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.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

--- victorious pirate PCs standing surrounded by victorious celebrating pirates, and
--- pirate PCs who, having won their own battles, are standing surrounded by really hacked-off crewmembers of the prize ship, who have just defeated all the PCs' pirate allies and are ordering the PCs to surrender or else.

But we all know what will happen next: The PCs will hack their way through the "victorious" crew as well, because of the massive power imbalance between PCs and mooks that is inherent in D&D rules.

The abstracted approach, where the battle is resolved by the PCs having to deal with a series of "crisis points", and the outcome resolved by how effectively they do that, is not only easier to run, it produces more realistic results. I can think of at least two official 5e adventures that use this method. I've even seen it used in CRPGs, even though a computer could handle thousands of combatants.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

And there's no obligation to build up a pirate armada, especially in a ttrpg.

DM: "Guys, if you start claiming a bunch of these ships for your own, this game is going to turn into a a big management exercise and naval wargame. We can do that, or you can just hold onto your sloop and do more standard D&D adventures, with a nautical and pirate vibe."

Players: "Sink the ship!"

I don't see any reason why the DM would bring it up at all. If the players want to build an armada, or engage in mercantile commerce, then they will bring it up themselves. It's a good idea to have some ideas sketched out in case they do though - I try to avoid any "DM says No" situations, and be prepared for the unlikely.

With regard to player agency, PCs do not need to be pirates for it to be a pirate campaign. They only need to be involved with pirates. It can be left up to the players to decide how piratical their characters arrrrr. However, I would try and make them enemies of the lawful stupid navel power in the area, perhaps have them set up for some crime if they are not naturally inclined to criminality. There is a strong anti-establishment theme to Pirates.

 

[Hussar]

And, of course, this brings up another point. Age of Piracy era is pretty anachronistic for D&D. We're talking several centuries ahead of what D&D is typically pegged at. If you keep to Medieval (say 1400 (ish) (yes, yes, I KNOW that's not right, but, it's a decent rough number, sit down in the back) level technology, then the ships are a LOT smaller and easier to work with in the game. Crews of 5-10 aren't unreasonable at all for most of these ships, which means you can have the PC's plus a nice, manageable number of NPC's on the ship. I would recommend keeping things lower technology, especially since you're not likely to be using cannons and gunpowder anyway.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Age of Piracy era is pretty anachronistic for D&D

Everything is anachronistic to D&D. But in this case it doesn’t matter. The only technological limitation on piracy is “must have sea trade”. You can have is with triremes, you can have it with container ships and speed boats, you can have it with flying ships and ship-mounted wands. You don’t need tall ships and canon - although that is established as being the norm for the Baldur’s Gate region of the Forgotten Realms.

 

[Hussar]

Everything is anachronistic to D&D. But in this case it doesn’t matter. The only technological limitation on piracy is “must have sea trade”. You can have is with triremes, you can have it with container ships and speed boats, you can have it with flying ships and ship-mounted wands. You don’t need tall ships and canon - although that is established as being the norm for the Baldur’s Gate region of the Forgotten Realms.

Let's just agree to disagree here. To me, the technology required to build, say, a 17th century Galleon has far too many implications for world building for me to ignore. I'm okay with Plate mail, that's about as far forward technologically as I want to get in my D&D. But, again, like I said, the point isn't so much about the technology, it's that it's a lot easier to PLAY when you limit the technology to about 14th century. Those ships are very small, require small crews (perfect for D&D) and are perfectly capable of doing anything you realistically need them to do in a D&D game.

Do you really want a 17th century galleon with hundreds of sailors? Or an 18th century Ship of the Line with closer to a thousand people on board? I don't. I want to stick to cogs (which, I'd point out, the Dutch Hansa Cog sailed all around the known world in) or thereabouts. Much simpler and far, far easier to use in game.

 

[GrimCo]

13-14th century Venetian galleys were large, with something up to 200+ people (sailors, officers, rowers). War galleys would have archers and marines, boosting that number to 400-500 in times of war ( in peace time it was around 250 ) And those are ships for Adriatic and Mediterranean sea mostly. Venice and Genova were big naval powers in those times( Venice was arguably the strongest naval power in Europe at the time) and galleys were their main ships, be it war galleys or great merchant galleys.

I posted ship sizes. There are plenty of smaller ships in iconic pirate era. And sure, while some exceptionally successful pirates did get their hands on larger ships or even formed armadas, those were, well, exceptions and very few very famous ones managed that. Most were using small, fast and agile ships to attack smaller merchant ships.

 

[Zardnaar]

13-14th century Venetian galleys were large, with something up to 200+ people (sailors, officers, rowers). War galleys would have archers and marines, boosting that number to 400-500 in times of war ( in peace time it was around 250 ) And those are ships for Adriatic and Mediterranean sea mostly. Venice and Genova were big naval powers in those times( Venice was arguably the strongest naval power in Europe at the time) and galleys were their main ships, be it war galleys or great merchant galleys.

I posted ship sizes. There are plenty of smaller ships in iconic pirate era. And sure, while some exceptionally successful pirates did get their hands on larger ships or even formed armadas, those were, well, exceptions and very few very famous ones managed that. Most were using small, fast and agile ships to attack smaller merchant ships.

Proto industrialization to do that. Henry Ford didnt invent the production line.

I dont think Venice did either iirc.