Talk:Naval Combat
I've created this page so that we can refine the naval combat rules that we started with last night during the Wilding game. My feedback is that it felt like it took too long for the ships to properly engage. I feel that either ships speed should increase by 1 or 2 or that weapon ranges should be increased by 1 or 2, preferring the latter. --Randy (Talk) 13:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, after I thought about it some, I actually liked the weapon ranges. I think that the ships should have gotten more attacks a round, or the attack bonuses/ACs should have been modified to better simulate volleys from siege weapons. You'd still get a -6 from a long range increment, but you would have a better chance to hit overall. More the ACs, because a siege weapon should have a poor chance of hitting a person (think how a size huge creature gets an AC minus and a penalty to hit). And, if you think about the scale, a ship would have a very low AC, but high hardness/hp. --t3knomanser 16:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Facing
I think facing should be more significant for combat. Certain attacks should only be capable of being done from broadsides, or when done from broadsides get a bonus. Again, think about a naval ship with light forward/rear facing emplacements and a much more significant broadside compliment. I know this goes against traditional D&D, where facing never matters. Coupled with higher movement on the ships, I think it would actually speed the game along. It also adds a bit more strategy, since there'd be more emphasis on putting your broadside against their forward/rear arcs. --t3knomanser 16:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Movement
I do think the slow movement was much more realistic, but I think faster ships would make for more interesting gameplay. Increasing the base speed of every ship by one might help. It also might be worth changing the wind's properties. Going against the wind should still only cost one, but going with the wind should add two. --t3knomanser 16:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
