Re: MAGIC: Spelljamming Attn Paul W.

>  I am trying to explain what I believe the SpellJammer rulebooks
>themselves say. My own House rule is normal gravity but helms generate the
>binary gravity GOC/GAE effects as well as inertial isolation.  Its kind of
>a specialized situ. See below ... I am discussing classic SJ rules.

Not really, classic rules don't state that walking upside down on a ship in
the atmopshere is possible explicitly, rather we on the list have
extrapolated that from the description of how gravity works.  That's why I
believe the gravity on contact theory was _not_ the intention of the
designers but simply the result of some poorly worded paragraphs which
slipped through the poor editing.  They way WCC implies gravity on entry is
correct in its short description further convinces me of this. Regardless,
your discussing one possible variation (I think)

>  There are two concepts at work here. Gravity and Inertial isolation.
>In my opionion the towing rules as presented in both WCC and COAS infers
>that any two fastened masses can form an isolated inertial frame which a
>spelljammer can drive. Two masses simply touching but not fastened merely
>share a common gravity plane. The helm drives the mass it is fastened to
>and not the mass merely touching it. This allows take-off and landing on
>>planets.

I agree that merely touching an object does not require the helm to try and
move it, that is clearly against the std rules. We disagree on the extent
of "fastening" needed.

Maybe this will clear my comments up. I think in deep spae a major helm on
a flitter would allow that flitter to tow a Man-o-War, provided the rope
used was strong enough to hold the forces (I'd argue a "std", thick
nautical mooring line would suffice, provided the bollards were properly
sunk on both vessel's decks).  However, when these two ships enter the
atmosphere of a planet (and the planets gravity takes over) the man-o-war
would plummet towards the earth, because the rope is not rigid.  If the
rope and flitter were strong enough material wise to hold an elven flitter
against gravity, the towing would continue with the man-o-war hanging
beneath the flitter like a truck being carried beneath a helicopter.  But,
of course, the forces here would be immense, and no flitter could actually
support such weight so the man-o-war would rip the rope, or the flitter
(because the helm would not have and problems with the weigth.

>  I don't have the rules here but I believe the helm itself (in the sense
>of normal helms minor and major) must be attached to the vessel in order
>to be active. Merely putting a helm on the deck without anchoring it will
>not work.  (Let me know if you can find this... I believe it to be true.
>And if it is it is further corrobative evidence from the text.)

No, this is quite true, a helm must be bolted to a vessel for it to work,
this is in the text (sorry, no time to hunt for the quote).  But that
doesn't really affect my problems here.

>   This is not how I see it working.  Gravity's primary mechanism
>is GOC(Gravity on Contact), the secondary mechanism is GAE(Gravity at
>Envelope).

Exactly, you interprete the gravity rules differently then I. Normally, I
would just say "Cool":) but in this case your interpretation (IMO) makes it
_much_ more difficult for people to suspend disbelieve and think SJ has
little impact on the original TSR worlds (Greyhawk, Dragonlance, FR). Since
one of the guiding conditions of the SJ concept seems to be just that I
think your interpreatation detracts from "canon" SJ. This _doesn't_ mean I
think yours wouldn't be fun or enjoyable (which I suspect you know Steve
but we have an audience so I like to be clear on that:)) or that it doesn't
make for a great, adventurerous RPG experience. It just means I think it
makes the "crossover" nature of SJ less believable and distances it from
the core AD&D worlds.  Which I think is a Bad Thing.:)

Some folks may think, hey, maybe that's what SJ needs, to be distanced from
Core AD&D and find its own niche. They maybe right, but I doubt SJ has ever
attracted "new" folks, who have never before played AD&D.  I think the
majority of potential SJ converts come from old TSR worlds which they want
to have continue  play,  using SJ, like Planescape, as a way for their PCs
from varying worlds to interact with each other logically minus the
contrived "gate" mechanic (I know Planescape uses gates, but they are
integral rather then one-shot "Move you there" devices).  So they want a
way to explain why their PCs had never encountered SJ before. Your gravity
system makes this less likely, I believe.:)

>   I hope that that makes more sense to you... hmm I guess you could call
>this the Strong and Weak forces of gravity theory ;)
>           -Steve

We seem to be engaging somewhat in a clasical Humanist versus Scientist
situation here:)  Not surprising when one compares our .sigs, I suppose:)
I understand your system, I just dislike it for the reasons outlined
aboved.

>+++++++++++++++   Steven Swenson
>### +++++++ ###   Technical Support Specialist
>#### +++++ ####   Texas Micro Inc.

"We look on the same stars,  the sky is common,  the same world surrounds
us.  What difference does it make by what pains each seeks the truth?  We
can not attain to so great a secret by one road..."
Symmachus,  "Memorial on the Occasion of the Removal of the Altar of
Victory from the Senate House" (392 AD)

Paul Westermeyer,  westermeyer.3@???.edu
Phd Candidate, History, Ohio State
Adjunct Faculty, Humanities Department, Columbus State Community College