What would you want in a book of naval rules?

[Nightson]

But again, for me, I gotta say that doesn't suit my personal fantasy-world sensibilities. WotBS had a mile-long airship and Star Wars has a Death Star; I feel that behemoth ships quarter of a mile long have their place in a fantasy setting, as do magically powered ships which move much faster than physics would allow.

If armour, weapons, races, creatures, and buildings don't have to obey the laws of physics and follow any kind of historical realism, I don't see why ships should be an exception.

All this is nothing to do with what Ryan's doing, BTW. I don't know what he's doing on the creative side (though I'm sure I'll find out soon enough). Just my own personal preference.

Well from my perspective, throwing physics and reality to the wind generally doesn't require a book to be helpful. A simulationist on the other hand is going to find a book of history and good numbers to be very helpful.

I think catering to all styles is completely awesome, but I think if you're choosing one to cater to, simulation might sell the best.

 

[ThunhusDM]

I recommend making ships larger than they really were when you're making maps of them. The truth is, you'd probably have more like upwards of ten people fighting in a 5' square in a real boarding action. It's probably far simpler to just make the ships bigger than they should be and leave it at that, rather than messing with the scale of combat.

I agree with this one. There are some good battlemats that I want to use.
Paizo has two flip mats and old dungeon magazine Sea Wyvern poster map.
http://paizo.com/products/btpy8qps?GameMastery-FlipMat-Pirate-Ship
http://paizo.com/products/btpy8ot6?GameMastery-FlipMat-Ship
paizo.com - Dungeon Issue #141

also
Gamescapes Story Maps - Ship Shape
Gamescapes: Story Maps, Pirates Set 6 [SMGSPISM006] - $19.95 : Savage Mojo, Shop

Thunhus

 

[Janx]

I knew I forgot something:

Water!

rules about swimming (how long in the ocean)

swimming and climbing on board an enemy ship in the dead of night

surviving on a piece of driftwood

castaway islands

waiting for another ship to come by and rescue

messages in bottles

Sharks! Remember the Indianopolis!

Whaling!

Ghost Ships!

Pirates and Privateers!

Varying technology levels (ancient greek & roman ships of the Mediteranean, viking ships up to the end of the age of piracy ought to do it)

 

[gamerprinter]

I think catering to all styles is completely awesome, but I think if you're choosing one to cater to, simulation might sell the best.

And I feel completely the opposite regarding simulationist anything. Though I hope all can get something good out of this product!

 

[TarionzCousin]

Drowning rule: fall in [-]lava[/-] water, no save.

 

[Janx]

And I feel completely the opposite regarding simulationist anything. Though I hope all can get something good out of this product!

How would you feel about an abstract simulation?

I suspect simulationist folks don't want rules that are so ridiculous they don't even account for any kind of reality.

I suspect anti-simulationist folks don't want rules that micro-manage ship speed, direction, sail positioning relative to wind and a ton of math to calculate adjusted speed.

technically, wind matters. In my own rules, I factored it as a movement bonus/penalty based on the wind direction relative to the ship direction. Part of the game of ship battles being, figuring out how to move the ship based on the wind conditions. Kind of like how Roborally is about moving your bot based on the movement cards handed to you.

That could be as simple as randomly choosing the direction and windspeed ) maybe on a big spinner, and based on your ship's heading relative to the main wind direction, your ship can move 4,3,2,1 squares a turn.

Maybe oars gives it a boost.
Maybe the wind speed makes for faster/slower general movement.

I could see that during the course of a short battle, wind doesn't change much, so rolling for wind would be like rolling init, setting the initial parameters of the fight.

As such, ship combat forms a mini-game of maneuvering both ships around the map to line up a shot from the fore or aft gun(s) or a full broadsides or ramming action. Kind of like how some of the airplane dogfight games work, but hopefully simple.

It might be, that this book could have room for 3 styles of ship combat, super abstract, mini-game mode (kind of like my example) and simulation mode. If each style fit within the rest of the rules, feats, and skills that would be pretty handy.

 

[gamerprinter]

How would you feel about an abstract simulation?

I suspect simulationist folks don't want rules that are so ridiculous they don't even account for any kind of reality.

