I don’t think it’s fair to say that “5e is always simple, what did you expect?” Hell, Descent into Avernus is just an adventure and isn’t primarily focused on vehicles and it still had like 5 pages of rules on driving Infernal War Machines in combat. So, yeah, I would expect a setting focused on spaceships in a game focused on combat to have rules for spaceship combat that make it worth doing.
Because that is where a chase mechanic should be. Bounded in a detailed module encounter. In the adventure modules where the rubber hits the road for premade content narratives. Modules have often pushed the envelope within the scope of their narrative. I hope the designers made it fun for that right set of reasons and not to create global rule sets. It may be fun to use that module idea elsewhere. Like Saltmarsh. But my tables don't like it. I have been at one table that did we enjoyed it, and that's why I ran it and never found a table that completely enjoyed it. Maybe 1 in 5 people enjoyed it as is. I had to continually spice up local hand to hand ship space to keep most of the table energized. In a base settings book I don't need that sort of thing. I played original Spelljammer and it was appropriate for the 2e setting (and recall that they added more complex battle rules 2.5 years later. The higher spell rater the faster your ship... you just outran everything on the straightaway or you didnt. 2e combat systems mentions lead with a warning that your players (they often cite half) may not like detailed ship battles. Sonas a DM be prepared to adjust... See the spacefarers guide's combat section. First paragraphs warning then they spend a paragraph each explaining each starting with not doing tactical combat! By the way that came out at the same time as the work captain's companion. Which had the complex battle rules in the 31ish page book 3 of that box if you were not aware. Even in that book dedicated to crunchy combat options. There were moments that it warns against going too far. Reminding dance that they don't have to do this... Always a warning about crunchy ship to ship battles and that is for a reason. Half the people I've ever played in 2e (crunchy crunch) did not want to play out ship to ship battles after the first attempt. They wanted the Gruberman experience (when do I get to kick some...). "Just tell me when to roll player initiative." Is what half the table would say and let the crunchy half have a go at ship to ship. It was rare a set of players actually enjoyed the full crunchy tabletop wargaming ship to ship battle experience. Because there were waayyy better games out there that handled it so much better. And why not play those!!! And they were fun to focus on that scale of battle. And it wasn't about your players perspective. This is why the D&D battle systems stuff never really took off. It's not what people were playing D&D. If they wanted the experience they would go to Warhammer. I didn't think battle system was all that bad but once again nobody really wanted to sit down and do that slog. It just wasn't a great tabletop organic system. It was all right. But it used all my D&D stuff so we played it...
Yo, as a DM who does a good chunk of homebrew I understand and agree with your sentiment to a point. Not every scenario is going to be covered by the rules and that is fine. There will be gaps. But the two examples you bring up regularly in this video is 5e vs AD&D. The problem with the spell jammer book is that it doesn't even live up to the 5e rules precedent set by itself. There is a HUGE middle ground between 1 and half pages vs 20 pages that would have been more in line with previous 5e rule sets. As far as the narrative experience goes, the rules, in my opinion, are there to facilitate the story but the rules can only do that if they are comprehensive enough and FUN enough. In ship to ship combat we could at least have rules that allow the players to actually DO things. Just being told what is happening with nothing for the player to do (literally if you are manning a mangonel cause you are a barbarian and have no decent ranged options you are essentially doing nothing) isn't fun or exciting either. Spell Jammer wasn't a complete wash, far from it, but it failed terribly on the ship combat front, which is a HUGE portion of Spell Jammer. It's one thing to add mechanics to a system to make it robust, it's another to offer mechanics that are nearly non-existent and honestly bad on their own and force me as a DM to completely re-write them. I don't need everything spelled out, every rule to be crunchy or complicated, but I would like, if WotC is going to play at selling us rules (which is literally the point of D&D as a game system) then there should be actual rules provided in the product. I mean you are right that I don't need any of the source books to make a story, taking that to inth degree, then what do I need any of the books for? What we got in the spelljammer book is far far too close to that line.
I def agree with Nathan here. There is a balance to RPG design. You want it light enough to not bog down the story, but also want it robust enough for players to chew on. The chew prompts more adventures, and helps form engaging decisions. For me, it's less about needing bloated rules for every circumstances, and more about the need for more chew.
What Nathan said is pretty much hitting the nail on the head. I don't need everything given to me as a DM, but for $70 (or $40 off Amazon) I expect to be given a number of tools and options to use in my games. The worst part is that they could have just used the ghost of saltmarsh ship rules that already exist. Frankly that book, which is supposed to be mainly an adventure collection, provides about as much, or in some cases more rules and lore as Spelljammer. And speaking of lore, and want a lot more of that in the book too. Ebberon has a ton packed in that book that you can get ideas for and use. And Spelljammer just feels empty. It's got a lot of cool ideas for starting points, and I'm going to have fun with it, but again. It's an expensive book. If it was like a $20-25 set I don't think anyone would have an issue. Call them "setting jumpstart books" and they could get away with this.
2 роки тому+22
Also agree. And you don’t need to compare to AD&D, saltmarsh I think is the best example. You can have simple enough, rich enough to give you the feeling you are part of a crew when your actions can make a difference, without becoming cumbersome. And as others have mentioned is a plus priced product! Not a supplement… It was rushed and you can tell. That’s my opinion.
I think what most people that where upset about spell jammer 5e was that they wanted ship to ship combat. The box text basically just says to not focus on ship to ship combat which is what many people wanted out of a game that focuses on ships.
I've had the same issue with Ghosts of Saltmarsh. Really wanted to include ship-to-ship combat fun. Takes at least a week of googling trusted homebrew sites combined with official to hammer out making sense and fun. Even then, I'm on my toes all the time with new shit I gotta take a best guess at. lol. Spelljammer is too damned short.
The problem is most D&D players don't want ship to ship combat. They may say they want it, but ship to ship combat tends to be the DM and 1-2 players playing with the rest of the party occasionally making a roll. I've run and played a lot of games with space or ship combat. The best games were Star Wars games where everyone had a turret on the main ship or Starfighter. Even well written games like Rogue Trader suffered from the combat being boring for most of the players. It got boring for the Astropath, Navigator, and Tech Priest. Sure they could do repairs, raise morale, or assist with targeting, but they had no agency in the combat. Still most of the time they just did whatever the captain said. So I understand why the dev are like just close and board. It's what is going to make the largest number of players happy.
@@DabroodThompson I give them a lot of credit, because it seems like the WotC writers threw up their hands after trying and said just close to boarding. It seem a little much to expect that the WotC writers are going to magically be better than other game devs in this regard.
I think the issue is people want a space d&d game, which spelljammer is not. A spellcaster is way more suited to take on another ship than a ship will ever be. A high level fighter is going to do more damage than a ship. If you were actually in space and forced to be inside a ship it would be a different story
I never played EITHER system, but here's what you sound like: "I never went to a 3 star restaurant and had a 14 course meal. I come from the McDonalds system where you get rubberized sprinkle goo and have little toy prizes in your pop soda. Restaurants sound so boring and difficult"
I'm afraid the point was missed a bit. I'm someone who pretty much started with 5e. I am also not among the people who are complaining about the book just about everywhere they can. But I can tell what the problem is. WotC wants to make 5e simple, which is fine. But maybe they are making it too simple? Or rather, leaving for us to make the rules that are harder to design? *There is a textbox that literally says that a PCs weapons and spells often work better than the ship's weapons.* It makes me question, did they just figure the game design for the ship's weapons was bad but didn't have the resources to make it viable? Now it is up to me to do spend hours and hours across a whole month to try to figure out how to make them at least worth using? As a game designer myself, I can't help but feel there is an issue with the current direction WotC is taking with D&D. What is the worth of the official books? Shouldn't it be something made by a team of designers that know the game inside out? People that would be able to design mechanics better than we ever could? Or that the very least, design them so we don't have to spend hours and hours over a month or two designing the mechanics ourselves? Personally, I think the reason people are getting mad at the latest releases is that, and you might disagree with me on this, the books are getting simpler, but the pricing stays the same. Then we either have to make do with what we got or we spend many hours trying to get to the point we hoped we would have gotten from that price. *Basically, it's getting harder to justify buying the official books when so much of the legwork we end up doing ourselves or by buying books from other sources.* Now I'm off to go back to trying to figure out how to make ship to ship battles actually fun rather than it being about just trying to board the enemy ship like the official book suggests is the best option.
The rules for ship to ship combat exist in 5e, but people complained about them when ghosts of Saltmarsh came out so the dev team didn't bother reprinting them here. If you really want to see where the problem with ship combat rules lies go watch the span of episodes in the second critical role campaign where they spent 3 months at sea searching for Fjord's backstory. The D&D team had just put out a UA detailing ship combat rules with all the mechanical crunch you could ever ask for. Matt Mercer spent at least a week studying and learning all the ins and outs of the ship combat rules. He crafted a ship vs ship encounter where the players had to take out the pirate ship chasing them. The encounter started... and then ended 20 seconds later when one of the clerics cast control water and slammed the pirate ship sideways onto some nearby rocks. Matt Mercer looked directly into the camera, apologized to the guy whose name was first on the ship vs ship UA credits, and then put the minis away. That's the playtesting that lead to these books not having mechanics focused rules in them. No ship vs ship system they come up with can compete with spell casters casting 3rd level spells.
it took a long time for shipboard weaponry (even cannons) to be very effective. We tend to think of ship to ship combat as "Age of sail" which was really the very end of the technology. What happened in the Napoleonics is not representative of the HUNDREDS of years of sailing vessels that came before. boarding being more effective than ships weaponry fits with human experience.
@@thedamnyankee1 I agree with you! Which is why these books are such a slap in the face. This is literally neon space fantasy. If they wanted to say "hey, you don't need books, you can figure this out, see above/previous commentary on ships in general" that would be totally fine. But if they're going to put out a glossy triple book package, I presumed when I bought it that money was FOR something. Ray guns. Sentient plasmoid cannons that stick ships together to make them easier to board. Giant ships that can eat other ships. A toolbox or table so DMs can make ships or ship actions on their own more easily. The whole point of a supplement IMHO is to make the DM's job easier and give them tools to accelerate what is already a lot of work. These books fail on both accounts and instead feel like a cash grab where they didn't put in the creative sweat to do something new.
I was most disappointed in the lack of new spells, magic items, feats, and sub classes. It’s such a huge alien campaign setting and we don’t have new material in the book to spice up the classes.
Also here criticism about it not healthy for wizards dedicating a lot of pages to player opinions in each new campaign book. Takes away the already laking pages dedicated to things to inspire adventures. The counter argument is why not add more pages, but there are a lot of monetary and practical problems the common consumer don’t want to deal with.
@@stephenlucas8836 I hear you, I think if they come in the box they should do paperback books to save cost and make them longer, maybe cut the screen too if it means longer books I really like this one but if it was that or bigger books...
@@L337P1R4735 The problem I think right now is that Wizards found an effective pattern and not willing to experiment to much with its. The book was aready an experiment with seeing how splitting a setting book into three separate books would work out (the Idea is that the player can read over the wild space and ship rules while GM can focus on the adventure). We need a lot more complaining from the community before they give a bigger the page count.
You are absolutely right in that D&D, as a system, is NOT about cumbersome ship vs ship battles and is more suited for engaging in toe to toe boarding combat. So let's look at what the book offers for that type of gameplay. For character options, the Astral Adventurer's Guide gives you 6 new races, 2 backgrounds, 3 magic items, and 2 spells; one of which exists for the sole purpose of creating one of the aforementioned magic items...and that's it. NO new character classes or class archetypes. NO new weapons or firearms (which feels weird when you consider one of the new races is all about using firearms). NO new general equipment, NO magical item upgrades for Spelljamming ships, etc. Other content creators aren't only complaining about the lack of a detailed ship to ship combat system. It's the lack of overall content and character options for DMs and players alike. Let's look at the 'section' for Creating a Wildspace System. It's on page 20. A meager three sentence paragraph which says 'A typical Wildspace system has a sun plus a number of planets and moons orbiting it. Two examples of Wildspace systems are described in the accompanying adventure handbook. Use them as models when creating your own Wildspace system.' That's it in its entirety. No randomized generation tables, no list of example anomalies or features of interest one could encounter in Wildspace, there's literally nothing. Any DM worth their salt regularly makes up this sort of stuff on their own but having official material to work with as a baseline makes it a LOT easier, and it gives players and DMs alike a mutual understanding of what sort of things they might encounter during gameplay. You can't fault people for being unhappy when a sourcebook they paid money for tells them 'do it yourself.' Lastly, the book is VERY short. It's 64 pages long and about half of that is art. Which is nice. I LIKE when a book has a lot of art. It's a good source of inspiration. But it feels like so much has been cut from this book both in terms of content AND production value. Let's look at one of the pages you presented in your video. Page 25. It talks about crashing and the cost of ship repairs, and when you turn the page it goes right into stats and layouts for different types of Spelljamming ships with NO introduction or splash page. I flipped back because I thought two pages had to have gotten stuck together or something, but no. It goes from page 25 to 26. And that's not the only time I had that feeling while reading this book. It feels rushed. Incomplete. And there's nothing wrong with warning others when a product might not contain everything a potential buyer might be looking for.
This in its entirety. “Just homebrew it/use the older books/use Ghosts of Saltmarsh” or whatever is entirely unrelated to whether or not the supplement is good, and in fact saying that is proof in and of itself that the paying customer isn’t getting what they want out of their $70 product. Oberoni fallacy at work.
Yeah they cut a ton out of the books. I am now under the impression there is something going on how these books were made, involving 32 pages and 64 page books. They have some sort of process where those page counts are easier to make. Where did I get those numbers? 32 page rulebook in both starter sets, 64 page counts on Lost Mine of Phandelver and the Spelljammer books, and it also double 32.
@@draco949 I worked at a magazine years ago and there's a very good reason for hitting page numbers, and it has to do with book layout, publishing costs, and editing. At the magazine we would rearrange pages to include more artwork, or shrink it down, just to fit on the page. We would work with writers to help them rewrite their text so it would fit on the pages. This is a problem with physical media only, and doesn't affect electronic media.
That is a very good point, for the RRP of this you can buy 2 or 3 *entire game systems* and here you get 3 magic items and 2 spells? For an entire setting? Sure, you could say well really it only costs 45 but that's still 1 or 2 complete RPGs... As an outsider looking in, I feel like they should change their tagline to "The world's most expensive roleplaying game".
The problems isn't that the rules are simple - it's that they don't make sense. 'Long range distance is X' is simple, and I like it. BUT 500ft is a dumb when movement is rarely above 50ft and the book states (paraphrase) 'you should just have fights on board a ship.' If fights should mostly be hand2hand, it means the writers conceded that they couldn't make ship2ship fun enough. By making ship2ship so far away for long distance it means that fights will either never be long distance (always within 500ft) or when they are, they will take forever because damage from ships is low and hp for sails is high. And Air Bubble is a nearly useless spell entirely based on GM discretion. The spell creates a bubble of fresh air. If a player ends up in a larger air envelope - even if that air envope isn't fresh air - "their air envelopes merge, and the quality of the air around the smaller body changes to match that of the larger body." So the spell is only helpful in full wildspace. On a derelict with foul air? Air Bubble won't help RAW. But all that is secondary. You can handwave that with house rules and we honestly had half this stuff since GoS anyways. You know what new GMs need really help with? Inspiration and Encounters. There is very little (not zero, just little) in the way of space hazards, encounters, and ideas to inspire new GMs who read this book. How do I make a system? Oh, uhh... make a sun... and some planets... and you're done. Go to this other book for an example. Nothing about asteroid belts, denizens, no charts or tables or walk through process, just 'here's a system in another book.' You called it smaller than the AD&D one. It's also smaller than all of the 5E ones. Had they spent 20 more pages on inspiring GMs in the Adventurers Guids (honestly, I could have done without half the player options and I'm a PLAYER predominantly - we already have 100 races and the two spells sucked as previously mentioned), 20 more on monsters (and displayed them prominently in the Adventurers Guide (they did good in the adventure at least), and 20 more pages in the adventure to shore up an epilogue. 60 more pages overall still puts it square in the middle of page count with all the other books. Instead they put out a poor product. The page count alone tells you it was rushed. The lack of thought in areas that needed it most (system creation) shows they don't care about the people they claim to. They had a deadline, and they were going to hit it no matter what.
Actually, Air Bubble is fine RAW. The spell states "The globe [around your head] is filled with fresh air that lasts until the spell ends." That means, even if the air from the bubble diffuses into the fouled air of a vessel, the bubble's fresh air would keep replenishing itself. You could even argue that, RAW, the fouled air envelope of the vessel would become fresh from the continuous defusing of fresh air from the bubble, though I wouldn't make that ruling personally. There IS so much to complain about with this book though, I'm not defending its quality. Just giving you a heads up that the spell can be used effectively RAW for your games :)
If the air replenishes, what does it replenish into? A bubble that is still surrounded by an air envelope of foul/deadly air. So every round it repeats, and the air from the bubble immediately becomes foul/deadly. Your DM (and I would hope all) could rule that you have a moment to suck the free air, or that the bubble is strong enough to stop the merge of air envelopes, but no, RAW - once the air tries to replenish, if you're still in the deadly/foul air envelope it's bigger than your bubble so it would becone deadly/foul again. I'm sure they wanted you to breathe clean air the whole time, but they screwed up their own rules. Which is weird, because they could have just pulled up the 3 paragraphs they wrote like 15 pages earlier and said 'hrm... does this work? Is there any ambiguity? How do we ensure this 'bubble' works differently than an air envelope so that we can use the specific vs general case? But no. Just a very poorly thought out spell that btw, isn't even available to the 2 support classes - clerics or bards. Oh, and Create Spelljamming Helm is only available to Wizards and Artificers. So no clerics, bards, druids, Sorcerers (Clockworks do due to transmutation spell), Warlocks. Wtf? A FORGE cleric can't even craft a helm. A Life Cleric can't cast an air bubble. They put 2 new spells in and said 'Bards, Clerics, and Warlocks not welcome.' Because Warlock Great Old Ones Pact sounds perfect as a Spelljammer captain. I just hope they don't ever fall overboard or have need of making their own helm...
@@vinspad3 It says "The globe [around your head] is filled with fresh air that lasts until the spell ends." I used the term "replenish" as a way of relating it to your scenario, but RAW within the bubble around your head, that is fresh are until the spell ends, and it can't be fouled. The rules about air transference is specifically about naturally occuring air envelopes and atmospheres, whereas the bubble produced by the spell is a magical effect, whose description negates the negative aspects of normal air envelope behaviour. As for your issues with the spell lists, that's where having a party comes in. Your captain CAN be a GOO Warlock, but having another spellcaster on board helps. And "Create Spelljamming Helm" isn't necessary for a crew, since your party can obtain a helm elsewhere. But yes, there ARE plenty of examples where the rules seem to contradict, or official rulings aren't clear. For example, read the description of the Spelljamming Helm item, the part where it says to fly at ftl speeds you must be "in space". What does that mean? If it means Wildspace, that means you cannot fly FTL within a planets atmosphere, which means you have to travel the diameter of the planet (the atmospheric heigh described in the book) going at between 25 and 70 ft. per round, which takes several days/weeks, just to get out of the planet's atmosphere. But, if it DOESN'T mean Wildspace, then... what does it mean? Technically, EVERYTHING is space, so it would seem pointless to include it unless there was a "not space" position to be in. Then theres the shody editing, including a reference to a spell called "Repair Objects" that doesn't exist. Was this a new spell they were going to include, but took it out and forgot to check for references in the adventure? Or how about the map of the Rock of Bral, that has a high class restaurant called "The Man-O-War", a reference to the old name for the Star Moth ship from 2e. EXCEPT, in a completely different district, there is a street called "Man-O-War Street". It doesn't lead to the restaurant, its in a lower class part of town, there's no reason why these two reference the same name. It's clear 2 different writers both made the same reference to the old system, and no one caught it. Or worse, the same writer made the reference twice and didn't catch it! Either way, the shody editorial is present throughout the books.
I think there is a middle ground between 1,5 pages and 20 pages long. I dont think no one is asking for the level of detail that Advanced dungeons and dragons had, but I think 5e spelljaming rules are lacking and it shows. If the rules are "avoid ship-to-ship combat and just move on to boarding" then something is very, very wrong.
The rules are just so vague and blah that it feels low effort. We had basic questions coming up about the pilot and some mechanics and their were no answers. It is evidence of the direction that WoTC wants to go. Make the players figure it all out. The thing about the old spelljammer rules is at least you got rules and could just use what you want. My advice is check out the 3rd party Wildjammer supplement. I mean 60 pages? Come on....like I said, low effort. There is more cardboard than content in the set.
I didn’t have a problem with the stuff in 5e until I read that box text. My group wanted spelljammer just for the ship to ship combat. They get the other combat from every other setting in D&D. I believe they want use to do ship to ship combat in theater of the mind.
I agree, I feel like the 5e book should have been about 5 pages, which is close to what Ghosts of Saltmarsh has. I will be using those with some modifications.
This! For crying out loud - THIS! Not only that (this), but there are tons of rules labeled "Optional" in all of the books. So why not add some pages of rules that are "Optional" that would give some more complexity to those that want them, and are internally consistent with each other (I know this would take some time to get right, but...). You haven't "forced" anyone to use more complex rules, and you haven't just dumped it on the DMs to either create a system, or retrofit the 2E system.
Well said. This is exactly why I am critical. I wanted something less complicated than 1e but more than what we got. How are chases supposed to work if all ships are able to travel at the same speed? And at the stated speed, increments of 1000, 500, and 250 feet are irrelevant distances being too short time wise to do anything with. I’m not paying $50-$70 to have to make up my own rules. I may be a DM but I have a job. I pay for books so that rule designers (who get paid to do this) can give me thoughtful mechanics to easily enhance my players fun and to save me time. This set may have value but the reason so many are disappointed is because the value is very low in relation to the price and because the expectations that were set, particularly because it wasn’t as if the designers were starting from scratch, were significantly higher than what was delivered.
At around 10 mins you point out "if you wanted to play in spelljammer/eberron you didnt need this or that book you just create it yourself" thats true. which pertains to what im saying next, if you want to not figure it out yourself but be a DM and just have to tweek it here and there then thats what the official books are for. GoSM and ebberon and avernus and strahd and all these books do that, they give you something to work with in 5e and you can tweek it as a DM. spell jammer does not do this, i have to make it up myself so its the first time i was like "i didnt need to buy this book, it doesn't have enough rules value to tweek". everything in this book is already in the game as far as i can see? hey heres a spell jamming helm costs 5k use it to move your ship thats it no cool gameplay for ship combat. Im creating a one shot and my player asked what he could do as a spell jammer all i could tell them was drive? nothing else and the spell jamming helm does the driving for you 90% of the time. nothing special there. what can anyone else do on the ship? nothing but man a siege weapon? captain? optional and no gameplay, crew? optional and no gameplay. for spell jammer its got no gameplay that makes it spell jammer..... just cool themed battle maps. I want cool themed spell jammer mechanics, which i have to make myself. I feel this did not give me cool spell jammer feeling in space. thats the difference, they didnt try to give us spell jammer cool things in D&D they just said heres a coat of paint. Salt marsh did, ebberon did and avernus did, it had to be tweeked but thats ok i payed for something to tweek not to create my own from scratch.
