Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-12-2012, 11:00 AM   #21
Peter Knutsen
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

To elaborate a bit on my previous post, if an item is very standardized, it should perhaps sometimes be dropped one Haggleability Class. That's mostly to do with guild standards, e.g. a bolt of "guild standard linen cloth", and since there are no guilds in my Ärth setting, at least not in pagan or Catholic lands, it's not something I've thought much about. If this causes an item to drop below Class A then you cannot haggle. Trying to do so will be futile, as the outcome of the process is always 100% no matter how well or badly either haggler rolls.

Standards have to be very strong for a Class shift to be warranted, though. Apart from guilds, the seller can sometimes get away with pleading "known quality". Barliman Butterbur may say to a frequent visitor that "you know my beer is always good. Stop trying to haggle!" thus accomplishing a Haggleability Class downshift (to Class 0). That's a "local" or "location-based" shift, though, and if there is a bad harvest (or rumours of one), it's reasonable to expect Butterbur to start skimping on beer quality, so at that point he can no longer claim "known quality".
Peter Knutsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 11:38 AM   #22
Snoman314
 
Snoman314's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
All right, let's play it out by the RAW.

Here is a Mercedes, fair price $60K. You come in and offer $1. That is effectively 100% under the fair price, so the merchant reacts at -10. With no other reaction modifiers, the average reaction is 0, Disastrous, meaning the merchant wants nothing to do with you, and you have potential combat at -2 (average reaction Poor, threats or insults). The best reaction is 8, Poor, meaning the merchant will ask 120% of fair price, or $72K, and will not accept less than $60K; the PCs can try to haggle him down, but if he listens to them at all, they won't get him below fair price.

Bill Stoddard
Ahh, I had been looking at the two parts in isolation. You're right. Put them together and the problem pretty much evaporates. I guess that's why you're writing books and I'm asking stupid questions. Thanks for enlightening me.
Snoman314 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 11:42 AM   #23
Snoman314
 
Snoman314's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen View Post
To elaborate a bit on my previous post, if an item is very standardized, it should perhaps sometimes be dropped one Haggleability Class. That's mostly to do with guild standards, e.g. a bolt of "guild standard linen cloth", and since there are no guilds in my Ärth setting, at least not in pagan or Catholic lands, it's not something I've thought much about. If this causes an item to drop below Class A then you cannot haggle. Trying to do so will be futile, as the outcome of the process is always 100% no matter how well or badly either haggler rolls.

Standards have to be very strong for a Class shift to be warranted, though. Apart from guilds, the seller can sometimes get away with pleading "known quality". Barliman Butterbur may say to a frequent visitor that "you know my beer is always good. Stop trying to haggle!" thus accomplishing a Haggleability Class downshift (to Class 0). That's a "local" or "location-based" shift, though, and if there is a bad harvest (or rumours of one), it's reasonable to expect Butterbur to start skimping on beer quality, so at that point he can no longer claim "known quality".
I like the idea behind your system. Without consciously thinking it through, I realise after reading your posts that I've been subconsciously restricting the 'haggleability' as you put it, on certain goods. I think I'll continue in the same vein for now (ie handwaving) but will be taking another look at what you wrote if I do a full blown trading game in future.
Snoman314 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 11:58 AM   #24
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snoman314 View Post
Ahh, I had been looking at the two parts in isolation. You're right. Put them together and the problem pretty much evaporates. I guess that's why you're writing books and I'm asking stupid questions. Thanks for enlightening me.
I believe firmly in the old theory that there are no stupid questions. If you don't understand something, the stupid thing is to endure your lack of understanding in silence. (I used to be a math tutor.)

And really, those rules are complex. I had to reread them and go through step by stop; I don't have them memorized. That's why they're an alternative system, and not the primary system. It's perfectly fair to use a single roll to decide the outcome, and just handwave the haggling part; or even to say that this is a non-haggling culture. Haggling is for campaigns where the players want to haggle.

I was fairly sure that I had managed to avoid disastrous booby traps, but I wanted to go back and check. I think in this case at least the rules are doing what they're meant to.

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 03:08 PM   #25
isf
 
isf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Jacksonville, AR
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
All right, let's play it out by the RAW.

Here is a Mercedes, fair price $60K. You come in and offer $1. That is effectively 100% under the fair price, so the merchant reacts at -10. With no other reaction modifiers, the average reaction is 0, Disastrous, meaning the merchant wants nothing to do with you, and you have potential combat at -2 (average reaction Poor, threats or insults). The best reaction is 8, Poor, meaning the merchant will ask 120% of fair price, or $72K, and will not accept less than $60K; the PCs can try to haggle him down, but if he listens to them at all, they won't get him below fair price.

