The Dark's page

2) The flamethrower doesn't allow iterative attacks, unlike the machine guns which allow to do so to every target in the line of fire. Adding speed should add an extra attack with it... but I'm not sure since the weapon doesn't allow extra attack to begin with. Do I get really get 2 attacks?

I would think so, as long as you can declare a full attack action (only take a 5-foot step, only free or swift actions, etc).

The classes could also vary depending on what the Furycrafter focuses on. It seems like most of the canon Furycrafters gravitate towards a particular skill set based on their type of Fury.
Water: Rogue/Furycrafter (with strong emphasis on persuasive skills)
Metal: Fighter/Furycrafter
Earth: Fighter/Furycrafter
Wood: Ranger/Furycrafter (ranged style)
Air: Ranger/Furycrafter (two-weapon or ranged style), possibly Fighter/Furycrafter
Fire: Sorceror/Furycrafter (this is more of a WAG, just based on firecrafters seeming to do more directly with their fury and not having as much pure physical power)

Tavi himself would be a weird mix of classes (possibly due to not being trained as a furycrafter). He probably started as a bit of a ranger, based on his outdoorsiness and the master of his hold being a ranger. The imperial training he receives seems to be a blend of fighter and rogue, with both combat in heavy armor and covert work being taught. By the end of the second book, I'd probably have him at somewhere around Ranger 1 / Fighter 1 / Rogue 2 if I was using book classes.

The Dark wrote:

Jubal Breakbottle wrote:

As I began this thread, firearms are relatively new to DnD.

cheers

Ed Greenwood did guns in DnD in Dragon #60, April 1982. If you don't care for rules from Dragon, since they were optional, they were also in 1990's Forgotten Realm Adventures. I do not believe firearms are new to DnD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boot_Hill_(role-playing_game)

Boot Hill was a different system from D&D. I have the third edition, and there's really no similarity. However, the first edition AD&D DMG did have rules for converting between Gamma World, Boot Hill, and AD&D. Those conversion rules included damage for Boot Hill guns in AD&D, so that does move the introduction of firearms in AD&D back to no later than 1979.

I have six players so I am trying to figure out a role for the Ship's Surgeon/Carpenter and Ship's Navigator to do in combat.

For the Navigator, they should be able to either aid the pilot's roll (Find a Current) or reduce the opponent's ability to maneuver (Force Them on the Shoals). A carpenter should be able to Fix the Ship, and once artillery shooting starts, they can get wounded sailors Back In The Fight.

As I began this thread, firearms are relatively new to DnD.

cheers

Ed Greenwood did guns in DnD in Dragon #60, April 1982. If you don't care for rules from Dragon, since they were optional, they were also in 1990's Forgotten Realm Adventures. I do not believe firearms are new to DnD.

I really wonder why they tried to enter the "pimp-my-ship" option........ next thing "shiny red metallic hue," which will put the fear of Besmara into anyone... +2 to scare merchants !

Nah...everybody knows red ones go faster!

(oh, wait...wrong intellectual property? I'll see myself out now)

Sorry, to say, but the "storytelling" in AP-II does not really take into account real shipbuilding.

First-off, there is and never was "squibbing". There just was not, so taking an irreal process as the base for calculations is ... futile.

Second, actual ships in the age of wood where build within a few months time, IF the materials were on site. The french small friagate L'Unite, later the HMS Surprise took about 7 months to fully equip and set sail from being ordered. A 130' long, late 18th century frigate, not some less complicated in build galleon. The VOC Batavia, a 17th century Dutch East Indiaman took less than a year to build, in war-torn Europe, with supplies of shipbuilding woods from the Baltic under constant wartime pressure.

Third, actual shipbuilding in the wooden age was far simpler than build something like the titanic, since cutting up and placing the Psars could be done simultaneously by work-crews working in paralell.

So building a less complicated pirate vessel, in an area where strong hardwoods are readily available presents no really great problem. The main problem usually facing a vessel upon completion is finding a crew, gaining suitable cannonage and getting fully equipped with stores.