@@Harlizarrd because I am looking for info on how other people are dealing with the problems i am dealing with? so im watching and reading a bunch of things to try and play spelljammer cause i like the idea and themes and feeling of that setting. but i didnt want to do all the work myself. i read it and im like "?" well i guess i have to build that feeling of ship combat and spelljamming giving me and my players a cool feeling of spelljamming through the astral sea and wildspace. now i have to figure out how to make that on my own. so yes im criticizing WOTC for what they did. because i want them to do better. give me gameplay mechanics that make me feel like a cool spell jammer controling my ship in space. give me mechanics to make me feel like im a crew of a spell jammer ship.
Consider two scenarios... 1) Your party is on a Lamprey ship and you encounter pirates on a Hammerhead ship. Say the DM decides they are at 1000 feet beyond the range of weapons on either ship. The pirates decide to close toward you to attack. You decide to outrun them. You're now at a stalemate. Since both ships travel at the same speed (35 feet per turn) and the skill of your Spelljammer doesn't matter, it is impossible to close to weapons range. Also since you're less than a mile apart, neither ship can enter Spelljamming speed. So essentially you have no option but to close with them and fight (even if you know you will lose) or keep going in a neverending chase until one of the crews starves or runs out of air. 2) You're navigating wildspace and encounter an asteroid field. Rules as written, you will automatically make it through. Again, if you have a novice spelljammer or one who has a century at the helm, it doesn't matter. Even if we know the odds of navigating an asteroid field are 3720 to 1, it doesn't matter because the spelljammer helm itself magically navigates through it for you. There's nothing amazing or epic feeling about that. Do we need 2e style rules for navigation and combat? No, certainly as you point out not in this age of D&D. But I do think they went a little too far with turning ship navigation and combat into "Move your flying dungeon close to the other flying dungeon and fight hand-to-hand as you do on the ground." A little more about developing the spelljammer skills would have helped make it feel a little better. Maybe even give them skills with rolls that can affect your ability to avoid environmental dangers, out maneuver the opponent, or give you an advantage in combat and it would have felt more like a space faring ship environment.
1) If your plan is to be able to run or chase people well, choose the Damselfly, Wasp, or Star Moth. They are faster than average. The Damselfly, specifically, is twice as fast as most ships. But, Vehicles (Space) is a tool proficiency introduced in the book. You could always make it a skill contest between the pilots instead of a combat encounter if the players want to run/chase. 2) Again, navigating an asteroid field, set a Vehicle (Space) DC. Have the players role. If they fail, they crash into and asteroid. We have crashing rules.
@@stevemalcolm8507 I think you're absolutely right and if I ever get around to running an adventure in Spelljammer (I suffer from too many ideas/plans :) ) I would probably use some house rules like that. I just feel like if WotC had done more to make the players matter in navigation it might have reduced some of the complaining.
I think it is a bit silly to compare the AD&D rules to the page and a half presented and pretend those are the only two options. I think it is totally fair for people to want something a bit more robust without it being cumbersome. This would be a bit like if they skimmed the next player manual rules set to 5 pages and you then told people that they are being ridiculous for being upset that they spend $60 dollars on it because the design is deliberately simple.
I appreciate his opinion on 2e style of spelljammer but during second edition there was a product called the War Captains Compendium that fixed or adjusted a lot of the rules from the original box set regarding ship combat. So I wish he would have reviewed both instead of half of the pie. Plus the main reason 2e was cool because you had to think outside the box as a player versus everything being watered-down and handed to you.
@@Malachi_Marx Basically all of the community dislikes the rules that were published, so you're wrong because there is no value to rules which people do not like to use. It could be well done without being complicated, and people buying books are in the right to complain when they are of poor quality.
I've heard this rhetoric dozens of times before, "Why did you need this book/setting/rules/etc to play the way you wanted?" and you want to know why people wait on this stuff? If 5e was trying to be "accessible" as so many claim, why are there no rules at all most of the time? Your GM/DM already has their hands full creating a world, playing the monsters and other NPCs, and arbitrating the rules and what's ultimately funny is the people defending the lack of most concrete rulings as "accessible". No! If I as a GM have to create the rules, from the ground up, to get ANY of this "system" to run at my table, why did I pay a single cent, let alone $40+ on "The Rules" if it all equates to "Well, if you don't like them, make your own." I didn't pay money to have someone tell me to do something I could have already done, I paid money to have, what I would have assumed, a great deal of the work done so I could get things off the ground without having to spend almost 10 years writing my own Game System to play with my friends. If half-assed rules are what accounts for "accessible" these days, guess I'm going to continue to NOT give Wizards any of my money after the "Core" 3 books since apparently, I've already spent too much as it is. Spelljammer was my hope that Wizards would at least have some kind of Ship-to-Ship Combat rules beyond Ghosts of Saltmarsh which is an ANTHOLOGY, FYI. A book of rules should include rules. If it is for the GM and not the players, that's fine. The DMG exists solely for that reason. But when a setting is published, and is smaller than every other setting to date, with less rules than even an Anthology has with regards to a mechanic important to that setting, that's a load of bull. I would assume this is why Wizards is going full digital with One D&D so when they decide to create lackluster rulesets and give people nothing, there's no cost to them to print it. They can just pretend there's more on the way and release it as Paid DLC at a later date. Funny how a Tabletop RPG is almost exactly like a Triple A Videogame Publisher for the amount of greedy, underhanded tactics they employ to drain their "loyal" fan's pockets dry.
Part of my issue personally is the lack of lore and other information that would allow me to build a campighn. Sure I can just make it up myself but than why would I pay a dime to wizards than if I'm doing all the work. The fact that it's 70 dollars for about half the page count of a 60 dollar book doesn't help.
Part of the problem is there’s so much lore in 2nd edition Spelljammer. 4 or 5 boxed sets, a Realmspace book, Krynnspace book, Greyspace book, Practical Planetology book… deciding what to put in and what not to is such an issue it appears they went with just the same short version of the Rock of Bral from the original box (it got an entire supplement later). Good news though, all those 2e books are available in pdf from DMsGuild and DriveThruRPG cheap. And a lot is on Spelljammer Wkis.
Welcome to the world of the new "inclusive" D&D, where having base expectations about anything like worldbuilding is taboo and the DM must do ALL the work while paying for consultant-level advice.
Here's the thing, man. I've been playing D&D for 20ish years, and when I buy a book, I expect it to be one of two things. Either it's going to be character options, items, subclasses and alternate mechanics to enhance my game, or it's going to be lore/setting heavy, and provide a lot of inspiration and material in that regard. Sometimes we get a mix of both, and it's great. This is the first time I've felt like I got neither. It took the ship combat and space travel and said "Hey your DM can decide all that stuff" and then turned around and did the same thing about the entire setting. I was able to glean basically the entire mechanics and lore from a couple of 5 minute promo videos they put out, and that sucks.
Drug addicts doing a money-rip-off are not roleplayer enough to even realize that every DM worth a weekend of time CAN update the original Spelljammer books (that most of us already purchased in at least 2 editions) himself, herself, LGBTQIAself.
People were expecting to be spoon fed. Really, there's no need to reprint the Saltmarsh rules in Spelljammer when anyone running a campaign revolving around the players living on a ship should be using both books already. Hell, between the ship rules in Saltmarsh and the henchmen/crew and base management rules in Acquisitions Incorporated we had everything needed to run Spelljammer in 5e years ago.
I'm gonna be real with you ship to ship combat rules from Ghost of Saltmarsh don't hold up to a 3rd level spell. At that point you can pretty much take out the mast or just capsize the ship. I know this for a fact because I'm running a seafaring campaign that we plan to transition to spelljammer.
The Saltmarsh rules are properly detailed... But are utter ass to play. Super boring, give players nowhere near enough to do. Tried them once and ended up fast-forwarding the fight since it was just... Not good gameplay at all. You can find much better via homebrew. I was hoping Spelljammer would update these to be more engaging. Nope. Total downgrade.
I would rather be provided with rules & mechanics & not use them, than not be provided and have to try to make them myself (with no idea if they will work well or not) or have to go and find alternate systems & shape them to fit the setting. I won't be playing with the same group every time, and sometimes having a more mechanics crunchy session can be refreshing even in a narrative focused group. If the books supplied a number of mechanics or optional rules that DMs could pick and choose from to make the most out of what works best for their game, it would be great... instead there seems to be a bare framework present which for a compendium that is supposed to encapsulate a whole new setting, with new forms of transport etc. isn't a good look.
What they did was dumb it down so much that they turned Spelljamming into moving dungeons in space. The ship pilots itself, so you don't have to do anything. Ship weapons are slow to use and the range isn't great (even though you're in space), so just close and board the moving dungeon. A lot of rules are vague and/or non-existent. They wrote 5e Spelljamming for people they think are stupid so that they didn't have to put in any real effort and still charge the suckers full price. :( So you are better off buying the 2nd edition rules from DriveThruRPG and then pick and choose the rules you want to use instead of having to make things up out of thin air.
As someone very familiar with both 2e Spelljammer and 5e as a whole, I did not expect the robust 20 pages of combat rules. I was very disappointed however because I did expect some simplified version of it boiled down to 4-5 pages not the one page we got. Wildjammer is a good example of what a 5e Spelljammer book could’ve included while not having anywhere near the girth and crunch of its 2e model. Should a DM really expect to have to design their own ship combat system for a book they bought which really should’ve had a more robust (and possibly optional) set of rules that at least in some way reflected the product it’s updating? I’d say no. That’s awesome that you don’t mind putting in time to design your own game and not just expect the book you bought to have a decent enough system already in it. 1/3 of the combat rules are for crashing and you don’t recognize a problem with this? Lol Sure, the book gives you enough to do something with it. It doesn’t give you enough to do more. Yes, you don’t get it and that’s cool. It’s funny how you enjoyed rules for Star Wars and such but don’t think you’d enjoy them in this system. Also funny how you point at the rule for towing to discredit the rest of the rules. As I said, a good middle ground with maneuverability ratings, more than two common ship weapons, some crew/role specific actions and commands during combat and random tables for planet and system design all could’ve been squeezed into the book in just a few pages. Different styles of helms would’ve been nice or somewhat more logical movement speeds but I don’t need to overdo it. Nothing in their design philosophy showed that WotC wouldn’t give us a bit more rules to play with? Xanathar’s, Ghosts of Salt Marsh, Mythic Odysseys and even Decent into Avernus say otherwise.
The expectation the DM must make the systems. Homebrew it all, why even buy the books, as you point out. I thought I was going to get a rule system. Silly me, what was I thinking. I feel like a sucker for buying this. That won't happen again.
Honestly, Drale - I do too (feel like a sucker). I don't think we're alone. And this does, unfortunately (I hate saying this), make me gun shy going forward for the WOTC books. Once bitten, as they say (well, bitten many times, but this was like... huge chunk taken out).
Honestly what annoys me more than the somewhat lacking mechanics for ship to ship combat is the lack of good advice for designing systems or just tables to roll on for generating systems.
Part of it, I think, is that WotC has done the rules already but instead of being willing to reprint them and tweek them for space they left it vague. I don't own it, but Treantmonk did I think 2 videos on ship to ship combat from ghost of saltmarsh. A lot of those rules seem applicable hear. They could have reprinted most of those rules, accounting for air envelopes and gravity planes and the like and been fine. To some degree it seems you need to own that adventure book to have a meatier ship to ship combat system in spelljammer.
The issue is. It has "Spelljammer" on top of the book. AD&D 2 Spelljammer had extensive ship-to-ship combat rules (with hexagonal mats and paper ship miniatures included), a decent amount of ship management material, unique monsters, and a 8-page-long random table chart for designing own Crystal Spheres (which could give you square planets, gas worlds with floating islands, and suns that are portals to Outer Planes). That IS what "Spelljammer" campaign setting is about. 5e Spelljammer has some monsters (mixed with inexplicable Dark Sun ones and stuff that really does not seem like anyone bothered to put any serious consideration into), but ships amount to set dressing, and no info on making the solar systems. Now. What did players want? Spelljammer as a campaign setting? Or Spelljammer as piece of flavour, for which you need to make material, all on your own, AFTER buying a glorified art book.
As a relatively new DM, having a loose framework of rules to fall back on consistently helps immensely. I don't want to have to hotfix a system into 5e, because I could just learn a new system if 5e isn't built for it. I play 5e, because it's what I know, and having the rules inside the system makes it easier to reliably adjudicate (which is my job at the table). I can't adjudicate rules consistently if the rules don't make sense, or lack details like when you can warp. I know you say it's the work that a DM should put in, that's my job. At the same time, if the rules are provided but incomplete or vague, that doesn't help me be consistent. I am planning so many things that it's already overwhelming. I enjoy being able to print out and point to official material that anyone in my D&D Beyond campaign can pull up on their phone to get specifics in between sessions or turns in combat. An extra page with more details would have gone a long way. As it stands, it's too vague in specific areas for a new DM to pick up and run effectively. I just heard a lot of people recommending the Wildjammer supplement just to see why. They include crew roles, but I'm not sure where it differs from Spelljammer or if they can be used in tandem to shore up the weaknesses in the official book. For context, I had no expectations or excitement for this release. I was interested, and considered using it, but it's not something that I'm itching to run. So my opinion is coming from the perspective of someone who lacked expectations, and still came up with unanswered questions that should've had answers in the book.
To sum it up. 5e has almost nothing dedicated to ship combat for a game which is predicated on ships.... 2e has tons of material dedicated to ship combat for a game which is predicated on ships and ship combat and movement. So, if you don't want to do ship combat in 2e, you don't have to use those rules, you can ignore them. But for 5e if you want to do ship combat...ln a game about ships.... you're pretty much fucked. TGP. you really need to think about what the suplement needs to do before you comment. I mean let's really think about this, If someone is playing spell jammer, they are going to be getting on a ship, and they're going to be traveling on that ship, likely being chased on that ship or chasing other ships. They're going to want to do ship to ship combat. They are going to expect that higher level characters that spelljam are going to do so BETTER FASTER STRONGER than than lower level characters. 2e Spelljammer gives them all this, 5e does not. Sure you might find ship combat boring (FOR YOU) and that's fine, but the game SHOULD cover everyone, not just you, so it should include people that might... I don't know... conceivably want to fight ship to ship battles, since that's sort of what spelljammer is about, ships. Soooo maybe you should look beyond your personal preferences, and ask yourself, is WOTC giving people their 80$ worth. I argue they have not. Spelljammer 2e Adventures in Space Boxed set was 18.,99 msrp at launch and you can get it in hard cover print on demand NOW for 26.96. So 50 dollars less than Spelljammer 5e boxed set (apples to apples comparison, hard back bound to hard back bound) So you get more than 100 pages more material, a better ship combat system, a more true to D&D (where player level matters) mechanic, with 2e. And even if you want to dismiss the ship combat, you still have an overall better product with more content... for 50$ less. which means you could buy 2e Spelljammer and ditch what you don't want to use, and the entire 2e phb, dmg, and monsterous compendium and still have money left over for more. Or you could buy more 2e Spelljammer content off DTRPG and have stuff like arcane space, tons of adventures, the legend of spelljammer and still have money left over. Wow, hard to choose.
In Role terms I am so dissapointed in the fact that they eliminated the phlogiston and they cut and paste the whole astral plane?! Now is confusing because they said that the astral sea and the astral plane are literaly the same but not exactly? Idk, now creating low content with a huge lack of effort camouflaging it as a way to make the game more accessible, Is a low blow of Wotc.
Hello, new DM here. Spelljammer was my first book I picked up. Looked through it and it was not easy to figure out. It had quite a lot of information, sure, but none of it was fleshed out. It had half pages devoted to ship-to-ship combat. It didnt explain much regarding if ships can flee or field repairs or what happens when one ship starts running away since they both travel essentially the same speed. There were a lot of things I decided to make up to make sense. That was not very welcoming but after a year, I've got it mostly figured out. Through playtesting. Something this book feels like it had none of.
With the title of the campaign setting being “Spelljammer”, I was expecting some sort of ship combat mechanics and it is shockingly absent. As a DM, I’d rather have 20 pages I could choose to ignore regarding ship combat. If my players want it to be simple, it’s much easier to ignore rules than to have to create them or transfer them from an older book. I paid for Spelljammer 5e, so it isn’t too much to ask to include basic ship mechanics for 5e. It’s convenient that their new sourcebook writing philosophy means less work and money expended on their end
Spelljammer Combat rules are a travesty - Combat on Ships, was a core mechanic and it was so abstracted they essentially told you NOT to do it and board each other and fight normally. Secondly, where is the participation of the players who are not piloting?
@@kurtacus3581 The ship can only be repaired once per hour for 1d8+spellcasting mod with the mending cantrip. Or three players can co-operate to fire a single ballista once per turn for a 1d20+6 to hit and 3d10 piercing damage. Wow. So engaging.
So, I've played 5E but had no desire whatever to run it. When I heard they were actually going to have a Spelljammer setting I thought I might change my mind about that. Spelljammer was the ONE setting that I had players actually REQUEST that I run again. They really enjoyed it. I did too but I declined to run it again because I found it EXHAUSTING. All those rules that you say made your eyes glaze over and put you to sleep - THEY WEREN'T ENOUGH. That's right. They were WOEFULLY insufficient in development and execution and while I ran it I was pulling SO MUCH stuff out of my arse all while behind the scenes I'm desperately trying to plug gaping holes in the whole system from ships to the lore and everywhere in between. I believe what you're failing to appreciate is what you initially started to allude to talking about FFG's detailed rules for handling spaceships for their Star Wars games. OF COURSE they had so many rules for it because it's an important and large portion of the setting AND THE GENRE. Well the issue then is you're not understanding that Spelljammer IS THE SAME GENRE. Spelljammer needs lots of rules regarding ship combat and EVERYTHING TO DO WITH SHIPS because those ships are a MASSIVE and INTEGRAL portion of the setting. To give just 1.5 pages (and yes, you were being OVERLY generous, it really amounts to 1 page of actual rules once you remove the art) is incomprehensible and frankly inexcusable. It's the same as presenting a set of Star Trek or Star Wars rules and saying, "Here's an entire box set of rules... but ALL the ship-to-ship combat stuff you can just make up yourself. We can't be bothered." It's rather breathtaking really. Would you release a Pirates of the Caribbean game and only include 1 page of ship combat rules? Not unless the entirety of the rules for the setting were only 10 pages - even then the ship combat probably ought to be more like 3 or 4 pages worth of the overall rules. You say it's a truly unique setting and that's what they WANTED to release rather than just another generic Greyhawk-ish setting. But neither you or they seem to grasp what that MEANT in the original setting and for the re-take. Ships feature IN EVERY PART OF IT. ALL those headings you read from the 2nd Edition rules (which I can appreciate you not fully sorting out - even 2E is a huge and complicated system WITHOUT adapting rules for ships of some kind as an integral portion of the setting) are IMPORTANT because SHIP COMBAT is that important TO THE SETTING. You CANNOT just gloss over it and then be _surprised_ when people freak out at the complete WTF-ery of doing so. Long before 5E Spelljammer was known to be a thing I was advising people who wanted to try the original Spelljammer setting that they needed to approach the rules and the adventures more like they would Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, Battlestar Galactica, or any SCIENCE FICTION setting that prominently featured space travel and combat - because THAT IS THE CORE OF THE SPELLJAMMER SETTING - space travel and combat. My original hopes regarding 5E Spelljammer have certainly been dashed and even before I saw this video my interest in attempting to RUN a 5E Spelljammer campaign had all but faded. It's BARELY hanging on at all anymore and I honestly don't see how it might be salvaged. I'd say maybe a 5% chance at this point. If WotC were to get out a set of ship combat rules that at least equaled the INADEQUATE rules from 2E it would still only be a 50/50 chance I could be lured into making an attempt. On the other hand, if players were to ask me to run THE ORIGINAL Spelljammer setting - using 2E rules which I haven't TOUCHED in 20 years - I'd do it in heartbeat. They are successfully PUSHING ME AWAY from 5E. That is a really bad indicator of their marketing, design, and grasp of what made not just Spelljammer entertaining to play, but ANY setting they might try to re-ignite. WORSE - this is not even ORIGINAL material. It is revision and republication of original creativity done by others. It really makes me call into question if they've simply got nothing ACTUALLY original left to try (or willing to try) - just a grinder that slowly reprocesses past ideas again and again, because most of their customers weren't around to know how much BETTER the original material actually was...
They decided that boarding action play would be more fun, but utterly failed to provide a maneuvering mechanic to allow play to proceed to a simple boarding action instead of a long boring pursuit. That is the kind of half-assed game design that people are rightly complaining about.
There is a difference between simplifying a system (which the 2nd AD&D Spelljamming rules could've benefitted from) and dumbing down a system to the point of non-existence (which is what WotC ended up doing with the Spelljammer books). So for what was served and fleshed out (races mainly, and the adventures), yeah I'm enjoying it, but as a DM I am now having to go back and essentially rebuild the very fun and robust mechanics from 2nd AD&D into a 5E flavor of simplified while still keeping the meat of what made those mechanics fun and interesting. And it's not just ship combat that was treated this way. There were wonderful systems in 2nd AD&D for custom building your own ship, rapidly generating randomized solar systems (crystal spheres in 2nd AD&D), generating Spelljamming encounters for random events, there were a whole host of monsters from 2nd AD&D Spelljammer (like a dozen flavor of Beholders and how that impacted their societies in space) that just were not brought forward and there was SO much flavor about notable characters, sites, cultures, the gods (and other powerful beings) and how things worked in Wildspace and the Phlogiston in strange and interesting ways. All of that could've been lifted and simplified for 5E, but WotC just didn't want to put the work in to make that happen. They were banking on nostalgia and they did, but now they are getting backlash for it. For example I'm going to be REAL reluctant about pre-ordering Dragonlance now if they are just going to "mail it in" until OneD&D. And to be honest, if this level of dumbing down is the direction they are taking OneD&D, I'm very likely to bail ship and shift the system I play under to Pathfinder or something that still keeps some of that wargaming soul, while still being a good medium for telling epic tales.
So since getting Spelljammer, I have been on a crazy creative high with making a campaign based off of it. I do not regret buying the product. BUT there is a a lot of wiggle room between AD&D spelljamming rules and what we got here, which was a major missed opportunity. They created a spaceship game, with spaceship weapons, and literally said “it’s best for PCs to ignore those and just use their own spells and weapons once in range”. If a DM or group wants even light detail in ship-to-ship action, they have to design one, which is something that the game designers should have done, or at least provided some guidance for. If the same level of guidance or rules had been given for personal combat in the PHB, it would have been unacceptable even if the reason was focusing on the narrative. So while I do enjoy this product, and while I do think that the people decrying it are obsessing over one negative in a setting book that has a lot of good, I 100% get why some buyers are upset.
I think that line is getting too much of a reaction. The ship weapons are fine, but big spells are better, it’s trying to acknowledge that players will want to close in to use them or board, not saying never use ship weapons. After all, damage before closing can make a huge impact on the gravity dominance.
