Quote:
Originally Posted by guymc
I’m sorry, my friend, but that’s exactly what I do not want to do with TFT. Seven Talents (plus second-level Talents for some of those), devoted to sailing? Realistic, but just not appropriate for TFT core. At most, we need a way to say “this character knows the sea” and perhaps “this character knows how to command at sea”. It is likely to be a part of a character’s background that offers a chance for related adventure hooks and interesting relationships to come back and affect play.
If we ever did a TFT-based game that centered on high-seas piracy, with megahex deck plans, cutlassry, diving and drowning, ship’s justice, planks and keelhauling — that game would probably include a bit more granularity as suited the setting. But it would be intended for the people playing that game, and would not be necessary complexity for 99% of TFT players.
I appreciate the enthusiasm for all kinds of settings and adventuring, but it is not core TFT, and that’s what we have to build (and sell) before we can even consider that sort of depth in the line.
|
I'm not arguing you
should do it, just saying that
if you do, the logical and historical path is to follow the departments. Note that Carpenter is already covered, too — it's the same skillset as ashore. Same with Cook, and Surgeon. (Tho', historically, many ship's surgeons were not competent at all.)
And I concur with your reasoning, too - not that I'd mind a proper naval supplement down the road... provided it's compatible with history. (And that also excludes captains being axiomatically competent - historically, most weren't. It was a political and/or combat position. Which is why the QM and the SM ran the ship day-to-day.)