Bill Stoddard
On the reactions table on pg 75, it has the results of a very good reaction being the merchant sells at 50% or buys at 200% of the fair price. I didn't see any RAW way to convince the merchant to go outside of this range other than using blackmail/mind control/etc.... Does that mean that the only point in making offers below 50% is to try and haggle to the 50% mark.

In DF, this would allow a nymph with the standard +10 to Reaction Rolls to haggle to 50% usually (and should have to buy an appropriate level of wealth).
__________________
Travis Foster
isf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 03:53 PM   #26
hal
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, New York
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

From what I was able to get from reading the material, I have to agree with Bill that the rules are deceptively simple, but are in fact, complex.

For instance? Step #3 of the haggling process has the money quote overall in my opinion. It states on page 27 in the upper right of the page the following:

If the merchant wins by 10 or more, he won’t change his price any further. If the PCs win by 10 or more, the merchant agrees to their proposed price,
unless it’s outside his limits; if so, he’ll go right to his best asking price or offer. Either way, haggling ends. Otherwise, continue to step 4.


Now, how to keep this explanation pithy...

The second money quote in all of this is:

The merchant will never go above his initially determined best offer, or below his initially determined best price; at that point his position is, “Take it or leave it.”

And finally, we have to go to page 75 to determine something known as asking price and selling price.

So, let us follow the steps listed on page 27, and list everything involved in the example (as I understand the rules to mean. Note: My understanding of the rules is not always in accordance with the authors intent, as witnessed by my thread involving sniper rules and various powered scopes elsewhere!)

First, the Player Character is a Knight from England trying to haggle prices with a merchant in Italy for needed supplies for the Crusade. He knows Latin at a broken level, and finds his good nature (Charisma) will stand him in good stead as he attempts to get money for his ring. Unfortunately for Sir Geof, he doesn't understand the Italian culture, so he suffers a -3 to his haggling skill rolls due to cultural unfamiliarity.
His ring is worth $3,000 and his desire to find a jeweler finds him searching the city high and low until finally, a citizen suggests Del Sarto's, just down the street. Since the knight already knows the value of the ring, but is working off a default of haggling (what, a Knight haggle?!!!), our erstwhile hero has haggling at a default of his IQ-5, or skill 7. Del Sarto on the other hand, has Merchant at 14. Del Sarto also has a bit of a problem with foreigners, and is somewhat intolerant of them. However, Del Sarto's social status within his community is a mere 1 versus the Knight's status 3 as a landed knight.

"I am Sir Geoff of Wynworth" says the Knight as he introduces himself to Antonio Del Sarto. "I have a ring I'd like to offer for sale, that was given to me by my sainted and departed mother. Where I not in need of various things, I would not part with this voluntarily. I am on a mission for God, and seek to battle the heathens who hold the Holy land, can you assist me in this?" The Mercant takes the pro-offered ring, and attaches a jewelers loupe to his eye as he examines the work.

GM rolls the reaction of the NPC and notes the following:

Status of Seller: 3
Status of Buyer: 1 (for a +2 bonus for the Knight's sales attempt)
Charisma of the seller: 2
Dislike of Foreigners: -3
True market value of the ring: $3,000

Net result: +3-1+2-3 or +1 overall.

GM rolls a 13 for his initial roll, modifed to a 14. Looking at page 561, a 14 result is "GOOD". Looking at page 75, a GOOD result means that the buyer will offer fair prices, and will volunteer extra information. Fair prices in this case per page 75 are:

* In a society where haggling is routine, a merchant will ask 110% of the fair price, accept 90%, offer 90%, or agree to pay 110%.

So, in this case, a fair price for a ring worth $3000 (expensive) is 50% of the value, or $1,500. The Jeweler will offer as his initial bid, .5 x .9 x $3,000 (or a total of $1,350 and will pay at most, .5 x 1.1 x $3,000 (or $1,650).

So, the Player character offered the Ring up for consideration, the Jeweler after examination, will offer $1,350.

"Surely, such a ring is worth more than that!" says the knight in an injured tone.

The Gm smiles at the player saying "Ok, roll against Sir Geof's haggling skill, I'll be rolling against Del Sarto's skill." The player rolls a 9 versus Sir Geof's default skill of 7, with a -3 penalty due to cultural unfamiliarty. As a consequence of this, Sir Geof's roll fails by 5. The Jeweler on the other hand, has a roll of a 6, which means that his skill succeeded by 8. Total overall result is a win by 13. So, despite his protestations of "Surely it is worth more than this", the Jeweler's heart is not moved by the plea. Since the contest was won by 10+, the haggling is officially over, and the Jeweler's response is...

