
Ahhh, I see. It is already more-or-less the standard chart for social interactions, it's the diplomacy chart.

SuperDave
2014-05-27, 08:45 PM
Well done, Squish. I like your idea for incorporating the attitude chart!

But I really don't like the "attacker" and "opponent" phrasing. Commerce is supposed to be two people who both need what the other has, coming to a mutually-beneficial agreement, not a battle where one party wins and the other loses. What if we called them the "entrepreneur" and the "emptor", or something like that? Something less confrontational, anyway.

Admiral Squish
2014-05-28, 08:55 PM
Well, first off, even I don't know what an 'emptor' is off the top of my head.
Secondly, I can't really think of any other pairings that work. It's not buyer/seller, bluffer/bluffee sounds... naughty for some reason. Nothing comes to mind.

Mith
2014-05-28, 10:08 PM
persuader/skeptic? You are the persuader, and you are trying to get a skeptic to see your point of view.

Admiral Squish
2014-05-28, 11:57 PM
persuader/skeptic? You are the persuader, and you are trying to get a skeptic to see your point of view.

Hmm... maybe. Getting close, but we haven't got it yet. I'll sleep on it, see what comes up.

Mith
2014-05-29, 12:11 AM
How about Negotiator, with distinguishing titles of Persuading Negotiator and Skeptic. Or maybe Selling and Buying. You sell ideas and products to a potential Buyer kind of idea.

Admiral Squish
2014-05-29, 12:09 PM
Hmm... I like negotiator, definitely, but I'm still not sold on sceptic. I think I'll just be lazy and say 'target' until we come up with something better.

Mith
2014-05-29, 02:22 PM
I like negotiator, definitely, but I'm still not sold on sceptic

Yeah, I'm skeptical of it myself.