Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pauper" data-source="post: 8227557" data-attributes="member: 17607">Right here is where this article breaks my sense of immersion.Why would a spelljamming ship be able to carry a virtually unlimited supply of rocks? No real-world analogue of a flying machine can carry unlimited amounts of anything, much less ammunition -- the trade-offs required to engineer a machine that can fly preclude anything like this.Oh, comes the response, spelljammers aren't planes, they're ships that fly, so they have massive cargo holds like sailing ships do. Except that if a spelljamming ship is going to war, the equivalent isn't a real-world merchant ship, but a real-world warship, which doesn't have massive cargo holds, because it has to house and feed the hundreds of men that crew it, along with the supplies to keep the ship operational. It has some room for weapons and ammunition, but some portion of that storage is going to be spent on weapons and ammunition to fight other spelljamming warships, leaving even less room for 'dumb bombs', assuming that's even seen as an option, because the more room you spend on carrying rocks, the less room you have for the ammo you'd use to fight an enemy spelljammer.Oh, comes yet another response, spelljammers don't require massive crews, because magic. And that's the crux of it, isn't it? The spelljamming side gets to hand-wave away all their potential issues 'because magic', but the defenders are still stuck with sticking to real-world (or in-world) problems like gravity and physics 'because immersion'. If one side can have a spelljammer bomber but the other side can't have, say, commandos riding hippogriffs with anti-magic grenades to wreak havoc with the jammer's magic systems, then you're not making changes to maintain verisimilitude, but simply choosing which side you want to win.--Pauper</blockquote>

Verification