"The ring is made of a gold of doubtful purity, and the gemstone's seating is less than it should be. I am sorry, but, I can not offer more than this."

Geof's broken latin isn't sufficient to grasp all this in the rapid fire Italian, so he asks the Jeweler to speak more slowly and more simply. Even the protestation that this is God's work, and of his unfortunate circumstances, fails to move the Jeweler's stance, and finally, in exasperation, the Jeweler tells the knight bluntly "Take it or leave it." Sir Geof considers his options, and decides that he'd rather find another person to sell his ring to and heads out to find someone else.
__________________
Newest Alaconius Lecture now up:

https://www.worldanvil.com/w/scourge-of-shards-schpdx

Go to bottom of page to see lectures 1-11
hal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 04:44 PM   #27
hal
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, New York
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Sir Geof manages to find a merchant who would offer $1,500 for the ring, and even be willing to pay $2,250 for it had Sir Geoff been a better haggler, but alas, Sir Geof isn't much of a haggler, and gains the $1,500 he was hoping for. In his journey, Sir Geof meets up with an english Yeoman, named Jack, who is conversant with the Italian culture, and also happens to have become somewhat capable of haggling. With a skill of 12, Jack's ability to haggle is on par with many merchants. As luck would have it, a foreign merchant with a consignment of swords for sale, is approached in the port city that both Jack and Sir Geof are spending time at, and Jack's approach to the sword merchant finds himself a touch happy. As Jack examines the wares, his skill with swords permits him to evaluate the values of each (The GM deciding that an IQ based sword skill is sufficient for that). Jack spies two swords that might meet the Knight's needs, and asks "How much for this plain sword, and for the adorned sword?"

Rolling dice, the GM determines that the sword merchant's reaction to Jack is VERY GOOD, and he begins his haggling with an offered price of $600 for the one sword (and is willing to accept .8 x $600 or $480), and $2,400 for the adorned sword. Jack realizes that the Knight's funds won't accept the $2,400 price, so he tries for the $600 one instead. He offers the Merchant $240 for the blade as if it were a cheap blade. The merchant looks offended, saying "I have many mouths to feed, and the blade, while not the best ever made, is surely not so poorly made as to warrant a cheap blade appraisal. Swing the blade and see how well it handles!" The GM rolls versus the merchant's 12 skill, while Jack's player rolls versus his merchant skill of 12 as well. Rolling an 8, Jack's skill succeeds by 4, while the Merchant's roll of a 10 only succeeds by 2. Winning by 2, Jack's counter offer of $300 is met by the merchant's counter offer of $576.

Jack swings the blade saying "Well, while this isn't for my hand, but a knight's hand, its balance seems ordinary, I suppose I could offer $300 for it." The Merchant responds "Surely you can tell that this blade is serviceable for the needs of a knight, but despite taking food from the mouths of my children, I could accept a price more akin to that a poor knight might pay - say, $576?" The merchant's hopeful look is met by Jack's appraising stare as he points out the blade's less than perfect polish will require extra work.

The Gm rolls a 12 for the merchant's skill while Jack's player rolls a 9 for his skill. Making his haggling skill by 3, Jack further manages to talk the merchant's asking price down by another $36 to $540. The GM says "Ouch my fine fellow, the polish of that blade is as good as a silvered mirror, but, my wife's needs are such that I must make as many sales today as I can, but I couldn't let this blade go for any less than $540. Surely you can see that the blade is worth more than that!"

Jack's player rolls against his skill and gets a 14, while the Gm rolls a 9, resulting in the merchant winning by 5.

Jack's player says "The blade isn't as sharp as it could be, and I can see that while the craftsmanship is reasonably good, it still needs to be improved. The blade is a tad point heavy." The merchant responds saying "Point heavy? Point heavy! I'll tell you sir, that the blade's forte is rather strongly built, and the crossguard is sufficient to withstand heavy blows handily. In fact, such workmanship deserves praise rather than scorn. I thought I was doing you a favor in offering such a low low price of $540, but there is a limit to my generousity! I've a mind to accept your assessment that its polish is less than it could be, so I will polish the blade for you, but only if you agree to the price of $600!"

