No Naval Rules?

[The Shaman]

*sigh*

Here we go again.

The 1e rules do cover that stuff, but in very little detail (all of the rules for waterborne adventure fill exactly two pages) . . .

That's two pages relating specifically to travel at sea, which are used in conjunction with the hundreds of other pages of rules which already apply to the things characters may do when they're on a ship as well as the pages and pages of monsters which are found in marine and aquatic environments.

Again, how much more did it need to be? What, in your opinion, is missing?

. . . and some of the specifics seem like they weren't thought out too well (e.g., ship movement is given in miles per hour, rather than in tabletop units as all other movement in the game . . .

Overland travel for both land and sea travel is give in miles per day (1e AD&D DMG, "Outdoor Movement," p. 58), so "all" is overstating things a bit.

Tactical movement for ships should've been given in tabletop units as well as miles per hour, but I seem to recall it taking about a minute to convert between the two. If that.

. . . large ships have fewer HPs than most mid-level characters . . .

Hull Values are equivalent to the Defensive Point Values used in sieges (1e AD&D DMG, "Construction Defense Values," p. 110). They are not the same thing as hit points used by characters and monsters.

IMO, the AD&D rules for waterborne adventure are woefully inadequate as written. With some house ruling, though, they'd be passable (just passable, though, not good and certainly not great). Like I said, though, YMMV.

You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

It really helps these discussions when the participants actually understand what it is they're criticizing.

 

[TarionzCousin]

No Naval Rules?

I'm dyslexic, so when I first saw this I swear I thought it read "No Lava Rules?"

 

[gamerprinter]

Corsair from Adamant Entertainment

I've used Corsair from Adamant Entertainment, which is D20, but have used them with my 3.5 game last year. It has wind direction, speed and maneuverability rules. Also the sailor's seamanship feats are averaged to give the ship a seamanship score. Also legendary ships are ships with their own ratings and feats - you can even give monster templates to ships, ie: Ghost for a ghost ship, Vampire, etc.

Plus it has about 30 or so ships, statted out from schooners to man-o-wars, and a couple ship deck plans.

We didn't do lots of sailing, but an early part of one home-brew campaign taking a ship for explorations and anti-pirate activities consumed our time for a while and these rules were very helpful.

Something to check out anyway.

GP

 

[jdrakeh]

Here we go again.

Indeed.

That's two pages relating specifically to travel at sea, which are used in conjunction with the hundreds of other pages of rules which already apply to the things characters may do when they're on a ship as well as the pages and pages of monsters which are found in marine and aquatic environments.

Remember that you said this. It will be important in a moment.

Overland travel for both land and sea travel is give in miles per day (1e AD&D DMG, "Outdoor Movement," p. 58), so "all" is overstating things a bit.

Travel time is presented in miles per day. Tactical movement is given in inches (both on land and in the air). In fact, such is the standard for all tactical movement in the game (as opposed to abstract measures of travel time). Unless you're at sea, as I previously stated (and you have now confirmed). I find that to be the hallmark of ill considered design.

Tactical movement for ships should've been given in tabletop units as well as miles per hour, but I seem to recall it taking about a minute to convert between the two. If that.

If by "convert" you mean "make something up" — then, yes, you're right. There aren't, however, any actual rules in the DMG for converting miles per hour on the water into inches of tactical movement.

Hull Values are equivalent to the Defensive Point Values used in sieges (1e AD&D DMG, "Construction Defense Values," p. 110). They are not the same thing as hit points used by characters and monsters.

This is a great time to get back to all of those monsters you keep mentioning. Monsters don't have siege attack values. How is damage inflicted by monsters measured in the game? In HPs. So, either Hull Values function like HPs when determining damage from monster attacks or monsters aren't capable of damaging ships. Again, another thing I consider a hallmark of ill considered design.

You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

The thing is, everything I've mentioned is supported wholly by the RAW in the DMG. That said, I can see how your own interpretations of the RAW can also hold true under certain circumstances.

It really helps these discussions when the participants actually understand what it is they're criticizing.

I understand the game just fine, thanks. I'd love to continue this discussion, but since you've resorted to talking down your nose at me (as usual), it's over.

