Sailing without a crew

[Khayman]

I hadn't considered that connection between sailing & theatre. That's really cool. And kinda explains the continuing fascination with Gilbert & Sullivan...

 

[Khayman]

Survival indeed says that 5+ ranks means you can tell where north is. No offense, but big deal. I know where north is right now and I'm still not able to navigate my way that far outside the city. Knowing north is only half the battle. What do you do if you have no landmarks to refer to?

It is however stated that a DC 15 check means that you keep from getting lost. IMHO the Survival skill is implicitly aimed at personal land-based tasks, and having some experience in orienteering I can see how a moderate check to avoid getting lost on land would come under Survival. Get me out on a large body of water, pffft, forget it. Personally, I'm more comfortable with having a separate Knowledge (navigation) skill to resolve this task.

Put it this way: you're hiring crew for your new ship. Who do you hire to plot your course, a navigator or a big-game hunter? Guaranteed the hunter has gobs of ranks in Survival but he keeps checking the hold for quicksand.

Broadsides is a bit nitpicky about the skills involved --- Profession (sailor) to run the ship & understand orders, Profession (pilot) to steer her, Knowledge (navigation) to determine position & plot a course. The Profession (pilot) skill is possibly redundant, but we've gotten used to using it. Repairs are effected by Craft (shipbuilding) or (in our campaign) Craft (carpentry) if hulls alone. As well, Broadsides consistently uses higher DCs --- reflecting the assumption that operating a ship properly requires co-operation and high levels of skill.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No, but I'd allow him to know that there was a cliff coming up without having to look out the window of the carraige.

Also, having fallen off the cliff in the carraige, if he survived he'd be able to make a check to find his way back to town.

Likewise, I'd probably allow the Survivalist to figure out that a reef was near - based on whatever natural intuition he's developed - and, if he survived the ship running aground, he'd be able to live off of reef fish and mollusks, but, just like you ruled, he doesn't get to steer the ship or the carriage.

In my book - profession gives no mechanical benefits beyond possibly a synergy bonus, and that only in very specific areas.

Note that well. MECHANICAL benefits. You still get all the roleplaying aspects. You know what things are called. You know how much you should be paid. You know the names of ports etc.

In other words, useless. Does anyone in any of your campaigns ever take a Profession skill and, more importantly, do they ever add points to it past 1st-level?

I wouldn't. I'd be better served with cross-class skill ranks in Spellcraft. At least then I'd have the chance, albeit slim, to do *something* with my precious few skill points.

Otherwise profession is the be-all end-all of skills.

Only if you fubar it as a DM.

Take profession(cat burglar) and you've got virtual ranks in pick locks, move silently, hide, bean person over the head with sap, search, appraise and anything else you can think of.

No, you don't. Certain Profession skills don't exist, because any checks that would be made by them are already covered by other skills / mechanics. Hit someone over the head with a sap? BAB. Pick Locks? Open Lock. Etc., etc., etc.

In other words, if you allow a redundant, unbalanced Profession and rule that it acts in redundant, unbalanced ways, you'll get a redundant, unbalanced skill.

Pretty simple, actually.

Survival provides a mechanic for not getting lost, for predicting the weather, and for avoiding storms, reefs and the edge of the world.

Except, as above, you still don't get to steer the carriage *or* the boat.

Profession(sailor) gives you the appropriate background

No. It gives you the knowledge and ability to "know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession’s daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems."

Manning a ship, setting the rigging, plotting courses, proper ship maintenance, all these things are "the profession's daily tasks."

Having a character history of "He was born on a ship o'war to a smuggled concubine and a random member of her crew, and spent the next 20 years of his life at sea" gives you the appropriate background.

Letting NPC's away with just having profession(sailor) to do everything is cheating, and telling your PC's that their skills don't work just because they're on the sea is even worse.

And where did I say the NPCs would only have Profession (Sailor)?

The trained hands would likely be Experts, with max ranks in Profession (Sailor), Use Rope, Climb, and Balance. Some would have ranks in Swim, some in a Craft skill or two. Others might have Survival, or Heal. An exceptional sailor might be a Rogue, instead of an Expert.

