Spelljammer d20

Dear Jason,

You may wish to try e-mailing Andy Collins directly as well; he can be reached at andy@andycollins.net

Failing that, I've posted these questions on Andy's own message board (although that appears to not really be read) and on Monte's boards. I'll get back to you if I see anything. Good luck!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Avast!

I did miss the neogi, giff, and the presence of the Arcane/Mercane, but that is easily fixed. I was never too happy with the space hampsters or the idiot tinker gnomes.
One thing that baffles me is the worry attached to the whole gravity thing in regards to spelljammer. Spelljammer was originally meant to depict space from a mideaval-type viewpoint. And the ancient worlds concept of "gravity" was quite different than in our time, as well as the way it was depicted in spelljammer.
In the philosophies (Plato in particular, I believe) that acknowledged the four elements of earth, wind, fire, and water (like the 2e planar makeup). It was believed that if a piece of an element ( lets say; a rock) is removed from its greater concentration (the ground), when released (dropped) it would be drawn to the greater concentration (the ground). Living things, being primarily made of a mixture of elements (more earth and water, though still needing fire and air) would also fall.
Many folks might sneer at such viewpoints as hopelessly ignorant, or even childish. But such suppositions were based on what people could SEE happening. Water does go downhill to the larger source. And when you add fare to a stick (releasing its internal fire by overbalencing its presence with outside fire) you would see the fire "escape", the earth fall to the ground as ash, etc.
Looking at spelljamming from a mideaval viewpoint changes things suptly, but firmly.
 


Re: Avast!

ruleslawyer, jaults -- thanks for the help! I won't bother the author with an email yet, but I may in a week or two if I don't hear back from you.

Bloodstone de Troll said:
I did miss the neogi, giff, and the presence of the Arcane/Mercane, but that is easily fixed. I was never too happy with the space hampsters or the idiot tinker gnomes.
One thing that baffles me is the worry attached to the whole gravity thing in regards to spelljammer. Spelljammer was originally meant to depict space from a mideaval-type viewpoint. And the ancient worlds concept of "gravity" was quite different than in our time, as well as the way it was depicted in spelljammer.

I rather like the "realistic" take. We're none of us children of midieval (or ancient greek) philosophy, there's no reason to build a system based upon that. We all know about gravity, that it exists, that it pulls matter together. Better to embrace reality and add fantastic to it than to rewrite reality. In this setting, IMO, that is.
 

>>>
Seriously, I can't find a thing on how to, say, *use* a spelljammer helm, or how people navigate from planet to planet, or even from system to system.
>>>

It's possible I don't understand what you're asking.

Check out page 32, under the "Movement" header. It takes 2d6+2 days to move between planets on a ship fitted with a minor helm. It takes 1d6+1 days to make the same trip in a ship fit with a major helm. That should cover navigating between planets. It's simple. You point your ship and you go.

As for spelljammer helms, they're magic items. You sit in them and activate them as you would a normal item. As long as a spellcaster is seated in the chair, that spellcaster can control the movement of the ship.

Are you looking for more specific information than that?

--Erik
 

Shiver me timbers!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I rather like the "realistic" take. We're none of us children of midieval (or ancient greek) philosophy, there's no reason to build a system based upon that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The whole planer makeup as presented in the 2e (and thus Greyhawk, and Planescape) setting is very greek philosophy-ish. With all of that elemental, and conjunctional planes stuff. But I do understand what you mean.
For me, if I were to think "realistically" while running a spelljammer game, the concept of open deck spaceships would be harder for me to get my head around. If I dream of open decked ships sailing upon an aether sea, propelled by the winds of the spheres (magic). Then thoughts of binary gravity, radiation, and barren dead worlds go right out the window.
For the mideaval man (and thus characters from most fantasy worlds) space travel would BE planar travel. Thus it would seem appropriate if the Arcane/Mercane would be involved. And if I ever run a spelljammer game, it will have neogi in those spiderships (I love those nasty little monsters).
 

