Remove ads

A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover

Reader mode
I like the Chrome too. More than I like the current Moonchaser. It fits better with the name and theme. Any chance to switch that one for it? The second is an obvious war ship like the Dauntless is supposed to be.

egoo said:
Moonchaser+ armor can handle the lava and PoF...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Actually maybe add an Environmental Adaptation enchantment for that. Spec it into the Air system as expanded Life Support Systems. Because I'm honestly not sure how it would take the Plane of Fire. Steel Melts and then armor despite its hardness is Steel with a lot of HP.
 
Last edited:
Abhishek M said:
Any chance to switch that one for it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Naaawt really.
Goldfish included it in his plan and it got voted on.

I don't think I'll be really in the right to, sorry :/

It's not like even Dauntless' look is going to stay the same no matter what, since we haven't even begun to build it.
I just need a decent non-inflammatory visual representation to round up the info-mark.
 
@egoo, your pics look far too sci-fi ish IMO. This remains a fantasy game!
The Nautilus one is a little better, at least. But I wouldn't paint it shiny and chrome either.
 
3/3 between C H R O M E and Nautilus, then.
Ah, and we're back to "too sci-fi".

I expected that :V

But really, @TalonofAnathrax, from what I've gotten from Azel's posts Glammered is here mostly for practical purposes, breaking up the ship's silhouette and such - but IIRC, it makes the base state of ship "shiny", because one can't have nice, ship-wide cheap enchantments without drawbacks.

I'll try to look for that particular design-post I (think) I've seen over a half-year ago now... and no promises. But I'll try.

Bottom line, such shiny aesthetic would also be very ours - no other faction makes ships based off the principles we do, no other faction makes them in "maximally slick/aerodynamic" shapes (since they don't have to worry about friction as much as we do, usually).
It's sufficiently unique, and well-defined IC through Lya's research.
 
Last edited:
...alright, scratch that, either I'm too tired now, or said post doesn't exist (Ice Dragons?!) and I've been guiled by a Time-Dragon.
Matters not, all I have found on Glammered is this tidbit on FIghters.
Yes, he did allow that for armor sections of a given size and the fighter is below the threshold. Also, it only changes color, not transform the whole thing into a flying banana, so it's weaker then the actual glammered effect.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh well.
Discount the above point about "has to be C H R O M E'd", but I still kinda prefer it.
Even though I'm not casting my own vote, because that would be prejudiced :/
 
Last edited:
I do like the Chrome but it just doesnt fit the blueprints. Though mine doesnt either for that matter.

But I cant actually see where in that link we voted for the Moonchaser design though? A little help?
 
Abhishek M said:
But I cant actually see where in that link we voted for the Moonchaser design though? A little help?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Here how it went through:
@Goldfish, then maybe add showing Moonsong a 1 to 100 model of the Moonchaser for showmanship.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
he adds it, but tally fails at adding the pic itself.
Goldfish said:
The tally is being weird and not displaying the link I embedded in my plan to show the scale model image of the Moonchaser. Here it is again for reference, @DragonParadox.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The one below is the winning vote:
Goldfish said:
Introduce her to the Wyvern aircraft and use them to demonstrate the development of an entirely new kind of flying vessel, then show her the plans for the Moonchaser which will begin construction in just a few days time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The link leads back to the picture.

*egoo feels pride in his info-search abilities*
 
Last edited:
egoo said:
But really, @TalonofAnathrax, from what I've gotten from Azel's posts Glammered is here mostly for practical purposes, breaking up the ship's silhouette and such - but IIRC, it makes the base state of ship "shiny", because one can't have nice, ship-wide cheap enchantments without drawbacks.

I'll try to look for that particular design-post I (think) I've seen over a half-year ago now... and no promises. But I'll try.

Bottom line, such shiny aesthetic would also be very ours - no other faction makes ships based off the principles we do, no other faction makes them in "maximally slick/aerodynamic" shapes (since they don't have to worry about friction as much as we do, usually).
It's sufficiently unique, and well-defined IC through Lya's research.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Azel decided that Glamered made the ship shiny while writing up the design post back when he was a player, and so now we have to keep following that decision years after he had a hissy fit and left the thread?
RAW Glamered absolutely doesn't make the ship shiny. AFAIK it's in the DMG, and it lets you change your appearance at will (it's an illusion). It's the opposite of shiny! It can look like whatever we damn well please!

And looking sleek and shiny absolutely isn't our aesthetic. Pathfinder is full of Outsiders who look like that, and before it got its magitech act together Eberron gave us piles of sleek-looking Constructs who looked like they'd stepped out of a sci-fi convention. We already have an aesthetic, and it's "Black and Red + Dragon iconography".
Having sleek silver ships is for Astral or Mechanus people!

And we can be aerodynamic and have a paint job. Honestly, where did the "if it's shiny it's better" idea come from? This is a warship, not an iphone!
 
A few runner-ups for those disliking glorious C H R O M E:
@TalonofAnathrax, @canute, @Abhishek M, @MTB, @Crake, how do you guys feel about these ones, as an attempt to find compromise between "too sci-fi" and "not reasonably built"?

I'll get the protruding "rockets" off it's back if this one is okay with the majority, and smoothen the sudden curve in the middle of it's belly.

Minus the back-spikes. Hell, I can get them off the art if everyone likes it otherwize.
I have the technology.

...I can remove the lazors..? Honestly, it's jsut the too-wide things on the sides that I don't like. And them, too, I can remove.
 
If it's a tie I am fine with Chrome. I'd just have liked the design for Moonchaser instead is all. Things wings fit a 2 engine ship better than one with 8.
 
I'd say the shape matters more than chrome or no chrome. And I like the more space ship-like shapes better, they look like they're made for flying and 3d combat. The submarine just looks so unwieldy.