Obviously mileage my vary, but the fact that so many people are saying that the line was off putting tells me that at the bare minimum, the line was inelegantly written. But also, I don’t get people swearing off the product because of it.
@@baynemacgregor8441 “Big spells” What big spells, exactly? Range for spells is not far, at least not when you are talking about rules where a “Close” encounter starts 250 feet away. You can’t chuck a Fireball at a ship at that range (150 ft). You can’t Fog Cloud at that range either (120 ft.). And by the time you ARE in range, you may as well close the gap entirely so your martial characters have something to do (since even if they pling away with Longbows, the Damage Threshold of the ship is an average of around 15, so the vast majority of attacks will do nothing). It’s a bad system that, if you follow it to its logical conclusion, is this: the ship with the biggest guns should blast the smaller ship and kite it. The smaller ship can’t catch the bigger ship (due to movement speeds being practically all the exact same) and the smaller ship can’t get away (for the exact same reason). No rules for better Helms, no way for a captain to pull a deft maneuver, no way for the Spelljammer to burn spell slots to create or close distance… just boring attrition. That’s not “simple” systems, that’s a shit system. The only experience this is good for us to have the party fire off a cannon or two before moving to standard PC to NPC combat. Ship to ship combat is ludicrously under-thought here.
"you didn't need this book to play spelljammer" I completely agree. But that's the issue I have with the book. If the half-baked random crap I can come up with is more fun and enjoyable for my table, then how can I look at the price I paid for the spelljammer book and NOT feel like I wasted my money? I expected a cool setting that has better mechanical ideas than what I can come up with. I just got the cool setting. And that's a shame, because my ideas are awful. More fun than what is in the book? For my group, yes. Fun in general? Eh not a lot, even for my table. Just adequate. Even if you don't mind the ship combat rules, you gotta admit that repairing the ship is a pain in the butt. Also, it's a bit weird that the book outright explicitly says that in ship combat, it's generally better to just use your normal weapons and skills. It steers players away from using the ship for anything other than transportation. That's probably the point, but it's a shame for those who wanted to give players a reason to care about their ship other than wanting to get somewhere.
Give them lovable npc's, have them befriend the cook, bosun, cabin boy. Steal from treasure planet. Have a betrayal, or a romance between crew members. This will endear them to the ship because it is a character it's self. Also maybe your ship loves to be moving and gives off a groan when it stops moving.
@@baynemacgregor8441 I don't disagree, but it's significantly easier to get something that has well thought out rules and accompanying pictures than making it all up yourself.
From what I am hearing the functionality of the ship and need for crew roles seems to be hurting the game mechanics. In marine ship battles the crew need to do things - the captain or first mate need to steer, the sails need to be raised or lowered, the anchor is another optional point for movement, guns need to be manned and loaded. It seems like spelljammer is just yeah the helm controls the ship. Now I could be wrong, I am still researching, but it seems like assigning more roles would allow for more role play opportunities as people have set things to do on board. Cooking, cleaning, maintaining, repairs, mending equipment, making rope, bard performances, even skill crafting could happen and be fun interaction points. And a DM could always bring a failed or skipped chore up to throw in as another obstacle; you forgot to load the cannons, you didn't make sure the rigging was set, etc. if they wanted to be more realistic. They don't have to be cruel about it or punishing, but it can add another element to game play. Some of the complaints I have been seeing are the lack of things to do while on a voyage, however a DM could definitely add these elements to make the game more exciting.
I don’t care about ship combat, but as a DM I need: adventure structures, encounter ideas, world design guidance, factions and actors, inspiring sample NPCs, interesting artifacts and treasures, lots of monsters, environmental hazards, travel guidance… WotC seems to completely disregard giving DMs tools to actually RUN GAMES.
As someone Who first got into D&D through 5th edition, I can assure you I would not enjoy advanced D&D. I also would not want to buy this spell Jammer book. After all it literally tells you to skip space combats and just go straight to boarding. I get that writing down The rules for everything and making it a war game is one end of the extreme, but what wizard did with this spell Jammer book is the opposite end of that extreme. All they do is tell you that spell Jammers are now a thing and provide you with almost no support or structure on how to implement them. And while it's easy enough for me to make my own rules for spell jamming without spending a dime, it is asinine to assume that everybody else should just do the same. I was hoping that this book could provide me with inspiration, but I know it will not.
This has been a theme of 5e really, I do not see the point of spending money on anything beyond the PHB and DMG for 6e/one D&D if I'm going to be asked to do the heavy lifting anyway.
@@hellboy6536 "Player characters are almost always better off using their own weapons and spells in ship-to-ship combat" what is the point of ship-to-ship combat if the SHIPS are not actually used for ship-to-ship combat?
@@spiderham20 Yeah thats why besides the 2 basic books plus monster manual I have ton of 3rd party books. They provide much better DM focused stuff. Heck the crafing system and the books about harvesting stuff have made my game much better as I now actualy workable rules I can encorage and do not have to dread when players ask can I harvest parts of this dragon?
My prominent complaint isn't with the ship-to-ship combat rules. It's with the lack of setting information. The (paraphrased) blurb "please look to our example Wildspaces to see how to make your own" was infuriating to see, given that the setting promises so much. I would have liked a page or two of procedures and tables for generating Wildspaces at the very least, and would have preferred a couple additional examples of known Wildspaces with descriptions and adventure hooks... You know... Exactly like the Doomspace and Xaryxispace descriptions we got? But you know... More of them. I realize that WotC may have omitted certain established settings so as to be more inclusive to the general audience, but they publish a bajillion products for the Forgotten Realms and they're about to publish one for Dragonlance so there's a couple Wildspaces right there that their fan base could have gotten excited about. They managed to give us Doomspace on a two-page spread, and I would have appreciated if they could maybe cut some of the, admittedly gorgeous, art pieces that are just the view of space and instead give us something that we can actually use to make our own adventurers. Instead we can run Light of Xaryxis out of the box and everything else we have to generate. "Adventure" in Space.
I agree with the sentiments of many players, it is that they have decided to over simplify spelljammer to the point of, wait til an enemy is in range, ram the ship, and treat it like a dungeon or a bar brawl. What do you do til then, you wait, lol. Mage hand press made dark matter 5e, it doesn't 20 pages is easy to use the space combat rules but when I bought the book I knew that rules at least a framework to start from would be in the book. If you look at the spelljammer "rules" you can't even get away from an enemy ship because it's usually 1 ton or over and has its own gravity field. An expensive rulebook should at least have the rules or framework needed to handle ship combat at least in a minor way. And if you don't want to use them then you don't have too.
Isn't the reason to watch a review to get information on the product so we can make a qualified dessision on if the product is for us? I think why people are underwelmed is that there is no real ship to ship combat and much reused content (monsters) from other books. At the moment most of us could flip through the book in a store and then make something better up on the fly. Thats not much for 50$.
If there are rules, most players remember parts of them, but that gives a point of reference for those rules. Then we can choose to use them or not, or to modify them. Imo, give us the rules, and encourage players and DMs to pick up and drop rules more freely. I would rather ask my players if they want to use rule A, B, or C, than create rules A, B, and C, them ask them if they want to use them. I homebrew enough of my campaigns, npcs and PC options, I don't want to also homebrew rules.
I agree with many of your points, but when people, myself included, complain that there's no ship to ship combat rules, what we should be saying is the rules are uninteresting and don't add anything dynamic or interesting to combat. If you put ballista on a wagon and had 2 groups ride at each other while on the ground, I'd basically be the same combat. Ghost of salt marsh had officer actions and added to combat, they could have at least updated those rules for space and reprinted them. They also stripped spelljamming of most of its flavor while keeping some vestigial mechanics. For instance, why does a spelljammer helm need to be attuned by a spellcaster? It no longer requires spell slots for anything, not even combat. Why is it even called spelljamming without the use of spells? The rules exist, they're just in impressive and boring.
5e was supposed to be a modular system, it is not but it was supposed to be. You would expect the setting on Spelljammer to have rules to make you feel like you are sailing through space. I am shocked they didn't have about 3 more pages to expand on the rules from Ghosts of Saltmarsh and explain how ship combat is different, instead we don't even get the depth of Saltmarsh. I think rolling charts or point adjustment to create your own unique Spelljammer would be 5 pages that should have been in the book. You don't want any Spelljammer you want your own. Some additional group checks and skill challenges for how Spelljammer deal with things and setting specific challenges would have been nice as well. These rules are not unique, special, or robust. They are even lacking compared to other 5E products. I see this book and say that I am better off with a book I previously bought.
There you go, right off the bat, having expectations. That's why you're disappointed. D&D is modular, you're just expecting far too much from the people who write the books.
@@Micsma I know if I would just buy everything and not assign a value to it, rather than think my enjoyment with the idea of a new book should blend with value the book can add to my games. If I could just do that everything would be great. Instead I do this dumb mental calculus: Is my idea of doing a Firefly like space cowboy campaign supported wholly by this new book, or am I only going to get concepts, ideas, and half information from the new book, for something I could have homebrewed anyway. Then supplement it with previous books for the desired outcome putting in way more work to run a game from box set that cost me 41.99 on sale versus another book that cost me 22.99 on sale. I am not yet the perfect DND consumer. I did buy both and that is a start. Soon my misgivings will fade. (Saltmarsh 60 more pages)
I agree they could have expanded the GoS rules, but at the very least they could have REPRINTED them for people that don't have GoS. Copy and paste, zero effort. But i guess it would have upped the page count and thrown off their profit margin.
@@Micsma Not really. I know how good books of 5e can be but not bevause WoTC but because I have bought 3rd party suplements on DM's guild. You would not belive how good some of them are in filling the holes left by WoTC. Many of the top sellers on there honestly are better than any offical book.
My problem with what you’re saying isn’t the truth behind it. It is the expectation we as consumers have based on previous setting books. When PIETY became a core mechanic they spelled it out. In Acq Inc, the party’s franchise level was a core mechanic and surprise, surprise… they spelled it out. Ravenloft’s Worlds of Dread were spelled out. In Spelljammer, a new core mechanic was introduced and they basically said… you get space travel but when you run into an encounter you don’t have it and ship to ship combat is complicated so… you won’t be able to run from it. You will most likely be boarded or will board another ship and at that point, it’s just another dungeon crawl so… let’s just skip to that. Let me put it a different way… If your DM wants you to run into an encounter while you are doing space travel, it will be a dungeon crawl and you won’t do ship to ship space combat. If you want that then use a different RPG system and not Spelljammer 5e. We as a company are so lazy we won’t even update our own systems or use Matt Mercer’s naval combat role system. WotC feels like it is being run by stockholders and not DMs as even the most recent bestiaries are reprints. When was the last time WotC and not a 3rd party like Critical Role has provided good adventuring content that doesn’t feel lazy, disconnected, rushed or half-assed? D&D felt at its core to be a combat simulator in an open world full of choices. 6E and it’s most recent predecessors feel like a whimsical tea party with hardly any stakes at all and the threat of death is a joke. Look at the release of Vecna, Feywild adventure book and this excuse of an update to bring Spelljammer into 5e. If this is the future of D&D, 6e and all of this then you aren’t wrong. I probably won’t continue playing it and other systems will attract me more. After seeing this, I’m worried for Dragonlance and honestly I am more hopeful and excited for the Paizo adventure to come to 5e - Abomination Vaults in March 2023.
I agree with what you're saying but I think the disappointing thing with the rules is that it assumes you'd rather cast your spells than work as a team to crew a ship in battle - which may be the case but as you rightly pointed out we can already do that. It would have been nice to see a ToTM and detailed option presented.
I disagree. I've never played AD&D in my life, but was moderately excited about spelljammer. I'm not attached in any way to the old mechanics, but the new ones (more like lack of ones) is just disappointment. In my group when we want to play tactical combat oriented game, we usually go for D&D 5e. I don't actually believe 5e is narrative driven game. It gets pretty obvious when compared to the actual narrative games. I also disagree with the statement that I could play Spelljammer already even without new books. I mean yes, I could, but why should I buy those then? I like 5e, I want to play with the spirit of it. I don't want to come back to the 90s. But I also want to be prepared with good set of rules, when during an adventure there is a spaceship battle. It's cool! One of the best things about the setting. So why do I have to come with my own ideas about how to make it engaging, so my players aren't bored to death?
"we want to play tactical combat oriented game, we usually go for D&D 5e". Yeah, that's not what D&D is. The old rules may have been more elaborate, but that doesn't mean they were functional or fun as "tactical combat" either. As a DM, if I give my players access to a SpellJammer (which I have done multiple times in 5e, w/out the new books) I expect them to use it as a vehicle to get to far-out new places they can explore...not a weapon that suddenly turns my D&D game into a "ship combat simulator".
@@pygar256 ???? Man... I can't believe that you deliberatly decide to skip the most fun thing a setting with spaceships can offer! I knows my players would never forgive me if I would do that. So... I think you have no point. Sorry. About the "tactical combat" then again - if we have the most fun from the game facing encounters with different obstacles, and if my character, as it progress, gets more and more ways to deal with those encounters - then I would deffinitely say that we play a "tactical combat oriented game". It's pretty obvious to me.
@@mateuszmazur6246 Sorry, I've been playing D&D long enough to remember the first version of SpellJammer....ship combat really isn't that fun. In fact, it has a big potential to bore players who end up dis-involved in vehicle combat...and if you lose, then TPK? If you think it's that essential, you can just borrow the old rules, or make your own rules up. (or go play a game that is tabletop strategy instead of rpg) Me as a DM, it's not what I'm looking for in SpellJammer- and me as a player doesn't like the thought of putting tons of time and care into my character just to be reduced to being a ballista gunner.
@@pygar256 but you have nothing against reducing spaceships into portals. The rest is all the same as on the video. "Go play the old rules" - which I specifiied i have no interest to do; "make your own ones" - yea, and pay creators for nothing. Whatever man, you talk like there was no way to do it properly. Just the old way or no way. That's simply not true. And then you talk like I don't want to play rpg, which od also false. RPG is about doing stuff you wouldn't do normaly. Dnd is about playing as an adventurer. Space battles are adventurous thing to do. Maybe you should play video games, if you don't like to follow imagination?
@@mateuszmazur6246 I talk about it like there wasn't a way to do it properly because...there wasn't. Imagination? I'm imagining ship-to-ship combat in D&D reducing my players to ship crew roles which should be filled by hired henchmen. You do what you want....but I can easily see why ship-to-ship battle rules were not included for SJ5e.
Anyone who’s written a report for school knows page count doesn’t matter. Word count and actual content does. Also one of my big issues is they didn’t cover chase scenes in the book. With the travel rules of just picking a random destination in space because stuff isn’t fixed in space means technically you can think of that ship I just fought and follow them. Since they describe everything as a cork floating in space it tracks that a ship could be tracked. Their example of location selection is the closest Githyanki fort. You never even have needed to be there to plot a course as a spelljammer. They really didn’t think this through as a product.
The idea that 5e is supposed to be accessible doesn't excuse the lack of rules, in fact I think it hurts the point. Having solid mechanical foundation could only help new dm's and players run adventures in the setting. As has been mentioned there is a large difference between 1.5 and 20 pages; moving more towards the middle of that range would only help accessibility. While I could theoretically homebrew anything, as a working adult I have issues with free time (think accessibility). I spend money on source books so I have ready-made, tested, and robust mechanics so I can readily jump into adventuring as quickly and easily as possible. These books just ain't worth it as they stand.
Honestly, a little of collum a little of collum b, does it need to be number and war-game crunchy to be fun no, but the fact that being able to pilot these ships IS what the setting is based around I would have liked it being at least a little closer to salt marsh than the generous 1.5 pages we got, even if it was just STR, DEX, CON scores for the 16 ships we did get which really wouldn't have taken up much additional space for situations where "the higher hp wins at tug of war". And the lack of internal consistency in the book for the sake of simplicity the book calls the movement of the ships slow and clumsy, but in combat they can spin around like it's on a lazy susan so all the weapons can be fired does feel like lazy hand-waving.
the air and gravity explanations as well. Much of this book seemed like lazy handwaving. Navigation as well, although that may be the same as the earlier (2E) setting, I don't know
I wish they'd added more to the book. More than three magic items. More than two spells. More defined locations. A random-location generation table. There was such a huge amount of content that they could have pulled from 2nd edition that wasn't just clunky combat rules. They could've created a box set that was a better value for their players with very little effort. I think that part of the complaint is just that players feel they're getting ripped off due to the low page count and they're looking hard for what is missing.
I feel as if the main letdown in the Spelljammer 5e books is that the price is not equivalent to the content and rules that you get in return. The SJ 5e books are great for a player but lacking for a DM. The majority of table groups will encounter and attempt crazy things that they don't have rules for. The Average DM does not have the time to homebrew something new between each session. That may sound lazy but WE have many more priorities before a hobby game. We buy the (hopefully) well tested rulebooks so we can have the same fun without the huge time investment. Otherwise, why buy any books at all...
I'd argue that in the 'You don't need the book' part of your video that it has some flaws. One, some of us don't have all the old rulebooks so we don't have a reference. And two, making rules ourselves is all well and good but that's an additional workload heaped onto the DM, and it's having an adverse affect on DM'ing in 5th edition. It's better to just have as many rules fleshed out, built, and made dummyproof as possible so that if the DM needs rules they can get them. It takes the load off the DM and saves them from having to make things up themselves. I notice a disconnect though. You found everything you need? Great! But you were hopping all over the place. It's not well described or organized. They could do better for that.
Honestly, I'm fine with what's there but I think it needed a little bit more. Maybe a few more siege weapon types for ships, some upgrades/ship gadgets to fix longer range combat stuff, a page of crew rules, a few more ship designs, a couple astral sea and wildspace encounter maps (even just generic ones) and a couple maps for some of the other encounters would of made this product way, way, way better. It didn't need much more, just a bit. Also the hadozee fix, which we just got.
WOTC said they were going to experiment with new formats, and spelljammer is one of those experiments. Unfortunately, I think the triple-book-boxset format doesn't really work because all three books are too short. They should have been split up and sold separately, or combined as two books. I think their design format just left them with no room for crunch after they had to fit in everything else.
Why do a space fantasy without actually providing much to do in actual space? Just do portals and jump from planet to planet. If you set d&d in space you need to actually do space combat, if you have ships in space they should have combat otherwise why bother with a space setting at all?
I just wish there would have been more ideas and rules suggestions on how to create wildspace systems. As well as example wildspace systems just like the original AD&D book. It would have added so much more.
There is a huge degree of difference between the 20 pages of combat rules with maneuvering and ranges being set in stone and the complete abstraction of those systems in the 5E book. When you say the latter is boring I can understand that to a degree but I also imagine a scene like in the first pirates of the Caribbean movie where they’re desperately trying to find an advantage against the better cannons of the Pearl where they run it aground and then shoot from an advantageous position. I could very easily see a crew weaving through a debris field desperately trying to avoid a bombard’s cannons while trying run it aground or escape (or players chasing a villain trying to do the same) which just doesn’t work with the current edition of the rules as presented. Now adding those in is something that can be done by the DM but when the ships are the major selling point why isn’t that in the rules to start? Also I have issues with the way speed works between ships and the way the setting handles planets and the like which makes the rules around landing and the like laughably absurd and in DESPERATE need of house ruling. The game specifically states that ships in another objects gravity/air envelope can only use cruising speed and gives an example planet that is 5,000 miles in diameter with an air envelope that extends 5,000 miles off the surface. Say the party had to land there for an adventure and then has to take off again to get the McGuffin back to space then you’re looking at roughly 50 DAYS transit each way with the rules as presented which is almost laughably bad. Also the fact that spelljammers not moving at hyper speed are slower than most sailing ships feels pretty sloppy in that regard as well where it really seems like combat speeds should have been bumped up to a notable degree and that there should have been a crushing speed adjustment added in for atmospheric flight and the rules for planets should have had atmosphere by object size like a small planet may have 50 miles from the surface, a medium planet 100, and a large planet 200 which took me all of about 5 minutes to realize and house rule which makes me wonder how they didn’t catch that issue in their playtesting for the book. Overall it just feels like they slap dashed together some things and left too much to DM fiat to fix. I grew up on 2nd edition and there are ways that it abstracted details that 5th Ed doesn’t (movement and placement in particular) and it never felt more like a war game than a narrative experience and I accept that 5th edition is less nitty gritty with mechanics but if the setting shares its name with a vehicle within said setting then it’s probably important to the rules and could use a bit more consideration. It just feels like some important details were glossed over and the books only total up to around 200 pages where Eberron was around 300 and included more of the flavorful class and equipment options.
I don't wont to be bogged down by too many of the technicalities of naval combat. And honestly, it doesn't take much for the players' eyes to glaze over from one too many rules. If anything, this should be brought up during a session zero. If I decide to run this and my players want a little more detail, I'll look at the DMG and Ghosts of Saltmarsh to help further flavor the ship combat. At least those are already 5e and I don't have to worry much about conversion and balancing
As someone who is minimally on the internet looking at people's complaints, but knows that some exist, I feel like what I hear the complaints addressing is not the rules as much as the amount of world that was developed to flesh out an entire campaign. One UA-camr who I generally think has good takes compared it to the eberron book, saying that the eberron book had everything he needed to run a campaign with no other materials. The spell jammer books cost more money and leave you with little room to grow beyond the adventures without a GM putting in a lot of effort. But what do I know? I haven't actually read the books. I'm more commenting on what I see online, and it seems to not really focus on the amount of spell jamming mechanisms.
Oh I don't know they cold have taken the best parts of the design from ghosts of saltmarsh and combined it with ideas from decent into Avernus and allowed the pilot to spend spell slots to do cool things they could also have put some effort into making cool things pcs could do manning weapons stations or directing damage control or just coordinating the crew and buffing the whole team you know deliver on the ship to ship combat fanticy not just say lol board them. Plus another part of the fantasy wotc failed to deliver was ship customization which a lot of people want.
The Slow down starts at what a 1,000’ out. Your speed ranges from 30 ‘ - 40’. That means if you are being Chased by the faster ship and you are running at max ( as it is unattached to normal movement methods for players) there’s only a 10’ gain per round. Let’s say minimum range for either to hit is a cool 500’ (just to speed things up between them )at disadvantage. So you won’t even be able to take pot shots for 50 rounds. With no effective way to avoid combat your next ( less boring) act you could take is head at them. Giving you a sweet 8 rounds before combat can even commence. Hope the faster ship isn’t full of warlocks that can push or pull . Then to reduce damage to your only method of survival you board! That’s when the real fun starts because, it was never there for the ship to ship. As lazy writing and gaming design was the only thing there for ship to ship.
"Just homebrew it 4head" is incredibly disappointing when it's for a core element of the fantasy to many DMs/players. Better to have it and not need it etc.
in the original ad&d spelljammer ship movement was determined by the level of the helmsman, now what in 5e is determined by character level? proficiency bonus. thye could have used that for the speed of the ship. 2-6 movement points (or whatever) the other thing 2e spelljammer had was ship manuverability. it was a number (in 2e ir was a letter that represented a number) wotc could have added "MR: #" to the ship stat sheet and done. now you have speed and how it manuvers. combine that with what they gave us for ship weapons (the weapons ranges could be multiplied by 10. seige weapons had good range on them not to mention the fact that spelljammer takes place in space) and you have enough to run fun ship to ship combat. myself I am looking to convert the ship speed from the book and make a manuverability class out of it.