None of which really applies to pirates who... commonly should have a fully equipped ship already, simply transfering their stores

I'd apply a building rate of roughly 700-1000 gp/day, reliant on quality and number of shipwrights and assistants in the workforce (and remember that most any seaman is also trained as a semi-skilled carpenter for shipboard repairs, if possible under supervision )

It depends on timeframe and labor. Shipyards were far more efficient in the late Age of Sail than in the Plantagenet/Lancaster/Tudor era that is more technologically similar to Golarion (excepting the salvaged items of Numeria). Japan built the 500-ton galleon Date Maru in 45 days in 1613, but they used 4500 trained craftsmen (shipwrights, smiths, and carpenters), and had prepared all the raw material ahead of time. Labor costs alone for those 45 days, in Pathfinder terms, would be 60,750 gold to pay for the workers, more than double the cost of the most expensive ship listed in Ultimate Equipment. A ship CAN be built quickly at low tech levels, but it is expensive. You also need a large and organized population - 4500 is more than 10% of the population of Port Peril, and getting 10% of Port Peril to work on anything would be virtually impossible.

If we go back a little further to 15th century England (simply because I have the references for that time and place), Henry V's 1400-ton carrack Grace Dieu took three years to build, while Henry VII's Regent and Sovereign (800-ton and 1000-ton carracks) each took two years to build. Henry VIII's 500-ton Mary Rose took a year and a half to build, while the Henri Grace a Dieu, the first two-decker and 1500 tons, required three years to build. Smaller ships (such as the 300-ton galleass Antelope of 1546) required only around a year to build.

For a ship that a medieval/renaissance pirate would be likely to use (i.e. one from the era of ballistae or early cannon), which would be similar to a small merchant ship, it should take only a few months to build a ship if it's being made at a decent shipyard - decorations will be significantly less than on a royal warship, and it's being built with less care to the details. Building it faster is possible, but at a significantly increased cost. For a caravel of 50-60 tuns capacity, it should take only a couple of months to build with an adequate work force.

Overall, it's easier just to steal a ship. It's already built, it has sails and rigging and hopefully some weapons and supplies. Ships even back in the 1400s lasted a long time - Columbus' Pinta was over 50 years old when she made the voyage in 1492, and the Santa Maria was over 30 years old.

Danke =D

Thanks to Dudemeister I have all the adjustments to Chapter 2 I'll need, other than my one personal tweak to Hargulka. Where the Stag Lord had the ring of the jabberwock's skin, granting him a small part of its immense physical resilience (DR 5/Vorpal), Hargulka will possess the ring of the jabberwock's blood, which will grant him the Half-Jabberwock template posted above (immunity/eye ray element fire). Irovetti will have the ring of the jabberwock's voice, which will give him Burble and Frightful Presence. I haven't decided what Armag's going to get, I want it to be thematic but he already has plenty of potential to break things.

How about a ring of the jabberwock's spirit, which grants fast healing 10? This is in line with his being a combat machine and annoyingly tough without granting him any more offensive abilities.

Again... the best way to "fix" the trade problem is to simply introduce a new Caravan feat: Expert Trader or some such, that adjusts the amount of money trade brings in. That way, a caravan who wants to be all about trade can just take that feat early on and be done with it.

How much that feat would adjust the money? You tell me! You all are the ones worried about caravans going broke! :-)

A relatively simple way that wouldn't require a feat would be to put in a chart similar to what Al-Qadim had for its merchant-rogues. They established trade companies rather than caravans, but the concept of a monthly profit is similar enought to a trade profit, and it kept the average profit manageable. On a trade, roll 1d10:

On average, this chart generates a 3% profit on any goods traded, with losses on 30% of goods and profits on 50% of goods. If characters choose to do research on what's needed further along their route, they may get a +1 bonus. Conversely, if wagons are badly damaged or they choose improper goods (bringing thin cotton tunics into the frozen north), they may be penalized with a -1 penalty.

Caveat Emptor was the one I was originally trying to find (I have that issue somewhere in my collection). That one would be a great scenario to run, since it's heavily investigative. When I tried to run it about six months after it was published, my group never did figure out what was causing the problem.

Looking back at some much older issues (these are mostly 2nd edition, but should be relatively easy to convert):

Dungeon 63 - Huzza's Goblin O' War (lv. 4-7)
Huzza's the big man on board. It's even more hilarious with Golarion goblins.

Dungeon 64 - Grotto of the Queen (lv. 6-9)
A magic ship has been stolen.

Dungeon 65 - Flotsam (lv. 6-8)
It even takes place in "a pirate-infested archipelago"!

Dungeon 66 - The Sunken Shadow (lv. 1-3)
Salvaging a shipwreck.