Erik Mona said:
Check out page 32, under the "Movement" header. It takes 2d6+2 days to move between planets on a ship fitted with a minor helm. It takes 1d6+1 days to make the same trip in a ship fit with a major helm. That should cover navigating between planets. It's simple. You point your ship and you go.

I saw that part and, ironically, that's what got me thinking about the rest. How do you know where to point your ship? Can you see everything with the naked eye?

Given the likely distances involved (and the travel times back this up), you can't see a damn thing with the naked eye. Therefore, there must be some way of finding out where you go. I assume Pyre is visible from any location in the system, is that used as a navigational aid? Given the mention of tidal effects of moons (and the lack thereof on one of the planets), are the planetary bodies in motion? Do they orbit? How does one determine where in the sky a planet happens to be at the moment?

None of this is mentioned, and it's all important, IMO. *Especially* if you want to have secret hideout bases on vagrant asteroids, etc. in your game.

Also not mentioned is inter-stellar travel. I've simply assumed that it's not possible.

As for spelljammer helms, they're magic items. You sit in them and activate them as you would a normal item. As long as a spellcaster is seated in the chair, that spellcaster can control the movement of the ship.

That's all? Whew. Old Spelljammer drained spells from the spellcaster sitting in the helm. There was no mention of this in the supplement, so I was wondering if it was still the case.

Are there any plans to fix the only flaw I mentioned in an errata? Space is 3d, but the guns only fire forward, backward, left, or right. Up/Down doesn't appear to be mentioned.
 

Shadow of the Spider Moon

In general, Erik's already addressed most of the issues I see here, but I'll add a few more comments.

[First of all, thanks to ruleslawyer for the plug for my website (www.andycollins.net). Actually, I visit my message boards almost every day, and frequently respond to questions or comments there. I try not to monopolize conversations too much, and I'll admit I don't respond to every post, but I try to provide an answer for every question I see that's directed to me. (I've already responded to the SJ questions posted there.) And if you really really need me to see something, you can always send it directly to me at andy@andycollins.net. My response time is pretty good for direct queries.]

It's true that Shadow of the Spider Moon doesn't address every possible topic that might come up in a Spelljammer game. Erik and I agreed up front that we'd present a usable ruleset that referred to the core D&D rulebooks as much as possible, while also presenting the basis of a setting for DMs to use in their games.

Could I have written more? Of course. Would it have fit into the space provided? Almost certainly not. I'm not going to say that every decision we made was perfect for everyone, but I'm pretty happy with the balance we struck between mechanics and flavor, between rules and setting.

We had to paint in pretty broad strokes in order to cover such a wide topic in the 30,000 words or so we had to spend. (Think of it this way: if Shadow of the Spider Moon had been a separate book, it would be a mere 48 pages.) by necessity, that forces us to use the tools we've already got (such as the core books) and, occasionally, ignore (or skim through) some topics that might otherwise get complicated and use up our precious, precious word count.

Why formians and not thri-kreen? Because presenting thri-kreen (and believe me, I think thri-kreen are very cool) would have taken up space, while everyone has formians in the Monster Manual. Ditto for giff, neogi, and all the other interesting critters floating around in the SJ universe.

(And yes, I know that the spider-shaped ships of the original SJ game were neogi vessels, but with no neogi, I didn't want to lose the fantastic visual image of enormous spiders soaring through space. Thankfully, the presence of the drow meant we could revisit that image without having to use space to include a new monster.)

We *almost* included the arcane/mercane. In fact, they were part of my original outline (I pictured them as mysterious visitors, flying enormous pyramid-shaped vessels that resembled the ruins on Ashen) but I just couldn't justify the additional space they'd take up.

No, we don't specifically call out the existence of an "Elven Imperial Navy," but it wouldn't be hard to imagine something like that emerging from the forests of Perianth, if that's something you wanted. That's assuming the various houses could cooperate enough to put a whole fleet into action, but that's up to the DM...

