Spelljammer...just wow

Rel · May 9, 2007

Ok, things are getting out of hand here. Contrarian and Whizbang, do not post any further in this thread.

Celebrim · May 9, 2007

Razz said:
Here's something for the naysayers on SJ:

The only valid arguments I've seen here ended up not being valid at all. The first was expecting D&D-space physics to be exactly like real-world physics. It's a fantasy game with fantastically odd sense of physics. I am glad space in D&D didn't turn out like real-world space or we'd have a Star Wars rip-off.

Seems like you keep saying that people are wrong for not liking the same things you do.

Speaking of which, the other debate on SJ was it's "goofiness". Um, Star Wars has goofiness in it yet tons of people still like Star Wars.

But no one is required to like Star Wars.

Dragonlance had those stupid, goofy Gully Dwarves and kleptomaniac kender and tinker gnomes....yet Dragonlance didn't lose its fan base because of that.

But no one is required to like Dragon lance or even Gully Dwarves.

Heck, I've even seen Planescape with goofy stuff (and, no, don't you dare say modrons) and it still became rather popular.

Gee, that is a puzzler isn't it.

Anyway, back to this notion of 'validity'. If we assume all the stated personal reasons that people did not like Spelljammer are invalid, then it follows that there is no reason not to like Spelljammer. But Spelljammer wasn't very popular.

Man, that is a puzzler.

Odhanan · May 9, 2007

*sigh* Seems to me some people on this thread just argue on the tone and words rather than what other posters are actually saying. I think this completely spoils the conversation.

We'll get nowhere from here on.

With this, I bid you good day, gents. I'm going to be posting elsewhere.

the Jester · May 9, 2007

Shemeska said:
Because they weren't alternate material planes. Toril, Oerth, Krynn, Athas, Ortho, Threnody, Falx, etc were all part of the same prime material plane. The prime wasn't just a single planet and nothing else, it was just as infinite as the other planes, dotted with innumerable other worlds.

Then how come you can plane shift from Oerth to Toril?

There were some serious logical flaws in the SJ setting. They tried to have it both ways- fly through space to another world! Er, that you can also reach via plane shift, astral spell, or whathaveyou.

Voadam · May 9, 2007

Razz said:
(and, no, don't you dare say modrons)

Modrons!

Voadam · May 9, 2007

the Jester said:
Then how come you can plane shift from Oerth to Toril?

There were some serious logical flaws in the SJ setting. They tried to have it both ways- fly through space to another world! Er, that you can also reach via plane shift, astral spell, or whathaveyou.

When could you plane shift from GH to FR?

FreeXenon · May 9, 2007

Being able to PS directly to different worlds would really take the mystery and fun out of having different worlds, especially a Darksun (which was at one point a closed sphere) like world during 2E.

SJ was flawed in its own way, but as long as you ignored the inconsistencies it was a hell-of-a-good time.

The_Warlock · May 9, 2007

Celebrim said:
Anyway, back to this notion of 'validity'. If we assume all the stated personal reasons that people did not like Spelljammer are invalid, then it follows that there is no reason not to like Spelljammer. But Spelljammer wasn't very popular.

Man, that is a puzzler.

Actually, the original post asks "Why didn't SJ Do Well?" Not why did others not like it. Nor that is was wrong to not like it.

And in the sense that Razz sees the arguments as invalid is not a jab at people's personal preferences or likes, but that several of the positted reasons, singularly, have corrolaries in other campaign settings - since examples of these potential reasons for failure exist in successful settings - singularly, it is unlikely that they can stand as the only reason or reasons why SJ failed.

While I didn't feel trod upon by the meta-campaign in the Core World products, I can understand the potential for strong response against that, both on a personal and preference aspect, and from the monetary point of view (ie, "wasted pages" that aren't part of what the buyer is purchasing). And that more than any of the "goof" mechanics, to me, has held up as a more viable reason.

In the end, I think the reason for failure was a combination of poor presentation (large font, wasted space, etc) and the trying to please too many people's preferences for intertwining game worlds without giving them more obvious control or optional mechanicsms for that meta-campaign. Very few people like being shoehorned or railroaded into a single option.

However, I never got the feeling from Razz that he was saying you couldn't like SJ, only that several of the statements for its failure didn't make sense, given similar precedence in other successes.