Dungeon 66 - Operation Manta Ray (lv. 6-9)
A spy has been captured by an enemy nation. Heroes to the rescue.

Dungeon 74 - The Scourge of Scalabar (lv. 1-3)
A gnomish submarine? Yes please!

Dungeon 77 - To Walk Beneath The Waves (lv. 3-5)
Something is attacking and sinking fishing boats. What?

Dungeon 80 - Fortune Favors the Dead (lv. 5-7)
Finding the treasure will be easy. Getting the map? Now that's a different story.

For sale:
A stitch in time: the next time the character drops below 0 HP, they automatically stabilize as a mysterious animated needle sews their wounds shut with thread that, upon close examination, looks strangely like green pine needles.

A price:
The changing of the seasons: On each solstice and equinox, the character is transported to the seller and serves them for the day.

Oh, something else for everyone: Brevoy has its \imports and exports listed in the article on it in Kingmaker 31.

Also, I remember that Katapesh has a much longer section on trade in Dark Markets, but I don't have a copy of that.

Judy Bauer wrote:

Exotic foods (monstrous seafood, fruit from other continents/monstrous plants, etc.) are also far more viable as luxury trade goods on Golarion than in the equivalent time period on Earth thanks to gentle repose and purify food and drink (as a relatively mundane example, Sargava exports pineapples).

And don't forget trade with other planes!

Okay you changed my entire trade layout with that one post!! :)

That is genius to use gentle repose to keep food fresh, and it makes a lot of exports and imports far more viable, in particular seafood and exotic fruits to northern climes. I am trying to lay out trade routes and import/export lines and this idea changes everything in a good way. Now I don't have to guessimate travel times and spoilage, etc.

I had not considered extraplanar trade at all outside of wizards guilds maybe. Where in the heck would extraplanar travel take place? Major temples of Abadar (god of civilization/commerce+plane shift) or Absalom? This plus an earlier post I read about the witchmarket now really has my creativity going...

The other obvious choice would be Cheliax for infernal products. Major temples of Sarenrae may do some trade with the good planes of the Outer Sphere, since she was one of the Empyreal Lords before ascending to full godhood. It should still be rare, though, to preserve the mid-high fantasy feel (as opposed to the potentially epic fantasy feel of massive interplanar trade).

Eric - as far as magic plants and minerals go, they got somewhat short shrift in the core setting. Darkwood and skymetal were the only ones explicitly mentioned that I saw.

The Dark wrote:

So I got bored the other night, and had a new copy of the Inner Sea World Guide. Using just the descriptions of locations within that book, some likely exports for each country:

...Awesome stuff....

This is obviously not a complete list, but it's a starting point utilizing one book to get a quick listing of some available commodities in different countries.

Thanks so much for putting this together! I was not looking forward to trying to dredge a list like this out of the books!

I made a list of my own, but it is possible trade goods. I am posting here in case anyone is interested:

...awesome list...

If anyone can think of anything else to add this list, that would be awesome as well.

Sugar. Sugar was incredibly important in history, because it's fairly limited in where it can grow, and it doesn't travel well unless processed (raw cane ferments incredibly rapidly). Honey is somewhat of a substitute, but there are things both sugar and honey can be used for that the other can't.

Medicinal herbs. Some will only grow in certain areas, others can be widely cultivated. Their importance will vary somewhat depending on how common magic is in a particular campaign (if every village has a cleric with the ability to cure disease, medicines are less important).

Flax/linen. More comfortable and cooler than wool, easier to make than cotton, and cheaper than silk.

Tobacco. Possibly falls under the category of "drugs," but worth mentioning. Along with sugar, this was the major cash crop of the early American colonies.