I suspect anti-simulationist folks don't want rules that micro-manage ship speed, direction, sail positioning relative to wind and a ton of math to calculate adjusted speed.

technically, wind matters. In my own rules, I factored it as a movement bonus/penalty based on the wind direction relative to the ship direction. Part of the game of ship battles being, figuring out how to move the ship based on the wind conditions. Kind of like how Roborally is about moving your bot based on the movement cards handed to you.

That could be as simple as randomly choosing the direction and windspeed ) maybe on a big spinner, and based on your ship's heading relative to the main wind direction, your ship can move 4,3,2,1 squares a turn.

Maybe oars gives it a boost.
Maybe the wind speed makes for faster/slower general movement.

I could see that during the course of a short battle, wind doesn't change much, so rolling for wind would be like rolling init, setting the initial parameters of the fight.

As such, ship combat forms a mini-game of maneuvering both ships around the map to line up a shot from the fore or aft gun(s) or a full broadsides or ramming action. Kind of like how some of the airplane dogfight games work, but hopefully simple.

It might be, that this book could have room for 3 styles of ship combat, super abstract, mini-game mode (kind of like my example) and simulation mode. If each style fit within the rest of the rules, feats, and skills that would be pretty handy.

Well I see all rules to be somewhat based on simulated reality (except magic of course), but with varying levels of abstraction anyway. I don't want or need wahoo rules, but at the same I time, I hate physics, and the constant need by some players that try to apply physics to every possible rule. Physics should be only loosely considered and not directly nor mathmatically applied in any way.

If a rule has no reflection to reality at all (other than magic), I'm not buying it either. But I have no needs to play my game in simulationist style.

Let me also add, that in most cases, I have not (in the real world) performed shipboard actions, killed anyone, and many other things that occur in D&D. I cannot measure what is truly possible, probably based on the physics of things I have not, nor will ever do - so I've got no measuring stick to decide what is reality and what is not (specifically enough to apply to a simulationist set of rules). I have worn armor and swung rattan swords (via SCA), but even that was simulating reality and not reality itself. So those that seem able to apply or need to apply simulationist rules (can't possibly know for sure, what their talking about, unless they've physically done any of those activities, the rules pertain.) Because of this simulationism is not only something I don't want to apply to my game, but something I think few people are qualified to really know.

If it's close enough to seem possible, it's good enough for D&D, at least to me.

 

[Janx]

Well I see all rules to be somewhat based on simulated reality (except magic of course), but with varying levels of abstraction anyway. I don't want or need wahoo rules, but at the same I time, I hate physics, and the constant need by some players that try to apply physics to every possible rule. Physics should be only loosely considered and not directly nor mathmatically applied in any way.

If a rule has no reflection to reality at all (other than magic), I'm not buying it either. But I have no needs to play my game in simulationist style.

True, but let's get a measure of what level you want to play at. Otherwise "I have no needs to play my game in simulationist style" doesn't really help.

If the rules were like I gave an example of for ship movement, is that too much, too little or just right for simulationism/wahoo balance?

 

[gamerprinter]

True, but let's get a measure of what level you want to play at. Otherwise "I have no needs to play my game in simulationist style" doesn't really help.

If the rules were like I gave an example of for ship movement, is that too much, too little or just right for simulationism/wahoo balance?

If your formula was in a book, I'd probably use it - and not waste my time trying to decide if it were truly simulationist or not, as I don't really care enough to decypher it. On the other hand, if some aspect seemed waaay off to reality, I'd probably opt to use something else, instead of trying to debug what you have for what I want.

I don't need much to satisfy my level of realism in a game.

 

[anest1s]

Chase rules - How sailing ships can "steal" the wind, when it becomes effective. How the chasing ship has to respond to to the movements of the lead ship to keep it working.

Ehhhh, this is one of those 'more trouble than I think it's worth' situations. In the span of a normal combat, ships won't move much. The wind will be abstracted for the 'close to combat' and 'chase' rules.

Some ships would depend on the wind to avoid an other ship that normally is faster than them. I mean if a pirate ship chases a trading ship, without the wind the trading ship is doomed.

Maybe add wind rules as a variant rule or something.