I'd be for the Chrome shape without the chrome itself since if given a choice I prefer non-shiny to shiny, but the shape still matters more.
 
Last edited:
TalonofAnathrax said:
This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Azel decided that Glamered made the ship shiny while writing up the design post back when he was a player, and so now we have to keep following that decision years after he had a hissy fit and left the thread?
RAW Glamered absolutely doesn't make the ship shiny. AFAIK it's in the DMG, and it lets you change your appearance at will (it's an illusion). It's the opposite of shiny! It can look like whatever we damn well please!

And looking sleek and shiny absolutely isn't our aesthetic. Pathfinder is full of Outsiders who look like that, and before it got its magitech act together Eberron gave us piles of sleek-looking Constructs who looked like they'd stepped out of a sci-fi convention. We already have an aesthetic, and it's "Black and Red + Dragon iconography".
Having sleek silver ships is for Astral or Mechanus people!

And we can be aerodynamic and have a paint job. Honestly, where did the "if it's shiny it's better" idea come from? This is a warship, not an iphone!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sheesh, you are reacting as if you are arguing with Azel again.
Please don't. Just me here.

I took the next logical step from the look of the Moonchaser - sleek and/or aerodynamic. Chrome makes sense for me, since it's better for, as Azel outlined once (but I couldn't find, so it doesn't count as valid quotation) for a ship.

And, okay, I was wrong on uniqueness of "flowing" ships, having looked up things from Starfidner, retarded as some are for the purpoises they are built.
But Wyvern and Moonchaser don't exactly go "red and black" either.

I am willing to compromise, if someone finds reasonably bulky yet aerodynamic built without unreasonable (sails, open spaces, etc) details, and I'm trying to do just that here.
Don't go blowing a fuse on me yet, please.

That I don't like the sub Nautilus doesn't mean I'm going to try and prohibit people off voting for it and promise to leave the quest if they do.
I've gone over that phase of being too invested long ago :V
 
Last edited:
I can't see the second picture. Try adding the url to the post so I can open it myself?

The third picture is all wrong, but the first one could do the job. Nautilus is still better though. Paint it black and red and it's not bad.

AFAIK we used Magic the Gathering art for our first ship or something, so maybe we should keep doing that for the next one? That way we're more likely to stay on theme.
 
egoo said:
how do you guys feel about these ones, as an attempt to find compromise between "too sci-fi" and "not reasonably built"?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
First one. I think 'built to do the job' would fit the Empire.
TalonofAnathrax said:
The third picture is all wrong, but the first one could do the job. Nautilus is still better though. Paint it black and red and it's not bad.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't like the Nautilus because (for me) it looks like a thin reed looking to be broken into pieces.
 
Last edited:
TalonofAnathrax said:
AFAIK we used Magic the Gathering art for our first ship or something, so maybe we should keep doing that for the next one? That way we're more likely to stay on theme.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That honestly worked well (in practical terms) mostly because of the specifics of Wyvern's design - the poor things had too little of AG-engine to maneuver, and wings actually gave them that to a great degree.
To a point that without one, as Azel described, "they'd have to awkwardly and slowly wobble back to home base".

I'd have loved to use similar aesthetics, but I looked into the artist, and that was his work for Riddick Chronicles movie.
Also the gun emplacement I linked a post below after it - but that was all on his portfolio made in that unique (and cool) style :(

Here's the second pic again, downloaded it on imgur:
 
I like the Nautilus too, it looks ship inspired instead of having somehow evolved advanced aerodynamics overnight.
Like TNE said, this is a prototype, it's not supposed to look like futuristic tech.
 
MTB said:
First one. I think 'built to do the job' would fit the Empire.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I disagree. Our ships are explicitly extraplanar PR pieces as well as weapons, and they're not exactly mass-produced : it makes sense for us to give them a paintjob, stick our logo on them, and generally treat them as more than a clean instrument of death.
Hell, in this very update Viserys thought of using the Moonchaser as a backdrop for a speech and to show power to the Shaitan !

MTB said:
I don't like the Nautilus because (for me) it looks like a thin reed looking to be broken into pieces.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's really huge though. It's longer than large, but it's still very large. It holds an awful lot of people!
It needs a tiny Dragon next to it for scale :D

egoo said:
That honestly worked well (in practical terms) mostly because of the specifics of Wyvern's design - the poor things had too little of AG-engine to maneuver, and wings actually gave them that to a great degree.
To a point that without one, as Azel described, "they'd have to awkwardly and slowly wobble back to home base".

I'd have loved to use similar aesthetics, but I looked into the artist, and that was his work for Riddick Chronicles movie.
Also the gun emplacement I linked a post below after it - but that was all on his portfolio made in that unique (and cool) style :(

Here's the second pic again, downloaded it on imgur:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Thanks!
Yeah, that ship is just too organic. It looks like it has intestines! Very cool for a Deep One ship, but not great for us.
 
MTB said:
I don't like the Nautilus because (for me) it looks like a thin reed looking to be broken into pieces.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, pretty much.
Our ships, from the way they are written up in construction, are equally robust and aerodynamic.
I don't think I can edit that onto the Submarine well enough, it is just too thin/long for an all-enviroment ship to my senses.

I'm eyeing the first picture more now. Will do a few edits if it's chosen. Like a targ logo @TalonofAnathrax apparently wants so very much :V

I'm in for the second picture less for the chrome (albeit I consider it really cool), and mostly for the shape.
I've yet to find a better fitting that isn't unreasonably prone to breaking at exerting of force. And I can't recolor an entire ship either, sorry.

Nautilus is just not really clicking for me, sorry.

So far, 2/4/3 for BftJ, CHROME and Nautilus respectively.
Me excluded.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top