Is illicit goods a valid specialization of Merchant?

[Not]

The wording in Basic for the Merchant skill says that without the Streetwise skill you have a penalty for black market goods, unless you have an optional specialization in such goods.

Which of these readings makes more sense to you? Is it saying you should specialize in illegal goods, or that you should take a specialization (such a, for example, small arms or exotic foods) and that if such goods are illegal you don't then suffer a penalty?

Initially I thought it was the former, but it struck me as too broad a class of goods to make for a valid optional specialization of Merchant, and I now believe it's the latter.

[whswhs]

I have always taken it as "optional specialization in black market goods." That seems the most straightforward interpretation of the language; and it makes sense to me that someone who deals in one black market will have some awareness of other black markets, but might be less good at dealing with legitimate goods.

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I have always taken it as "optional specialization in black market goods." That seems the most straightforward interpretation of the language; and it makes sense to me that someone who deals in one black market will have some awareness of other black markets, but might be less good at dealing with legitimate goods.

That would be my interpretation too.

A character with merchant(raw metals) probably shouldn't ignore the penalty if he want to procure some weapon-grade plutonium.

While a merchant specialised in illegal drugs should have an easier time scoring a black market weapon.

That said, there are probably some edge case where the GM could/would/should allow it to work the other way.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I have always taken it as "optional specialization in black market goods." That seems the most straightforward interpretation of the language; and it makes sense to me that someone who deals in one black market will have some awareness of other black markets, but might be less good at dealing with legitimate goods.

This, and it matches my real life experience. Even without Streetwise, there's just certain things you learn to expect and work with when you do illicit goods that don't come up with legal ones and vice versa.

I could also see a technique to get rid of the penalty, especially if you want to train off the specialty (although it wouldn't be worth the points with RAW prices for techniques).

[Hide]

Yes, but I would pay attention at what skill you buy.

Streetwise (average skill) is about finding information and influencing people in rough environments, which often times is a staple trait of a black market.

So, waiving such benefits, I would take the Current Affairs (black market) skill as the specialization (easy skill).
´
Assuming you have an IQ-10 character, you will save 4 CP at level 12 (if aiming at the streetwise 12+ SL "requirement", which would be irrelevant with Current Affairs). IMO it is also better than buying both (average skills) merchant and merchant (black market) or only buying merchant (black market).

Then, Current Affairs lets you learn about the goods you need and also offset the lack of familiarity with the area, if your roll is successful.

To make it fair, you will be subject to the “Geographical and Temporal Scope” modifiers from the GURPS Basic Set (p. 176), meaning the farther you are from your region the greater the penalty to find what you need.

Finally, Current Affairs won’t help you to pave the way to the goods (as streetwise might do). Of course, you can counterweight this with other skills (yours or the party’s), making CP room for other aspects of your character concept.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Not

The wording in Basic for the Merchant skill says that without the Streetwise skill you have a penalty for black market goods, unless you have an optional specialization in such goods.

Which of these readings makes more sense to you? Is it saying you should specialize in illegal goods, .

I would say that it's fine to not have a penalty when dealing with black market commodities but to have a penalty when trying to deal legitimately. Although you could also buy off the penalty with a technique.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

I would say that it's fine to not have a penalty when dealing with black market commodities but to have a penalty when trying to deal legitimately. Although you could also buy off the penalty with a technique.

I'm not sure that's a legitimate use of techniques.

In the first place, I can't think of any example in the published rules of a technique being used for that purpose.

In the second place, a technique is defined as "increased skill at doing one specific thing": kicking, operating a motion picture camera, picking a lock by touch. But when you propose to buy Merchant (Illicit Goods), which gives you a -2 to skill for goods that aren't illicit, you are not buying increased skill at doing one specific thing, but at doing all the other things that can be done with that skill. You get +2 to dealing in foods, +2 to dealing in electronics, +2 to dealing in luxury goods, +2 to dealing in spacecraft, and so on for every other category that might conceivably be a specialty of Merchant. That seems overbroad!

I think I wouldn't permit that. Yes, you can describe the mechanics using the terminology of GURPS. But I don't think it represents something that actually makes sense in terms of how the world works.

[Kromm]

My experience in my misspent youth was that it didn't matter what you were selling . . . almost at all. It was the same set of tricks. It's just that the more serious the penalties for selling it, the more you had to avoid the law. But that isn't about the Merchant part of things – that's about your Streetwise level (and Area Knowledge, and Contacts).

On the other hand, while people with Merchant (Black Market Goods) get to sell a much wider range of stuff than people with legit specialties like Merchant (Cars), they just about never know as much about the merchandise, least of all its true origins, pedigree, features, or relative quality. They can and will lie about all that, but they won't have verifiable knowledge. Also, they'll rarely have an "in" with most of the distribution chain, and never have an "in" with the original producers. Oh, and they'll be unable to broker warranties, insurance, financing, etc.

[Not]

Thanks, all. Option A it is.