Re: First look at Leroy's 3rdEd SJ combat system

On May 6, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Dreamer wrote:

> I know I am taking a risk here, as I have criticised in some
> considerable detail the bits that I think I know something about,
> but this should be taken in the spirit of supplying some
> hopefully useful feedback to what looks like a well-designed
> system.

I am not sure if this critique is a general one, or based on the idea  
of using the system for a proposed semi-official 3e version of  
Spelljammer. I would not claim that my system is the ideal choice for  
an official system for Spelljammer in 3e, if one is trying to stay as  
true as possible to the 2e version. But since that is not my  
intention, that's OK with me. Some of my replies reflect this.

> However, I am unsure about the ship's hit point rules, as I would
> prefer to stay with hull points if possible.

There are no hull points in 3e, or at least none that I have seen (I  
don't own every book). I didn't see much use for them. Buildings,  
ships and immense creatures all use hit points, so I followed suit.  
In addition, hit points work directly with DR. How does DR 4 work  
with 10 hit points = 1 hull point?

> Also, it would be
> preferable if the ship size groups were just an extension of the
> creature size groups, rather than just a related system.

I have yet to see a system that assigns ships sizes using the same  
sizes as creatures that I liked. I tried to work it out that way, but  
was unsatisfied with the results.

> Skills are added by this system: Operate Rigging (Dex, Trained
> Only), and Pilot Spelljammer (Int, trained Only).  I am not sure
> these are a good idea, as there is always the risk of skills
> dilution, which has plagued some games systems.

I have not added a lot of skills to the game, so that is not a  
concern for me.

> For someone to
> be a sailor the skills Climb, Jump, Spot, Use Rope and Profession
> (sailor) already exist (see NPC Classes: Commoner), and look
> sufficient.

Profession is a Wisdom based skill, which did not seem sensible for  
what a rigger does.

> For someone to pilot a helm just being a spellcaster
> is supposed to be enough; possibly Concentration would help to do
> difficult things.

Helmsmen are not required to be spellcasters in my SJ games, so this  
avenue does not make sense for my own system. And, personally, I find  
it to be an ungratifying method.

I don't think 3e needs a vast array of additional skills, but a few  
wouldn't hurt, and having a skill for piloting ships in 3e makes tons  
of sense. It's the kind of thing that adds flavor and serves a  
specific purpose for a specific setting, and I believe that to be a  
good thing.

> As a matter of design preferance
> I'd avoid adding new Feats where there are existing game
> mechanics (unless you believe them to be completely inadequate),

I believe them to be inadequate.

> Rigging Crews seem a little too good for the sort of sailors
> listed in CoAS.  Green sailors should have the skills of whatever
> Commoner background they come from - they are not even sailors.

As indicated in the document, I made riggers Experts, not commoners.  
Which I am sure some will dislike, but I am happy with it.

> - they are not even sailors.
> Average sailors at least have (space) sailing experience, and can
> be assumed to have spent at least one Commoner level doing this;

I am not going to go into this level of detail and give every rigger  
a level of commoner. The same reasoning could be applied to many  
different character types, including PCs, but most supplements and  
campaigns don't give each character levels of commoners or other NPC  
classes when said character is otherwise primarily defined by another  
class. Not many Commoner 1/Wizard 3 characters running around, or  
even Commoner 1/Warrior 2, despite the fact that last example would  
make the most sense in many instances.


Leroy Van Camp III
malacoda@????????.net
ICQ #20039817

" We tend to scoff at the beliefs of the ancients. But we can't scoff  
at them personally, to their faces, and this is what annoys me."