Hard to answer according to your scheme. There are some things I like to be very realistic about. I base my geography on real-world geography, and try to make social structure, politics, economics et al plausible (although not based on a particular historic time and place). On the other hand, I do incorporate a lot of "mythic realism", meaning that what people have commonly believed, is actually true. The gods are much like the gods of various real-world pantheons except that they actually exist. (To avoid getting into forbidden subject matter, those who believe in one or more gods should feel free to interpret that last comment as referring to everyone else's gods.) The sun really does move across the sky from east to west every day on the path prescribed by the appropriate god(s), and there are similar mythological explanations for climate variation.
How Close To "Real" Is Your World?
- Thread starter Kid Charlemagne
- Start date
Kid Charlemagne
I am the Very Model of a Modern Moderator
Old One said:Is this a new kind of Russian pastry?
~ OO
Similar to a French Tart.
Patryn of Elvenshae
First Post
Old One said:Is this a new kind of Russian pastry?
Damn!
I was gonna make that joke!
IMC, the world is pretty close to realistic, in that most things work as you would expect.
However, there are certain implications of the D&D "magical worldview."
1. There are only 4 elements, not 100+. Various minerals and whatnot are basically just different forms of elemental earth (perhaps mixed with various "strains" of elemental water, air, and fire - accordingly, you might be able to find certain kinds of stone or metal on the Prime, but not on the elemental plane of Earth).
2. There is no such thing as DNA. Take any inheritance theories you may have, and leave them at the door. It is eminently sensible that orcs and elves can interbreed with humans, but not each other, and that dragons and celestials / fiends can breed with anything.
3. Similarly, diseases are not caused by bacteria and viruses. Diseases, like most forms of decay, are an expression of the effects of negative energy in the world.
I voted very real - eg there's a scientific explanation for magic, it's generated by the planet's electromagnetic flux. I do also use spirits and a spirit world - a shamanic magical tradition that is not scientific but is much closer to "real world" magical ideas. I like my settings to be internally consistent and I won't hamdwave stuff with "It's D&D, it's not supposed to be believable" - eg if a villainous organisation is raiding other dimensions for slaves it's because they can make a profit on it as well as for sheer evilness.
Galethorn
First Post
I voted for 'Mostly Real'
Generally speaking, everything in my world works just the way it would if real 'earthican' people were in the same situation. To be fair, however, that situation is one in which magic is rare, dangerous to the user, and unreliable...which makes things a lot easier; instead of having a completely unfamiliar (and probably unpleasantly weird) type of society and underlying culture (as would be the case if you really took magic into account realistically), I have a setting that's 1. Inherently familiar to the players, and 2. Internally consistent.
Personally, I don't think you really can have both Familiarity and Interal Consistency if your setting has by-the-book magic, but you can certainly have one or the other and have plenty of fun with it.
Anyway, back to my setting...
Standard 'earthican' physics and astronomical setup (though, beyond the planet-moon-sun system, it doesn't really matter what's out there)
Realistic-for-conditions cultures and societies (the Big Guys are agrarian feudal monarchies, the smaller ones are advanced chiefdoms, etc.)
Only dragons (which are incredibly rare) and semi-deific beings (also very rare) have innate abilities that defy physics, biology, or whatever
Spellcasters are opening a hole between paralell universes, using 'understanding' (wis-based casters), very specific calculations (int-based casters), or innate connection to that other universe (cha-based casters), for a variety of effects. This is physically taxing on the caster, and (basically) drains them of metabolic energy...meaning they have to eat a lot to recover from casting a lot, or else become weak, tired, and frail.
Generally speaking, everything in my world works just the way it would if real 'earthican' people were in the same situation. To be fair, however, that situation is one in which magic is rare, dangerous to the user, and unreliable...which makes things a lot easier; instead of having a completely unfamiliar (and probably unpleasantly weird) type of society and underlying culture (as would be the case if you really took magic into account realistically), I have a setting that's 1. Inherently familiar to the players, and 2. Internally consistent.
Personally, I don't think you really can have both Familiarity and Interal Consistency if your setting has by-the-book magic, but you can certainly have one or the other and have plenty of fun with it.
Anyway, back to my setting...
Standard 'earthican' physics and astronomical setup (though, beyond the planet-moon-sun system, it doesn't really matter what's out there)
Realistic-for-conditions cultures and societies (the Big Guys are agrarian feudal monarchies, the smaller ones are advanced chiefdoms, etc.)
Only dragons (which are incredibly rare) and semi-deific beings (also very rare) have innate abilities that defy physics, biology, or whatever
Spellcasters are opening a hole between paralell universes, using 'understanding' (wis-based casters), very specific calculations (int-based casters), or innate connection to that other universe (cha-based casters), for a variety of effects. This is physically taxing on the caster, and (basically) drains them of metabolic energy...meaning they have to eat a lot to recover from casting a lot, or else become weak, tired, and frail.
WayneLigon
Adventurer
Cinematically real. I cleave to real world physics, economics, weather, whatever if it advances the plot and dump it when it doesn't. Years and years ago, I did tons of research on midieval culture and castles and all... And nobody gave a tinkers damn about it, so I stopped bothering.
I treat it like a novel. If woolmaking is important to the story, then I'll do a little research on wool making, pull out some salient facts that could add a sense of false verisimiltude to the session (and make it look like the world is far more 'real' than it really is), and go from there.
I try not to go too heavily into what changes when you add magic. I also came to the conclusion that magic should be treated like most TV science fiction. You have to hold an audience and to do that you have to give them something familiar to hold on to. You can change a few things, but if you change too much you lose your audience. If you take every magic item and spell in D&D and take it to it's logical conclusion, you end up with a world and a culture that no-one will recognize.
I treat it like a novel. If woolmaking is important to the story, then I'll do a little research on wool making, pull out some salient facts that could add a sense of false verisimiltude to the session (and make it look like the world is far more 'real' than it really is), and go from there.
I try not to go too heavily into what changes when you add magic. I also came to the conclusion that magic should be treated like most TV science fiction. You have to hold an audience and to do that you have to give them something familiar to hold on to. You can change a few things, but if you change too much you lose your audience. If you take every magic item and spell in D&D and take it to it's logical conclusion, you end up with a world and a culture that no-one will recognize.
