Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: Armadas (was Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...)
Next Message: My Ship Construction Rules Changes
Month Index: June, 1996


From:     Leroy Van Camp III <van891@??????.edu>
Date:     Mon, 24 Jun 1996 03:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:  Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...

On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Thomas O. Magann Jr. wrote:

> >   _But_, should the need arise, the elves can muster a huge number of
> >reserves.  There are high number of young elves on various planets just
> >waiting for a chance to get into space.
> >    Something big would have to happen before casulties become a problem.
>
> Um, how many of them, being groundlings, have a uniquely space kit?

    First, the use of the word "groundling" colors things.  Yes, most are
groundlings, but they have an extensive knowledge of space and its
workings.  I am not just talking any ol' elven nations, either, but those
that have a direct relation with the Imperial Fleet (i.e. Evermeet,
Evereska, High Forest, Alfheim, etc, in my campaigns).  Many will have a
day-to-day relation with Fleet members.
    And, the class is not necessarily a one trick wonder, designed only to
fly ships.  They have a useful ground-based function: civil defense.  The
class has no actual dependence on space or piloting ships, it is about
training people quickly to be able to channel large amounts of magickal
energy.  So, if you find a need for these reserves, you pick them up, give
them a month training in a ship, and there you go.  Instant pilots (sort
of).

> >    After the initial boxed set some of the people who contributed to the
> >SJ setting added some silly concepts.  Aerodynamic space ships is one of
> >them (good for flying through atmospheres, irrellevant in space), as well
> >as basing a ship's space stats on weight (like the ship construction
> >system in WCC).  But this is just MHO.
>
> I feel much the same way about new classes, especially one note ones, when a
> kit would do. Like the War Mage.

    That's all well and good, but the kit wouldn't achieve the desired
result.
    As for being "one note", this is limited by imagination, not the
class.  I can see other uses for it.  Besides, their _are_ types of
training in the world designed to focus a person's abilities towards one
area.  The class represents a formal militairy training focused on one
primary (channelling magic) and one secondary (tactics) skill, to the
exclsuion of most others.
    Now, if this was designed as a PC class, such complaints would be a
bit more justified.  I tend to feel the same way about new classes that
could have been achieved by a good kit.  But a kit would not have worked
in this case.  Well, it would have, but it would done the exact same
thing, produced the same result.  The reason I didn't call it a kit is
becasue kits generally don't change the XP table a class uses, and not
having a lower XP requirement defeats the purpose of the whole thing.

> I take it that rigging doesn't boost
> Manueverability in your world, either?

    Ummm, what are you talking about?

> BTW, Ship tonnage isn't weight, it's volume. Water displacement, actually.
> Just like with sea going ships. That's why the volume of one ton, as given in
> the rules, doesn't vary according to the material used.

    Yeah... that was my point.  That's why I call basing performance stats
on weight silly.  And the WCC construction rules base MC on material type,
and the chart would indicate it as a weight factor.  And the Stripping
option, which the book indicates removes weight, increases MC.
     (In defense of WCC, I have to point out that the Stripping option is
also in the original set.  Seems even the original author couldn't get it
straight.)


	     		  Leroy Van Camp III
  	  owner-mystara-l@??.com         van891@??????.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     "You know, not kneeing you in the groin is a constant struggle."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
				 MST3K





Previous Message: Re: Armadas (was Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...)
Next Message: My Ship Construction Rules Changes
Month Index: June, 1996

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
A New Class for the SJ setting...    Leroy Van Camp III    22 Jun 1996 08:47:48
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    23 Jun 1996 00:32:36
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Paul Westermeyer    23 Jun 1996 02:57:43
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Leroy Van Camp III    23 Jun 1996 08:04:42
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Leroy Van Camp III    23 Jun 1996 09:03:24
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Shelby Michlin    23 Jun 1996 16:01:45
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Paul Westermeyer    23 Jun 1996 15:04:54
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    23 Jun 1996 20:31:57
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Leroy Van Camp III    24 Jun 1996 10:55:04
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    sinny@?????????.net    24 Jun 1996 12:31:30
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Eugene Shumu1insky    24 Jun 1996 14:53:47
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Eugene Shumu1insky    24 Jun 1996 14:55:55
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    24 Jun 1996 20:25:42
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Ken Lipka    25 Jun 1996 12:06:20
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Jamie Cavanagh    25 Jun 1996 15:02:20
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Jamie Cavanagh    25 Jun 1996 21:54:53
A New Class for the SJ setting...    Leroy Van Camp III    27 Jun 1996 02:04:53
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Ken Lipka    27 Jun 1996 12:08:02
Re: A New Class for the SJ setting...    Jamie Cavanagh    27 Jun 1996 13:09:17

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]