Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: SPELLJAMMER-L Digest - 31 Dec 2003 to 4 Jan 2004 (#2004-2)
Next Message: Re: Just some thought!
Month Index: January, 2004


From:     Ariel Sibal <asibal_2000@?????.com>
Date:     Mon, 5 Jan 2004 03:39:54 -0800
Subject:  Re: SPELLJAMMER-L Digest - 31 Dec 2003 to 4 Jan 2004 (#2004-2)
Yeah, I thought catapults are tension powered weapon
while a trebuchet is a counterweight type weapon. I
think it can be use as a siege weapons against
fortified asteroids. So the weapon would be
specialized in it's use in any naval engagement. Maybe
used on something like an elven Armada or a Ark ship
to be able to handle the weapon.

A.Sibal

--- smu anonymous <sxoa@?????.com> wrote:
> I was of the understanding, though I could most
> certaintly (and most likely) be wrong, that heavy
> catapults were trebuchets.  However I also disagree
> with this because trebuchets and catapults are
> fundamentally different kinds of machines.  A
> catapult works of the tension in wound rope, hair,
> etc. where as a trebuchet launches its payload with
> a massive counterwait.
>
> I thnk it could probably be used by capital ships
> and such that didn't have to much rigging overhead,
> but thats my thought.  IIRC the historical trebuchet
> outraged the early bombards so I would give it at
> the very least more hexes than those but I'm not
> totally sure.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree


Previous Message: Re: SPELLJAMMER-L Digest - 31 Dec 2003 to 4 Jan 2004 (#2004-2)
Next Message: Re: Just some thought!
Month Index: January, 2004

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
Re: SPELLJAMMER-L Digest - 31 Dec 2003 to 4 Jan 2004 (#2004-2)    smu anonymous    05 Jan 2004 11:24:36
Re: SPELLJAMMER-L Digest - 31 Dec 2003 to 4 Jan 2004 (#2004-2)    Ariel Sibal    05 Jan 2004 11:39:54

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