There is no moon.

[tjoneslo]

No moon. Some effects your players should notice:

Little or no tides, the sea remains always the same level or nearly so. There are solar tides but they are much smaller than the lunar ones. No moon, no tides.

The night would always be very dark, except for the few stars.

No Eclipses. These are portents of great events, but no longer happen.

No months. The lunar cycle provides a quick and easy way to divide the year in to a managable number of parts. You will need to describe another way of doing so. This also prevents lycanthropes and other moon aspected magic from occuring.

There are many cults which worship the moon, you need to replace their moon worship with something else. How do the creatures of the night hunt?

The physics aspects (wobbing poles, day-night cycles, asteroid impacts) are rare and random enough that they players may not notice them during a game. Unless you make it the point of the campaign to do so.

 

[Mark]

This is a fantasy world, so it doesn't have to follow the laws of physics.

I had thought your first post suggested that was a primary concern of yours. Anyway, certainly no need for a fantasy world to be tied to actual physical laws. What changes that you've either read or come up with on your own are you leaning toward using at this point?

 

[fusangite]

Actually, the no moon idea was just to make things a little different. Most fantasy settings I have read either have our one moon or several moons. Why not no moon at all?

This is a fantasy world, so it doesn't have to follow the laws of physics. I certainly doubt that I would mess around too much with the length of days or extreme changes to how the earth works. But a few differences would add a bit of flavor to the campaign.

It is a bad idea to run a D&D world where there are no physical laws. However, different physical laws are, in my view, a lot of what RPGs are about. Did you my model helpful as an alternative that didn't involve screwing up tides and the like?

 

[Kemrain]

By comparison to Earth, Mars has diddly for erosion, and has been that way for a long time.

Absolutely. As I understand, the leading school of thought is that much of the surface of Mars is 4 billion years old. There is 1 place in Greenland where there are rocks that are 4 billion years old. And they contain evidence of life, too. Comparing the two, Earth is hyperdynamic, and Mars is merely a slowly eroding ball of dusty rock and ice.

- Kemrain the Science Channel Subscriber.