Re: Should I make SJ "cards" using 3d or cartoon art, folks? :)

3-D art is a MUST, IMO.  SJ badly needs a facelift to raise eyebrows.  You
never know, your ideas might even get picked up by a game company for
development if you sell them just right, and visual impact is key here.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Shepheard" <david_shepheard@???????.com>
To: <SPELLJAMMER-L@??????.???????.com>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 12:17 PM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [SPELLJAMMER] Should I make SJ "cards" using
3d or cartoon art, folks? :)


> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steven" <steven.james.1@??????????.??.uk>
> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 12:03 AM
> Subject: [SPELLJAMMER] Should I make SJ "cards" using 3d or cartoon art,
> folks? :)
>
> >Going to make re-creations of all the ships I make into the "battle
cards"
> >like in the original boxed set: A4-sized card with deckplans (based on
new
> >design and info)
>
> Great! Every ship hull type needs a card. I'd even go as far as to say
that
> the variant ship designs also need to have their own cards. While ships
like
> the Gnat (a stripped down Mosquito) look pretty much the same as the
> original, other variants, such as the Stinger (another Mosquito variant)
> have different weapons so really do need that card. All of the variants
have
> slightly different stats, so it would be nice to eventually have a
"complete
> collection" on BtM.
>
> TSR also failed to give us deck plans for certain groundling ships and
while
> we might all agree that these ships are not very useful for SJ campaigns,
it
> would be nice to have them in the complete set for use with groundling
> civilisations that are SJ newbies. (I'm imagining something like a Nordic
> country on a groundling world that has destroyed a few slave ships making
> raids and has decided to mount the helms on its own ships and take the war
> up to the enemy. It would be great for the PCs to encounter a small fleet
of
> longships, especially if that fleet rescued if they were unfortunate
enough
> to be captured by a slave ship. The PCs could be employed by the
groundling
> nation as guides.)
>
> >Now, would folk prefer 2d cartoon look, or 3d look for these? Also I
could
> >make both, cartoon with 2nd ed stats, and 3d version for 3rd ed stats, if
> >folk could help/suggest stats for 3rd ed? :)
>
> I know that other people have said "can we have both please". However,
> looking at this logistically, you have only actually finished a certain
> percentage of the ships so far. How long do you think it would take for
you
> to do every SJ ship?Given the amount of quality you are injecting into
this
> project I can't see you finishing any time in the near future. And if you
> were to also try to do the variant hull designs you would be taking even
> longer to finish each individual ship. I'm sure that you could re-use your
> "new Wasp" if you wanted to create a "new Bee", "new Bumble Bee" and/or a
> "new Fleet Footed Wasp"*.
>
> * = (I do think that name, and some of the other variant names, is a bit
> naff and would be happy to see the "Fleet Footed Wasp" called something
like
> the "Hornet" instead.)
>
> I've got mixed feelings about 3d deck plans. I'd also like to see copies
of
> both types, before making a decision. However, I'd like to point out that
> you seem to be the only 3d expert we have, so if we did switch to 3d deck
> plans we would have to ask you to create 3d models of any fan created hull
> designs. This could really slow down the process (especially in the near
> future when you are going to actually be fixing all of the bugs you see in
> the TSR ships).
>
> I would suggest that for now you turn out 2d deck plans as they will be
> compatible with the deck plans that people already have. If you want to
make
> 3d deck plans (and your trial versions work for GMs) then it would be
great
> to have both, but I think until you have a "complete set" made people will
> need to use 2d deck plans for anything you haven't done yet. So I say 2d
is
> a must have for at least the next few years.
>
> However, having said that I think that 2d deck plans (or 2d deck plans
plus
> a back up supply of 3d deck plans) is the way to go, I wouldn't say that
> same rule applies to the other side of the ship's card. TSR gave us 3d
> artwork that often didn't match up with the deck plans on the other side.
> You could replace that artwork with something made from your 3d models.
>
> I think that you should also make a few experimental versions of that side
> of the card in order to find the best format for it. However here are some
> early thoughts:
>
> * I like the original TSR borders so would hope you would keep them (or
use
> something very similar that fits in with whatever style Static is going to
> use for the 3e PDFs).
> * It is essential to have the name of the hull type. While you are doing
> these cards you can sort out small inconsistencies in ship hull names. (I
> think I've seen "Squid-ship", "Squid-Ship" and "Squidship".) You could
also
> create a convention for names of variant designs and cards for specific
> ships. I would suggest trying a sub heading under the name of the variant
> ships that says something like: "a variant of the ****" and a similar sub
> heading under named ships that says "a ****" (with the stars being
replaced
> by the name of the hull that the ship is based on).
> * As far as I know the conversion of ships and ship's combat to 3e hasn't
> been finished yet, so it might be better to do 2e plans for now and save
> them all as templates that can be tweaked when we have 3e worked out.
>
> <offtopic subject="3e ship stats">
> Most of the 3e details would be the same for all three GMs, but I think
that
> 3 and 3.5e GMs will want AR (armour rating) replaced with a standard AC
(as
> it will help standardise d20 rolls). I'm not sure what people's thoughts
are
> on Hull Points, but I think we might want to use hit points and a
hardness.
> Alternatively we might also want to give ships statistics similar to
> animated objects.
