Trade route actions

[kgauck]

Some thoughts on trade:

1) Empty provinces: There is money to made at trade, you need people for that, but the BR materials are full of this notion of the guilders harming the land through resource extraction. So the guilders must be attracted to these low level provinces to get timber, ores, and other natural resources.

2) Distance: In trade, two things will drive up the price of the goods I have to sell, rarity and distance transported. These interact. Selling Roesone hill products to a Roesone plains province is nothing like selling items from the Khinasi Island States in the Anuirean Western Coast.

I've never liked the idea that you can set up a trade route on adjacent provinces just because they have different terrain types. Making extra money from trade should involve doing something special, not moving cattle a few days to market. The cattle haven't gained much value for the guilder.

I require trade routes to move at least from region (Western Coast) to region (Heartlands) before they are worth anything. And the amount of value is more a function of distance traveled (1GB per region boundary) that the size of any particular province.

[cyrano24100]

... to extend on Ken Gauck's comment on empty provinces and distance; I always wondered if Nomads in the Rjurik Highlands could not better represent what a few refered to as non guild-dependant traditional trade routes (i guess a nomad regent could have one of Green Knight's "Trade holdings".)

In order to bring nomads into a more palatable role I wanted to allow them to establish trade routes that do not need roads (perhaps without guilds), linking similar peoples/terrains; and creating revenu based on distance; Agreed this might end up a recipe for disaster but it would go exactly with the idea that goods can be obtained from empty provinces (think fur trappers) and that bringing goods to/from distant/exotic places creates larger profits.

A long muddy trail in the fresh snow meant that nomads had passed through Hvarliik again this spring. New buckskins pilled up by Dane's cabin: the cobler had material to last rest of the year; The women of the homesteads had new furs for next year's winter; and Farmer Laners had two new work horses, strong heavy animals to make-up for his blunt plow. With them the nomads had taken small metal tools, salt, and dried fish, to bring back north where they would spend the summer... until next season then old friend.

[Rowan]

AT, I do think Law holdings should apply to trade route DC's. I usually allow all holdings to influence it; medieval through renaissance "temples" (European monasteries and churches) held quite a bit of trade influence as well, since they actually owned and cultivated land and produced a lot of goods.

As for fortifications, I think the explanation in terms of holding out (for just a couple of months) against military forces that fail to take them directly (like assaulting a fortification rather than just besieging it) is simply the running of blockades. They can even smuggle, or just travel from one sheltered spot to another to try to get their goods to market.

Caravan units could mimic ships (units with some basic movement and combat and cargo capacity statistics) in terms of military conflict--you need to actually either defeat the units (capture or destroy) or deter them enough that they willingly decide not to run the route in order to destroy the route. Even then, I suggest that routes could just be suspended, decaying only at a rate of 1 level per season.

I should mention that for me, each level of trade route could actually be a new route to a different province, or it could just be increasing the size of a single route. So a level 4 Trade Route could represent 4 different routes to 4 different provinces, one large level 4 route, or any combination (2 level 1 routes, one level 2 route). The GB income is the same unless you take advantage of some of the boosters (cross-cultural, etc.).

Ken, I agree that distance and scarcity matter most. I included a smaller income for closer routes because I do believe that provinces can trade with nearby provinces--they need not be homogenous in the products they produce or the skills of their services. Income can double if connecting to more diverse locations that also require more risk.

Your rule is a simple one (a virtue in my eyes), but how much do inequities in actual distance come into play with your cross-regional rule? i.e., Ilien to Ghoere is farther (and entails risk because it goes through other realms) than Roesone to Ghoere.

[kgauck]

I don't see trade as going from a province to a province, but rather from a trade center to a trade center. More like South Coast goods to Calrie, or Ilien, or City of Anuire, then to Endier, then into the Heartlands (Haes/Lofton, Ghieste, Ruimache). Goods that cross from northern Roesone to southern Ghoere are part of guild holdings, not trade routes.

[Green Knight]

I don't see trade as going from a province to a province, but rather from a trade center to a trade center. More like South Coast goods to Calrie, or Ilien, or City of Anuire, then to Endier, then into the Heartlands (Haes/Lofton, Ghieste, Ruimache). Goods that cross from northern Roesone to southern Ghoere are part of guild holdings, not trade routes.