The ship's carpenter would have Craft (Shipmaking), and possibly Skill Focus in it, as well.

The ship's doctor? Also, likely, an Expert - or an Adept if the crew is particularly lucky.

The pressed crew - if they exist - would be a hodge-podge mixture of Commoners, Experts, Warriors, and possibly some PC classes. Very few, if any, would have the appropriate skills, and, therefore, would need constant supervision by the trained crewmen. For most shipboard tasks, Taking 10 would be sufficient, assuming none of them were complete morons.

The ships marines would be warriors - many of whom would have taken cross-class ranks in Profession (Sailor) - with perhaps a Fighter or other class officer. In this way, they could fill in for a regular sailor if necessary though would be less effective at it.

In summation, if you *force* the Profession skill to be a background and downtime-only skill, you are not following the RAW, as they allow for Profession checks to accomplish specific tasks.

And, besides that, you are ripping out one of the very, very few reasons that a PC would ever "waste" his skill points on such an otherwise useless skill.

 

[tarchon]

A party of 3-4 PCs who know what they're doing could probably limp into port late (days or even weeks), though I think there's a good chance they'd run into something. Probably what they'd have to do is strike some of the sail and leave up only as much as they could handle, which would obviously reduce their speed substantially. Me, I'd press some of the crew into service. They're sailors - they're probably used to draconian discipline, so you put cutlasses to their throats, even promise pay, they'll say "aye, aye, sir" and sail the ship.

A party of 3-4 PCs who know nothing about sailing will drift about aimlessly until they die, sink the ship, or run aground. Forget sailing the ship - they have to navigate too, and if you thought sailing was hard to get right... I mean, the crew probably has 30 guys who can handle the mechanics of sailing and maybe 2 or 3 who can figure out how get the ship to go to the right place.

 

[Arnwyn]

Where can I find information on how many men it takes to crew a ship of various sizes and riggings? I have read many books on the subject, but few very list how a number of crew on board. And most of the crew info I find refers to war ships or pirate ships---so the crew numbers are greatly exaggerated for fighting ability. A war ship with 200 men aboard may only need 30 to sail the ship from point to point. But I can't find any information that states exactly how many sailors are necessary.

Full information on this stuff, for a large variety of ships, can be found in the 2e book Of Ships & the Sea. It gives you crew size (including min/normal/max, and what happens when you have few crewmembers on board), passenger capacity, cargo capacity, the works. That book certainly answers all the questions you put forth, and more.

I consider this book the best seafaring supplement yet, by a long shot. (I adapted the entire book to 3e, so I still use it - heavily.)

(Also, IMO, your presumptions in your original post are spot-on with the difficulties that the PCs might have. Sailing ships don't just "go" like automobiles... especially if none of them have Profession (Sailor).)

Final P.S.: I'm surprised you're trying to run anything seafaring without a good sourcebook for reference, especially if you have players who question actions and situations... A tip of my hat to you if you're successful.

 

[Chimera]

Blackadder II
Episode: Potato

Scene 9: Rum's Cabin

Blackadder finally lifts his head from his hands

Blackadder
Look, there's no need to panic. Someone in the crew will know how to steer this thing.

Rum
The crew, milord?

Blackadder
Yes, the crew.

Rum
What crew?

Blackadder
I was under the impression that it's common maritime practice for a ship to have a crew.

Rum
Opinion is divided on the subject.

Blackadder
Really?

Rum
Yes. All the other captains say it is, and I say it isn't.

Blackadder
Oh, God. Mad as a brush.

 

[painandgreed]

IIRC, the D&D Arms and Equipment Guide lists such ships (warship or longship, both collossal) as having 20 crew. One must be Profesion(sailor) with 2 ranks and the others may be untrained to "operate the vehicle safely". They offer no system for having less than required crew. I'd say something like -1 per crew member short. If they don't have Profession(sailor) then they're at the mercy of the winds. If they're a party of 4 and somebody has Profession(sailor) then the check would be at -18 (-16 for missing crew and -2 for the ship). So, I'd say that the PCs are going to have to let some of the sailors out to help sail the ship. I'd be surprised if the sailors aren't offering to do so, especially if bad weather is coming. While they might be slavers and scoundrals, the captain and officers are probably the only ones profiting from the slave trade and the rest are just along for the ride and maybe even slaves themselves.