Jack's player realizes that the merchant has managed to undo all of his progress in haggling to this point, and decides the next time he's ahead of the game, he will accept the price, providing that it is back down to the $540 price he got earlier. So he says "No no no, I wouldn't want to take up your valuable time for the blade by having to polish it so much, besides, you're selling these outside of your shop, and it would inconvience the knight to have to wait so for the blade to be polished. What say you, that you throw in a thicker belt for the scabbord of the blade in addition to the sheath, and we'll call it even at $540? Rolling a 12 against his haggling, Jack's player thinks that he's not going to win this round of haggling, but watches with happiness as the GM rolls a 17. Making his roll exactly for Jack verus failing a roll by 5 for the merchant - the price gets adjusted right back to $540 again. The merchant counters with "I'll tell you what, since you're pressed for time, I'm pressed for time, why don't we just agree to selling the blade at $540 without the belt being added, without extra polish, and I'll accept that God never intended my children to be well fed - hmmm?"

Jack agrees to the bargain, and heads back to Sir Geof with his prize in hand, and a savings of $60 off the normal value of the transaction. Sir Geof, realizing the service that Jack has provided, offers him a couple of ales in reward for his endeavors.
__________________
Newest Alaconius Lecture now up:

https://www.worldanvil.com/w/scourge-of-shards-schpdx

Go to bottom of page to see lectures 1-11
hal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 11:26 PM   #28
Snoman314
 
Snoman314's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

I'm pretty sure the rules don't intend for the merchant's offers to go backwards, only to adjust by an amount smaller or larger than the the amount the PC adjusted by, depending on the outcome of the quick contest.

Social Engineering, pg27
Quote:
If the Quick Contest was a tie, the amount of his adjustment will be identical to the PCs’. If the PCs won, increase the adjustment by 10% times the margin of victory. If the merchant won, reduce it by 10% times the margin
Emphasis mine.
Snoman314 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 11:40 PM   #29
hal
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, New York
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snoman314 View Post
I'm pretty sure the rules don't intend for the merchant's offers to go backwards, only to adjust by an amount smaller or larger than the the amount the PC adjusted by, depending on the outcome of the quick contest.

Social Engineering, pg27

Emphasis mine.
If that were the case, then a PC can never lose the haggling contest, as each contest will result in the cost being haggled always going towards the point where the lowest acceptable cost to the seller will eventually be reached.

On the other hand, I noted that the "results" in the section on page 27 never seemed to take into account whether the haggling involved is for the seller, or for the buyer - whereas the original slant on the rules indicated that the haggling rules were to be used for both buying and selling. So, my interpretation was based on the fact that the haggling can in fact, go both upwards and downwards, but that the seller will never go HIGHER than his initial offer.

Last but not least? Why was the rule "the seller may never go higher than his initial offer" included - unless it was possible to adjust the cost via haggling, to the benefit of the seller (assuming the NPC was the seller in this case)?
__________________
Newest Alaconius Lecture now up:

https://www.worldanvil.com/w/scourge-of-shards-schpdx

Go to bottom of page to see lectures 1-11
hal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 11:57 PM   #30
Snoman314
 
Snoman314's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Default Re: Social Engineering: Haggling - Broken?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal View Post
If that were the case, then a PC can never lose the haggling contest, as each contest will result in the cost being haggled always going towards the point where the lowest acceptable cost to the seller will eventually be reached.
Lol, did you read my original post? That was the very point I made at the start. Note however, that if the PC's price is closer to the NPC's limit price than the NPCs initial offer, the PCs can in fact arrive at a non-optimal result. It's only when the PCs start price is extreme that it starts to look like there's a problem (more on that in a minute)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal View Post
On the other hand, I noted that the "results" in the section on page 27 never seemed to take into account whether the haggling involved is for the seller, or for the buyer - whereas the original slant on the rules indicated that the haggling rules were to be used for both buying and selling. So, my interpretation was based on the fact that the haggling can in fact, go both upwards and downwards, but that the seller will never go HIGHER than his initial offer.
You're right, the haggling can go up or down, but never past the NPC's limit price, which is determined in the reaction roll. Note that the rules on p27 do explicitly include haggling the price up and down for selling and buying respectively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal View Post
Last but not least? Why was the rule "the seller may never go higher than his initial offer" included - unless it was possible to adjust the cost via haggling, to the benefit of the seller (assuming the NPC was the seller in this case)?
Because this is one of the examples where the rules are explicitly covering both buying and selling. The NPC won't go above his maximum price when they're buying something from you, or below their minimum when selling to you.

As for the problem I pointed out at the start, Bill Stoddard pointed out to me that when combined with the reaction roll for PC price offers significantly high or low compared to the fair price, the problem goes away. Read his post.
Snoman314 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
social engineering

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.