Exactly! Trade center to trade center - in fact, before I used trade holdings I used a system where I had Anuire divided into trade centers, and the value of said trade center was related to the value of those provinces associated with it. Was more complex though,so I abandoned it.

Guilds = local "everyday" trade
Trade = long-distance trade

[irdeggman]

I don't see trade as going from a province to a province, but rather from a trade center to a trade center. More like South Coast goods to Calrie, or Ilien, or City of Anuire, then to Endier, then into the Heartlands (Haes/Lofton, Ghieste, Ruimache). Goods that cross from northern Roesone to southern Ghoere are part of guild holdings, not trade routes.

Which is pretty much what the "guild holding" involved in a trade route represents, IMO. A developed trade center - the more developed it is the more it can process.

Guild Holdings (like all holdings) are deliberately "abstract" in what they represent.

[AndrewTall]

AT, I do think Law holdings should apply to trade route DC's. I usually allow all holdings to influence it; medieval through renaissance "temples" (European monasteries and churches) held quite a bit of trade influence as well, since they actually owned and cultivated land and produced a lot of goods.

I often think that one of the big flaws in BR is the lack of law holdings held by temples - the legal power of many churches was quite high in medieval times - and this should be reflected by law holdings under Br mechanics. Personally I'd like to see them with law for political power / legal force, temple for piety and income, source for magic potential, but that all gets a bit dominating.

As for fortifications, I think the explanation in terms of holding out (for just a couple of months) against military forces that fail to take them directly (like assaulting a fortification rather than just besieging it) is simply the running of blockades. They can even smuggle, or just travel from one sheltered spot to another to try to get their goods to market.

Agree, my point on occupation forces affecting DC was a start in this direction - the DC modifier could be quite big, especially for very mobile disciplined troops - but it would give guilds a chance to resist long enough for the inevitable rebellion.

One aspect of separating having the route, and running trade in it, is that the occupation only ever suspends the action - I am increasingly thinking that occupation could make ruling or other actions near impossible, but not actually reduce the holding (although occupation followed by contest would be very effective since the occupied territory produces less income and cannot effectively use influence).

Ken
Trade between neighbouring provinces could be seen as simply the standard guild income - as you note if it is easy and quick, the margins are slim. That would then force trade routes to be long distance.

Under a regional trade route system would you suggest:
1. Maximum of 'x' trade routes, based on population, wealth, accessibility?
2. First come first served for routes in the area or opposed rolls to make routes?
3. Is there any scope for 'key' or 'rich' resources?
4. How are distances measured? Over land, sea, around hostile realms?
5. How do military blockades and trade barriers work?
6. Would the route be automatic once founded, or use a system like I suggested of the route gives access, but actions are needed for the cash?

[kgauck]

Guild Holdings (like all holdings) are deliberately "abstract" in what they represent.

Sure. But the purpose of that abstraction should be to save the appearances. We know how trade works, we know some cities, like Florence, Genoa, or Venice are much more important to trade and much richer than Milan, Rome, or Naples. Why? The abstractions neither reflect this reality unless the DM is the only one playing the game and can set and keep the guild holdings in Milan to the point where I can use your explanation. If a PC maxes out the guild holdings of Padua and Verona and already holds Venice, Padua, and Verona isn't about to produce an income anywhere like Venice.

Turning another city into a Venice or Florence cannot be described by guild holdings alone unless severe limits are imposed on ruling up guilds in the same fashion that people have talked about for population limits on ruling province levels. That seems both heavy handed (since it need not apply to temple or law holdings) and unnecessary, since Venice can be made special by the use of trade holdings.

Instead of regarding guild holdings as the big whatever, I think the critical way to distinguish between Padua and Venice, Pisa and Florence, is to focus on trade routes, not guild holdings. You can be abstract with trade routes too. Florence was a banking center much more than a trade center, but can be represented by trade routes just as well as Venice.