I have a simple fix that'll work for most games with these ships regarding the boring tactical speeds. Have a separate grid for the ships that'll serve as the "tactical table." The scale is 100 feet per tile. Add a zero to ship movement speeds. Make sure every character has a ship weapon they can fire. Provide the pilot with a ship mounted staff with fire bolt, or some similar spell that receives a buff to its range at the dm's discretion. Now a ship with 70 movement becomes a ship with 700, thus on the scaled up table, it can move 7 tiles. I'd recommend tweaking all the weapon ranges as well to suit your tables play style. Now everyone can attack, and do other actions on the ship as needed as part of the turn order, using the ships battle map, and the pilot can move the ship around, and attack as well.
Also here's a fun monster idea to play around with. Living Cannon Ball: 4hp, 15 ac, 500ft movement. 1str 20dex 10con 1int 1wis 1chr (size tiny) The living cannonball remains inert until told to attack a creature or object its maser can see, and loaded into a cannon. When activated, it will pursue its target relentlessly. It's Initiative is always last. Actions/Abilities: Detonate- The cannonball deals 4d8 thunder damage, half of that on a successful save (dc 15 con), destroying itself in the process. The Weapon Knows Where It Isn't- The cannonball has truesight. Delayed Blast- The cannonball detonates after 4 rounds of being activated. (optional) Telegraph- The cannonball glows moments before detonating. Any creature that can see it may make an opportunity attack against it if it's within their range, potentially preventing the explosion.
Thank you Eric! Between Spelljammer and the One D&D playtest, there is so much negativity around the stuff we are getting. It seems like any time a cool thing comes out, fans of that thing shout it down. I joke with my wife, who is a big Star Wars fan, that the definition of a "Star Wars fan" is a person who aggressively dislikes any new Star Wars. I'm starting to worry that the D&D community is headed the same way.
How bout you both stop fanboying. This is a setting about magical shops that allow realm to realm travel. That's it. There's no realm of their own to build. And in this setting entirely about ships, there's very little in there about how to use ships. Covering up for lazy, profit grabbing is a joke. You dummies are literally praising them for low effort lol
QUESTION: Coming from someone who did play AD and D, I agree with you and that's how I played spell jammer long ago in the before time. I skipped a lot of rules and went more narrative. But I don't have the new books and I have a question about facing. What are the rules in 5th edition when it comes to sea combat? If I understood you in this video, Spell jammers can just turn on a dime? Dose size not come into question? Spell jammer was based on sea combat. The name spelled jammer actually comes from the sailing term "windjammer" .
I think what is missing is that the original ad&d 2e Spelljammer modules where designed to play on a hex grid map and therefore had more detailed combat rules. You needed to find facing and direction on a 3d space represented on a 2d play mat. I do agree with you that the simplification of the rules allows for more fun and engaging original gameplay moments. One of my main things with this rule set is there a range for weapons like ballista and cannon fire, where as in ad&d 2e it specifically states that there is a range, but if the shot misses then the projectile will continue on until acted upon by another force or strikes something. But this is something that is easily fixed and brought in under house rules. I would imagine that you could just use ship 2 ship combat form ocean faring ships but with 3 dimensions instead of being on a flat plane…
What's crazy to me about stickers for the old rules is like, are you seriously telling me that the magic ship powered by someone's brain, firing magic guns, is legitimately neutered by like, simple facing and positioning rules like "sorry that gun can only fire due north!" You're out of your mind. It's space magic, in space, against magic space monsters. And again, you're flying a spaceship with a chair you practically plug your brain into. We don't need all those rules. We need engagement distances, flow of combat clarifers, and that's about it.
No. But what dose is how bare it is and how little it actualy helps DM. Heck there arent even a small generation table set for new solar systems to jump start crative process if you need it.
Tbh i would air on the side of wanting more rulings, because that in itself can help with the creative process. On a more anecdotal note, I find it funny how you brought up how easy it is to bring things from earlier editions of D&D specifically spell jammers from AD&D cause honestly as a person who only got into the dnd on 5th edition and never felt the need to look at previous editions I didn't know spell Jammers was a thing in the past so if I were to want a setting like spell jammers I would have either homebrewed a lot or try a completely different system
I understand your point of view of simplicity gives freedom to the DM, but generally the rules are there for game balance and the problem with not having enough rules in the book has nothing to do with whether you're playstyle is cinematic or your play style is simulation war table. The real crux of it is a player and DM often don't see eye to eye when it comes to interpretations of rules The rules are there to try to mitigate those in table arguments about balance versus reality. if I were to tell you as an example that the rules state if you float outside the air envelope you have one minute of air from a generated air envelope that is floating around you, but that generated an air envelope around you actually has much more than a minute's worth of air plus going foul much more time available about 145 minutes. this is physics versus game balance. and this is just an example of why the rules are rules so that gameplay can be smooth and balanced between players and GM if you just say willy nilly and cinematic storyline then you might as well not have dice at all and stand around and each tell a story. what you interpret as easy to find the rules by looking at certain sections some other player may interpret those differently and it becomes less fun as a group when players argue with players about how rules and conditions interact plus it makes it even more difficult on the DM if you have a player that is argumentative or rules lawyery. My disappointment in the book has to do with not the fact that it's a great world it's a great description but they really do need a more robust rule set that can be optional just so that balance of gameplay happens. just reading the rules as written in that book and that book alone, I can see several ways to exploit those rules to make it not fun for everyone but have an auto succeed situation in most combats. Plus with how fast those ships move and how helms work pirates have a severe advantage because as long as they have a fast ship no ship can ever get away from them. like I said I could debate each rule and each non-rule description and if flavor is meant to be a rule or flavor is meant to be flavor again it goes on interpretation and everyone has a different interpretation and that is what bogs down the game when the DM and player versus other player versus DM all disagree on interpretation. and I like the setting I just hate how rules light it is and I don't want to have to rebuild an entire set of rules from a previous edition in order to just make it balanced for all players and make sure all players have fun.
It's interesting. You pick on the "wargaming" aspect of the old spelljammer rules. However, I have found 3rd and and newer to be much more "wargamey" than AD&D was for normal combat. The high reliance of detailed movement for miniatures that was largely introduced in 3rd ed. always felt a lot more restrictive (and very slow) for combat than I ever experienced in AD&D, where every group I played with used miniatures for rough placement and went with what worked in the theatre of the mind over trying to measure it. You complain about facing and movement when it comes to ships but don't argue it in general combat in D&D? (edit modified 3.5 to 3rd ed for clarity - I largely regard them as the same).
I’d rather have too much info and too many things to think about because I can grasp it eventually during play. What I don’t want is too little information to the point the players find everything to do that’s not in the rules. Players will always want to do things that will make you search the rules to figure out how that idea works. To make my case, I still don’t know how to run chases. Im not the brightest DM, but I would prefer more information that tell me what can happen and various rules so I can not bore my players and hate chase moments.
You're the only UA-camr I've seen that actually says pretty much what I've been thinking. I've been saying this on a lot of videos about the new Spelljammer books. I think the more rules in a book then the more restricting the game feels. People look for rules so that they know what to go off of but usually during games these rules are only there for when things get serious. The rest of the time rules change or are ignored based on the story that unfolds during play. If there was a huge book all about space fighting then I would probably never touch Spelljammer 5e. The idea of playing in space is bc space is cool and so much can happen that you can say "it's space". Fighting with ships should be simple. The story of what is in space should be the focus and thinking about if there is air or not air in space muddies everything and makes it too difficult. I also believe that Gary made this game and built on it with new editions from suggestions and ideas of people who were playing and homebrewing. D&D to it's core is a game with a foundation of rules but other than the rules it's all up to the players. It's a game that you want to do anything in yet a lot of people want rules. if there are too many rules then you cannot do anything you want. 5e is what D&D is supposed to be (to me). Less rules, less construction and more up to the people playing. It allows you to do anything without feeling like you are not playing D&D anymore. Without rules it wouldnt be fun either. Like playing cops and robbers. your friend keeps making things up and now the robber can fly and now the cop has telekinesis. It gets boring bc you can do anything without consequences and then you don't want to play cops and robbers anymore. No risks, no limitations. So it's good to have a foundation of rules that give you some limitations like whether this character can/can't fly or this one can/can't have telekinesis.
See, the thing is that these books ultimately exist to help the dm with technical aspects of running the game. And if someone wants to have more complicated ship on ship battle, it would be very rude to tell them that they just need to loosen up theri style of running the game or whatever. They easily could've touched on mechanical aspects of running ship on ship heavy encounter without adding additional 20 pages, just a little bit to help out the dm. If we can't have even that, there is something very wrong going on
In my game the helmsman casts ship-to-ship offensive spells. Since 1 hull point equals 10 hit points, spells cast from the helm do ten times the damage. Now it's a fight between super space wizards, but with the AC and HP of their ships.
So buy our book $$$$ for our game system and make up the rules for all the rules that are not there. Yes, I am all for giving and encouraging the DM to make rules up for their table but at least give a framework. Right out the gate 5e was an incomplete game ( I am looking at you, no regular naval ship combat rules) and this clearly shows WOTC is all about options and bloat for the players an no support for the DM. It is a shame as many of the bare rules of 5e are elegant but every release after Xanathar’s had drive me away from this version of the game.
You find 'what position your ship is facing' and all the rules boring? Have you ever played DnD 5e? There are all sorts of rules about combat in DnD 5e: initiative, advantage/disadvantage, surprise, attacks of opportunity, cover, disengaging, prone condition, grappling, spell casting, reactions, bonus actions, movement, saves, KO, etc. The PHB has 10 pages devoted this combat, not including spell mechanics, abilities, feats, skills, etc, listed elsewhere in the book. Should we have just "made all that up" coz we're, I don't know, DMs? I expect 5e, a system, to have a, I don't know, SYSTEM.
wotc could "fix" this very easly. make a "tactical combat rules" pdf for free on D&D beyond and the wotc websight if you want the rules everyoen will have access to them if not forget about them and play as you have.
Having played AD&D, it was often very complex and confusing, **so** confusing the DM would often just skim the info, then just wing it. It **was** based on war games. *TSR's* full name was *Tactical Studies Rules.* The amount of rules, some of them seemingly contradictory, were endless. When 3e came out there was a collective sigh of relief from the D&D players and DMs because **so much** was edited down to to be far more understandable and clear. When 3.5e came out, there was a huge jump in participation because the threshold was so much lower and it was far more easy to get into. Also, there is lots of info about ship-to-ship combat in the 5e DM guide and Saltmarsh that are **perfectly** adaptable to Spelljammer. Just use your imagination to fill in the gaps and make extrapolations. And if you hate it, fine, but plenty of people are having fun, so let them, will ya?
I don't want more crunch, but I would like a few more suggestions for how they envision the setting to work. I haven't picked up the books yet, but from the reviews I've seen the speed of ships seems frustratingly vague, especially for how close you can get to something before it forces you to slow down. The free Spelljammer Academy adventure seems to imply that your ship can't fly past a couple of space eels without them disrupting the "warp drive" enough to force you to slow down and deal with them. The free adventure also has skill challenges to navigate your ship, but I haven't seen anyone mention that being a part of the rules in this book. I'm still going to pick it up eventually, and may even try to run the adventure, but it feels like I (a relatively inexperienced GM) will have some basic questions that will not be answered by this book.
It's not about having simple or complex rules. It's about getting ALL the players involved in the operation of the ship, both in and out of combat. Too many times i have seen a spelljammer game where the pilot was the only one really doing anything. The main problem i see is the lack of "fighters" that can give multiple players a chance to act, coordinate, ect. As it stands, a player can man a gun, but does it use his skill? You can load a weapon with a barbarian, but is there any special action or benefit for doing so? If you give players the choice of sitting around on a ship while a battle happens you are going to find yourself in a loop of boarding actions that closer resemble a dungeon delve one shot on repeat. Perhaps if each player had a ship it could go a long way to improve the combat, although it may not be the combat type everyone likes ("Hey barbarian, guess what.. your ranged fighter now"). As for "everything you need for ship combat" I must disagree with you, I can appreciate simple but a certain level of grounding in rules is needed. Most of this is there yes, but the lack of turning rate and firing arks is not a plus in my book. What if a ship wants to split it's fire between two targets? Or if you have a ship with cannons on either side but want to fire them all at the same target? Does the ship do an amazing spin on the spot? If a fighter has two actions and enough movement speed can they load two weapons? The ways the rules work now a ship can, in one turn, do a 180 and fire on a ship then do another 180 and use its full movement then, if they want , spin the ship again to defend weak points. This seems a bit much for a ship that is as big as those ships are.I'm not saying there needs to be a rule for everything but there needs to be more of a base system to give dm's more to work with. Charging us that price for something you yourself pointed out that "we don't need" is the exact point that is making everyone not like this product. We didn't need this... we could have adapted SJ ourselves and had more to work with. Why are they selling us what feels like a half hearted attempt. If they were too busy with DnD one to give SJ the attention it needed then they should have waited to develop it until they could spend more time and get more feedback. To me all this has done is shown me that there is little interest in developing spelljammer outside of making a quick buck off of us for little effort. Sorry if this is too salty but ya kinda triggered me there. Please don't think it is an attack on you or your views it's just that i have always loved the idea and setting of spelljammer and was really hoping for more than a cheesy watered down remake.
I don't mind that they leave some things for the dm but the fact is they couldn't take the time to flush out space combat in a sci Fi campaign setting that includes spaceships. Just seems a bit bullshit especially for what they charged for the books. I think a lot of us where hoping for updates to the ship combat in ghosts of salt marsh
I still think that it's way too little. Calling it an adventure in space and then I have to wing it all... I canceled my order and I'll pick up what I need on dnd beyond.
I thought it was fine. I didn’t have any problems as I was reading through the book with my kids but I was a little disappointed with the size because I thought that, since it was a boxed set, it would be three full sized books. I guess that’s what I get from preordering. I thought it was cheaper as a pre-order and that the price would go up after they came out. I just think that the boxed set was a little misleading.
I agree with everything you are saying. My only complaint is the books are smaller than I'd like which means there aren't things like new subclasses and magic items. I don't need everything spelled out world wise more like give me more weird open ideas. I was 4 sessions into a spelljammer campaign when the book came out so I don't need more rules, but fun ideas that I'd be here for
Wait, so you're not familiar with ADND and you found the supplementary rules for (essentially) spaceships confusing? I would expect so? "That's called being a DM" - If people wanted a proper rules light system they'd be playing it, and not a TTRPG where the communities favourite books are all filled with mechanics. If we're making all this shit up ourselves then there's no need for WotC to sell us lorebooks, and especially no need for random dudes on youtube talking about the rules that don't exist.
You nailed it on the head when you said nobody needed to wait for 5e Spelljammer because 2e already existed and I'll add that conversion from ad&d to 5e is easy. I also agree that there is plenty of info for ship to ship combat in 5e Spelljammer, I don't understand the hate it's getting for combat. I DO understand the hate it's getting for lack of tables for stellar system creation, that was lazy writing on their part.
I’ve literally been spending the last two years making a homebrew 5e setting inspired by OG Spelljammer. I really don’t care about the new book one way or another, I’ve spent two years handling most of that stuff and I’m not gonna throw that work down the drain. I’ll be honest in saying I have no idea what other people’s issue is with it, but not because the issue doesn’t exist, but because I’m approaching the game in MY way and they’re approaching it in THEY’RE way. I’ve got no skin in the game.
Yes I have been playing since the AD&D, but I never got into Spelljammer back in the day. My problems with the new Spelljammer rules go far beyond ship to ship combat. But on that note - they honestly could have repurposed the materials from Saltmarsh and the Saltmarsh UA and it would have been an improvement. Some more direction would have been helpful. My problem is the entire travel/wildspace rules seem to have been put together by people who have no clue what kind of distances are involved in interstellar travel. I understand keeping things simple, but they seem to have pulled numbers out of the air purely in the name of simplicity. There is no benefits to "We have a faster ship" or "Our ship has a bigger air-pocket" or "We have a crew of 1/2 auto-gnomes so we won't deplete our air as fast" With 100,0000,000 miles/day you're looking at 30+ days travel to leave a normal solar system. To get to the closest star would be 683 years. Yes, I can work around this too...but that is making a crutch for things that I shouldn't HAVE to work around. Am I going to use these rules and handwave my way around their weaknesses - probably if my group is ever interested in a Spelljammer campaign. Am I annoyed that I'm going to have to re-do lots of the rules sections because they didn't put the work in that they should have? Yes. I'm not expecting (or wanting) the huge sections on ship to ship combat that we had previously, but I don't want to have to rewrite large sections of the rules just because they didn't put in minimum amount of work they should have. It shows a lack of care about what they were putting out.
I am fine with simple rules. These are not simple rules, they are non-existent rules. Simple rules are: "Spelljammers operating a Spelljammer Helm can sense objects around them in wildspace/astralspace/normal space as they travel via the magic of the helm, unless the object is attempting to remain undetected. An entity can attempt to remain undetected in an effort to hide, sneak past, or close with another entity undetected by blending in with the background currents by succeeding at a Stealth(Dexterity) check versus the targets Passive Perception or Perception(Wisdom) if the target has reason to believe something is present; this roll is made at disadvantage if the target's hp is 1/2 or less the maximum hp of the sneaking entity and at advantage if the target's hp is x2 or more the maximum hp of the sneaking entity. A Spelljammer that detects another object can estimate the mass of the object (the GM should give a rough mass size based on an object's description and maximum hp) and if the object is moving. " Another: "An entity who has detected another object in wildspace/astralspace/normal space may as a move action choose to do one of the following three options: 1. decrease the distance to the object, 2. increase the distance to the object, or 3. maintain the distance to the object. Each of these is done by succeeding at a Space Vehicle (Intelligence) check for non-creatures or Athletic (Strength)/Acrobatics(Dexterity) check for creature; this roll is made at disadvantage if the target's move speed is x1.5 or more the move speed of the acting entity and at advantage if the target's move speed is 1/2 or less the move speed of the acting entity. The GM should let the acting entity automatically succeed without a check if the object is either unable to or chooses not to oppose this action." Possibly make this check require 5 move actions or only occur once every 30 secs in game. Possible GM discretion on frequency of the check. I chose a move action as Jammers will be sitting the helm not using it anyway effectively free like in the book or its a creature using its movement anyway. Last one: "If an entity has decreased the distance to an object enough that their air bubble will merge with the objects air bubble, the entity may as free action merge the air bubbles and gravity fields without negative effect by succeeding at a Space Vehicle (Intelligence) check for non-creatures or Athletic (Strength)/Acrobatics(Dexterity) check for creature; this roll is made at disadvantage if the target's hp is x2 or more the maximum hp of the merging entity and at advantage if the target's hp is 1/2 or less the maximum hp of the merging entity. A failed roll means that the entity attempting to merge the envelops is slammed by the sudden collision of atmospheres and gravity and takes bludgeoning damage equal to the 1d6 for every 50 hp of the target object to a minimum of 1d6; any crew on a crewed entity must make a Strength or Dexterity Save or take bludgeon damage equal to half that of their vessel and get knocked prone. The GM should let the acting entity automatically succeed without a check if the object is either unable to or chooses not to oppose this action as the entity can gradually merge the two air bubbles over 1 minute. The diameter of this new merged bubbles is increased to the sum of the combined sizes of the various merged bubbles, and the air quality of the entity with the smaller air bubble is increased or decreased by one step based on the air quality of the entity with the larger air bubble (two steps if the entity's air bubble is x2 or more the size). An entity may attempt to exit a merged air bubble by successfully increasing the distance to an object." I figured adding some risk to effectively initiating combat would be more exciting with some risk. In order to give them purpose, only siege weapons may be used prior to the merging of the air bubbles. Simple, very 5e, but actually gives players and GMs something to bite into. Once the air bubbles are merged, the GM uses standard combat rules and movement or adapts Salt Marsh.
Thank you!!! I play a lot of genesys as well, and Savage Worlds. I play D&D for a hybrid of the two Tactical narrative play. I love that so much is left up to the DM so I can take my players input and make it our game. The designers have said they are focused on narrative theatre of the mind. Spelljammer fits that perfectly. Do I wish there was a bigger gazetteer, yes. But Chris Perkins said that they would like to add more to spelljammer if there is enough response for it. I think the fact they own Dndbeyond gives them more options to just drop a pdf of spelljammer info, like they did with that monstrous compendium. I m excited and love the new take
My group plays Theatre of the mind and what was in the Spelljammer book was something less than desired. There was no inspiration tables to help create your own wildspace systems, the random encounters tables were kinda lacking ect.... it still felt very empty on the story telling front. For a set that cost me $100AUD I kinda expected more to work with.
Many complaints I’ve seen were bad at expressing what they feel is missing. I went in only expecting ship stats and combat rules and wasn’t disappointed. Requests for more varied combat actions gives me an idea, tho. I’ll reflect more after using the rules more in play, but after reading the books, I’d have liked more material to help run space exploration; the “running out of air” rules ask for it, to me. Tips on how to arrange a map that tests players’ ability to plot courses to maintain/refresh air and rations, gives rules on braving asteroid fields and mysterious gravity wells. I don’t feel there’s enough guidance on how to build maps to test and run resource management exploration in the DMG, either, tho. I wonder if all that’s needed is a good example of that type of play.
I don’t think it’s fair to say that “5e is always simple, what did you expect?”
Hell, Descent into Avernus is just an adventure and isn’t primarily focused on vehicles and it still had like 5 pages of rules on driving Infernal War Machines in combat. So, yeah, I would expect a setting focused on spaceships in a game focused on combat to have rules for spaceship combat that make it worth doing.
Because that is where a chase mechanic should be. Bounded in a detailed module encounter. In the adventure modules where the rubber hits the road for premade content narratives. Modules have often pushed the envelope within the scope of their narrative. I hope the designers made it fun for that right set of reasons and not to create global rule sets. It may be fun to use that module idea elsewhere. Like Saltmarsh. But my tables don't like it. I have been at one table that did we enjoyed it, and that's why I ran it and never found a table that completely enjoyed it. Maybe 1 in 5 people enjoyed it as is. I had to continually spice up local hand to hand ship space to keep most of the table energized. In a base settings book I don't need that sort of thing. I played original Spelljammer and it was appropriate for the 2e setting (and recall that they added more complex battle rules 2.5 years later. The higher spell rater the faster your ship... you just outran everything on the straightaway or you didnt. 2e combat systems mentions lead with a warning that your players (they often cite half) may not like detailed ship battles. Sonas a DM be prepared to adjust... See the spacefarers guide's combat section. First paragraphs warning then they spend a paragraph each explaining each starting with not doing tactical combat! By the way that came out at the same time as the work captain's companion. Which had the complex battle rules in the 31ish page book 3 of that box if you were not aware. Even in that book dedicated to crunchy combat options. There were moments that it warns against going too far. Reminding dance that they don't have to do this... Always a warning about crunchy ship to ship battles and that is for a reason. Half the people I've ever played in 2e (crunchy crunch) did not want to play out ship to ship battles after the first attempt. They wanted the Gruberman experience (when do I get to kick some...). "Just tell me when to roll player initiative." Is what half the table would say and let the crunchy half have a go at ship to ship. It was rare a set of players actually enjoyed the full crunchy tabletop wargaming ship to ship battle experience. Because there were waayyy better games out there that handled it so much better. And why not play those!!! And they were fun to focus on that scale of battle. And it wasn't about your players perspective. This is why the D&D battle systems stuff never really took off. It's not what people were playing D&D. If they wanted the experience they would go to Warhammer. I didn't think battle system was all that bad but once again nobody really wanted to sit down and do that slog. It just wasn't a great tabletop organic system. It was all right. But it used all my D&D stuff so we played it...