 

[jdrakeh]

Just had a thought. You know how people are always arguing for the return of "loose" rules, where things were more open to individual interpretation, instead of being spelled out in stone? Is this what people have been missing about "loose" rules? Rules-lawyering? If so, I'm not so sure I want "loose" rules to make a comeback.

 

[MarkB]

I seem to recall that the Savage Tide 3.5e adventure path made a good stab at combining Stormwrack's ship-statting rules with some simple-but-effective naval combat rules that were somewhat more concrete than Stormwrack's default "narrative" combat system, for the couple of chapters that involved extended naval travel. It's been awhile though, so I don't recall the details.

 

[Achan hiArusa]

Naval Rules:

Game Supplements
Expert Set: Both versions had rules for ships
M2 Vengeance of Alphaks: Had War Machine supplemental rules for naval combat.
Seas of Cerilia Boxed Set: Had naval rules using the Birthright War Card system.

Dragon Magazine Articles:
"High Seas" by Margaret Foy; v. 116(10); Best set of rules I've ever seen
"The Oriental Sea" by Margaret Foy; v. 130(64); "High Seas" Oriental supplement
"Anchors & Arrows" by Thomas M. Kane; 165(10); Battlesystem rules for naval combat
"Weapons of the Waves" by Rich Baker; 232(8); Birthright War Card system for naval combat
"Warships of the Sea" by Keith Francis Strohm; 250(44); Supplement for "Of Ships and Sea" (mentioned previously in this thread so I didn't repeat it)

 

[Achan hiArusa]

Indeed.



Remember that you said this. It will be important in a moment.

Travel time is presented in miles per day. Tactical movement is given in inches (both on land and in the air). In fact, such is the standard for all tactical movement in the game (as opposed to abstract measures of travel time). Unless you're at sea, as I previously stated (and you have now confirmed). I find that to be the hallmark of ill considered design.

If by "convert" you mean "make something up" — then, yes, you're right. There aren't, however, any actual rules in the DMG for converting miles per hour on the water into inches of tactical movement.

This is a great time to get back to all of those monsters you keep mentioning. Monsters don't have siege attack values. How is damage inflicted by monsters measured in the game? In HPs. So, either Hull Values function like HPs when determining damage from monster attacks or monsters aren't capable of damaging ships. Again, another thing I consider a hallmark of ill considered design.

The thing is, everything I've mentioned is supported wholly by the RAW in the DMG. That said, I can see how your own interpretations of the RAW can also hold true under certain circumstances.

I understand the game just fine, thanks. I'd love to continue this discussion, but since you've resorted to talking down your nose at me (as usual), it's over.

There are 176" outdoor to a mile and 1440 rounds per day. So you divide your tactical movement in inches per round by dividing by eight or you multiple your movement in miles per day by eight.

Siege attack values for creatures are 1/2 a siege attack value per 1d6 of damage the creature inflicts on a wooden structure. They are 1/2 per 3d6 against Soft Stone, and 1/2 per 6d6 against hard stone. The article "High Seas" standardizes all the values by saying that a hull point is 10 hit points and all damage is rounded down for wooden hulled ships as I believe the Expert set also does.

 

[Argyle King]

One thing I've found you have to be careful with -especially if you're playing D&D 4E- is that the PCs can general do enough damage to easily destroy most objects; this includes vehicles. The values given in the DMG for how much HP an object should have don't work very well if you're trying to build an object which you want to stick around for a while. You might need to do some handwaving for ships to actually be viable. I learned this during the first campaign I ran.

I had designed an encounter which involved what can be best described as ski lifts. I had thought it would be a cool encounter, but it ended up being very anti-climactic.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Just had a thought. You know how people are always arguing for the return of "loose" rules, where things were more open to individual interpretation, instead of being spelled out in stone? Is this what people have been missing about "loose" rules? Rules-lawyering? If so, I'm not so sure I want "loose" rules to make a comeback.

Loose rules were never the problem. Players and DM's trying to "win" at the expense of everyone else was (and continues to be) the problem. Tighter and more exhaustive rules are no cure for those bent on destroying the fun for everyone else. It can still happen.
By themselves, loose rules allow a playing group to customize the experience of the home game to get exactly what they want.