Adventurer's Vault Excerpt: Airships

[Wormwood]

The idea of having a single HP pool for a vehicle of any size? It's an obvious solution to the "sections" problem of previous editions, because the first reaction someone would have to "how do we solve this?" would be "get rid of them."

*shrug*

I find that gordian-knot solutions like this leave me slapping my head and wondering why I didn't think of it before.

And I honestly don't see why I would ever want or need D&D vehicle rules more complex than this.

 

[Wormwood]

All elements are presented in a similar fashion that is easily scanable for needed info. Makes determining how soemthing works or happens in the hat of the game a snap.

At the end of the day, that's my main point of praise for 4e: it organizes information is discrete packets, allowing it to be run with deceptive ease.

 

[Mallus]

Anyone - and I mean lit'rally anyone - who frequents this board could have done that.

This is frequently the response to an elegant solution (from the people not responsible for it).

The idea of having a single HP pool for a vehicle of any size?

It's a lot like creatures having single HP pool and not HP-by-location.

"But that's hard." Yeah, well, tough crap.

If it's so easy to come up with a better and robust system, why don't you do so and post your results?

I am disturbed by how wow'd people are by this solution.

I'm disturbed by your disturbance. Wait, no I'm not. I think it's kinda funny.

Is it simple and easy to run...

And that's all I'm looking for. What more do you want?

...it is elegant simply by lack of attempting to push the envelope...

Where do you want the envelope pushed? Back into cumbersome and overcomplicated? Been there, done that.

 

[GnomeWorks]

This is frequently the response to an elegant solution (from the people not responsible for it).

This solution - vehicles having a single HP pool - has already been extensively used.

I used it in 3.5, writing up vehicle rules.

It's a lot like creatures having single HP pool and not HP-by-location.

...fair enough.

If it's so easy to come up with a better and robust system, why don't you do so and post your results?

Didn't I just say that it's difficult to do so?

I have higher expectations of people who get paid to do this than to come up with something that I thought of in my freetime.

If you feel like throwing $40,000 at me a year, for which I would sit around and think up cool ideas and try to design a game, then sure - done and done.

And that's all I'm looking for. What more do you want?

People to not regard this as the most amazing innovation in vehicle rules evar?

Sure, it's simple. Sure, it's a solution. But it's not an amazing solution to the complicated conundrum that was vehicle HP rules. It's the first and most obvious one. And if that had been acknowledged, and the rules not proclaimed as the most innovative thing evar, then I most likely wouldn't have even bothered to post here.

Where do you want the envelope pushed? Back into cumbersome and overcomplicated? Been there, done that.

And that is why design is hard, because the goal would be to have vehicle HP rules that sufficiently model the way a vehicle takes damage (like the sections thing), but without being too complicated or cumbersome.

A solution to that problem, an actual solution rather than a copout (which is what the single HP pool is: a copout), that was relatively simple and easy to deal with, would be worthy of being called elegant.

The solution they came up with? Not elegant, because it's freaking obvious.

 

[Scribble]

Having vehicles have seperate HPs would be out of character for the game.

As was pointed out, why would vehicles have seperate HP totals, yet other large things would not?

In a system like 3e, yes, this would be bare bones simple design. But in 4e, the system is designed around the concept of everything being easy to grasp, with the effects and options being discreet add on packages.

In 4e, as opposed to "called shots" there are powers that do certain effects that a called shot would handle. Like blinding, or tripping. This in effect negates the need for seperate HP totals.

My guess, is there will be certain, powers, or items with powers built in, that allow you to effect vehicles in a similar fashion.

The elegance of the Airship is in how well it fits into the already elegant system.

 

[Riley]

You know, I was going to agree with you...but pre Final Fantasy, I don't actually remember airships being part of the fantasy lexicon.

Looking back at the 1e list of "influential books", did airships show up in ANY of those sources?

I can't speak to any classic books with airships, but I remember playing a D&D airship battle (and crash) well before Final Fantasy. Actually, I had no idea Final Fantasy had airships, until it was announced in this thread.

 

[Wormwood]

The elegance of the Airship is in how well it fits into the already elegant system.

This.

 

[rkwoodard]

Vance

I can't speak to any classic books with airships, but I remember playing a D&D airship battle (and crash) well before Final Fantasy. Actually, I had no idea Final Fantasy had airships, until it was announced in this thread.

There is an airship in one of the Cudgel Books by Vance. If no one else can find the specifics, I will cite it tonight when I get home from work.

RK

 

[thundershot]

See, BECAUSE the rules and designs were so complex before, we'd NEVER USE VEHICLES. I'd much rather have simple rules and end up using things than to have complex "more accurate" rules that I would never use due to complexity.



Chris

 

[Wormwood]

See, BECAUSE the rules and designs were so complex before, we'd NEVER USE VEHICLES. I'd much rather have simple rules and end up using things than to have complex "more accurate" rules that I would never use due to complexity.

If I were playing 3.5, HERO or Shadowrun? Oh hell yeah I expect me some complex vehicle rules. The airship as presented would be wholly unacceptible for my needs.

4e? This is *all I want*.