So I got bored the other night, and had a new copy of the Inner Sea World Guide. Using just the descriptions of locations within that book, some likely exports for each country:

Andoran:
Lumber, furniture, art, olives/olive oil, grapes/wine

Brevoy:
Grain, fish, lumber, ore

Druma:
Gems, precious metals

Five Kings:
Mercenaries, siege weapons, iron

Galt:
Food

Geb:
Food

Isger:
Goats (and goat products - milk, leather, cheese), fish, ice

Jalmeray:
Knowledge, sugar, coffee

Katapesh:
Pesh, slaves, spell components

Linnorm Kings:
Furs, copper, lumber

Mana Wastes:
Gold, crystals, (few) guns

Mediogalti:
Whale oil

Mwangi Expanse:
Gold, gems, darkwood

Nex:
Potions, elixirs

Nidal:
Horses

Nirmathas:
Ore, lumber

Numeria:
Skymetals

Qadira:
Salt, spice, silk, slaves, weavings

Rahadoum:
Cloth, produce, gems

Sargava:
Gems, cattle, slaves

Taldor:
Metal, lumber

Thuvia:
Sun orchid elixir, potions

Ustalav:
Wine, perfume, alabaster

Kelesh:
Silk, drugs, philosophy, bronzework

This is obviously not a complete list, but it's a starting point utilizing one book to get a quick listing of some available commodities in different countries.

Hosting a feast for the pirate lords...I'm now hoping for a Comedy of Manners scene.

I'd mostly be interested in a few things:

What does each country export?
What does each country import?
What are the common trade routes?

Details beyond that (and possibly some charts for figuring the variability in cost of goods based on whether it's an export, import, or neutral for a particular country) should, in my opinion, be based on the needs of the DM.

The Dark wrote:

Niccolo Caponi (MacMillan 2006) disagrees with your claim. Page 328 - 2 galleasses in the left division, 2 in the centre, 2 in the right, 6 total. Per pages 325-327, they were Bragadina (32) and Bragadina (27) on the left, Guora (23) and Duoda (28) in the centre, and Pesara (26) and Pisana (23) on the right. The map on page XXI clearly shows 6 galleasses across the entire fleet. For another source, R. G. Grant's Battle at Sea (Dorling Kindersley 2006) states on page 93 that the fleets at Lepanto were 206 galleys and 6 galleasses for the Holy League and 230 galleys for the Ottomans.

now...... THAT is fun, because quoting from pages 266-267 of Capponi

"Slowly Doudo's six ships made a half-turn, oars moving in half-turn.." He (Capponi) is talking about the center squadron of galleasses here.

It's unclear in that section, but taking the whole of Capponi's work in total, it appears he's referring to all of the galleasses, of which Duoda was in overall command. If you have page 257, it reads "...the four galleasses allotted to the centre and left wing managed to move into position in time, a mile ahead of their respective divisions. As for the other two they certainly reached the front of the right wing, but probably only a few hundred yards from it." Back on page 240, Capponi lists the vessels that set sail from Messina and were blessed by nuncio Giulio Maria Odescalchi as "207 galleys, six galleasses, twenty-eight roundships and thirty-two smaller vessels (frigates and brigantines)".

Ironically, 266-268 is also why I brought up the disruption of the Ottoman line and the flanking maneuvers. The galleass fire disrupted the Ottoman line, allowing tactical flanking by galleys. Doria's right flank was an odd combination of maneuvers, where both he and Uluc Ali Reis proceeded south in attempts to outflank each other. Ali Reis utilized his superior maneuverability to cut back inside Doria and "shoot the gap" between the League's centre and right, at which point Bazan's reserve held the turned flank while Doria flanked Ali Reis.

And given the size of the battle field, coordination of ships on both wings from a central command seems hard to accomplish without repeaters

I quite agree, which is why I think Capponi's description is too "clean." More likely, the galleasses were carrying out a prepared plan, rather than responding to actual orders. I like some of the detail Capponi goes into, but his narrative isn't as clear as, for example, Crowley's Empires of the Sea, or anything by Konstam.

My seminary copy (PDF) has no order of battle, but also has no page count beyond p.324. But obviously there is an order of battle attached in the original book, listing only six galleasses overall ?

Would be a major foible (and on my part, but that's the problem with e-booked scripts. You can't verify whether that really is all of the original text ). The rest of the book never explicitly...

It sounds like you have the full text, but without the two appendices (Appendix 1. Battle Arrays and Appendix 2. A - Galley Armament and 2. B - The Southern European Pound) and the maps (which aren't very good anyway).

Appendix 1 is also why I'm somewhat dubious about the galleasses sinking 60 ships. The Ottoman fleet totaled 302 ships (220 galleys, 39 galliots, and 43 lantern galleys). Uluc Ali Reis returned to Constantinople with 87 vessels. The Holy League captured 137 ships. That's 224 accounted for, and only 78 unaccounted for. If the galleasses sank 60 ships, that means the galleys of the Holy League only accounted for 18 ships sunk or otherwise destroyed (Capponi mentions a couple that were beached and couldn't be re-floated).

