Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Of Ships and The Sea


Derren

Hero
Destroying the helm seems a bit too easy, but there seem to be no long term problems having a destroyed helm and weapons can apparently fire in all directions.
Wind plays too little of a role.
Giving ships attribute scores, half of them 0, seems clunky. Same to having their attack scores fixed instead of dependent on the crew.
And the names of the officers seems to be too modern for the ships presented, especially the definition of Quartermaster.

Also, no rules for boarding.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

D

DQDesign

Guest
They did it partially with SCAG, and interestingly the parts they playtested have been better received in the long run. I think it is no accident that it is post-SCAG that they changed their methodology, and stopped outsourcing these books for that matter.

You asked, so I answered.

I don't see the fluff part of SCAG as bad, I find it better than the thoroughly-playtested crunch. And I liked the days in which wotc partnered with Kobold Press and Green Ronin, for me was like "we know we can't manage something larger-than-life like the d&d brand only by ourselves, so we team up with special friends in order to do that in the best way". But it's only my opinion, obviously.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I don't see the fluff part of SCAG as bad, I find it better than the thoroughly-playtested crunch. And I liked the days in which wotc partnered with Kobold Press and Green Ronin, for me was like "we know we can't manage something larger-than-life like the d&d brand only by ourselves, so we team up with special friends in order to do that in the best way". But it's only my opinion, obviously.

Don't get me wrong, I like SCAG just fine. But it did get a mixed reception, which prompted procedural changes.
 

robus

Lowcountry Low Roller
Supporter
Interestingly the latest episode of Critical Role explores life (and roles) on board a sailing ship:

[video=youtube_share;nsmHNxJZSSM]https://youtu.be/nsmHNxJZSSM[/video]
 



D

DQDesign

Guest
Don't get me wrong, I like SCAG just fine. But it did get a mixed reception, which prompted procedural changes.

The procedural changes are what I can't understand. why the reaction to mixed reviews is deciding not to work together with partners? in which survey did they ask this? I would have answered that the problem would be another, not the presence of partners in the development.

why the reaction to mixed reviews is selling 'early preview', not complete settings in pdf (delaying their completion sine die)?

did they really think that those choices improve their brand management?

I can't figure how.
 


I think ship parts and weapons should be modular to some degree, as a ship that's a focus in a campaign that belong to a party of PCs, replacing and upgrading parts is probably something that PCs would want to do.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
wait, weren't you saying they have good plans for years? o_O

anyway, 'unsolidified plans' sounds to me very strange, something like 'transparent opacity' or 'lowly highness' XD

Being flexible and open to change and delay is a good quality in planning. If they stuck yo plans they recognized as problematic...well, that's what happened in 3.x for one thing.
 

D

DQDesign

Guest
Being flexible and open to change and delay is a good quality in planning. If they stuck yo plans they recognized as problematic...well, that's what happened in 3.x for one thing.
the only problem is that when plans are not disclosed the flexible and smart ones are indistinguishable from the not existent ones.
as I said somewhere else the core issue is lack of transparency.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
the only problem is that when plans are not disclosed the flexible and smart ones are indistinguishable from the not existent ones.
as I said somewhere else the core issue is lack of transparency.

We have nobody to blame but ourselves. If they had been less transparent about the Artificer, people would be happier right now about it.
 


D

DQDesign

Guest
We have nobody to blame but ourselves. If they had been less transparent about the Artificer, people would be happier right now about it.
No, in that case we would still have the wayfinder's guide without the artificer and no explanation about the absence of it. it would be far worse, also because now I have a hope to have the artificer in my $ 9.99 expenditure. in the other way around I would be very upset.
transparency is the best option in most cases, IMO.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
No, in that case we would still have the wayfinder's guide without the artificer and no explanation about the absence of it. it would be far worse, also because now I have a hope to have the artificer in my $ 9.99 expenditure. in the other way around I would be very upset.
transparency is the best option in most cases, IMO.

Transparency has not worked for WotC; not being transparent has worked for them. Rewarded behavior gets reinforced, punished behavior is disincentivized.
 

cbwjm

Legend
Great minds think alike! Unfortunately, I don't have a great mind. I was wondering if it's a stealth playtest for Eberron airships.
You may be right. It does have an air ship with an elemental drive in it and since they do have the living document for Eberron this might be part of it. Someone also mentioned a high seas adventure is on its way so it could also be related to that (no reason it couldn't have multiple purposes).
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
You may be right. It does have an air ship with an elemental drive in it and since they do have the living document for Eberron this might be part of it. Someone also mentioned a high seas adventure is on its way so it could also be related to that (no reason it couldn't have multiple purposes).

The possibilities are literally endless if they get the basic rules workable.
 

D

DQDesign

Guest
Transparency has not worked for WotC; not being transparent has worked for them. Rewarded behavior gets reinforced, punished behavior is disincentivized.

it's the only rational explanation.

anyway, managing a brand like the d&d one on the basis of such a primitive approach (present also in the ethology of the most ancient animals) is not the best way, imo.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
it's the only rational explanation.

anyway, managing a brand like the d&d one on the basis of such a primitive approach (present also in the ethology of the most ancient animals) is not the best way, imo.

For you subjectively, but it seems to be working out OK.
 

cbwjm

Legend
The possibilities are literally endless if they get the basic rules workable.
True that. As soon as I posted that I thought that they could also use the rules for the silt skimmers in Darksun. Air, water, silt, space. Different environments through which ships can sail.
 

Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top