Edited to add:
I feel I must add that the Arms and Equipment Guide is the book I most drag out when ranting about how people should not write RPG books by pulling arbitrary numbers out of the air that aren't consistant with reality or even fantasy.

 

[CarlZog]

In reference to tides, mentioned by one post:

The presence and influence of tide and tidal current is a product of geography, but generally currents generated by astronomical tides become unnoticeable pretty shortly after you get offshore. Ocean currents, like the Gulf Stream, are a different matter, and it's up to the DM to decide if and where such currents exist.

In reference to navigation:

Yes, it is a very separate skill set from actually sailing the ship, and if the ship were offshore when the PCs took control, somebody will need to have some nav skills if they're going to find their way home. As for the application of wilderness survival and orienteering skills, there may be some crossover here depending on the circumstances.

Although technology and tools improved, ocean navigation methods didn't change dramatically from the time of Columbus to the time of Nelson. The backbone of navigation, even today, is a process known as deduced reckoning. Essentially, you need to have a known starting point. From there, you keep track of how fast you're going (using a chip log) and in what direction (using a compass). Obviously you'll also need to keep track of time (an hourglass). Skillful ded reckoning, as this is known, can be surprisingly accurate for extended periods of time. For centuries this was the only means of determining your East-West position crossing the Atlantic.

If the crew had a good, recent position on the chart when the PCs took over, someone with some nav skill could rebuild and continue that. Even someone with some shore-based orienteering skills could possibly muddle through and achieve reasonable results. Again an accurate starting point on a chart is pivotal.

DR positions are complemented by sun and star sights to confirm latitude. Longitude may have been able to be determined by either lunar distances, or, later, mechanical chronometer. These are definitely specialized skills that only an experienced ocean navigator would have.

Now all of this assumes a traditional, European approach. Depending on the races and homelands of your PCs, someone may have unique cultural skills that would allow an entirely different form of ocean navigation to take place. The real world parallel to this is the navigation systems of the Pacific islanders.

For those who want a comparatively high level of accuracy in the matters of the sea, I think Broadsides is the best d20 rule set. For even more detailed miniatures rules, see Heart of Oak, an old FGU title still available as pdf.

Carl

 

[MerakSpielman]

Sailing a ship in a straight line towards a set destination, with no physical landmarks, is an incredibly complicated task, even assuming you know your precise starting position and it's relative position to your destination.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to have common sailors need ranks in Profession (sailor) in order to operate a ship.

But I also think it makes a great deal of sense to need ranks in Profession (Navigator) to be able to handle complex navigational tasks. The Profession list in the PHB is just a brief list of examples, not the end-all-be-all of all Profession skills available.

I would allow a character to use Survival to keep from getting lost and to know what direction is north, but I wouldn't allow him to set the most effecient course between two points. "Not being lost," in my mind, means always being able to retrace your steps to your starting point. It doesn't mean you have some sort of magical GPS device lodged in your brain.

I would expect a sailor to have ranks in Profession (sailor), Balance, Climb, Use Rope, and Survival. I would expect a captain to have ranks in all of those, but also have ranks in Profession (Navigator) and Diplomacy (perhaps other social skills as well, for crew control). A large ship would probably have somebody with Craft (Shipbuilding) to handle maintenance and repairs and somebody with Profession (Cook). Perhaps the 1st mate would have ranks in Intimidate, to motivate the crew.

If adventurers suddenly have access to a ship, I see no reason to believe they'd be able to operate it in an efficient manner. But if they have access to a full crew, a well-played adventuring party should be able to strike up a deal of some sort to get them to work for them.

I wouldn't expect adventurers to be able to construct a vast temple dome without ranks in Profession (archetect) or find veins of ore without Profession (miner). Why should they be able to sail a ship?