Yo, as a DM who does a good chunk of homebrew I understand and agree with your sentiment to a point. Not every scenario is going to be covered by the rules and that is fine. There will be gaps. But the two examples you bring up regularly in this video is 5e vs AD&D. The problem with the spell jammer book is that it doesn't even live up to the 5e rules precedent set by itself. There is a HUGE middle ground between 1 and half pages vs 20 pages that would have been more in line with previous 5e rule sets. As far as the narrative experience goes, the rules, in my opinion, are there to facilitate the story but the rules can only do that if they are comprehensive enough and FUN enough. In ship to ship combat we could at least have rules that allow the players to actually DO things. Just being told what is happening with nothing for the player to do (literally if you are manning a mangonel cause you are a barbarian and have no decent ranged options you are essentially doing nothing) isn't fun or exciting either. Spell Jammer wasn't a complete wash, far from it, but it failed terribly on the ship combat front, which is a HUGE portion of Spell Jammer. It's one thing to add mechanics to a system to make it robust, it's another to offer mechanics that are nearly non-existent and honestly bad on their own and force me as a DM to completely re-write them. I don't need everything spelled out, every rule to be crunchy or complicated, but I would like, if WotC is going to play at selling us rules (which is literally the point of D&D as a game system) then there should be actual rules provided in the product. I mean you are right that I don't need any of the source books to make a story, taking that to inth degree, then what do I need any of the books for? What we got in the spelljammer book is far far too close to that line.
Learn to format. Your wall of text is annoying to look at.
Well said
I def agree with Nathan here. There is a balance to RPG design. You want it light enough to not bog down the story, but also want it robust enough for players to chew on. The chew prompts more adventures, and helps form engaging decisions. For me, it's less about needing bloated rules for every circumstances, and more about the need for more chew.
What Nathan said is pretty much hitting the nail on the head. I don't need everything given to me as a DM, but for $70 (or $40 off Amazon) I expect to be given a number of tools and options to use in my games. The worst part is that they could have just used the ghost of saltmarsh ship rules that already exist. Frankly that book, which is supposed to be mainly an adventure collection, provides about as much, or in some cases more rules and lore as Spelljammer.
And speaking of lore, and want a lot more of that in the book too. Ebberon has a ton packed in that book that you can get ideas for and use. And Spelljammer just feels empty. It's got a lot of cool ideas for starting points, and I'm going to have fun with it, but again. It's an expensive book. If it was like a $20-25 set I don't think anyone would have an issue. Call them "setting jumpstart books" and they could get away with this.
Also agree. And you don’t need to compare to AD&D, saltmarsh I think is the best example. You can have simple enough, rich enough to give you the feeling you are part of a crew when your actions can make a difference, without becoming cumbersome.
And as others have mentioned is a plus priced product! Not a supplement…
It was rushed and you can tell. That’s my opinion.
I think what most people that where upset about spell jammer 5e was that they wanted ship to ship combat. The box text basically just says to not focus on ship to ship combat which is what many people wanted out of a game that focuses on ships.
I've had the same issue with Ghosts of Saltmarsh. Really wanted to include ship-to-ship combat fun. Takes at least a week of googling trusted homebrew sites combined with official to hammer out making sense and fun. Even then, I'm on my toes all the time with new shit I gotta take a best guess at. lol. Spelljammer is too damned short.
The problem is most D&D players don't want ship to ship combat. They may say they want it, but ship to ship combat tends to be the DM and 1-2 players playing with the rest of the party occasionally making a roll. I've run and played a lot of games with space or ship combat. The best games were Star Wars games where everyone had a turret on the main ship or Starfighter. Even well written games like Rogue Trader suffered from the combat being boring for most of the players. It got boring for the Astropath, Navigator, and Tech Priest. Sure they could do repairs, raise morale, or assist with targeting, but they had no agency in the combat. Still most of the time they just did whatever the captain said.
So I understand why the dev are like just close and board. It's what is going to make the largest number of players happy.
@@samflory I agree the DM needs to make sure everyone is involved but that is true of any adventure.
@@DabroodThompson I give them a lot of credit, because it seems like the WotC writers threw up their hands after trying and said just close to boarding. It seem a little much to expect that the WotC writers are going to magically be better than other game devs in this regard.
I think the issue is people want a space d&d game, which spelljammer is not. A spellcaster is way more suited to take on another ship than a ship will ever be. A high level fighter is going to do more damage than a ship. If you were actually in space and forced to be inside a ship it would be a different story
I never played EITHER system, but here's what you sound like:
"I never went to a 3 star restaurant and had a 14 course meal. I come from the McDonalds system where you get rubberized sprinkle goo and have little toy prizes in your pop soda. Restaurants sound so boring and difficult"
I'm afraid the point was missed a bit. I'm someone who pretty much started with 5e. I am also not among the people who are complaining about the book just about everywhere they can.
But I can tell what the problem is. WotC wants to make 5e simple, which is fine. But maybe they are making it too simple? Or rather, leaving for us to make the rules that are harder to design?
*There is a textbox that literally says that a PCs weapons and spells often work better than the ship's weapons.* It makes me question, did they just figure the game design for the ship's weapons was bad but didn't have the resources to make it viable? Now it is up to me to do spend hours and hours across a whole month to try to figure out how to make them at least worth using?
As a game designer myself, I can't help but feel there is an issue with the current direction WotC is taking with D&D. What is the worth of the official books? Shouldn't it be something made by a team of designers that know the game inside out? People that would be able to design mechanics better than we ever could? Or that the very least, design them so we don't have to spend hours and hours over a month or two designing the mechanics ourselves?
Personally, I think the reason people are getting mad at the latest releases is that, and you might disagree with me on this, the books are getting simpler, but the pricing stays the same. Then we either have to make do with what we got or we spend many hours trying to get to the point we hoped we would have gotten from that price.
*Basically, it's getting harder to justify buying the official books when so much of the legwork we end up doing ourselves or by buying books from other sources.* Now I'm off to go back to trying to figure out how to make ship to ship battles actually fun rather than it being about just trying to board the enemy ship like the official book suggests is the best option.
I think it’s just that big spells will do more than siege weapons once in range.
The weapons are still fine.
The rules for ship to ship combat exist in 5e, but people complained about them when ghosts of Saltmarsh came out so the dev team didn't bother reprinting them here.
If you really want to see where the problem with ship combat rules lies go watch the span of episodes in the second critical role campaign where they spent 3 months at sea searching for Fjord's backstory. The D&D team had just put out a UA detailing ship combat rules with all the mechanical crunch you could ever ask for. Matt Mercer spent at least a week studying and learning all the ins and outs of the ship combat rules. He crafted a ship vs ship encounter where the players had to take out the pirate ship chasing them. The encounter started... and then ended 20 seconds later when one of the clerics cast control water and slammed the pirate ship sideways onto some nearby rocks. Matt Mercer looked directly into the camera, apologized to the guy whose name was first on the ship vs ship UA credits, and then put the minis away.
That's the playtesting that lead to these books not having mechanics focused rules in them. No ship vs ship system they come up with can compete with spell casters casting 3rd level spells.
@@CitanulsPumpkin in water sure, but even in space?
it took a long time for shipboard weaponry (even cannons) to be very effective. We tend to think of ship to ship combat as "Age of sail" which was really the very end of the technology. What happened in the Napoleonics is not representative of the HUNDREDS of years of sailing vessels that came before. boarding being more effective than ships weaponry fits with human experience.
@@thedamnyankee1 I agree with you! Which is why these books are such a slap in the face. This is literally neon space fantasy. If they wanted to say "hey, you don't need books, you can figure this out, see above/previous commentary on ships in general" that would be totally fine.
But if they're going to put out a glossy triple book package, I presumed when I bought it that money was FOR something. Ray guns. Sentient plasmoid cannons that stick ships together to make them easier to board. Giant ships that can eat other ships. A toolbox or table so DMs can make ships or ship actions on their own more easily.
The whole point of a supplement IMHO is to make the DM's job easier and give them tools to accelerate what is already a lot of work. These books fail on both accounts and instead feel like a cash grab where they didn't put in the creative sweat to do something new.
I was most disappointed in the lack of new spells, magic items, feats, and sub classes. It’s such a huge alien campaign setting and we don’t have new material in the book to spice up the classes.
This is fair criticism
Very fair especially subclasses seem obvious.
Also here criticism about it not healthy for wizards dedicating a lot of pages to player opinions in each new campaign book. Takes away the already laking pages dedicated to things to inspire adventures. The counter argument is why not add more pages, but there are a lot of monetary and practical problems the common consumer don’t want to deal with.
@@stephenlucas8836 I hear you, I think if they come in the box they should do paperback books to save cost and make them longer, maybe cut the screen too if it means longer books I really like this one but if it was that or bigger books...
@@L337P1R4735 The problem I think right now is that Wizards found an effective pattern and not willing to experiment to much with its. The book was aready an experiment with seeing how splitting a setting book into three separate books would work out (the Idea is that the player can read over the wild space and ship rules while GM can focus on the adventure).
We need a lot more complaining from the community before they give a bigger the page count.
You are absolutely right in that D&D, as a system, is NOT about cumbersome ship vs ship battles and is more suited for engaging in toe to toe boarding combat. So let's look at what the book offers for that type of gameplay. For character options, the Astral Adventurer's Guide gives you 6 new races, 2 backgrounds, 3 magic items, and 2 spells; one of which exists for the sole purpose of creating one of the aforementioned magic items...and that's it. NO new character classes or class archetypes. NO new weapons or firearms (which feels weird when you consider one of the new races is all about using firearms). NO new general equipment, NO magical item upgrades for Spelljamming ships, etc.
Other content creators aren't only complaining about the lack of a detailed ship to ship combat system. It's the lack of overall content and character options for DMs and players alike.
Let's look at the 'section' for Creating a Wildspace System. It's on page 20. A meager three sentence paragraph which says 'A typical Wildspace system has a sun plus a number of planets and moons orbiting it. Two examples of Wildspace systems are described in the accompanying adventure handbook. Use them as models when creating your own Wildspace system.' That's it in its entirety. No randomized generation tables, no list of example anomalies or features of interest one could encounter in Wildspace, there's literally nothing. Any DM worth their salt regularly makes up this sort of stuff on their own but having official material to work with as a baseline makes it a LOT easier, and it gives players and DMs alike a mutual understanding of what sort of things they might encounter during gameplay. You can't fault people for being unhappy when a sourcebook they paid money for tells them 'do it yourself.'
Lastly, the book is VERY short. It's 64 pages long and about half of that is art. Which is nice. I LIKE when a book has a lot of art. It's a good source of inspiration. But it feels like so much has been cut from this book both in terms of content AND production value. Let's look at one of the pages you presented in your video. Page 25. It talks about crashing and the cost of ship repairs, and when you turn the page it goes right into stats and layouts for different types of Spelljamming ships with NO introduction or splash page. I flipped back because I thought two pages had to have gotten stuck together or something, but no. It goes from page 25 to 26. And that's not the only time I had that feeling while reading this book. It feels rushed. Incomplete. And there's nothing wrong with warning others when a product might not contain everything a potential buyer might be looking for.
This in its entirety. “Just homebrew it/use the older books/use Ghosts of Saltmarsh” or whatever is entirely unrelated to whether or not the supplement is good, and in fact saying that is proof in and of itself that the paying customer isn’t getting what they want out of their $70 product. Oberoni fallacy at work.
Yeah they cut a ton out of the books. I am now under the impression there is something going on how these books were made, involving 32 pages and 64 page books. They have some sort of process where those page counts are easier to make. Where did I get those numbers? 32 page rulebook in both starter sets, 64 page counts on Lost Mine of Phandelver and the Spelljammer books, and it also double 32.
@@draco949 I worked at a magazine years ago and there's a very good reason for hitting page numbers, and it has to do with book layout, publishing costs, and editing. At the magazine we would rearrange pages to include more artwork, or shrink it down, just to fit on the page. We would work with writers to help them rewrite their text so it would fit on the pages. This is a problem with physical media only, and doesn't affect electronic media.
You nailed it. Well done, Sir (or Madame).
That is a very good point, for the RRP of this you can buy 2 or 3 *entire game systems* and here you get 3 magic items and 2 spells? For an entire setting? Sure, you could say well really it only costs 45 but that's still 1 or 2 complete RPGs... As an outsider looking in, I feel like they should change their tagline to "The world's most expensive roleplaying game".
The problems isn't that the rules are simple - it's that they don't make sense.
'Long range distance is X' is simple, and I like it. BUT 500ft is a dumb when movement is rarely above 50ft and the book states (paraphrase) 'you should just have fights on board a ship.'
If fights should mostly be hand2hand, it means the writers conceded that they couldn't make ship2ship fun enough. By making ship2ship so far away for long distance it means that fights will either never be long distance (always within 500ft) or when they are, they will take forever because damage from ships is low and hp for sails is high.
And Air Bubble is a nearly useless spell entirely based on GM discretion. The spell creates a bubble of fresh air. If a player ends up in a larger air envelope - even if that air envope isn't fresh air - "their air envelopes merge, and the quality of the air around the smaller body changes to match that of the larger body." So the spell is only helpful in full wildspace. On a derelict with foul air? Air Bubble won't help RAW.
But all that is secondary. You can handwave that with house rules and we honestly had half this stuff since GoS anyways. You know what new GMs need really help with? Inspiration and Encounters. There is very little (not zero, just little) in the way of space hazards, encounters, and ideas to inspire new GMs who read this book.
How do I make a system? Oh, uhh... make a sun... and some planets... and you're done. Go to this other book for an example. Nothing about asteroid belts, denizens, no charts or tables or walk through process, just 'here's a system in another book.'
You called it smaller than the AD&D one. It's also smaller than all of the 5E ones. Had they spent 20 more pages on inspiring GMs in the Adventurers Guids (honestly, I could have done without half the player options and I'm a PLAYER predominantly - we already have 100 races and the two spells sucked as previously mentioned), 20 more on monsters (and displayed them prominently in the Adventurers Guide (they did good in the adventure at least), and 20 more pages in the adventure to shore up an epilogue. 60 more pages overall still puts it square in the middle of page count with all the other books.
Instead they put out a poor product. The page count alone tells you it was rushed. The lack of thought in areas that needed it most (system creation) shows they don't care about the people they claim to. They had a deadline, and they were going to hit it no matter what.
For WotC actually "fun" rules, it would require efforts and talent from them.
2 things that they severly lack
Actually, Air Bubble is fine RAW. The spell states "The globe [around your head] is filled with fresh air that lasts until the spell ends." That means, even if the air from the bubble diffuses into the fouled air of a vessel, the bubble's fresh air would keep replenishing itself. You could even argue that, RAW, the fouled air envelope of the vessel would become fresh from the continuous defusing of fresh air from the bubble, though I wouldn't make that ruling personally. There IS so much to complain about with this book though, I'm not defending its quality. Just giving you a heads up that the spell can be used effectively RAW for your games :)
If the air replenishes, what does it replenish into? A bubble that is still surrounded by an air envelope of foul/deadly air. So every round it repeats, and the air from the bubble immediately becomes foul/deadly. Your DM (and I would hope all) could rule that you have a moment to suck the free air, or that the bubble is strong enough to stop the merge of air envelopes, but no, RAW - once the air tries to replenish, if you're still in the deadly/foul air envelope it's bigger than your bubble so it would becone deadly/foul again.
I'm sure they wanted you to breathe clean air the whole time, but they screwed up their own rules. Which is weird, because they could have just pulled up the 3 paragraphs they wrote like 15 pages earlier and said 'hrm... does this work? Is there any ambiguity? How do we ensure this 'bubble' works differently than an air envelope so that we can use the specific vs general case?
But no. Just a very poorly thought out spell that btw, isn't even available to the 2 support classes - clerics or bards.
Oh, and Create Spelljamming Helm is only available to Wizards and Artificers. So no clerics, bards, druids, Sorcerers (Clockworks do due to transmutation spell), Warlocks.
Wtf? A FORGE cleric can't even craft a helm. A Life Cleric can't cast an air bubble. They put 2 new spells in and said 'Bards, Clerics, and Warlocks not welcome.' Because Warlock Great Old Ones Pact sounds perfect as a Spelljammer captain. I just hope they don't ever fall overboard or have need of making their own helm...
@@vinspad3 It says "The globe [around your head] is filled with fresh air that lasts until the spell ends." I used the term "replenish" as a way of relating it to your scenario, but RAW within the bubble around your head, that is fresh are until the spell ends, and it can't be fouled.
The rules about air transference is specifically about naturally occuring air envelopes and atmospheres, whereas the bubble produced by the spell is a magical effect, whose description negates the negative aspects of normal air envelope behaviour.
As for your issues with the spell lists, that's where having a party comes in. Your captain CAN be a GOO Warlock, but having another spellcaster on board helps. And "Create Spelljamming Helm" isn't necessary for a crew, since your party can obtain a helm elsewhere.
But yes, there ARE plenty of examples where the rules seem to contradict, or official rulings aren't clear.
For example, read the description of the Spelljamming Helm item, the part where it says to fly at ftl speeds you must be "in space". What does that mean? If it means Wildspace, that means you cannot fly FTL within a planets atmosphere, which means you have to travel the diameter of the planet (the atmospheric heigh described in the book) going at between 25 and 70 ft. per round, which takes several days/weeks, just to get out of the planet's atmosphere. But, if it DOESN'T mean Wildspace, then... what does it mean? Technically, EVERYTHING is space, so it would seem pointless to include it unless there was a "not space" position to be in.
Then theres the shody editing, including a reference to a spell called "Repair Objects" that doesn't exist. Was this a new spell they were going to include, but took it out and forgot to check for references in the adventure? Or how about the map of the Rock of Bral, that has a high class restaurant called "The Man-O-War", a reference to the old name for the Star Moth ship from 2e. EXCEPT, in a completely different district, there is a street called "Man-O-War Street". It doesn't lead to the restaurant, its in a lower class part of town, there's no reason why these two reference the same name. It's clear 2 different writers both made the same reference to the old system, and no one caught it. Or worse, the same writer made the reference twice and didn't catch it! Either way, the shody editorial is present throughout the books.
I think there is a middle ground between 1,5 pages and 20 pages long. I dont think no one is asking for the level of detail that Advanced dungeons and dragons had, but I think 5e spelljaming rules are lacking and it shows. If the rules are "avoid ship-to-ship combat and just move on to boarding" then something is very, very wrong.
The rules are just so vague and blah that it feels low effort. We had basic questions coming up about the pilot and some mechanics and their were no answers. It is evidence of the direction that WoTC wants to go. Make the players figure it all out. The thing about the old spelljammer rules is at least you got rules and could just use what you want. My advice is check out the 3rd party Wildjammer supplement. I mean 60 pages? Come on....like I said, low effort. There is more cardboard than content in the set.
I didn’t have a problem with the stuff in 5e until I read that box text. My group wanted spelljammer just for the ship to ship combat. They get the other combat from every other setting in D&D.
I believe they want use to do ship to ship combat in theater of the mind.
I agree, I feel like the 5e book should have been about 5 pages, which is close to what Ghosts of Saltmarsh has. I will be using those with some modifications.
This! For crying out loud - THIS! Not only that (this), but there are tons of rules labeled "Optional" in all of the books. So why not add some pages of rules that are "Optional" that would give some more complexity to those that want them, and are internally consistent with each other (I know this would take some time to get right, but...). You haven't "forced" anyone to use more complex rules, and you haven't just dumped it on the DMs to either create a system, or retrofit the 2E system.
Well said. This is exactly why I am critical. I wanted something less complicated than 1e but more than what we got. How are chases supposed to work if all ships are able to travel at the same speed? And at the stated speed, increments of 1000, 500, and 250 feet are irrelevant distances being too short time wise to do anything with. I’m not paying $50-$70 to have to make up my own rules. I may be a DM but I have a job. I pay for books so that rule designers (who get paid to do this) can give me thoughtful mechanics to easily enhance my players fun and to save me time. This set may have value but the reason so many are disappointed is because the value is very low in relation to the price and because the expectations that were set, particularly because it wasn’t as if the designers were starting from scratch, were significantly higher than what was delivered.
At around 10 mins you point out "if you wanted to play in spelljammer/eberron you didnt need this or that book you just create it yourself" thats true. which pertains to what im saying next,
if you want to not figure it out yourself but be a DM and just have to tweek it here and there then thats what the official books are for. GoSM and ebberon and avernus and strahd and all these books do that, they give you something to work with in 5e and you can tweek it as a DM.
spell jammer does not do this, i have to make it up myself so its the first time i was like "i didnt need to buy this book, it doesn't have enough rules value to tweek". everything in this book is already in the game as far as i can see? hey heres a spell jamming helm costs 5k use it to move your ship thats it no cool gameplay for ship combat.
Im creating a one shot and my player asked what he could do as a spell jammer all i could tell them was drive? nothing else and the spell jamming helm does the driving for you 90% of the time. nothing special there. what can anyone else do on the ship? nothing but man a siege weapon? captain? optional and no gameplay, crew? optional and no gameplay. for spell jammer its got no gameplay that makes it spell jammer..... just cool themed battle maps. I want cool themed spell jammer mechanics, which i have to make myself. I feel this did not give me cool spell jammer feeling in space.
thats the difference, they didnt try to give us spell jammer cool things in D&D they just said heres a coat of paint. Salt marsh did, ebberon did and avernus did, it had to be tweeked but thats ok i payed for something to tweek not to create my own from scratch.
It begs the question, if his best suggestion is "do it yourself" why are we buying the books or watching his videos about them?
@@Harlizarrd because I am looking for info on how other people are dealing with the problems i am dealing with?
so im watching and reading a bunch of things to try and play spelljammer cause i like the idea and themes and feeling of that setting.
but i didnt want to do all the work myself.
i read it and im like "?" well i guess i have to build that feeling of ship combat and spelljamming giving me and my players a cool feeling of spelljamming through the astral sea and wildspace. now i have to figure out how to make that on my own.
so yes im criticizing WOTC for what they did. because i want them to do better.
give me gameplay mechanics that make me feel like a cool spell jammer controling my ship in space. give me mechanics to make me feel like im a crew of a spell jammer ship.
Consider two scenarios...
1) Your party is on a Lamprey ship and you encounter pirates on a Hammerhead ship. Say the DM decides they are at 1000 feet beyond the range of weapons on either ship. The pirates decide to close toward you to attack. You decide to outrun them. You're now at a stalemate. Since both ships travel at the same speed (35 feet per turn) and the skill of your Spelljammer doesn't matter, it is impossible to close to weapons range. Also since you're less than a mile apart, neither ship can enter Spelljamming speed. So essentially you have no option but to close with them and fight (even if you know you will lose) or keep going in a neverending chase until one of the crews starves or runs out of air.