If that is the case, however, it does show how the galleasses were a major change in sea combat, from melee-and-capture (137 captured to 18 sunk by the galleys) to firepower (60 sunk to 0 captured by the galleasses). Given that the Venetian and Spanish galleys tended to carry heavy cannon (36-60 pounders), it suggests it wasn't just the size of cannon that made the difference. It's possible it was the extra elevation of the castles, which meant that the cannon were firing at a downward angle and thus more likely to hole a galley below the waterline, as opposed to a galley's centerline gun that tended to shoot straight through an opposing ship. This would also favor the catapults (though not the ballistas), as they would likewise be utilizing plunging fire.

The Dark wrote:

Quote:

If you want a "short and bloody fight" with smaller ships, look up Thomas Cochrane and his fight with "HMS Speedy vs El Gamo" (decided within 10 minutes, broadsides included),

That's not correct. After the first broadside, El Gamo tried to board Speedy for over an hour, but Cochrane would establish enough distance to make boarding impossible while still staying under the depression ability of El Gamo's guns, at which point he'd resume firing into El Gamo. It was only "decided" quickly because of Cochrane's superior seamanship. It's also a couple hundred years after...

Niccolo Caponi ( Macmillan 2006) disagrees on the galleases , there being six of them in the middle squadron alone (nevermind the ones shoreward and seawards). If you have more accurate numbers, please let me know.

Niccolo Caponi (MacMillan 2006) disagrees with your claim. Page 328 - 2 galleasses in the left division, 2 in the centre, 2 in the right, 6 total. Per pages 325-327, they were Bragadina (32) and Bragadina (27) on the left, Guora (23) and Duoda (28) in the centre, and Pesara (26) and Pisana (23) on the right. The map on page XXI clearly shows 6 galleasses across the entire fleet. For another source, R. G. Grant's Battle at Sea (Dorling Kindersley 2006) states on page 93 that the fleets at Lepanto were 206 galleys and 6 galleasses for the Holy League and 230 galleys for the Ottomans.

Not that I am aware of but I would love something like that.

Ditto. The only mention I can think of at the moment is pages 240-241 of the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting. It states that most trade travels either along the "North Tack" (Sedeq-Katheer-Absalom-Taldor-Andoran-Corentyn) or the "South Tack" (Sothis-Absalom-Merab-Manaket-Azir). Other runs include Almas-Sothis, "the increasingly profitable Varisian Run," and "nearly two dozen" trade routes from Katapesh, with destinations ranging from Eleder to Kalsgard. Piecing through the various books to figure out who produces which products and where they'd be good to sell would be an interesting project, and one that could probably be done best by a group, since it will probably involve throw-away references scattered throughout adventures and sourcebooks.

I hope later books do have defenses like wall of force around the wheel.

Those ivory belaying pins at 10-foot intervals around the deck of the ship full of archers? Yeah, they're all enchanted with Antimagic Field.

The Dark wrote:

vikingson wrote:

That being said, the "ship to ship" rules are mostly a sad joke. I mean "burning sails".. what is a crew to do ? Drop them on the deck ? Nevermind fire spreading ? IMHO the damage for the warmachines is deliberatly low. Otherwise, warmachines, especially ballistas etc would be too useful in eliminating out "heroic characters".

Actually, I don't see even Conan shrugging off a hit from a Trebuchet, but... Yeah well, the rules as in RAW..*shrug*

The examples you selected are far later and more technologically advanced than a Pathfinder setting. The Constitution had a 950 pound broadside. The heaviest ship at the Battle of Lepanto, if it fired every gun it had (not a broadside, *every* gun) would shoot 504 pounds of ammunition. Most vessels of the time were far more lightly armed (carracks and caravels generally...

Ships of "the period" are also build far more fragile, both in size and strength of planking, since their rigging provided far less propulsion, nevermind merchant seaman being far less inclined to be torn to shreds then those fighting for "King and Country"

To an extent. A 74 was about 100 tons (or 7%) bigger than Grace Dieu, or about the same size as Sovereign of the Seas (which was a 106-gun carrack). HMS Speedy was 10% bigger than a Lantern Galley at Lepanto, or 28% smaller than the Spanish galleasses that fought as part of the Armada.

