Fantasy world maps and real world geology

[prosfilaes]

A force in the physics of their universe (often called the DM or GM) prevents them from doing so.

Is that a serious argument? It makes no sense to me to simulate a world where brilliant people spend their lives figuring out how things fall, with the first approximation being 9.8 m/s^2, but the real answer is the one in the PHB. It's much easier for me to think that they are entirely correct, but the simplifications involved in gaming are just that, simplifications of the game-world to make it playable.

Since there's no correct answer, the answer chosen is arbitrary and going to be the one that people accept, so sophistic answers are pointless and merely argumentative.

 

[prosfilaes]

I'm having a moment. I'm looking at the map of the world and I'm seeing peninsulas all over the place. And how big does an ithsmus need to be before you call it that? Because you could easily lable the sliver of land that connects the portion of Xendrik that stradles the equator with the bulk of the continent an ithsmus.

I wouldn't label that an ithsmus. And there doesn't seem to be any sharp peninsulas, like Florida or Baja California.

Really, it's the shape and feel of things, in a way that I'm having a hard time describing, that annoys me. Every continent feels the same; is about the same size, has the same islands around it. That ithsmus you're talking about on Xen'drik is right next to a freaking huge river, unlike any seen on Earth, but relatively common on Ebberon. The fundamental problem for me, I think, is that the fractal dimension is all wrong.

Yeah, but . . . the planet is believed to literally be the body of the progenitor dragon Eberron itself.

See, magic.

But that misses the real reason for my objection. It's not wrong for pedantic, technical reasons, it's wrong because I look at the map and it offends me. I look at the map, and it jumps out at me as being wrong.

I've read that a problem with robots that look like humans is that people reject things that look a lot like humans, but not quite close enough to fool the human mind. People rarely seriously object to Oz, or other worlds that are clearly fantastic. But if you lay out something that looks like a real world, but not really, then things are going to get judged as if it were a real world. And frankly, invoking magic feels like a cop-out here, since there's nothing overtly magic that we're talking about.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Extraordinarily little? Considering what we allow to fly under its own power.

I mean, what physics laws could we determine by comparing the flight speed and maneuverability of various flying creatures that fly as a natural ability?

If a hippogriff can fly, I should be able to flap my arms pretty fast and fly too. I'm just as aerodynamic as a horse (and probably resemble one as well - at least one end. ) Slapping a couple of wings on a horse is all we need to achieve flight?

Or could it be the rules that govern aerodynamics are pretty much absent from the game since we don't need them?

In other words, if the rules say it can fly, it can fly. If the rules do not say it can fly, it cannot.

Now, what in D&D determines whether or not matter or energy follow conservation laws?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Is that a serious argument?

Yes.

It makes no sense to me to simulate a world where brilliant people spend their lives figuring out how things fall, with the first approximation being 9.8 m/s^2, but the real answer is the one in the PHB.

But, regardless of whether it makes sense to you or not, if within the world you game in, you use the rules for the PHB instead of that first approximation, that is what you are doing.

It's much easier for me to think that they are entirely correct, but the simplifications involved in gaming are just that, simplifications of the game-world to make it playable.

Which is fine for you to think. At the end of the day, though, the PHB rules are the "laws" that anyone in that world will take into account when deciding what actions will, or will not, work. Unless, of course, you houserule something else.

IOW, if I was to play in a D&D game with no houserules, what should I take as my predictive model? A real life physics model, or the RAW?

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Now, what in D&D determines whether or not matter or energy follow conservation laws?

The imagination of the GM.

 

[JustinA]

When looking at a fantasy world map, do you know or care anything about real world geology?

I have a simple rule about fantasy: It should be realistic unless you give me a specific reason why it isn't.

If you show me two rivers a dozen miles apart, running parallel to each other but in opposite directions for a thousand miles... well, that doesn't make a lot of sense. But if you tell me those rivers are the remnants of an ancient system of magical canals... well, now it's awesome.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Even real world geography can be pretty spectacular - I created an RPGNet thread asking for the most spectacular environments on Earth, and got some rather good examples...

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Even real world geography can be pretty spectacular - I created an RPGNet thread asking for the most spectacular environments on Earth, and got some rather good examples...

I'm pretty sure that there are many places that would have just been fantasy to the ears of foreigners until they actually saw them.

The trees of the Redwood Forest (they're how tall did you say?)
The Grand Canyon (how deep and how wide?)

Those easily come to mind.

 

[skinnydwarf]

When looking at a fantasy world map, do you know or care anything about real world geology?

Quasqueton

I voted don't know, don't care. I don't think "we have magic we we don't need real world geology" (not that there's anything wrong with that). I just don't care- I have more important things to worry about in my game. "Real world" geology in my game goes about as far as rivers originating in mountains and flowing downhill, and hills being near mountains.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Fusangite said that the RAW provides the physics of the universe. But, the RAW contradicts itself frequently when dealing with PC's and with everyone else. Either the RAW XP rules are universal or the Demographics are, because both cannot be.

The xp rules apply only to PC's and NPC's that are adventuring with them. ALL other NPC's otherwise have their levels and abilities assigned by the DM, and not even because they are assumed to have "earned" xp in the same manner as PC's but because those levels and abilities simply meet the current needs and desires of the DM for representing NPC allies and opponents. Similarly, demographics of any campaign are set as the DM desires, not by the RAW (remembering that the demographics tables in the DMG are for IMPROMPTU generation of information, NOT for creation of accurate, broadly useful demographic models.)