I've given valid responses. Ignoring them and claiming they weren't is pretty hokey.
Right, this song and dance. Should have known we'd end up here.
Holy hell. Are you really that clueless about what I wrote, or is this deliberate?
Holy hell!! Why don't you explain what you think I missed instead of accusing me of your favorite diatribe of bad traits.
Wait. This is fantastic. You're actually arguing that since I have to make up a few additional locations, that's the same as making up the tons of locations a real setting gives me plus a few additional ones. You're arguing that 5=305.
You seriously need 305 locations for a campaign? I've been in multi-year campaigns that maybe dealt with more than 50. And that's a stretch.
What I'm actually arguing is that you likely only need like... 20 locations, maybe 30, and you were going to make up a few locations anyways. So, is it really that much of a burden to need to make 10 locations compared to 5? You keep gnashing your teeth over this like it is some massive burden, but it isn't.
Both githyanki and dead gods are part of the default setting, not Spelljammer. The Forgotten Realms doesn't cease to exist just because Spelljammer mentions it(Page 7 of the Light of Xaryxis) and turn into the Spelljammer setting. Similarly the astral plane and those things already known to be in it don't suddenly turn into the Spelljammer setting.
Wut?
So, you've literally been arguing with me in another thread that every setting (including Theros, for example) has the Negative Energy Plane because it is default. However, NOW you want to argue that the Astral Sea is different in normal DnD compared to Spelljammer because they are different settings? This is nonsense. Spelljammer takes place in the Astral Sea, so stuff about the Astral Sea would be true. You can't just speak out of both sides of your mouth like this.
Literally nobody said that they needed 1000 pages.
Literally huh? What is this then?
So yes, the 8 pages of setting material in the Adventures Guide and the 2(and I'm being generous) pages of monster lore that is actual setting in the Boo's Menagerie amounts to about .01 of what I would be using when it comes to Spelljammer.
8 + 2 = 10
10 ÷ 0.01 = 1,000
So concludes our lesson on basic algebra. And our proof that you are either literally nobody, or literally somebody DID say they needed 1,000 pages. Take your pick.
I guess you have players who don't bother to look past the few things you point them at. My players and quite literally every group I've played with in the last 30 years actually talks to normal crew and gets to know them. So I need more than 20 crew members that are all clones of one another.
It's no wonder you think that you don't need more than the 5e Spelljammer setting gives you. You're players aren't going to look for anything outside the tidbits you give.
Normal crew? Oh, were you talking about them getting on someone else's ship? I thought you were talking about them as villains. It is expected the players will have their own spelljamming ship. Heck, if I wanted the players to have a ship with a captain and crew, I'd likely give them broad options and have them interview and hire the people. And of course, if I'm doing that, I'm not doing any different work than if they hired people in any other setting.
Player: "I go into the cabin on the left. What do I see?"
DM: "Cabin #1"
Player: "What else?"
DM: "Nothing. According to Chaosmancer the label is all you need."
Right, you have no idea what is in the book. Actually, looking at the first ship I find, if you descend below the deck and go to the cabin on the left, you'd find the Speljammer's Quarters. So, the room of a mage who pilots a ship. That isn't exactly hard to describe, now is it?
Also, it would be locked unless they were the Spelljammer.
And while I get that you'd love if the book detailed the personal quarters of every single captain and spelljammer in a 20 ship list... I have no patience for that.
Sooooo, the picture is just the beginning of what I need. I already told you a large part of the rest, but you conveniently cut it out of your response. Funny that.
I didn't cut it, I split it to discuss each piece separately. Because "I need to describe the tavern" is different than "I need a menu for the tavern" Something you should know I did, since supposedly you read my post to make this remark.
I've tried random generators. They suck.
Okay, and? Do you realize that WoTC has not released a single setting book (Theros, Eberron, Ravnica, Ravenloft, SCAG) that bothered creating a menu for ANY of the taverns, inns or dives in them? I was simply saying if you don't want to make a menu yourself, there are tools (lots and lots of tools) for doing so, because they are never going to publish that in a setting book like this.
So if you know what I always say, then you know that you've just twisted my words to try and score points, failing badly. I've said that alignment is great for monsters. And I've said alignment is great for random minor NPCs that the players suddenly decide to go visit, like a town baker. You also know that I've said that important NPCs like Large Luigi get a lot more treatment from me on their personality and details.
Why is he an important NPC? He's a minor NPC, he's just one of six or seven bartenders in a single city in the setting. He has no ties or ambitions for anything greater.
Also, you don't just have the alignment, do you? You have a lot of details here. And instead of replying about why it isn't enough to know everything I listed, you obfuscate by focusing on one aspect of what I listed and saying I twisted your words.
Right. A large, busy bar(you looked at the picture) only has one guy to cook, clean and serve everyone.
Ever hear about this thing called magic? It is really amazing.
Also, cool thing about beholders, they have these eye rays. And each eye can do different things. Like, there is an eye ray for telekinesis, meaning that they can move things just by looking at them. So, combine that with some magic, like a little spell called prestidigitation, and... well, I'm sure I don't have to explain this to you.
After all, I said "maybe he doesn't have staff" not "and he can run the entire business by himself". The implication of not having staff would be that he has other things that he can do or access to run the place.
Because it's a throne. Just because you sit on it doesn't make it a simple chair. When you sit on a rock, does it also become a chair?
I've sat on a chair made of rock before. So a rock can be a chair. And you seem to have no idea why a throne isn't a chair, except to state again that it is a throne. Thrones are subsets of chairs. Not all chairs are thrones, but all thrones are chairs.
Because the entire Gondor Red Herring was just that, a Red Herring. I decided to stop fishing.
So, you decided to stop responding to my point because it wasn't about how you don't need 50+ locations to make a setting. Funny, doesn't seem like a red herring. Seems like a point that you hoped I just wouldn't pursue.
You need to re-read what I said if that's what you got.
You mean this part? "Your False Equivalence where you equate your personal Star Wars setting being bad for using horrible ship combat rules to all Star Wars settings being bad"
My personal Star Wars, so the Star Wars I am using at the table with these rules, being bad, does not equate to all Star Wars Settings being bad.... but there is only one Star Wars setting right? Did Lucas make alternate universe Star Wars settings that I'm unaware of? Is every rule set for Star Wars actually a different setting each time?
So if the rules only affect a setting that uses those rules, then the rules don't make the setting good or bad, because the same setting can be used with different rules. This is really basic stuff here.