I often think that one of the big flaws in BR is the lack of law holdings held by temples

So true. I think that the leading powers anywhere should have the law holdings (or have a hand in them). Some realms -Avanil- are the great powers and should hold most of the law. Other places -Dhoesone- the guilds should hold (and do, but its exceptional) a good part of the law, probably more. Still other places, it should be the temples. Now, where we have theocracies, the materials often say that the temple runs the law. So Talinie and Medoere, fine. The temples seem so strong in Tuornen (and Alamie and Mhoried too) it certainly seems sensible that the temples hold some law, especially when the landed regent holds so little.

The medieval world knew the feudal law of landed powers, the canon law of the Church, and the commercial law of the cities and towns. The lack of temple and guild control of more law holdings seems to be an oversight and a realm focus that I regard as misplaced.

Trade between neighbouring provinces could be seen as simply the standard guild income - as you note if it is easy and quick, the margins are slim. That would then force trade routes to be long distance.

Under a regional trade route system would you suggest:
1. Maximum of 'x' trade routes, based on population, wealth, accessibility?
2. First come first served for routes in the area or opposed rolls to make routes?
3. Is there any scope for 'key' or 'rich' resources?
4. How are distances measured? Over land, sea, around hostile realms?
5. How do military blockades and trade barriers work?
6. Would the route be automatic once founded, or use a system like I suggested of the route gives access, but actions are needed for the cash?

1) Population and wealth track together, consider how a town's GP limit climbs as the town grows. So I would use population has a baseline, and special wealth as a modifier.
2) Opposed rolls
3) as a modifier if desired, its easy to get too complex here, and the point irdeggman makes as a general principle is well advised. This is really just the wealth modifier mentioned in section 1, and I'd use it sparingly.
4) The books give us good regions, South Coast, Eastern Marches. As a general rule you draw a route through as few of these regions as possible from the starting region to the ending region. The precise starting and ending points are irrelevant. To some degree the answer is "several" so trade between the Khinasi plains states and the Anuirean South Coast is from Adaba (Aftane), Ariya, Zikala, Turin, and Ber Dairas to Calrie, Ilien, Endier, City of Anuire.

Don't try and figure out which particular routes are break even and which are the profit centers. Medieval didn't have the math/accounting techniques to calculate rate of return, only profit not profit. Because of competition and trade barriers, goods in Zikala and Turin may make you a tiny profit compared to the goods from the other cities. The trade is region to region, trade center to trade center, not Ariya to Ilien.
5) Any barrier to trade, whether legal, competitive, cultural, military, or even geographical should be a modifier to the roll to establish or maintain the route.

Consider Storm Holtson attempting trade with the Khinasi Plains States. You have a cultural difference (base -2 to check, but good diplomacy and a knowledge check to -1), fantastic success here might even reduce this to -0 or might help with another part of the check. This is why its so important to describe what the character is doing and not just roll dice. The Straits of Aerele are a zone with Mieres corsairs, and possibly a bit of independent piracy. Give Storm a chance to take a penalty or try and negotiate passage or pay tribute. There is the Seadrake. Unless Storm has purchased a domain wide benefit like good captains or superior ships this penalty is a fixed -2 to the check, if he has the benefit, -1. Perhaps Storm has no contacts, no friends or allies in the Plains States eager to receive his goods, and he certainly has no holdings. -2. Good Diplomacy here must establish a trading partner to reduce or eliminate this penalty. Having a small holding here (say a single level 1 in Zikala) would reduce this to -1. Having decent holdings could eliminate it. Say 4x level 2's, depends on the circumstances.

If Storm just wakes up one day and wants to try a trade route to the Plains States, the full -8 (or worse if other obstacles exist) is imposed on the check. A fun guilder adventure might start with Storm accompanying the first expedition to alter these circumstances - encounters at Mieres, Binsada, Zikala, Ariya, and Aftane, perhaps a stop in Boeruine, fun on the South Coast, and then extensive diplomacy in skill challenge type situations in each target realm. Depending on results you can keep the -2 culture penalty or reduce it, establish trade relations or not. You have 4 states to consider, so you have the full range to help you set a right penalty. While its possible for Storm to have amazing success and become everyone's new best friend in the Plains states and eliminate all penalties, its more likely he'll have some kind of mixed success.