You say gnomes aren't the same without giant hamsters? I don't mean to be too flip, but "Great!" I hope that each of the PC races looks a little different from what people are used to, both from older SJ and from 3E itself.

Yeah, three-dimensional combat is a bear. I wish I had the space (and, frankly, the expertise) to present a simple system to handle it in your game. Ultimately, our feeling was that if you liked 3-D space combat, you probably already have a favorite rules system for it (in which case any attempt we made would almost certainly fail in providing anything useful for you), and if you didn't like 3-D space combat, you wouldn't care about any rules we bothered to put in. Maybe we were wrong--if there's anything in there that I'm not really happy with, it's the fact that we couldn't give space combat a full treatment. If that happens to be what really peeves you, then I'm truly sorry.

As far as navigation goes, I suppose it works just like navigation in any other form would work--there are probably charts and landmarks (or "spacemarks"?) and such to use, familiar shipping lanes, and the like. To find something "off the beaten path" should be as difficult as finding an uncharted island in the middle of a huge ocean, but multiplied across a third dimension of searching. I suppose we could have included more on that topic, but we would have had to cut something else. I guess we thought that other subjects would be more interesting, and that most players wouldn't want to spend too much time on the mundanities of navigation. If you're really concerned about other travel times, you can certainly use those listed as a starting point to estimate others.

Erik and I appreciate all the interest that Shadow of the Spider Moon is getting. Like he said, this is just our take on a familiar setting, and we fully expected that it wouldn't please everyone. If we get the opportunity to revisit the setting, you can be sure that we'll re-examine topics like these to see if we can provide additional useful information for DMs and players in Shadow Moon games.

Thanks, everybody!
 

Re: Re: Avast!

Randolpho said:
I rather like the "realistic" take. We're none of us children of midieval (or ancient greek) philosophy, there's no reason to build a system based upon that. We all know about gravity, that it exists, that it pulls matter together. Better to embrace reality and add fantastic to it than to rewrite reality. In this setting, IMO, that is.

I dunno about the old 'gravity plane', but I always liked the crystal spheres and phlogiston. It just supported the fact that 'this is not our world' all the better.

If that's missing from SJ:SotSM I can see that I have my work cut out for me...

J
 

Re: Shadow of the Spider Moon

No, thank *you* Andy, for coming to visit here! :)

I understand space is limited in a magazine that is tack-on to another magazine, so I understand the need for some of the cuts. Personally, I think 3d *movement* was at least covered without problem. The only problem I had was the complete inability of the ships to fire up or down. I personally think you could have simply tacked that ability onto the turrets, and tacked up/down fire capability into the ship stats. At most, an aditional 1/8th-page of type. I think it could easily be addressed in an errata, where you simply say "x ship can fire in X directions, rather than the old Y directions". Basically, only ships with the big turrets can fire up/down.

As to the setting, don't worry. It's a good setting, with a nice layout. I was a little disappointed about the lack of ability to spelljam to other systems, but understand that it would have taken at least another page or two of warmup and fluff text to outline. Perhaps you could add that on in a polyhedron supplement? :) If you do, I'd suggest you keep the current "semi-realistic" space setup, and, rather than add crystal spheres and the phlogiston (which I never really understood in previous editions anyway), add a 3rd speed to spelljammer helms -- an "interstellar speed", if you will. Make travel between systems cost months, or even a couple of years, to travel.

As for navigation -- well, I suppose I could create my own system as flavor for my own campaign -- sorry, but I don't plan to use your setting, just the rules ;). I really would have liked to see a starmap, tho.

Finally, can I get your final word on this: do spelljammer helms suck spells, or merely require that a spellcaster (or a Use Magic Item roll) use it?

Again, thanks for taking the time with feedback.
 

Remove ads

Top