If you want a "short and bloody fight" with smaller ships, look up Thomas Cochrane and his fight with "HMS Speedy vs El Gamo" (decided within 10 minutes, broadsides included),

Francis Drake's "Golden Hind " battle with the "Cacafuego" ("Nuestra Senora de la Conception") (broadside + melee action, all over within half an hour)

That was an ambush (and there was no broadside). Fair enough to say that it was over quickly, but it was over quickly because it was a sneak attack rather than a stand-up slugging fight (and it was darn intelligent of Drake, since Nuestra Senora de la Concepcion probably badly outgunned him). Drake was the first Englishman in the Pacific, so the Cacafuego assumed it was a friendly ship until Drake had come alongside and started boarding. That's how smart pirates operate - subterfuge and lightning strikes, rather than slugging fights where both ships could be crippled.

The galleases at Lepanto : for one : no true broadsides, but two canon-armed castels , armed with cannons of up to 36 pounds,

They had cannon up to 50/60 pounds. Guoro's galleass had 2 60 pounders and 6 30 pounders. Every other galleass had 2 50 pounders, at least 2 30 pounders, and at least 4 20 pounders (the one with only 2 30 pounders had 10 20 pounders to compensate). Up to ten guns were carried on the forecastle, with 14 gun broadsides and the remaining cannon at the aft.

plus some light swivel guns.

Second, these are Galleases, stengthened and extended galleys, not man-o-wars for deep-water raiding. Any of the ships at Lepanto were struggling for sheer survival in winds of Beaufort 6 or more. that is "strong winds". Since they are light in build, their capacity to carry guns is limited for reasons of stability. But the centerline guns of galleys were absolutely crippling in the mediterranean conditions.
Third, the galleases at Lepanto (all 12 of them) are gainsaid to have sunk or crippled up to 60 Turkish galleys in that half-day battle, by cannonfire, without a loss of their own. At miserable rates of reload.

Firstly, the centerline guns of galleys weren't always crippling, or else 5 galleons (despite their "fragile" planking) wouldn't have resisted 55 galleys at Cape Celidonia for three days, sinking 10 of them in total.

Secondly, it was 6 galleasses, 2 on each wing. Bragadin and Bragadin on the left, Duodo and Guoro in the center, and de Pesaro and Pisani on the right. The Venetians (who built the ships) claimed 60 sunk by their galleasses, but Hugh Bicheno has suggested it was much less based on the writings from the other nations involved in the Holy League. However, it is possible, since they had roughly 80 times as much firepower as 60 Western galleys, Turkish galleys carried fewer guns than Western ones, and their high sides would have made them mostly immune to boarding from galleys. It's more probable, though, that their primary contribution was in disrupting the Turkish line so that the heavier Western galleys had openings to flank the Turks.

The galleasses' main problems with deep-sea raiding were lack of supplies (due to large crews) and fragile rudders. The English thought they were great ships (once they had been developed a bit so they didn't need to be towed like the Venetian ones), which was why the Tudors built the galleasses Grand Mistress, Galley Subtile, Mary Fortune, Sweepstake, Anne Gallant, Swallow, Lion, Jennet, Dragon, New Bark, Mermaid, Greyhound, George, Tiger, Bull, and Hart, as well as using the captured Franco-Scottish galleasses Unicorn and Salamander.

We're wandering off-topic a bit, though. Getting back to ship-to-ship combat, if someone felt they were too slow and wanted to speed them up, a relatively simple way would be to integrate the cannon from Atlas Games' Northern Crown setting. In short, cannon in that setting (which is slightly post-Elizabethan) inflict 10 damage plus 1d10 per pound of shot, so a galley's 36-pounder would inflict 36d10+10 damage, or an average of 208 damage. 4 shots would break a sailing ship. The paired 60-pounders of Duodo's galleass would inflict 680 damage as a "foreside", breaking a warship or sinking a keelboat with a single shot. This is almost certainly overkill, and might work better with the Stormwrack conversions that Varthanna is working on, but it's a start at making ship combat quicker.

Adam Daigle wrote:

Kajehase wrote:

So... no squirrels? :(

SEE! ;)

Do you not fear the wrath of Foamy?