People might argue that a sailing ship is an inherently simple device. Wind hits sails, ship moves forward. Turn rudder, ship turns. But it is, in reality, far more complex than that. You can sail West with a strong wind from the North, for instance - it's just slower than if the wind was from the East. It's all in setting the sails and rigging just precicely so. Tie Rope will let you know how to tie a knot, but it won't tell you what kinds of knots are needed exactly where to get the ship to do what you want it to. Survival might tell you which way to go, but not what to do if the prevailing current is going the opposite direction. Knowledge (nature) can identify seaweed and tell you it's edible, but it won't tell you it can get caught by the rudder and slow down the ship. Decipher Script can help you read that old navigational chart but it won't tell you what the hell you're supposed to do with all those lay-lines dotted across it.

Saying your average PC could get on a ship and sail it across an ocean it is like saying one of us, without special training, could get in the cockpit of a 747 and fly it from Denver to Hong Kong.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Sailing a ship in a straight line towards a set destination, with no physical landmarks, is an incredibly complicated task, even assuming you know your precise starting position and it's relative position to your destination.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to have common sailors need ranks in Profession (sailor) in order to operate a ship.

I think it's a lot more fun to let my players actually play, rather than saying "nope, you don't know anything about ships or sailing, so you HAVE to release the crew. Muhhahaha."

But I also think it makes a great deal of sense to need ranks in Profession (Navigator) to be able to handle complex navigational tasks. The Profession list in the PHB is just a brief list of examples, not the end-all-be-all of all Profession skills available.

I don't. I fail to see the point of inventing (essentially) new skills to cover what already exists. Players will simply never be able to keep up.

I wouldn't expect adventurers to be able to construct a vast temple dome without ranks in Profession (archetect) or find veins of ore without Profession (miner). Why should they be able to sail a ship?

I would expect adventurers to be able to create a vast temple dome using craft, not profession. They're making something. Beyond that - I'd say that intelligence and not wisdom is going to be the driving attribute. Further I'd expect them to be able to put together a ramshackle roof over something with no skill at all, merely describing what it is that they actually do.

I'd expect adventurers to be able to find a vein of ore with search checks (assuming they're visible), by describing their actions to my satisfaction("I turn into a thoqqua and dig around for a while until I taste gold", or "I contact the elemental plane of earth and ask them to show me the money").

I'm not going to say "nope, sorry, only people with profession(miner) can dig".

I would allow a character to use Survival to keep from getting lost and to know what direction is north, but I wouldn't allow him to set the most effecient course between two points. "Not being lost," in my mind, means always being able to retrace your steps to your starting point. It doesn't mean you have some sort of magical GPS device lodged in your brain.

I'd say that the DC 15 check is what's required to read the lay of the land, the positions of the stars and anything else to get from a point he knows about to another point he knows about.

Otherwise you're saying that most people, without any sort of pressure on them at all, cannot walk into a forest and then walk back out again more than half the time.



See - my problem here is this.

You are effectively making up skills which didn't otherwise exist for the sole reason of penalising the players which don't have those new skills. Ie - all of them.

You're saying "Nooo. Survival doesn't work anymore. Now you need profession(navigator)."

Suppose I have a plainsman. He has survival. Would you stop his survival skill from working in a forest? In a jungle? In the arctic? On a mountain? Underground? They're no different to being out at sea.

If the answer was yes to any of those, then maybe you should have said that BEFORE the campaign started, before I made my character, and certainly before it became crucial to use that skill in that environment. Maybe you should have put some serious thought into the mechanics of it. Perhaps one evironment per rank? Or totally seperate skills for each environment? Or something in between.

If you're looking at a plot which will involve the PC's potentially using a boat, then maybe you should consider actually working out the mechanics of that ahead of time. Maybe you should consider telling the PC's that they DON'T know how to run the boat. They are there. They have little to do but watch the crew work.

Otherwise you're effectively changing the rules after the fact, and if you're going to do that, then you damn well better be changing them to make the game more fun.

And telling a PC "no, only the NPC's can do that" is a sure-fire way to kill fun.