2) You're navigating wildspace and encounter an asteroid field. Rules as written, you will automatically make it through. Again, if you have a novice spelljammer or one who has a century at the helm, it doesn't matter. Even if we know the odds of navigating an asteroid field are 3720 to 1, it doesn't matter because the spelljammer helm itself magically navigates through it for you. There's nothing amazing or epic feeling about that.
Do we need 2e style rules for navigation and combat? No, certainly as you point out not in this age of D&D. But I do think they went a little too far with turning ship navigation and combat into "Move your flying dungeon close to the other flying dungeon and fight hand-to-hand as you do on the ground." A little more about developing the spelljammer skills would have helped make it feel a little better. Maybe even give them skills with rolls that can affect your ability to avoid environmental dangers, out maneuver the opponent, or give you an advantage in combat and it would have felt more like a space faring ship environment.
1) If your plan is to be able to run or chase people well, choose the Damselfly, Wasp, or Star Moth. They are faster than average. The Damselfly, specifically, is twice as fast as most ships. But, Vehicles (Space) is a tool proficiency introduced in the book. You could always make it a skill contest between the pilots instead of a combat encounter if the players want to run/chase.
2) Again, navigating an asteroid field, set a Vehicle (Space) DC. Have the players role. If they fail, they crash into and asteroid. We have crashing rules.
@@stevemalcolm8507 I think you're absolutely right and if I ever get around to running an adventure in Spelljammer (I suffer from too many ideas/plans :) ) I would probably use some house rules like that. I just feel like if WotC had done more to make the players matter in navigation it might have reduced some of the complaining.
I think it is a bit silly to compare the AD&D rules to the page and a half presented and pretend those are the only two options. I think it is totally fair for people to want something a bit more robust without it being cumbersome.
This would be a bit like if they skimmed the next player manual rules set to 5 pages and you then told people that they are being ridiculous for being upset that they spend $60 dollars on it because the design is deliberately simple.
NO! NO COMPROMISE ALLOWED IN THE WORLD TODAY! /s
I appreciate his opinion on 2e style of spelljammer but during second edition there was a product called the War Captains Compendium that fixed or adjusted a lot of the rules from the original box set regarding ship combat. So I wish he would have reviewed both instead of half of the pie. Plus the main reason 2e was cool because you had to think outside the box as a player versus everything being watered-down and handed to you.
its not silly. its 100% accurate. It SHOULD be simple. Don't want to spend that much? pirate it. simple.
@@Malachi_Marx Basically all of the community dislikes the rules that were published, so you're wrong because there is no value to rules which people do not like to use. It could be well done without being complicated, and people buying books are in the right to complain when they are of poor quality.
I've heard this rhetoric dozens of times before, "Why did you need this book/setting/rules/etc to play the way you wanted?" and you want to know why people wait on this stuff? If 5e was trying to be "accessible" as so many claim, why are there no rules at all most of the time? Your GM/DM already has their hands full creating a world, playing the monsters and other NPCs, and arbitrating the rules and what's ultimately funny is the people defending the lack of most concrete rulings as "accessible". No! If I as a GM have to create the rules, from the ground up, to get ANY of this "system" to run at my table, why did I pay a single cent, let alone $40+ on "The Rules" if it all equates to "Well, if you don't like them, make your own." I didn't pay money to have someone tell me to do something I could have already done, I paid money to have, what I would have assumed, a great deal of the work done so I could get things off the ground without having to spend almost 10 years writing my own Game System to play with my friends. If half-assed rules are what accounts for "accessible" these days, guess I'm going to continue to NOT give Wizards any of my money after the "Core" 3 books since apparently, I've already spent too much as it is. Spelljammer was my hope that Wizards would at least have some kind of Ship-to-Ship Combat rules beyond Ghosts of Saltmarsh which is an ANTHOLOGY, FYI.
A book of rules should include rules. If it is for the GM and not the players, that's fine. The DMG exists solely for that reason. But when a setting is published, and is smaller than every other setting to date, with less rules than even an Anthology has with regards to a mechanic important to that setting, that's a load of bull. I would assume this is why Wizards is going full digital with One D&D so when they decide to create lackluster rulesets and give people nothing, there's no cost to them to print it. They can just pretend there's more on the way and release it as Paid DLC at a later date. Funny how a Tabletop RPG is almost exactly like a Triple A Videogame Publisher for the amount of greedy, underhanded tactics they employ to drain their "loyal" fan's pockets dry.
Part of my issue personally is the lack of lore and other information that would allow me to build a campighn. Sure I can just make it up myself but than why would I pay a dime to wizards than if I'm doing all the work. The fact that it's 70 dollars for about half the page count of a 60 dollar book doesn't help.
Yes. More space lore would have been better. Something more than Rock of Bral. Exactly the real problem in their latest books- all story, no teeth.
Part of the problem is there’s so much lore in 2nd edition Spelljammer. 4 or 5 boxed sets, a Realmspace book, Krynnspace book, Greyspace book, Practical Planetology book… deciding what to put in and what not to is such an issue it appears they went with just the same short version of the Rock of Bral from the original box (it got an entire supplement later). Good news though, all those 2e books are available in pdf from DMsGuild and DriveThruRPG cheap. And a lot is on Spelljammer Wkis.
Welcome to the world of the new "inclusive" D&D, where having base expectations about anything like worldbuilding is taboo and the DM must do ALL the work while paying for consultant-level advice.
Oh, WOTC made sure the would f*ck up the Astral Plane cosmology as well!
@@baynemacgregor8441 But why didn't they print a single thing from the original except the ships. Copy Past
Here's the thing, man. I've been playing D&D for 20ish years, and when I buy a book, I expect it to be one of two things. Either it's going to be character options, items, subclasses and alternate mechanics to enhance my game, or it's going to be lore/setting heavy, and provide a lot of inspiration and material in that regard. Sometimes we get a mix of both, and it's great. This is the first time I've felt like I got neither. It took the ship combat and space travel and said "Hey your DM can decide all that stuff" and then turned around and did the same thing about the entire setting. I was able to glean basically the entire mechanics and lore from a couple of 5 minute promo videos they put out, and that sucks.
Drug addicts doing a money-rip-off are not roleplayer enough to even realize that every DM worth a weekend of time CAN update the original Spelljammer books (that most of us already purchased in at least 2 editions) himself, herself, LGBTQIAself.
I think people were expecting At Least the level of detail given to Sea-based Ship rules as presented in Ghosts of Salt Marsh.
People were expecting to be spoon fed. Really, there's no need to reprint the Saltmarsh rules in Spelljammer when anyone running a campaign revolving around the players living on a ship should be using both books already. Hell, between the ship rules in Saltmarsh and the henchmen/crew and base management rules in Acquisitions Incorporated we had everything needed to run Spelljammer in 5e years ago.
I'm gonna be real with you ship to ship combat rules from Ghost of Saltmarsh don't hold up to a 3rd level spell. At that point you can pretty much take out the mast or just capsize the ship. I know this for a fact because I'm running a seafaring campaign that we plan to transition to spelljammer.
@@CitanulsPumpkin what if you don't own those books?
@@CitanulsPumpkin "just buy like 3 other products to play the thing you bought"
The Saltmarsh rules are properly detailed... But are utter ass to play. Super boring, give players nowhere near enough to do. Tried them once and ended up fast-forwarding the fight since it was just... Not good gameplay at all. You can find much better via homebrew. I was hoping Spelljammer would update these to be more engaging. Nope. Total downgrade.
I would rather be provided with rules & mechanics & not use them, than not be provided and have to try to make them myself (with no idea if they will work well or not) or have to go and find alternate systems & shape them to fit the setting.
I won't be playing with the same group every time, and sometimes having a more mechanics crunchy session can be refreshing even in a narrative focused group. If the books supplied a number of mechanics or optional rules that DMs could pick and choose from to make the most out of what works best for their game, it would be great... instead there seems to be a bare framework present which for a compendium that is supposed to encapsulate a whole new setting, with new forms of transport etc. isn't a good look.
Absolutely agree.
What they did was dumb it down so much that they turned Spelljamming into moving dungeons in space. The ship pilots itself, so you don't have to do anything. Ship weapons are slow to use and the range isn't great (even though you're in space), so just close and board the moving dungeon. A lot of rules are vague and/or non-existent.
They wrote 5e Spelljamming for people they think are stupid so that they didn't have to put in any real effort and still charge the suckers full price. :(
So you are better off buying the 2nd edition rules from DriveThruRPG and then pick and choose the rules you want to use instead of having to make things up out of thin air.
The weapons aren’t slow if you have NPCs doing the loading and firing, have the PCs aim and you have a shot every round.
I wouldn't even say WotC "dumbed it down." The rules are untested suggestions. It's nothing more than DMs hand waving.
As someone very familiar with both 2e Spelljammer and 5e as a whole, I did not expect the robust 20 pages of combat rules. I was very disappointed however because I did expect some simplified version of it boiled down to 4-5 pages not the one page we got. Wildjammer is a good example of what a 5e Spelljammer book could’ve included while not having anywhere near the girth and crunch of its 2e model.
Should a DM really expect to have to design their own ship combat system for a book they bought which really should’ve had a more robust (and possibly optional) set of rules that at least in some way reflected the product it’s updating? I’d say no. That’s awesome that you don’t mind putting in time to design your own game and not just expect the book you bought to have a decent enough system already in it.
1/3 of the combat rules are for crashing and you don’t recognize a problem with this? Lol
Sure, the book gives you enough to do something with it. It doesn’t give you enough to do more.
Yes, you don’t get it and that’s cool. It’s funny how you enjoyed rules for Star Wars and such but don’t think you’d enjoy them in this system. Also funny how you point at the rule for towing to discredit the rest of the rules. As I said, a good middle ground with maneuverability ratings, more than two common ship weapons, some crew/role specific actions and commands during combat and random tables for planet and system design all could’ve been squeezed into the book in just a few pages. Different styles of helms would’ve been nice or somewhat more logical movement speeds but I don’t need to overdo it.
Nothing in their design philosophy showed that WotC wouldn’t give us a bit more rules to play with? Xanathar’s, Ghosts of Salt Marsh, Mythic Odysseys and even Decent into Avernus say otherwise.
The expectation the DM must make the systems. Homebrew it all, why even buy the books, as you point out.
I thought I was going to get a rule system. Silly me, what was I thinking.
I feel like a sucker for buying this. That won't happen again.
Honestly, Drale - I do too (feel like a sucker). I don't think we're alone. And this does, unfortunately (I hate saying this), make me gun shy going forward for the WOTC books. Once bitten, as they say (well, bitten many times, but this was like... huge chunk taken out).
Honestly what annoys me more than the somewhat lacking mechanics for ship to ship combat is the lack of good advice for designing systems or just tables to roll on for generating systems.
Part of it, I think, is that WotC has done the rules already but instead of being willing to reprint them and tweek them for space they left it vague. I don't own it, but Treantmonk did I think 2 videos on ship to ship combat from ghost of saltmarsh. A lot of those rules seem applicable hear. They could have reprinted most of those rules, accounting for air envelopes and gravity planes and the like and been fine. To some degree it seems you need to own that adventure book to have a meatier ship to ship combat system in spelljammer.
The issue is. It has "Spelljammer" on top of the book.
AD&D 2 Spelljammer had extensive ship-to-ship combat rules (with hexagonal mats and paper ship miniatures included), a decent amount of ship management material, unique monsters, and a 8-page-long random table chart for designing own Crystal Spheres (which could give you square planets, gas worlds with floating islands, and suns that are portals to Outer Planes). That IS what "Spelljammer" campaign setting is about.
5e Spelljammer has some monsters (mixed with inexplicable Dark Sun ones and stuff that really does not seem like anyone bothered to put any serious consideration into), but ships amount to set dressing, and no info on making the solar systems.
Now. What did players want? Spelljammer as a campaign setting? Or Spelljammer as piece of flavour, for which you need to make material, all on your own, AFTER buying a glorified art book.
Spelljammer is too simple, when 5e rules are simplified enough as it is. The guidance in this book is too vague. Why does one need to buy it again?
As a relatively new DM, having a loose framework of rules to fall back on consistently helps immensely. I don't want to have to hotfix a system into 5e, because I could just learn a new system if 5e isn't built for it. I play 5e, because it's what I know, and having the rules inside the system makes it easier to reliably adjudicate (which is my job at the table). I can't adjudicate rules consistently if the rules don't make sense, or lack details like when you can warp.
I know you say it's the work that a DM should put in, that's my job. At the same time, if the rules are provided but incomplete or vague, that doesn't help me be consistent. I am planning so many things that it's already overwhelming. I enjoy being able to print out and point to official material that anyone in my D&D Beyond campaign can pull up on their phone to get specifics in between sessions or turns in combat.
An extra page with more details would have gone a long way. As it stands, it's too vague in specific areas for a new DM to pick up and run effectively. I just heard a lot of people recommending the Wildjammer supplement just to see why.
They include crew roles, but I'm not sure where it differs from Spelljammer or if they can be used in tandem to shore up the weaknesses in the official book.
For context, I had no expectations or excitement for this release. I was interested, and considered using it, but it's not something that I'm itching to run. So my opinion is coming from the perspective of someone who lacked expectations, and still came up with unanswered questions that should've had answers in the book.
To sum it up. 5e has almost nothing dedicated to ship combat for a game which is predicated on ships.... 2e has tons of material dedicated to ship combat for a game which is predicated on ships and ship combat and movement. So, if you don't want to do ship combat in 2e, you don't have to use those rules, you can ignore them. But for 5e if you want to do ship combat...ln a game about ships.... you're pretty much fucked. TGP. you really need to think about what the suplement needs to do before you comment. I mean let's really think about this, If someone is playing spell jammer, they are going to be getting on a ship, and they're going to be traveling on that ship, likely being chased on that ship or chasing other ships. They're going to want to do ship to ship combat. They are going to expect that higher level characters that spelljam are going to do so BETTER FASTER STRONGER than than lower level characters. 2e Spelljammer gives them all this, 5e does not. Sure you might find ship combat boring (FOR YOU) and that's fine, but the game SHOULD cover everyone, not just you, so it should include people that might... I don't know... conceivably want to fight ship to ship battles, since that's sort of what spelljammer is about, ships. Soooo maybe you should look beyond your personal preferences, and ask yourself, is WOTC giving people their 80$ worth. I argue they have not. Spelljammer 2e Adventures in Space Boxed set was 18.,99 msrp at launch and you can get it in hard cover print on demand NOW for 26.96. So 50 dollars less than Spelljammer 5e boxed set (apples to apples comparison, hard back bound to hard back bound) So you get more than 100 pages more material, a better ship combat system, a more true to D&D (where player level matters) mechanic, with 2e. And even if you want to dismiss the ship combat, you still have an overall better product with more content... for 50$ less. which means you could buy 2e Spelljammer and ditch what you don't want to use, and the entire 2e phb, dmg, and monsterous compendium and still have money left over for more. Or you could buy more 2e Spelljammer content off DTRPG and have stuff like arcane space, tons of adventures, the legend of spelljammer and still have money left over. Wow, hard to choose.
In Role terms I am so dissapointed in the fact that they eliminated the phlogiston and they cut and paste the whole astral plane?!
Now is confusing because they said that the astral sea and the astral plane are literaly the same but not exactly?
Idk, now creating low content with a huge lack of effort camouflaging it as a way to make the game more accessible, Is a low blow of Wotc.
I feel like axing the phlogistion was a choice made to keep it within the page limit of the book, though it is sad to see it go.
Hello, new DM here. Spelljammer was my first book I picked up. Looked through it and it was not easy to figure out. It had quite a lot of information, sure, but none of it was fleshed out. It had half pages devoted to ship-to-ship combat. It didnt explain much regarding if ships can flee or field repairs or what happens when one ship starts running away since they both travel essentially the same speed. There were a lot of things I decided to make up to make sense. That was not very welcoming but after a year, I've got it mostly figured out. Through playtesting. Something this book feels like it had none of.
With the title of the campaign setting being “Spelljammer”, I was expecting some sort of ship combat mechanics and it is shockingly absent. As a DM, I’d rather have 20 pages I could choose to ignore regarding ship combat. If my players want it to be simple, it’s much easier to ignore rules than to have to create them or transfer them from an older book. I paid for Spelljammer 5e, so it isn’t too much to ask to include basic ship mechanics for 5e. It’s convenient that their new sourcebook writing philosophy means less work and money expended on their end
Well said, the current "rules" are super thin and pathetic.
Spelljammer Combat rules are a travesty - Combat on Ships, was a core mechanic and it was so abstracted they essentially told you NOT to do it and board each other and fight normally. Secondly, where is the participation of the players who are not piloting?
Using the guns and cannons that come with each ship or repairing the ship
@@kurtacus3581 The ship can only be repaired once per hour for 1d8+spellcasting mod with the mending cantrip.
Or three players can co-operate to fire a single ballista once per turn for a 1d20+6 to hit and 3d10 piercing damage.
Wow. So engaging.
So, I've played 5E but had no desire whatever to run it. When I heard they were actually going to have a Spelljammer setting I thought I might change my mind about that. Spelljammer was the ONE setting that I had players actually REQUEST that I run again. They really enjoyed it. I did too but I declined to run it again because I found it EXHAUSTING. All those rules that you say made your eyes glaze over and put you to sleep - THEY WEREN'T ENOUGH. That's right. They were WOEFULLY insufficient in development and execution and while I ran it I was pulling SO MUCH stuff out of my arse all while behind the scenes I'm desperately trying to plug gaping holes in the whole system from ships to the lore and everywhere in between.
I believe what you're failing to appreciate is what you initially started to allude to talking about FFG's detailed rules for handling spaceships for their Star Wars games. OF COURSE they had so many rules for it because it's an important and large portion of the setting AND THE GENRE. Well the issue then is you're not understanding that Spelljammer IS THE SAME GENRE. Spelljammer needs lots of rules regarding ship combat and EVERYTHING TO DO WITH SHIPS because those ships are a MASSIVE and INTEGRAL portion of the setting. To give just 1.5 pages (and yes, you were being OVERLY generous, it really amounts to 1 page of actual rules once you remove the art) is incomprehensible and frankly inexcusable. It's the same as presenting a set of Star Trek or Star Wars rules and saying, "Here's an entire box set of rules... but ALL the ship-to-ship combat stuff you can just make up yourself. We can't be bothered." It's rather breathtaking really. Would you release a Pirates of the Caribbean game and only include 1 page of ship combat rules? Not unless the entirety of the rules for the setting were only 10 pages - even then the ship combat probably ought to be more like 3 or 4 pages worth of the overall rules.
You say it's a truly unique setting and that's what they WANTED to release rather than just another generic Greyhawk-ish setting. But neither you or they seem to grasp what that MEANT in the original setting and for the re-take. Ships feature IN EVERY PART OF IT. ALL those headings you read from the 2nd Edition rules (which I can appreciate you not fully sorting out - even 2E is a huge and complicated system WITHOUT adapting rules for ships of some kind as an integral portion of the setting) are IMPORTANT because SHIP COMBAT is that important TO THE SETTING. You CANNOT just gloss over it and then be _surprised_ when people freak out at the complete WTF-ery of doing so.
Long before 5E Spelljammer was known to be a thing I was advising people who wanted to try the original Spelljammer setting that they needed to approach the rules and the adventures more like they would Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, Battlestar Galactica, or any SCIENCE FICTION setting that prominently featured space travel and combat - because THAT IS THE CORE OF THE SPELLJAMMER SETTING - space travel and combat.
My original hopes regarding 5E Spelljammer have certainly been dashed and even before I saw this video my interest in attempting to RUN a 5E Spelljammer campaign had all but faded. It's BARELY hanging on at all anymore and I honestly don't see how it might be salvaged. I'd say maybe a 5% chance at this point. If WotC were to get out a set of ship combat rules that at least equaled the INADEQUATE rules from 2E it would still only be a 50/50 chance I could be lured into making an attempt. On the other hand, if players were to ask me to run THE ORIGINAL Spelljammer setting - using 2E rules which I haven't TOUCHED in 20 years - I'd do it in heartbeat. They are successfully PUSHING ME AWAY from 5E. That is a really bad indicator of their marketing, design, and grasp of what made not just Spelljammer entertaining to play, but ANY setting they might try to re-ignite. WORSE - this is not even ORIGINAL material. It is revision and republication of original creativity done by others. It really makes me call into question if they've simply got nothing ACTUALLY original left to try (or willing to try) - just a grinder that slowly reprocesses past ideas again and again, because most of their customers weren't around to know how much BETTER the original material actually was...
They decided that boarding action play would be more fun, but utterly failed to provide a maneuvering mechanic to allow play to proceed to a simple boarding action instead of a long boring pursuit. That is the kind of half-assed game design that people are rightly complaining about.
There is a difference between simplifying a system (which the 2nd AD&D Spelljamming rules could've benefitted from) and dumbing down a system to the point of non-existence (which is what WotC ended up doing with the Spelljammer books). So for what was served and fleshed out (races mainly, and the adventures), yeah I'm enjoying it, but as a DM I am now having to go back and essentially rebuild the very fun and robust mechanics from 2nd AD&D into a 5E flavor of simplified while still keeping the meat of what made those mechanics fun and interesting.
And it's not just ship combat that was treated this way. There were wonderful systems in 2nd AD&D for custom building your own ship, rapidly generating randomized solar systems (crystal spheres in 2nd AD&D), generating Spelljamming encounters for random events, there were a whole host of monsters from 2nd AD&D Spelljammer (like a dozen flavor of Beholders and how that impacted their societies in space) that just were not brought forward and there was SO much flavor about notable characters, sites, cultures, the gods (and other powerful beings) and how things worked in Wildspace and the Phlogiston in strange and interesting ways.
All of that could've been lifted and simplified for 5E, but WotC just didn't want to put the work in to make that happen. They were banking on nostalgia and they did, but now they are getting backlash for it. For example I'm going to be REAL reluctant about pre-ordering Dragonlance now if they are just going to "mail it in" until OneD&D.
And to be honest, if this level of dumbing down is the direction they are taking OneD&D, I'm very likely to bail ship and shift the system I play under to Pathfinder or something that still keeps some of that wargaming soul, while still being a good medium for telling epic tales.
So since getting Spelljammer, I have been on a crazy creative high with making a campaign based off of it. I do not regret buying the product. BUT there is a a lot of wiggle room between AD&D spelljamming rules and what we got here, which was a major missed opportunity. They created a spaceship game, with spaceship weapons, and literally said “it’s best for PCs to ignore those and just use their own spells and weapons once in range”. If a DM or group wants even light detail in ship-to-ship action, they have to design one, which is something that the game designers should have done, or at least provided some guidance for. If the same level of guidance or rules had been given for personal combat in the PHB, it would have been unacceptable even if the reason was focusing on the narrative.
So while I do enjoy this product, and while I do think that the people decrying it are obsessing over one negative in a setting book that has a lot of good, I 100% get why some buyers are upset.
I think that line is getting too much of a reaction.
