To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.gamingOpen lugnet.gaming in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Gaming / 1952
1951  |  1953
Subject: 
Numerous ESPG Thoughts
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.gaming
Date: 
Wed, 4 Apr 2007 00:50:50 GMT
Viewed: 
8731 times
  
Hello Pirate Game Friends:

The Explanation
So, I’ve been asked to partcipate in a mini-private-game-con-thing (i.e. a party amongst a group of friends at a private home that is being organized like a weekend gaming convention). When I put forth a few options as to which game I might run, the majority seemed interested in Evil Stevie’s...

First problem is, I’ve never played the game. Always meant to. Much in the same way I always meant to buy more than the first two Lego® Pirate Ships. But time is on my side for this particular project. The event is not until November. This gives me plenty of time (I hope) to access my renta-cave and dig out enough brick for several cutters, islands, etc. And in the last few days I took advantage of the excuse to buy some ship sets off BrickLink to supplement my BSB and CC.

Meanwhile, the rules are not lengthy and I’ve started to familiarize myself with them already. I also read through a few of the “more recent” threads here on Lugnet on the topic.

The Call for Advice
All that said, I am primarily posting to ask for any suggestions or advice regarding what I should plan for or consider, particularly for a game session that is as short as 4 - 6 hours...and involves players who are experienced gamers, but unfamiliar with Evil Stevie’s in particular.

I am thinking a simple Sail and Shoot game (as opposed to a campaign style) is my only option given the time restraints.

Comments on Prior Threads / Varying the Rules
I do want to add a few comments, while talking about ESPG. In prior threads, I see Frank Filz encourages new GMs to follow just the rules as they are before considering modifying the game with untested house rules. But one or two of my players will end up playing royal seamen rather than pirates (due to what I have available). That said, I was thinking of starting them off with more treasure - and thus to end the game richer, their goal is not to hunt for gold, but rather protect the gold they have. ...Maybe this isn’t really a rule change so much as a shoot-and-sail game with a slight scenario element. Has anyone ever tried something to this effect?

Comments on Prior Threads / New Idea
Further, I see in prior threads time and again a problem some GMs have had is that a fleet of Class 1’s is better than a larger ship (say a Class 7) because they are more maneuverable. Any game balance derived from the number of cannon is further lost because cutters are often fitted with turntable turrets for their one gun to be effective (presumably this design is common because the example in the rules has this). Thus, a one gun cutter can bring all its firepower to bare to both port or starboard, but a bigger ship with set gunports presumably divides its guns between port and starboard. Thus (if I’m right) a Class 7 will only be able to bring three or four guns to bare at a time - unless its crew mounts all 7 guns on one side - but that would leave the other side defenseless! This versitility makes several Class 1’s more effective in combat and from what I’ve read gives little incentive for players to want to get hold of a large vessel.

I offer the following possible alternate rule to help with this issue. I apologize now if this idea has already been discussed (heck it could even be in the rules I just haven’t noticed it yet! Again I apologize if that’s the case). So my idea is this: Give the bigger ships a some value via game-mechanics, in particular what I call “hold size”. Here’s how this could work:

A single “hold size” is equal to one treasure chest or two small barrels. A ship would not be permitted to carry more treasure than its hold size. The capacity would increase on a graduated scale as the ship class increases, such that two of one class would not have a capacity as great as one of twice the class. Take this possible distribution for example:

Ship: -- Hold Size: -- Example:
Class 0 -- 1 -- (one chest, or two barrels)
Class 1 -- 1 -- (one chest, or two barrels)
Class 2 -- 2.5 -- (two chests and a barrel, or equivalent)
Class 3 -- 4 -- (four chests, or equivalent)
Class 4 -- 5.5 -- (five chests and a barrel, or equivalent)
Class 5 -- 7 -- (seven chests, or equivalent)
Class 6 -- 8.5 -- (eight chests and a barrel, or equivalent)
Class 7 -- 10 -- (ten chests, or equivalent)
Class 8 -- 12 -- (twelve chests, or equivalent)

Sure, Class 8’s should be 11.5, but so few people get Class 8’s they deserve a little extra.

Through an idea like this, a pirate who wants to hoard his treasure will need to, over time, get bigger ships. Simply getting seven cutters will not equal a Class 7.

...I was also thinking a rule could allow a ship to tow a Class 0 raft or boat as a means of increasing capacity. But the rule should state that doing so reduces speed. The ropes could of course be cut, but then the raft would be set adrift...I dunno...

Anyone have any thoughts about this hold capacity concept?... Or any of my comments...?

-Hendo



1 Message in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR