D&D General What's your view on a pirate-driven campaign?

[Zardnaar]

Also, when it comes to ships. Most type they used in Caribbean were sloops, schooners and cutters. Merchant sloops had as few as 6 crew members. Pirates and privateers usually had 40-60 (crew for cannons and boarding party). Cutters were even smaller, with 20-30 people. Schooners were a bit larger with crews of 80-100. Depending on the era, of course, cause that Golden Age of piracy was from 1650-1730 ( with privateer era being 1550-1650 and Anti piracy era from 1730-1800). Thats 250 years of ship and maritime combat evolution.

Those small ships usually attacked brigs (20-50 crew), merchant sloops (8-20), barque (50-100), ketch (8-20), smack (3-10). Larger ships were targeted if they were not armed or lightly armed.

So party of pirates in cutter, targeting smaller coastal traders, while boarding, it's doable without using mass combat rules.

Yeah the big ships didnt exist yet or were the ones pirates ran from.

Golden Age of piracy was more like 20 years.

Crews got equal shares, captains got more voted on bu crew.

PCs probably think pay crew well. Its more like they wsnt a full share of loot and tge players might get a double share or bit more.

 

[TheSword]

It’s worth saying I also think the shares/profits element is highway to nothing. It can all be abstracted.

Work out how much net cash you want the PCs to gain after a fixed period of piracy and if they are successful at the down time activity just let them get that sum of money and assume it what is left after shares, ship costs, widows money. Once you start making PCs split treasure with 50
People they’re gonna start gaming ways to have a smaller crew which is bad for the campaign.

 

[Celebrim]

Also, when it comes to ships. Most type they used in Caribbean were sloops, schooners and cutters. Merchant sloops had as few as 6 crew members. Pirates and privateers usually had 40-60 (crew for cannons and boarding party). Cutters were even smaller, with 20-30 people. Schooners were a bit larger with crews of 80-100. Depending on the era, of course, cause that Golden Age of piracy was from 1650-1730 ( with privateer era being 1550-1650 and Anti piracy era from 1730-1800). Thats 250 years of ship and maritime combat evolution.

Those small ships usually attacked brigs (20-50 crew), merchant sloops (8-20), barque (50-100), ketch (8-20), smack (3-10). Larger ships were targeted if they were not armed or lightly armed.

So party of pirates in cutter, targeting smaller coastal traders, while boarding, it's doable without using mass combat rules.

I mean some of this happened but that's not really an accurate description of the mechanism of pirates in the Golden Age of piracy. Those smaller targets generally had to do with the age of criminal pirates post 1730 when pirates couldn't be expected to have safe ports or government backing. During the Golden Age of Pirates, armadas of 12 ships and more than 1000 men weren't unknown, with targets varying from treasure fleets to towns. This "gritty" or "realistic" piracy where you are stealing a load of sugar or tobacco or lumber from a merchant and selling it for a fraction of its value to a dishonest fence is hardly what pirate movies show. Rather, the buccaneers and corsairs of Hollywood fantasy have the eventual backing of England and the ability to obtain pardons, and are going after Spanish treasure galleons. And the thing is, a lot of that actually happened, including raiding Mogul treasure fleets in the Indian Ocean.

As for shares, it wasn't unusual for shares to not be equal, and indeed it was necessary that the master of the ship receive additional shares in order to pay for the ship generally as well as provisions like food, rum and water. A good Captain gets the big shares, but then buys a keg of room and a few pigs and throws a party to show his generosity. The point is only that the shares were more equal than they would have been if you were a sailor in the Navy where the ratios on a large ship could be 1000's to 1 between the captain and a crew member.