The ship weapons are fine, but big spells are better, it’s trying to acknowledge that players will want to close in to use them or board, not saying never use ship weapons.
After all, damage before closing can make a huge impact on the gravity dominance.
@@baynemacgregor8441 this is the most sensible response to this statement!
Obviously mileage my vary, but the fact that so many people are saying that the line was off putting tells me that at the bare minimum, the line was inelegantly written. But also, I don’t get people swearing off the product because of it.
@@baynemacgregor8441 “Big spells” What big spells, exactly? Range for spells is not far, at least not when you are talking about rules where a “Close” encounter starts 250 feet away.
You can’t chuck a Fireball at a ship at that range (150 ft). You can’t Fog Cloud at that range either (120 ft.). And by the time you ARE in range, you may as well close the gap entirely so your martial characters have something to do (since even if they pling away with Longbows, the Damage Threshold of the ship is an average of around 15, so the vast majority of attacks will do nothing).
It’s a bad system that, if you follow it to its logical conclusion, is this: the ship with the biggest guns should blast the smaller ship and kite it. The smaller ship can’t catch the bigger ship (due to movement speeds being practically all the exact same) and the smaller ship can’t get away (for the exact same reason). No rules for better Helms, no way for a captain to pull a deft maneuver, no way for the Spelljammer to burn spell slots to create or close distance… just boring attrition.
That’s not “simple” systems, that’s a shit system. The only experience this is good for us to have the party fire off a cannon or two before moving to standard PC to NPC combat. Ship to ship combat is ludicrously under-thought here.
As a veteran, I can assure you that facing will generate a lot of tension real fast on a battlefield.
"you didn't need this book to play spelljammer" I completely agree. But that's the issue I have with the book.
If the half-baked random crap I can come up with is more fun and enjoyable for my table, then how can I look at the price I paid for the spelljammer book and NOT feel like I wasted my money?
I expected a cool setting that has better mechanical ideas than what I can come up with. I just got the cool setting. And that's a shame, because my ideas are awful. More fun than what is in the book? For my group, yes. Fun in general? Eh not a lot, even for my table. Just adequate.
Even if you don't mind the ship combat rules, you gotta admit that repairing the ship is a pain in the butt.
Also, it's a bit weird that the book outright explicitly says that in ship combat, it's generally better to just use your normal weapons and skills.
It steers players away from using the ship for anything other than transportation. That's probably the point, but it's a shame for those who wanted to give players a reason to care about their ship other than wanting to get somewhere.
Gygax is quoted saying something along the lines that no D&D books are really necessary.
Give them lovable npc's, have them befriend the cook, bosun, cabin boy. Steal from treasure planet. Have a betrayal, or a romance between crew members. This will endear them to the ship because it is a character it's self. Also maybe your ship loves to be moving and gives off a groan when it stops moving.
@@baynemacgregor8441 I don't disagree, but it's significantly easier to get something that has well thought out rules and accompanying pictures than making it all up yourself.
From what I am hearing the functionality of the ship and need for crew roles seems to be hurting the game mechanics. In marine ship battles the crew need to do things - the captain or first mate need to steer, the sails need to be raised or lowered, the anchor is another optional point for movement, guns need to be manned and loaded. It seems like spelljammer is just yeah the helm controls the ship. Now I could be wrong, I am still researching, but it seems like assigning more roles would allow for more role play opportunities as people have set things to do on board. Cooking, cleaning, maintaining, repairs, mending equipment, making rope, bard performances, even skill crafting could happen and be fun interaction points. And a DM could always bring a failed or skipped chore up to throw in as another obstacle; you forgot to load the cannons, you didn't make sure the rigging was set, etc. if they wanted to be more realistic. They don't have to be cruel about it or punishing, but it can add another element to game play. Some of the complaints I have been seeing are the lack of things to do while on a voyage, however a DM could definitely add these elements to make the game more exciting.
another way to think about it is that the spell jammer helm is creating and directing the wind that is pushing the ship along
I don’t care about ship combat, but as a DM I need: adventure structures, encounter ideas, world design guidance, factions and actors, inspiring sample NPCs, interesting artifacts and treasures, lots of monsters, environmental hazards, travel guidance…
WotC seems to completely disregard giving DMs tools to actually RUN GAMES.
As someone Who first got into D&D through 5th edition, I can assure you I would not enjoy advanced D&D. I also would not want to buy this spell Jammer book. After all it literally tells you to skip space combats and just go straight to boarding. I get that writing down The rules for everything and making it a war game is one end of the extreme, but what wizard did with this spell Jammer book is the opposite end of that extreme. All they do is tell you that spell Jammers are now a thing and provide you with almost no support or structure on how to implement them. And while it's easy enough for me to make my own rules for spell jamming without spending a dime, it is asinine to assume that everybody else should just do the same. I was hoping that this book could provide me with inspiration, but I know it will not.
This has been a theme of 5e really, I do not see the point of spending money on anything beyond the PHB and DMG for 6e/one D&D if I'm going to be asked to do the heavy lifting anyway.
It doesn't tell u to skip ship combat...
@@hellboy6536 "Player characters are almost always better off using their own weapons and spells in ship-to-ship combat" what is the point of ship-to-ship combat if the SHIPS are not actually used for ship-to-ship combat?
@@spiderham20 Yeah thats why besides the 2 basic books plus monster manual I have ton of 3rd party books. They provide much better DM focused stuff. Heck the crafing system and the books about harvesting stuff have made my game much better as I now actualy workable rules I can encorage and do not have to dread when players ask can I harvest parts of this dragon?
My prominent complaint isn't with the ship-to-ship combat rules. It's with the lack of setting information. The (paraphrased) blurb "please look to our example Wildspaces to see how to make your own" was infuriating to see, given that the setting promises so much. I would have liked a page or two of procedures and tables for generating Wildspaces at the very least, and would have preferred a couple additional examples of known Wildspaces with descriptions and adventure hooks... You know... Exactly like the Doomspace and Xaryxispace descriptions we got? But you know... More of them.
I realize that WotC may have omitted certain established settings so as to be more inclusive to the general audience, but they publish a bajillion products for the Forgotten Realms and they're about to publish one for Dragonlance so there's a couple Wildspaces right there that their fan base could have gotten excited about. They managed to give us Doomspace on a two-page spread, and I would have appreciated if they could maybe cut some of the, admittedly gorgeous, art pieces that are just the view of space and instead give us something that we can actually use to make our own adventurers. Instead we can run Light of Xaryxis out of the box and everything else we have to generate.
"Adventure" in Space.
I agree with the sentiments of many players, it is that they have decided to over simplify spelljammer to the point of, wait til an enemy is in range, ram the ship, and treat it like a dungeon or a bar brawl. What do you do til then, you wait, lol.
Mage hand press made dark matter 5e, it doesn't 20 pages is easy to use the space combat rules but when I bought the book I knew that rules at least a framework to start from would be in the book.
If you look at the spelljammer "rules" you can't even get away from an enemy ship because it's usually 1 ton or over and has its own gravity field.
An expensive rulebook should at least have the rules or framework needed to handle ship combat at least in a minor way. And if you don't want to use them then you don't have too.
Isn't the reason to watch a review to get information on the product so we can make a qualified dessision on if the product is for us?
I think why people are underwelmed is that there is no real ship to ship combat and much reused content (monsters) from other books.
At the moment most of us could flip through the book in a store and then make something better up on the fly. Thats not much for 50$.
That's precisely it. It only tells you that you can have magical ships that fly from realm to realm. We didn't need a book to tell us only that.
If there are rules, most players remember parts of them, but that gives a point of reference for those rules. Then we can choose to use them or not, or to modify them. Imo, give us the rules, and encourage players and DMs to pick up and drop rules more freely. I would rather ask my players if they want to use rule A, B, or C, than create rules A, B, and C, them ask them if they want to use them. I homebrew enough of my campaigns, npcs and PC options, I don't want to also homebrew rules.
I agree with many of your points, but when people, myself included, complain that there's no ship to ship combat rules, what we should be saying is the rules are uninteresting and don't add anything dynamic or interesting to combat. If you put ballista on a wagon and had 2 groups ride at each other while on the ground, I'd basically be the same combat.
Ghost of salt marsh had officer actions and added to combat, they could have at least updated those rules for space and reprinted them.
They also stripped spelljamming of most of its flavor while keeping some vestigial mechanics. For instance, why does a spelljammer helm need to be attuned by a spellcaster? It no longer requires spell slots for anything, not even combat. Why is it even called spelljamming without the use of spells?
The rules exist, they're just in impressive and boring.
5e was supposed to be a modular system, it is not but it was supposed to be. You would expect the setting on Spelljammer to have rules to make you feel like you are sailing through space. I am shocked they didn't have about 3 more pages to expand on the rules from Ghosts of Saltmarsh and explain how ship combat is different, instead we don't even get the depth of Saltmarsh. I think rolling charts or point adjustment to create your own unique Spelljammer would be 5 pages that should have been in the book. You don't want any Spelljammer you want your own. Some additional group checks and skill challenges for how Spelljammer deal with things and setting specific challenges would have been nice as well. These rules are not unique, special, or robust. They are even lacking compared to other 5E products. I see this book and say that I am better off with a book I previously bought.
There you go, right off the bat, having expectations. That's why you're disappointed.
D&D is modular, you're just expecting far too much from the people who write the books.
@@Micsma I know if I would just buy everything and not assign a value to it, rather than think my enjoyment with the idea of a new book should blend with value the book can add to my games. If I could just do that everything would be great. Instead I do this dumb mental calculus: Is my idea of doing a Firefly like space cowboy campaign supported wholly by this new book, or am I only going to get concepts, ideas, and half information from the new book, for something I could have homebrewed anyway. Then supplement it with previous books for the desired outcome putting in way more work to run a game from box set that cost me 41.99 on sale versus another book that cost me 22.99 on sale. I am not yet the perfect DND consumer. I did buy both and that is a start. Soon my misgivings will fade. (Saltmarsh 60 more pages)
I agree they could have expanded the GoS rules, but at the very least they could have REPRINTED them for people that don't have GoS. Copy and paste, zero effort. But i guess it would have upped the page count and thrown off their profit margin.
@@Micsma Not really. I know how good books of 5e can be but not bevause WoTC but because I have bought 3rd party suplements on DM's guild. You would not belive how good some of them are in filling the holes left by WoTC. Many of the top sellers on there honestly are better than any offical book.
My problem with what you’re saying isn’t the truth behind it. It is the expectation we as consumers have based on previous setting books. When PIETY became a core mechanic they spelled it out. In Acq Inc, the party’s franchise level was a core mechanic and surprise, surprise… they spelled it out. Ravenloft’s Worlds of Dread were spelled out.
In Spelljammer, a new core mechanic was introduced and they basically said… you get space travel but when you run into an encounter you don’t have it and ship to ship combat is complicated so… you won’t be able to run from it. You will most likely be boarded or will board another ship and at that point, it’s just another dungeon crawl so… let’s just skip to that.
Let me put it a different way… If your DM wants you to run into an encounter while you are doing space travel, it will be a dungeon crawl and you won’t do ship to ship space combat. If you want that then use a different RPG system and not Spelljammer 5e. We as a company are so lazy we won’t even update our own systems or use Matt Mercer’s naval combat role system.
WotC feels like it is being run by stockholders and not DMs as even the most recent bestiaries are reprints. When was the last time WotC and not a 3rd party like Critical Role has provided good adventuring content that doesn’t feel lazy, disconnected, rushed or half-assed? D&D felt at its core to be a combat simulator in an open world full of choices. 6E and it’s most recent predecessors feel like a whimsical tea party with hardly any stakes at all and the threat of death is a joke. Look at the release of Vecna, Feywild adventure book and this excuse of an update to bring Spelljammer into 5e.
If this is the future of D&D, 6e and all of this then you aren’t wrong. I probably won’t continue playing it and other systems will attract me more. After seeing this, I’m worried for Dragonlance and honestly I am more hopeful and excited for the Paizo adventure to come to 5e - Abomination Vaults in March 2023.
Matt Mercer used the naval combat role system from saltmarch.
I agree with what you're saying but I think the disappointing thing with the rules is that it assumes you'd rather cast your spells than work as a team to crew a ship in battle - which may be the case but as you rightly pointed out we can already do that. It would have been nice to see a ToTM and detailed option presented.
I disagree. I've never played AD&D in my life, but was moderately excited about spelljammer. I'm not attached in any way to the old mechanics, but the new ones (more like lack of ones) is just disappointment. In my group when we want to play tactical combat oriented game, we usually go for D&D 5e. I don't actually believe 5e is narrative driven game. It gets pretty obvious when compared to the actual narrative games. I also disagree with the statement that I could play Spelljammer already even without new books. I mean yes, I could, but why should I buy those then? I like 5e, I want to play with the spirit of it. I don't want to come back to the 90s. But I also want to be prepared with good set of rules, when during an adventure there is a spaceship battle. It's cool! One of the best things about the setting. So why do I have to come with my own ideas about how to make it engaging, so my players aren't bored to death?
"we want to play tactical combat oriented game, we usually go for D&D 5e". Yeah, that's not what D&D is. The old rules may have been more elaborate, but that doesn't mean they were functional or fun as "tactical combat" either. As a DM, if I give my players access to a SpellJammer (which I have done multiple times in 5e, w/out the new books) I expect them to use it as a vehicle to get to far-out new places they can explore...not a weapon that suddenly turns my D&D game into a "ship combat simulator".
@@pygar256 ???? Man... I can't believe that you deliberatly decide to skip the most fun thing a setting with spaceships can offer! I knows my players would never forgive me if I would do that. So... I think you have no point. Sorry.
About the "tactical combat" then again - if we have the most fun from the game facing encounters with different obstacles, and if my character, as it progress, gets more and more ways to deal with those encounters - then I would deffinitely say that we play a "tactical combat oriented game". It's pretty obvious to me.
@@mateuszmazur6246 Sorry, I've been playing D&D long enough to remember the first version of SpellJammer....ship combat really isn't that fun. In fact, it has a big potential to bore players who end up dis-involved in vehicle combat...and if you lose, then TPK? If you think it's that essential, you can just borrow the old rules, or make your own rules up. (or go play a game that is tabletop strategy instead of rpg) Me as a DM, it's not what I'm looking for in SpellJammer- and me as a player doesn't like the thought of putting tons of time and care into my character just to be reduced to being a ballista gunner.
@@pygar256 but you have nothing against reducing spaceships into portals. The rest is all the same as on the video. "Go play the old rules" - which I specifiied i have no interest to do; "make your own ones" - yea, and pay creators for nothing. Whatever man, you talk like there was no way to do it properly. Just the old way or no way. That's simply not true. And then you talk like I don't want to play rpg, which od also false. RPG is about doing stuff you wouldn't do normaly. Dnd is about playing as an adventurer. Space battles are adventurous thing to do. Maybe you should play video games, if you don't like to follow imagination?
@@mateuszmazur6246 I talk about it like there wasn't a way to do it properly because...there wasn't. Imagination? I'm imagining ship-to-ship combat in D&D reducing my players to ship crew roles which should be filled by hired henchmen. You do what you want....but I can easily see why ship-to-ship battle rules were not included for SJ5e.
Anyone who’s written a report for school knows page count doesn’t matter. Word count and actual content does. Also one of my big issues is they didn’t cover chase scenes in the book. With the travel rules of just picking a random destination in space because stuff isn’t fixed in space means technically you can think of that ship I just fought and follow them. Since they describe everything as a cork floating in space it tracks that a ship could be tracked. Their example of location selection is the closest Githyanki fort. You never even have needed to be there to plot a course as a spelljammer. They really didn’t think this through as a product.
Never asked to not be recommended a channel faster than after seeing this video.
The idea that 5e is supposed to be accessible doesn't excuse the lack of rules, in fact I think it hurts the point. Having solid mechanical foundation could only help new dm's and players run adventures in the setting. As has been mentioned there is a large difference between 1.5 and 20 pages; moving more towards the middle of that range would only help accessibility. While I could theoretically homebrew anything, as a working adult I have issues with free time (think accessibility). I spend money on source books so I have ready-made, tested, and robust mechanics so I can readily jump into adventuring as quickly and easily as possible. These books just ain't worth it as they stand.
Honestly, a little of collum a little of collum b, does it need to be number and war-game crunchy to be fun no, but the fact that being able to pilot these ships IS what the setting is based around I would have liked it being at least a little closer to salt marsh than the generous 1.5 pages we got, even if it was just STR, DEX, CON scores for the 16 ships we did get which really wouldn't have taken up much additional space for situations where "the higher hp wins at tug of war". And the lack of internal consistency in the book for the sake of simplicity the book calls the movement of the ships slow and clumsy, but in combat they can spin around like it's on a lazy susan so all the weapons can be fired does feel like lazy hand-waving.
the air and gravity explanations as well. Much of this book seemed like lazy handwaving. Navigation as well, although that may be the same as the earlier (2E) setting, I don't know
I wish they'd added more to the book. More than three magic items. More than two spells. More defined locations. A random-location generation table. There was such a huge amount of content that they could have pulled from 2nd edition that wasn't just clunky combat rules. They could've created a box set that was a better value for their players with very little effort. I think that part of the complaint is just that players feel they're getting ripped off due to the low page count and they're looking hard for what is missing.
I feel as if the main letdown in the Spelljammer 5e books is that the price is not equivalent to the content and rules that you get in return.
The SJ 5e books are great for a player but lacking for a DM. The majority of table groups will encounter and attempt crazy things that they don't have rules for. The Average DM does not have the time to homebrew something new between each session. That may sound lazy but WE have many more priorities before a hobby game. We buy the (hopefully) well tested rulebooks so we can have the same fun without the huge time investment. Otherwise, why buy any books at all...
If Wizards is going to “remaster” a classic setting they need to show that setting respect instead of seeing it as a quarterly scheduled cash grab
I'd argue that in the 'You don't need the book' part of your video that it has some flaws. One, some of us don't have all the old rulebooks so we don't have a reference. And two, making rules ourselves is all well and good but that's an additional workload heaped onto the DM, and it's having an adverse affect on DM'ing in 5th edition.
It's better to just have as many rules fleshed out, built, and made dummyproof as possible so that if the DM needs rules they can get them. It takes the load off the DM and saves them from having to make things up themselves.
I notice a disconnect though. You found everything you need? Great! But you were hopping all over the place. It's not well described or organized. They could do better for that.
Honestly, I'm fine with what's there but I think it needed a little bit more. Maybe a few more siege weapon types for ships, some upgrades/ship gadgets to fix longer range combat stuff, a page of crew rules, a few more ship designs, a couple astral sea and wildspace encounter maps (even just generic ones) and a couple maps for some of the other encounters would of made this product way, way, way better. It didn't need much more, just a bit.
Also the hadozee fix, which we just got.
WOTC said they were going to experiment with new formats, and spelljammer is one of those experiments. Unfortunately, I think the triple-book-boxset format doesn't really work because all three books are too short. They should have been split up and sold separately, or combined as two books. I think their design format just left them with no room for crunch after they had to fit in everything else.
Why do a space fantasy without actually providing much to do in actual space? Just do portals and jump from planet to planet. If you set d&d in space you need to actually do space combat, if you have ships in space they should have combat otherwise why bother with a space setting at all?
I just wish there would have been more ideas and rules suggestions on how to create wildspace systems. As well as example wildspace systems just like the original AD&D book. It would have added so much more.
There is a huge degree of difference between the 20 pages of combat rules with maneuvering and ranges being set in stone and the complete abstraction of those systems in the 5E book. When you say the latter is boring I can understand that to a degree but I also imagine a scene like in the first pirates of the Caribbean movie where they’re desperately trying to find an advantage against the better cannons of the Pearl where they run it aground and then shoot from an advantageous position. I could very easily see a crew weaving through a debris field desperately trying to avoid a bombard’s cannons while trying run it aground or escape (or players chasing a villain trying to do the same) which just doesn’t work with the current edition of the rules as presented. Now adding those in is something that can be done by the DM but when the ships are the major selling point why isn’t that in the rules to start?
Also I have issues with the way speed works between ships and the way the setting handles planets and the like which makes the rules around landing and the like laughably absurd and in DESPERATE need of house ruling. The game specifically states that ships in another objects gravity/air envelope can only use cruising speed and gives an example planet that is 5,000 miles in diameter with an air envelope that extends 5,000 miles off the surface. Say the party had to land there for an adventure and then has to take off again to get the McGuffin back to space then you’re looking at roughly 50 DAYS transit each way with the rules as presented which is almost laughably bad. Also the fact that spelljammers not moving at hyper speed are slower than most sailing ships feels pretty sloppy in that regard as well where it really seems like combat speeds should have been bumped up to a notable degree and that there should have been a crushing speed adjustment added in for atmospheric flight and the rules for planets should have had atmosphere by object size like a small planet may have 50 miles from the surface, a medium planet 100, and a large planet 200 which took me all of about 5 minutes to realize and house rule which makes me wonder how they didn’t catch that issue in their playtesting for the book.
Overall it just feels like they slap dashed together some things and left too much to DM fiat to fix. I grew up on 2nd edition and there are ways that it abstracted details that 5th Ed doesn’t (movement and placement in particular) and it never felt more like a war game than a narrative experience and I accept that 5th edition is less nitty gritty with mechanics but if the setting shares its name with a vehicle within said setting then it’s probably important to the rules and could use a bit more consideration. It just feels like some important details were glossed over and the books only total up to around 200 pages where Eberron was around 300 and included more of the flavorful class and equipment options.
5e is still a wargame. 80% of the rules are combat focused.
I don't wont to be bogged down by too many of the technicalities of naval combat. And honestly, it doesn't take much for the players' eyes to glaze over from one too many rules. If anything, this should be brought up during a session zero.
If I decide to run this and my players want a little more detail, I'll look at the DMG and Ghosts of Saltmarsh to help further flavor the ship combat. At least those are already 5e and I don't have to worry much about conversion and balancing
As someone who is minimally on the internet looking at people's complaints, but knows that some exist, I feel like what I hear the complaints addressing is not the rules as much as the amount of world that was developed to flesh out an entire campaign. One UA-camr who I generally think has good takes compared it to the eberron book, saying that the eberron book had everything he needed to run a campaign with no other materials. The spell jammer books cost more money and leave you with little room to grow beyond the adventures without a GM putting in a lot of effort. But what do I know? I haven't actually read the books. I'm more commenting on what I see online, and it seems to not really focus on the amount of spell jamming mechanisms.
Oh I don't know they cold have taken the best parts of the design from ghosts of saltmarsh and combined it with ideas from decent into Avernus and allowed the pilot to spend spell slots to do cool things they could also have put some effort into making cool things pcs could do manning weapons stations or directing damage control or just coordinating the crew and buffing the whole team you know deliver on the ship to ship combat fanticy not just say lol board them. Plus another part of the fantasy wotc failed to deliver was ship customization which a lot of people want.