>
> Read more about hardness here:
> http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#hardness
>
> Read more about animated objects here:
> http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/animatedObject.htm
>
> My personal feeling is that ship saving throws should be made by a
helmsman
> (if applicable) because a ship is an "attended object". (Although I don't
> see why the ships 2e MC and AR couldn't also be converted into saving
throw
> adjustments for reflex or fortitude saves.)
>
> I'd also argue that weapon attack rolls should be made by one PC or NPC
> (with anyone else on the crew "assisting" them). This seems to be how the
> PbEM people do it and it makes a lot more sense than having a ship make
its
> own attack rolls. (It also means that PCs and NPCs can use the "Weapon
> Focus" feat and fighters can use the "Weapon Specialisation" feat. This
> allows you to build spacefaring NPCs or PCs who make very good weapon
> masters.)
> </offtopic>
>
> <offtopic subject="HackJammer">
> It would be nice if any new cards could also work for HackJammer players,
so
> if you can keep all the original templates someone like Adam could give
you
> HJ details and you could make another set of cards to support that game.
> </offtopic>
>
> I think that the "Ship Information Form" at the back of the LotV needs to
be
> replaced with something a lot more like a character sheet. It would be
nice
> if your "ship portraits" could also be made available in a standard size
> (i.e. x times y pixels) that would slot into a standard space on a new
form.
> Perhaps you could create a group of thumbnail pictures at some point.
>
> >I think there should be no copyright problems, since it's re-creations
not
> >direct copies, not-for-profit fan art, also would like to credit original
> >artist for designs, if anyone recalls who that is?
>
> I AM NOT A LAWYER - THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
>
> The Spelljammer Campaign Setting is the property of Wizards of the Coast.
> They may not have trademarked their original SJ hull designs, but you
*are*
> basing your new work on work they own, so I'm pretty sure that copyright
law
> still does apply.
>
> Wizards of the Coast have given people three legal ways to produce SJ
> material:
>
> 1) Beyond the Moons
>
> As the official Spelljammer website BtM has the permission of WotC to
> produce certain types of content that other websites are not able to
> produce. The easiest thing to do with your stuff is give it to Static and
> have him put it on BtM.
>
> 2) The ESD Conversion Agreement
>
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/welcome
> http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/ESDpolicy.rtf
>
> This agreement allows you to make non-profit conversions of 2e or 1e
> material (including Spelljammer or any other campaign setting) to 3rd
> edition. It even allows you to put the "d20 System" logo on your
> conversions. (So this logo *might* make its way onto the SJ PDFs when they
> get finished.)
>
> 3) A separate legal agreement
>
> This is what the HackJammer team did. This sort of thing is probably out
of
> your league, but at some point some publisher might come along and licence
> the SJ campaign setting. This has already happened with Dragonlance and
> Ravenloft, but it probably isn't going to happen with SJ in the near
future.
>
> As I've already said, I *think* your best route is to give this stuff to
> BtM, but if you want to use the ESD Conversion Agreement you need to also
> check out the Classic Download FAQ:
>
> http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20010309x
>
> This explains when your conversions can only be replacement stats and when
> you can recreate the entire product as a 3e conversion. Interestingly as
the
> ship cards are downloadable from WotC they *seem* to be things that anyone
> can convert to 3e (as long as they comply with the Conversion Agreement).
> However, your ship plans seem to be "modifications" rather than
> "conversions", so you might want to speak to a lawyer if you want to host
> them yourself.
>
> <offtopic subject="conversions">
> Interestingly while you can only get the Spelljammer ship plans from the
> Classic Downloads page, the Spelljammer Campaign Setting is mentioned in
> lots of things like Undermountain Stardock and the Arcane Age campaign
> setting and we could probably create new 3e PDFs from all of these
> downloads.
>
> This *should* mean that we could create a Stardock that fits in better
with
> Realmspace and a retro-SJ campaign set in the time period of the Arcane
Age
> (so you could send PCs back to fight in the First Unhuman War or explore
> pre-destruction Astromundi or Zivilyn).
> </offtopic>
>
> As for the original artist, that would be Jim Holloway. He gets a credit
of
> "Book Cover Paintings, Illustrations, Ship Concepts". Although if you ever
> do the Spelljammer then you need to credit that to Diesel (Dave LaForce).
> LotV page 3 says: "Jim Holloway started playing with ship types and Diesel
> began designing both the Spelljammer itself and the asteroid base that
> became the Rock of Bral."
>
> Bear in mind that this only applies to the original boxed set and you will
> need to double check who made new ships for supplements like Lost Ships.
>
> >What do you all think? :)
>
> I think whatever you end up making, your best bet is to get Static to put
> them on his site and put links to the cards on your own website.
>
> Static is good at giving credit where credit is due so you will get the
> shout out that you want. If you give each ship type its own "homepage" on
> your own website, people can use BtM for the statistics and ship cards and
> surf over to your page for a collection of 3d artwork featuring the same
> ships. Just let Static know what you want him to do and he will help you
> out.
>
> When the complete collection of 3e ship cards are available it would be
nice
> to have copies of them put into the back of the "Ships in Wildspace" PDF.
> (Probably as an Appendix B.)
>
> David "Big Mac" Shepheard
> Virtual Eclipse Role Playing Club
>
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/virtualeclipselrp/links/d20_system_001071937434/Spelljammer_001071430476
> http://www32.brinkster.com/virtualeclipse/
>
> ********************************************************************
> The D&D Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd
> The Spelljammer Homepage: http://www.spelljammer.org
> To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@??????.???????.com
> with UNSUB SPELLJAMMER-L in the body of the message.
>