Flumphs do not know the meaning of fear.

real ship to ship combat... did not take hours, if the crews knew what they were doing. Take a good look at USS Constitution vs HMS Java, or USS Chesapeake vs HMS Shannon. Long battles "occur" because they get calculated by logs, denoting when the ship sets course for battle, with its crew being sent to battle stations, not actually when the first shots are fired and usually mostly as the result of long chases.

What "killed" ships were shots under the waterline (being hard to plug and causing flooding) or into the rudder mechanism, wheel or the rudder itself , plus those taking out masts (shredding sails with cannonfire was something the french tried without success for most of a century - although grapeshot worked well, it only did so over very short distances).
And what mattered most was the size of the gun delivering the cannon ball, having it punch through the oppositions hull - dependant on what the ship using it could conceivably carry, and to a lesser degree on the thickness of a ship's size.

Catapult work, done only in classic times and possibly by the Byzantine, would have been even more effective as the ships of those ages were considerably more vulnerable.

That being said, the "ship to ship" rules are mostly a sad joke. I mean "burning sails".. what is a crew to do ? Drop them on the deck ? Nevermind fire spreading ? IMHO the damage for the warmachines is deliberatly low. Otherwise, warmachines, especially ballistas etc would be too useful in eliminating out "heroic characters".

Actually, I don't see even Conan shrugging off a hit from a Trebuchet, but... Yeah well, the rules as in RAW..*shrug*

The examples you selected are far later and more technologically advanced than a Pathfinder setting. The Constitution had a 950 pound broadside. The heaviest ship at the Battle of Lepanto, if it fired every gun it had (not a broadside, *every* gun) would shoot 504 pounds of ammunition. Most vessels of the time were far more lightly armed (carracks and caravels generally had broadsides of under 100 pounds). Battles did not necessarily end quickly - the Battle of Cannanore (1502) involved fighting over two days. Likewise, the 1508 Battle of Chaul involved sporadic fighting over two days as the Mamluks tried to board Portuguese vessels. Even Lepanto, with thin-hulled galleys and relatively heavy artillery, was a five-hour battle from first shot to final disengagement. Looking at the Armada campaign, the engagement off Eddystones lasted from dawn to dusk, and Gravelines lasted from dawn until 4PM, when the British ran out of ammunition. At Cape Celidonia, the first shot was fired at roughly 9 AM and battle continued until sunset, then resumed the next day and went until sunset again, then continued for a third day and lasted until 3 PM, when the galleys finally retreated from the galleons, for approximately 26 hours of battle over three days. Yes, some battles were quick. Just as many were long and slow.

For converting 2nd edition material to 3rd edition, Wizards of the Coast put out a conversion guide (though it was for 3.0)...

It can still be downloaded HERE (Just scroll down to the bottom of the page and it's under the heading of "Classic Downloads")...

And, of course, the 2nd edition had the holy grail of mind flayerdom, The Illithiad. I recommend both that and The Sea Devils, which was a book devoted to sahuagin.

I'm probably in the minority, but I've never been a fan of the art style throughout Pathfinder and most of the 3.X stuff. Having grown up on the art of Jeff Easley and the like with AD&D, I have a real fondness for that style, which feels more realistic and in tune with how I imagine a fantasy setting (granted, the way I imagine people dress in a fantasy setting is probably tied directly to this art style being my introduction). To me, the more recent stuff has always seemed more cartoonish and almost anime-like in some of it's proportions and style. It's not that it's bad, it's just not my cup of tea.

Flipping through my 2nd edition PHB, I see images like This and This. Contrast the Pathfinder Red Dragon to the dragon in the second picture I linked, and you'll see the stylistic difference I mean. However, some of the black and white images don't quite fit the same standard, and the depictions of the different races aren't always in agreement. On top of that, the monster manual illustrations never seemed to fit with the rest of the art. So I can appreciate the consistency of the art style and quality present throughout Pathfinder.

I did like the Osprey Publishing style for some of the books that 2e did (the Horde Campaign and For Gold & Glory are prime examples as well), but I also greatly appreciate the internal consistency that Paizo has exhibited. It reminds me of the better sort of fantasy novel cover art. Besides which, 2e was also what gave us the absurdity of Dark Sun and Spelljammer (not to mention Planescape, which made even less sense than these).

Ehhxcellent, Sekret_One, that's what I'm looking for: some sort of assurance that the ones who employ shenanigans would still be using ships.