6) I like your suggestion, but I also think that treating trade routes as holdings works too. As long as you have to attend, pay money, use actions, and keep up the route in the face of competition, I think you have a good system. If you do it once and its a cash cow until the second coming of Azrai, I think something is missing.

[Exile]

I also like the idea of a holding at each end - but would say it should only need to be an allied holding, not necessarily the guilders own holding - if they don't mind splitting the income. Of course the recipient gets income without spending an action, but they lose a 'slot' in their province - and high level provinces would also only really want to trade with other centres - assuming that they have complimentary goods.

Oh, the intention was always for it to be possible to utilise an allied holding. That's part of the point of the system - it encourages guild-only regents to take an active role in diplomacy and politicking, forging connections with regents in other areas. After all, many PC guilders tend to either take over a state or become a "state-approved" guild in some particular realm; it makes a great deal of sense for rulers of other territories to ally with their own local guilders in keeping such overtly biased groups out of their lands... but a suitable agreement can permit trade to pass between the domains without the need for holdings to be created where they're not wanted. It even opens up the option for a minor guild in a rich trade centre to operate precisely as a forwarding agent, making its money by taking a small cut of various trade routes owned by other regents.

------

As for a lack of temple law holdings: that's a complaint I've heard before, but one I think that misses part of the nature of the BR setting. There are very, very few "state" faiths - and even some of those that do exist are pantheistic. In medieval Europe, there was at least nominally a single head of a single faith, with a long string of wars fought locally and internationally over Papal claims to the right to affect (and then to dominate) the political affairs of the lords and kings. It's worth bearing in mind that rulers and local prelates alike often found it worthwhile to oppose those claims and assert their freedom of action. Most attempts by the Papacy to control the actions of distant rulers failed; diplomacy served it far better than the issuing of orders.

In Cerilia as written... there isn't even a figurehead pontiff, and there are a whole range of rival churches serving any given deity, never mind the more extreme option of a change of deities if one temple becomes too aggressive in its demands for power. Quite appropriately, some temples have not only demanded power but have won it - but it makes sense in the setting for realms like Talinie to be real aberrations, of which most landed regents will be somewhat wary.

There's also the simple question of game balance - there are four primary character classes in BR's original conception, and four primary types of holding (or five, if you count the universally-accessible and valuable province). Especially given the clerical access to Agitate as a free action in the base rules, never mind the power granted by realm spells and the potentially critical role of Investiture, I'm yet to see many priest regents find themselves politically weak, let alone irrelevant. A class with the ability to kick off five Agitate actions in a single turn (Free, Lieutenant, and one per action round) has a heck of a weapon in its arsenal even without doing anything supernatural or adventurous.

As it is, temple and guild holdings already enjoy many of the benefits associated with medieval rulers - the acquisition of substantial incomes and the ability to raise troops certainly spring to mind.

Clerical and guild wealth is represented by the income of their holdings - tapped only by those rulers willing to use Law claims (something often further penalised by GMs beyond any PC repercussions that might arise). Law holdings - the ones usually associated by players and DMs with nobles - provide no direct income whatsoever. They're merely a means of "getting away" with higher taxes, raising troops, or attempting to tap the incomes of temples and guilds. Would it really be appropriate to give priests and guilders even more power than they already hold, when they enjoy many of the benefits of Law-based regents, and have access to unique powers as well?

[irdeggman]

As for a lack of temple law holdings: that's a complaint I've heard before, but one I think that misses part of the nature of the BR setting. There are very, very few "state" faiths - and even some of those that do exist are pantheistic.

There are lot more than you think.

In Anuire alone:

Theologic rulers include (these are just off the top of my head):

Talanie and Moedore of course.

Known places with state religions include:

Diemede, Avanil, Ilien and Roesone.

All of the Rjurik Highlands are "state faiths" pretty much as are Vosgaard.

The Brecht and Khinasi lands are more diverse.

But there are several provinces ruled by paladins in Anuire and Khinasi (hard to make a real distinction there).

All dwarven realms have one religion (well the non-Azrai influenced ones anyway).