The Slow down starts at what a 1,000’ out. Your speed ranges from 30 ‘ - 40’. That means if you are being Chased by the faster ship and you are running at max ( as it is unattached to normal movement methods for players) there’s only a 10’ gain per round. Let’s say minimum range for either to hit is a cool 500’ (just to speed things up between them )at disadvantage. So you won’t even be able to take pot shots for 50 rounds. With no effective way to avoid combat your next ( less boring) act you could take is head at them. Giving you a sweet 8 rounds before combat can even commence. Hope the faster ship isn’t full of warlocks that can push or pull . Then to reduce damage to your only method of survival you board! That’s when the real fun starts because, it was never there for the ship to ship. As lazy writing and gaming design was the only thing there for ship to ship.
It's even worse than that. The slow down starts at 1 mile, not 1000ft.
"Just homebrew it 4head" is incredibly disappointing when it's for a core element of the fantasy to many DMs/players. Better to have it and not need it etc.
I mean, I paid $80 to WotC for them to tell me "Just homebrew it 4head" so maybe I deserved it...
in the original ad&d spelljammer ship movement was determined by the level of the helmsman, now what in 5e is determined by character level? proficiency bonus. thye could have used that for the speed of the ship. 2-6 movement points (or whatever) the other thing 2e spelljammer had was ship manuverability. it was a number (in 2e ir was a letter that represented a number) wotc could have added "MR: #" to the ship stat sheet and done. now you have speed and how it manuvers. combine that with what they gave us for ship weapons (the weapons ranges could be multiplied by 10. seige weapons had good range on them not to mention the fact that spelljammer takes place in space) and you have enough to run fun ship to ship combat. myself I am looking to convert the ship speed from the book and make a manuverability class out of it.
I have a simple fix that'll work for most games with these ships regarding the boring tactical speeds. Have a separate grid for the ships that'll serve as the "tactical table." The scale is 100 feet per tile. Add a zero to ship movement speeds. Make sure every character has a ship weapon they can fire. Provide the pilot with a ship mounted staff with fire bolt, or some similar spell that receives a buff to its range at the dm's discretion. Now a ship with 70 movement becomes a ship with 700, thus on the scaled up table, it can move 7 tiles. I'd recommend tweaking all the weapon ranges as well to suit your tables play style. Now everyone can attack, and do other actions on the ship as needed as part of the turn order, using the ships battle map, and the pilot can move the ship around, and attack as well.
Also here's a fun monster idea to play around with.
Living Cannon Ball: 4hp, 15 ac, 500ft movement. 1str 20dex 10con 1int 1wis 1chr (size tiny)
The living cannonball remains inert until told to attack a creature or object its maser can see, and loaded into a cannon. When activated, it will pursue its target relentlessly. It's Initiative is always last.
Actions/Abilities:
Detonate- The cannonball deals 4d8 thunder damage, half of that on a successful save (dc 15 con), destroying itself in the process.
The Weapon Knows Where It Isn't- The cannonball has truesight.
Delayed Blast- The cannonball detonates after 4 rounds of being activated.
(optional) Telegraph- The cannonball glows moments before detonating. Any creature that can see it may make an opportunity attack against it if it's within their range, potentially preventing the explosion.
the comparison should be to ghosts of salt Marsh. This Spelljammer gave us floating dungeons not spaceships
Thank you Eric! Between Spelljammer and the One D&D playtest, there is so much negativity around the stuff we are getting. It seems like any time a cool thing comes out, fans of that thing shout it down. I joke with my wife, who is a big Star Wars fan, that the definition of a "Star Wars fan" is a person who aggressively dislikes any new Star Wars. I'm starting to worry that the D&D community is headed the same way.
How bout you both stop fanboying. This is a setting about magical shops that allow realm to realm travel. That's it. There's no realm of their own to build. And in this setting entirely about ships, there's very little in there about how to use ships.
Covering up for lazy, profit grabbing is a joke. You dummies are literally praising them for low effort lol
QUESTION: Coming from someone who did play AD and D, I agree with you and that's how I played spell jammer long ago in the before time. I skipped a lot of rules and went more narrative. But I don't have the new books and I have a question about facing. What are the rules in 5th edition when it comes to sea combat? If I understood you in this video, Spell jammers can just turn on a dime? Dose size not come into question? Spell jammer was based on sea combat. The name spelled jammer actually comes from the sailing term "windjammer" .
I think what is missing is that the original ad&d 2e Spelljammer modules where designed to play on a hex grid map and therefore had more detailed combat rules. You needed to find facing and direction on a 3d space represented on a 2d play mat. I do agree with you that the simplification of the rules allows for more fun and engaging original gameplay moments. One of my main things with this rule set is there a range for weapons like ballista and cannon fire, where as in ad&d 2e it specifically states that there is a range, but if the shot misses then the projectile will continue on until acted upon by another force or strikes something. But this is something that is easily fixed and brought in under house rules. I would imagine that you could just use ship 2 ship combat form ocean faring ships but with 3 dimensions instead of being on a flat plane…
What's crazy to me about stickers for the old rules is like, are you seriously telling me that the magic ship powered by someone's brain, firing magic guns, is legitimately neutered by like, simple facing and positioning rules like "sorry that gun can only fire due north!" You're out of your mind. It's space magic, in space, against magic space monsters. And again, you're flying a spaceship with a chair you practically plug your brain into. We don't need all those rules. We need engagement distances, flow of combat clarifers, and that's about it.
No. But what dose is how bare it is and how little it actualy helps DM. Heck there arent even a small generation table set for new solar systems to jump start crative process if you need it.
Tbh i would air on the side of wanting more rulings, because that in itself can help with the creative process. On a more anecdotal note, I find it funny how you brought up how easy it is to bring things from earlier editions of D&D specifically spell jammers from AD&D cause honestly as a person who only got into the dnd on 5th edition and never felt the need to look at previous editions I didn't know spell Jammers was a thing in the past so if I were to want a setting like spell jammers I would have either homebrewed a lot or try a completely different system
I understand your point of view of simplicity gives freedom to the DM, but generally the rules are there for game balance and the problem with not having enough rules in the book has nothing to do with whether you're playstyle is cinematic or your play style is simulation war table. The real crux of it is a player and DM often don't see eye to eye when it comes to interpretations of rules The rules are there to try to mitigate those in table arguments about balance versus reality. if I were to tell you as an example that the rules state if you float outside the air envelope you have one minute of air from a generated air envelope that is floating around you, but that generated an air envelope around you actually has much more than a minute's worth of air plus going foul much more time available about 145 minutes. this is physics versus game balance. and this is just an example of why the rules are rules so that gameplay can be smooth and balanced between players and GM if you just say willy nilly and cinematic storyline then you might as well not have dice at all and stand around and each tell a story. what you interpret as easy to find the rules by looking at certain sections some other player may interpret those differently and it becomes less fun as a group when players argue with players about how rules and conditions interact plus it makes it even more difficult on the DM if you have a player that is argumentative or rules lawyery. My disappointment in the book has to do with not the fact that it's a great world it's a great description but they really do need a more robust rule set that can be optional just so that balance of gameplay happens. just reading the rules as written in that book and that book alone, I can see several ways to exploit those rules to make it not fun for everyone but have an auto succeed situation in most combats. Plus with how fast those ships move and how helms work pirates have a severe advantage because as long as they have a fast ship no ship can ever get away from them. like I said I could debate each rule and each non-rule description and if flavor is meant to be a rule or flavor is meant to be flavor again it goes on interpretation and everyone has a different interpretation and that is what bogs down the game when the DM and player versus other player versus DM all disagree on interpretation. and I like the setting I just hate how rules light it is and I don't want to have to rebuild an entire set of rules from a previous edition in order to just make it balanced for all players and make sure all players have fun.
It's interesting. You pick on the "wargaming" aspect of the old spelljammer rules. However, I have found 3rd and and newer to be much more "wargamey" than AD&D was for normal combat. The high reliance of detailed movement for miniatures that was largely introduced in 3rd ed. always felt a lot more restrictive (and very slow) for combat than I ever experienced in AD&D, where every group I played with used miniatures for rough placement and went with what worked in the theatre of the mind over trying to measure it. You complain about facing and movement when it comes to ships but don't argue it in general combat in D&D? (edit modified 3.5 to 3rd ed for clarity - I largely regard them as the same).
I'll probably go back to my 2E Spelljammer boxed set to fill in to the black hole-sized gap in the 5E Spelljammer rules.
I’d rather have too much info and too many things to think about because I can grasp it eventually during play. What I don’t want is too little information to the point the players find everything to do that’s not in the rules. Players will always want to do things that will make you search the rules to figure out how that idea works.
To make my case, I still don’t know how to run chases. Im not the brightest DM, but I would prefer more information that tell me what can happen and various rules so I can not bore my players and hate chase moments.
You're the only UA-camr I've seen that actually says pretty much what I've been thinking.
I've been saying this on a lot of videos about the new Spelljammer books.
I think the more rules in a book then the more restricting the game feels. People look for rules so that they know what to go off of but usually during games these rules are only there for when things get serious. The rest of the time rules change or are ignored based on the story that unfolds during play.
If there was a huge book all about space fighting then I would probably never touch Spelljammer 5e.
The idea of playing in space is bc space is cool and so much can happen that you can say "it's space".
Fighting with ships should be simple.
The story of what is in space should be the focus and thinking about if there is air or not air in space muddies everything and makes it too difficult.
I also believe that Gary made this game and built on it with new editions from suggestions and ideas of people who were playing and homebrewing.
D&D to it's core is a game with a foundation of rules but other than the rules it's all up to the players.
It's a game that you want to do anything in yet a lot of people want rules. if there are too many rules then you cannot do anything you want.
5e is what D&D is supposed to be (to me). Less rules, less construction and more up to the people playing. It allows you to do anything without feeling like you are not playing D&D anymore.
Without rules it wouldnt be fun either. Like playing cops and robbers. your friend keeps making things up and now the robber can fly and now the cop has telekinesis. It gets boring bc you can do anything without consequences and then you don't want to play cops and robbers anymore. No risks, no limitations.
So it's good to have a foundation of rules that give you some limitations like whether this character can/can't fly or this one can/can't have telekinesis.
See, the thing is that these books ultimately exist to help the dm with technical aspects of running the game. And if someone wants to have more complicated ship on ship battle, it would be very rude to tell them that they just need to loosen up theri style of running the game or whatever. They easily could've touched on mechanical aspects of running ship on ship heavy encounter without adding additional 20 pages, just a little bit to help out the dm. If we can't have even that, there is something very wrong going on
In my game the helmsman casts ship-to-ship offensive spells. Since 1 hull point equals 10 hit points, spells cast from the helm do ten times the damage. Now it's a fight between super space wizards, but with the AC and HP of their ships.
So buy our book $$$$ for our game system and make up the rules for all the rules that are not there.
Yes, I am all for giving and encouraging the DM to make rules up for their table but at least give a framework. Right out the gate 5e was an incomplete game ( I am looking at you, no regular naval ship combat rules) and this clearly shows WOTC is all about options and bloat for the players an no support for the DM. It is a shame as many of the bare rules of 5e are elegant but every release after Xanathar’s had drive me away from this version of the game.
You find 'what position your ship is facing' and all the rules boring? Have you ever played DnD 5e?
There are all sorts of rules about combat in DnD 5e: initiative, advantage/disadvantage, surprise, attacks of opportunity, cover, disengaging, prone condition, grappling, spell casting, reactions, bonus actions, movement, saves, KO, etc.
The PHB has 10 pages devoted this combat, not including spell mechanics, abilities, feats, skills, etc, listed elsewhere in the book.
Should we have just "made all that up" coz we're, I don't know, DMs?
I expect 5e, a system, to have a, I don't know, SYSTEM.
wotc could "fix" this very easly. make a "tactical combat rules" pdf for free on D&D beyond and the wotc websight if you want the rules everyoen will have access to them if not forget about them and play as you have.
Having played AD&D, it was often very complex and confusing, **so** confusing the DM would often just skim the info, then just wing it. It **was** based on war games. *TSR's* full name was *Tactical Studies Rules.* The amount of rules, some of them seemingly contradictory, were endless. When 3e came out there was a collective sigh of relief from the D&D players and DMs because **so much** was edited down to to be far more understandable and clear. When 3.5e came out, there was a huge jump in participation because the threshold was so much lower and it was far more easy to get into.
Also, there is lots of info about ship-to-ship combat in the 5e DM guide and Saltmarsh that are **perfectly** adaptable to Spelljammer. Just use your imagination to fill in the gaps and make extrapolations. And if you hate it, fine, but plenty of people are having fun, so let them, will ya?
I don't want more crunch, but I would like a few more suggestions for how they envision the setting to work. I haven't picked up the books yet, but from the reviews I've seen the speed of ships seems frustratingly vague, especially for how close you can get to something before it forces you to slow down. The free Spelljammer Academy adventure seems to imply that your ship can't fly past a couple of space eels without them disrupting the "warp drive" enough to force you to slow down and deal with them. The free adventure also has skill challenges to navigate your ship, but I haven't seen anyone mention that being a part of the rules in this book.
I'm still going to pick it up eventually, and may even try to run the adventure, but it feels like I (a relatively inexperienced GM) will have some basic questions that will not be answered by this book.
It's not about having simple or complex rules. It's about getting ALL the players involved in the operation of the ship, both in and out of combat. Too many times i have seen a spelljammer game where the pilot was the only one really doing anything. The main problem i see is the lack of "fighters" that can give multiple players a chance to act, coordinate, ect. As it stands, a player can man a gun, but does it use his skill? You can load a weapon with a barbarian, but is there any special action or benefit for doing so? If you give players the choice of sitting around on a ship while a battle happens you are going to find yourself in a loop of boarding actions that closer resemble a dungeon delve one shot on repeat. Perhaps if each player had a ship it could go a long way to improve the combat, although it may not be the combat type everyone likes ("Hey barbarian, guess what.. your ranged fighter now").
As for "everything you need for ship combat" I must disagree with you, I can appreciate simple but a certain level of grounding in rules is needed. Most of this is there yes, but the lack of turning rate and firing arks is not a plus in my book. What if a ship wants to split it's fire between two targets? Or if you have a ship with cannons on either side but want to fire them all at the same target? Does the ship do an amazing spin on the spot? If a fighter has two actions and enough movement speed can they load two weapons? The ways the rules work now a ship can, in one turn, do a 180 and fire on a ship then do another 180 and use its full movement then, if they want , spin the ship again to defend weak points. This seems a bit much for a ship that is as big as those ships are.I'm not saying there needs to be a rule for everything but there needs to be more of a base system to give dm's more to work with.
Charging us that price for something you yourself pointed out that "we don't need" is the exact point that is making everyone not like this product. We didn't need this... we could have adapted SJ ourselves and had more to work with. Why are they selling us what feels like a half hearted attempt. If they were too busy with DnD one to give SJ the attention it needed then they should have waited to develop it until they could spend more time and get more feedback. To me all this has done is shown me that there is little interest in developing spelljammer outside of making a quick buck off of us for little effort.
Sorry if this is too salty but ya kinda triggered me there. Please don't think it is an attack on you or your views it's just that i have always loved the idea and setting of spelljammer and was really hoping for more than a cheesy watered down remake.
After 6 months mulling it over (and watching this video for a third time) I have ordered my copy of Spelljammer.
Treasure Planet, here I come!
I don't mind that they leave some things for the dm but the fact is they couldn't take the time to flush out space combat in a sci Fi campaign setting that includes spaceships. Just seems a bit bullshit especially for what they charged for the books. I think a lot of us where hoping for updates to the ship combat in ghosts of salt marsh
I still think that it's way too little. Calling it an adventure in space and then I have to wing it all... I canceled my order and I'll pick up what I need on dnd beyond.
I thought it was fine. I didn’t have any problems as I was reading through the book with my kids but I was a little disappointed with the size because I thought that, since it was a boxed set, it would be three full sized books. I guess that’s what I get from preordering. I thought it was cheaper as a pre-order and that the price would go up after they came out.
I just think that the boxed set was a little misleading.
I agree with everything you are saying. My only complaint is the books are smaller than I'd like which means there aren't things like new subclasses and magic items. I don't need everything spelled out world wise more like give me more weird open ideas. I was 4 sessions into a spelljammer campaign when the book came out so I don't need more rules, but fun ideas that I'd be here for
Wait, so you're not familiar with ADND and you found the supplementary rules for (essentially) spaceships confusing? I would expect so?
"That's called being a DM" - If people wanted a proper rules light system they'd be playing it, and not a TTRPG where the communities favourite books are all filled with mechanics. If we're making all this shit up ourselves then there's no need for WotC to sell us lorebooks, and especially no need for random dudes on youtube talking about the rules that don't exist.
To be fair, a lot of 5e players want more from the system than it is designed to have.
Myself included.
You nailed it on the head when you said nobody needed to wait for 5e Spelljammer because 2e already existed and I'll add that conversion from ad&d to 5e is easy. I also agree that there is plenty of info for ship to ship combat in 5e Spelljammer, I don't understand the hate it's getting for combat. I DO understand the hate it's getting for lack of tables for stellar system creation, that was lazy writing on their part.
I’ve literally been spending the last two years making a homebrew 5e setting inspired by OG Spelljammer. I really don’t care about the new book one way or another, I’ve spent two years handling most of that stuff and I’m not gonna throw that work down the drain. I’ll be honest in saying I have no idea what other people’s issue is with it, but not because the issue doesn’t exist, but because I’m approaching the game in MY way and they’re approaching it in THEY’RE way. I’ve got no skin in the game.
Yes I have been playing since the AD&D, but I never got into Spelljammer back in the day.
My problems with the new Spelljammer rules go far beyond ship to ship combat.
But on that note - they honestly could have repurposed the materials from Saltmarsh and the Saltmarsh UA and it would have been an improvement. Some more direction would have been helpful.
My problem is the entire travel/wildspace rules seem to have been put together by people who have no clue what kind of distances are involved in interstellar travel.
I understand keeping things simple, but they seem to have pulled numbers out of the air purely in the name of simplicity.
There is no benefits to "We have a faster ship" or "Our ship has a bigger air-pocket" or "We have a crew of 1/2 auto-gnomes so we won't deplete our air as fast"
With 100,0000,000 miles/day you're looking at 30+ days travel to leave a normal solar system.
To get to the closest star would be 683 years.
Yes, I can work around this too...but that is making a crutch for things that I shouldn't HAVE to work around.
Am I going to use these rules and handwave my way around their weaknesses - probably if my group is ever interested in a Spelljammer campaign. Am I annoyed that I'm going to have to re-do lots of the rules sections because they didn't put the work in that they should have? Yes.
I'm not expecting (or wanting) the huge sections on ship to ship combat that we had previously, but I don't want to have to rewrite large sections of the rules just because they didn't put in minimum amount of work they should have.
It shows a lack of care about what they were putting out.
I am fine with simple rules. These are not simple rules, they are non-existent rules.
Simple rules are: "Spelljammers operating a Spelljammer Helm can sense objects around them in wildspace/astralspace/normal space as they travel via the magic of the helm, unless the object is attempting to remain undetected. An entity can attempt to remain undetected in an effort to hide, sneak past, or close with another entity undetected by blending in with the background currents by succeeding at a Stealth(Dexterity) check versus the targets Passive Perception or Perception(Wisdom) if the target has reason to believe something is present; this roll is made at disadvantage if the target's hp is 1/2 or less the maximum hp of the sneaking entity and at advantage if the target's hp is x2 or more the maximum hp of the sneaking entity. A Spelljammer that detects another object can estimate the mass of the object (the GM should give a rough mass size based on an object's description and maximum hp) and if the object is moving. "
Another: "An entity who has detected another object in wildspace/astralspace/normal space may as a move action choose to do one of the following three options: 1. decrease the distance to the object, 2. increase the distance to the object, or 3. maintain the distance to the object. Each of these is done by succeeding at a Space Vehicle (Intelligence) check for non-creatures or Athletic (Strength)/Acrobatics(Dexterity) check for creature; this roll is made at disadvantage if the target's move speed is x1.5 or more the move speed of the acting entity and at advantage if the target's move speed is 1/2 or less the move speed of the acting entity. The GM should let the acting entity automatically succeed without a check if the object is either unable to or chooses not to oppose this action." Possibly make this check require 5 move actions or only occur once every 30 secs in game. Possible GM discretion on frequency of the check. I chose a move action as Jammers will be sitting the helm not using it anyway effectively free like in the book or its a creature using its movement anyway.
Last one: "If an entity has decreased the distance to an object enough that their air bubble will merge with the objects air bubble, the entity may as free action merge the air bubbles and gravity fields without negative effect by succeeding at a Space Vehicle (Intelligence) check for non-creatures or Athletic (Strength)/Acrobatics(Dexterity) check for creature; this roll is made at disadvantage if the target's hp is x2 or more the maximum hp of the merging entity and at advantage if the target's hp is 1/2 or less the maximum hp of the merging entity. A failed roll means that the entity attempting to merge the envelops is slammed by the sudden collision of atmospheres and gravity and takes bludgeoning damage equal to the 1d6 for every 50 hp of the target object to a minimum of 1d6; any crew on a crewed entity must make a Strength or Dexterity Save or take bludgeon damage equal to half that of their vessel and get knocked prone. The GM should let the acting entity automatically succeed without a check if the object is either unable to or chooses not to oppose this action as the entity can gradually merge the two air bubbles over 1 minute. The diameter of this new merged bubbles is increased to the sum of the combined sizes of the various merged bubbles, and the air quality of the entity with the smaller air bubble is increased or decreased by one step based on the air quality of the entity with the larger air bubble (two steps if the entity's air bubble is x2 or more the size). An entity may attempt to exit a merged air bubble by successfully increasing the distance to an object." I figured adding some risk to effectively initiating combat would be more exciting with some risk.
In order to give them purpose, only siege weapons may be used prior to the merging of the air bubbles. Simple, very 5e, but actually gives players and GMs something to bite into. Once the air bubbles are merged, the GM uses standard combat rules and movement or adapts Salt Marsh.
Thank you!!! I play a lot of genesys as well, and Savage Worlds. I play D&D for a hybrid of the two Tactical narrative play. I love that so much is left up to the DM so I can take my players input and make it our game.
The designers have said they are focused on narrative theatre of the mind. Spelljammer fits that perfectly.
Do I wish there was a bigger gazetteer, yes. But Chris Perkins said that they would like to add more to spelljammer if there is enough response for it.
I think the fact they own Dndbeyond gives them more options to just drop a pdf of spelljammer info, like they did with that monstrous compendium.
I m excited and love the new take
My group plays Theatre of the mind and what was in the Spelljammer book was something less than desired. There was no inspiration tables to help create your own wildspace systems, the random encounters tables were kinda lacking ect.... it still felt very empty on the story telling front. For a set that cost me $100AUD I kinda expected more to work with.
Many complaints I’ve seen were bad at expressing what they feel is missing. I went in only expecting ship stats and combat rules and wasn’t disappointed. Requests for more varied combat actions gives me an idea, tho.
I’ll reflect more after using the rules more in play, but after reading the books, I’d have liked more material to help run space exploration; the “running out of air” rules ask for it, to me. Tips on how to arrange a map that tests players’ ability to plot courses to maintain/refresh air and rations, gives rules on braving asteroid fields and mysterious gravity wells. I don’t feel there’s enough guidance on how to build maps to test and run resource management exploration in the DMG, either, tho. I wonder if all that’s needed is a good example of that type of play.