I follow your point, Mr Radagast, regarding not everyone knowing a caster capable of teleporting. For many people, the price of passage overseas would still be more affordable or accessible than the price of a teleport. Since I have yet to run a party that does not have at least one player able to teleport, access to teleport was not really an issue. But come level 7 (So, Skull & Shackles vol 3?), would the party still want to travel by boat? What would prevent this conversation:

"So you must make your way to the Island Where the Quest Is."
"Okay. We divine its location and teleport there."
"But what about the Wormwood (or whatever the PCs would have renamed it)?"
"Jimmy the Cook can keep it warm for us until we get back."

I'm assuming it's covered in the AP but would hate that it not be. I'd hate to resort to a tacit agreement that players just forget about teleport magic for this particular campaign.

But your replies are solid; thank you, Pathfinder community! :-)

Well, a ship is a really great way of hauling stuff around that you might need or might not. We need to climb 500 feet down a sheer sinkhole? Good thing we can go back to the ship and get a LOT of rope! There are unfriendly natives with an interest in shiny things? Good thing we have 3 crates of glass beads on the ship!

And there's the problem of moving heavy (but valuable!) booty. When you capture a fort and there's a room full of raw silk where your mage could only transport a fraction of it each time, having a ship to carry that heavy (but valuable!) treasure is helpful.

In addition, if you've never been to or seen the Island Where The Quest Is, teleporting's dangerous. Clairvoyance probably shouldn't help, since that requires a "known or obvious" target. Scrying requires a creature to target. Even if the caster did manage to get a magical look at the place, it's likely to be at the "Viewed Once" level, meaning there's about a 1-in-4 chance of the spell going wrong, with them winding up on a random island somewhere in the middle of the ocean.

Also, part of the point of the AP is that the characters are trying to develop a reputation as infamous pirates. Pirates without a ship may be notorious, but for all the wrong reasons.

The old TSR Birthright setting had basic rules that would be fairly easy to use. This system bunches characters/creatures into groups of 20.

The total number of HD are the group's HP (i.e. 20 level 3 fighters have 60 HP).
AC is the average AC for the group
Base Damage is equal to BAB (the level 3 fighters would deal 3 damage as their base)
Double base damage if the creatures/characters have more than 1 attack/round
Double base damage if the maximum damage by an attacker in a single attack exceeds 12
These are cumulative - a group with multiple attacks and the ability to deal more than 12 damage deal quadruple damage.
Final damage dealt is 20 + modified base damage - opponent's AC (minimum 1). (The original system used THAC0 - this formula converts from THAC0 and the low-AC system to BAB and the high-AC system)

For example, if those level 3 fighters were attacking AC 15 opponents, their final damage would be (20 + 3 - 15) = 8. Against AC 24 opponents, it would be (20 + 3 - 24) = -1, which would default to the minimum of 1.

Roll a die (original used 1d8, I prefer 1d10 to make things a little quicker) for each side and compare results
The winning side adds the difference to their damage, the losing side subtracts the difference from their damage
If multiple groups attack one group, add their die rolls together before comparing

Bonuses/penalties to the die roll:
+1 per 2 levels of magic cast to benefit the group (either buffing the group or harming their opponent)
+1 for a group led by a PC or unique NPC
+2 for the first round of an ambush or other surprise attack
+1 for terrain advantage (sahuagin in water, treants in forests, etc)

When a group's HP are halved in combat, halve their damage (rounding up) and reduce their die by one type (i.e. d8 to d6 or d10 to d8). At 1/4 HP, reduce the die type again.

In general, half of HP losses are deaths; the other half are recoverable wounds.

I would consider adding some additional rules as well, based on situation - for example, if one side has ranged weapons and the other doesn't, and it's not an ambush situation, the side with ranged weapons should get at least one free attack with the ranged weapons before being engaged in melee (roll as usual, but ignore casualties for the ranged unit).

I am having similar problems - Windows 7, Adobe Reader X 10.1.3, HP OfficeJet Pro 8100 with current drivers. I am able to print off some of the internal pages, but it takes about 45 seconds to a minute for Adobe to process each page, because it has to perform "flattening." Having done some large printing jobs in the past, each page takes longer to process than a 180-page black-and-white document took in its entirety. The printing is also hideously slow, presumably because of the complicated inking required. It's functional (mostly), but it may be beneficial to simplify future Player's Guides so that DMs can actually print out enough copies for their players (or, conversely, so that all the players are able to print their own).