Is Your Setting Pretty Much Earth?

[NimrodvanHall]

Our world mailnly is like the real world except that our Dm shortned the year a bit to 336 days so a week has 7 days all months have 4 weeks and a year has excactly 12 months. it also makes the lifespan of humans a bit more logical.

 

[fusangite]

I'm interested in your world ideas. I recall a thread a while back about using different rules of physics in D&D. In a nutshell, how does incorporating Aristotelian physics change D&D? Where can I go to get a readable (to a layman) explanation of said physics?

Sorry I can't really help you on getting a precis of Aristotelian physics. I might recommend a general history of science textbook for undergraduate courses.

Generally, Aristotelian physics are closer to the physics our observations and intuition predict about the physical world. So, about 99% of observed phenomena work just the same as they do in any other model of physics; Aristotle just explains these phenomena differently. Fire is the lightest element, followed by air, followed by water, followed by earth; so things that are all earth fall down because it is in their heavy nature to go down towards the centre of the earth/universe. Similarly, fire goes up because it is in its inherent nature to do so. Heavy things fall; light things float. The phenomena don't change, just the explanations. Often heavy things really do fall faster than light things but while Newtonian physics has to factor in such difficult things as friction, force, etc. to explain this, in Aristotelian physics, it is just a self-evident truth.

Aristotelian physics are generally only really different in that they predict very different things will happen if you go outside of normal day-to-day observable phenomena. You can't get to the moon because you'll bump into a sphere made out of quintessence; water doesn't conduct electricity ever because electricity is fire and therefore can't travel through water; etc.

The reason I use Aristotelian physics for D&D is not because they are more fascinating but because D&D, quite accidentally I understand, already uses a bunch of things from this model. D&D uses the four elements rather than the 100+ modern physics uses; falling objects don't seem to accelerate under the falling damage rules; D&D economics breaks when inflation starts operating; etc. I fell into Aristotelian physics because running D&D under the system required less work than running it under Newtonian physics. People couldn't create vacuums, couldn't use electricity, couldn't cause inflation; using Aristotelian physics started out as my excuse for why a bunch of really inconvenient things just weren't allowed in the game.

So, read up a little on Aristotle's physics but don't sweat it too much. Just try to forget Newtonian/Einsteinian physics and instead go with your visceral, common-sense ideas about how the world works rather than what you "know" to be true scientifically. That should cover about 90% of it.

 

[gizmo33]

falling objects don't seem to accelerate under the falling damage rules;

They do accelerate. In fact, they accelerate faster under normal falling rules than they do in real life. People who advocate the 1d6/10 ft/10 ft rule are actually getting distance confused with velocity. They're using numbers related to distance fallen, which has nothing to do with the velocity at which you hit the ground - think parachute: long distance, low velocity (you hope). I can be much more detailed on this if you wish.

I like the Aristotle physics idea - if anything, it might get players out of the habit of using too much real world knowledge.

 

[Desdichado]

Aristotlean physics explains inflation?

 

[TerraDave]

Oh its Earth alright. Whatever from Earth we want to use, we use. But then add all the spells and creatures and the fact that adventuring is a strangely good career choice

...in terms of the RL life science vs. medieval perceptions, that is a fascinating question, and our answer is: depends on what we feel like

 

[fusangite]

Aristotlean physics explains inflation?

It denies inflation. The Aristotelian theory of value is that value is objective not subjective -- there is a fixed amount of gold every object is worth and no set of market conditions can nullify this. If objects change hands for more or less gold than this, someone is behaving unethically.

 

[Gez]

D&D uses the four elements rather than the 100+ modern physics uses

I think this here is just semantical confusion. There's still, for example, gold and silver in D&D, not just Earth.

Can you imagine helium and plutonium elementals? Yeah, it would be silly.

So, it's a question of using the same words to designate two different concepts. Just like dimension in "dimensional travel" doesn't mean spacial dimension as in height, width, and depth, element as in Elemental Plane doesn't mean element as in Mendeleiev's periodic table.

 

[fusangite]

I think this here is just semantical confusion. There's still, for example, gold and silver in D&D, not just Earth.

There were gold and silver in Aristotle's world too. But they weren't elements. They were earth combined in different ways at different ratios with other elements like water and fire. Hundreds of years of alchemical study elaborated on this idea. Alchemy, not chemistry, is used to make things like Greek fire in D&D; the D20 skills system further indicates that alchemy is an objectively true science in D&D.

There are four elements in D&D. It's not just semantics; it is part of the basic structure of the D&D universe. Unlike Aristotle's world, D&D also has elemental planes. If the four basic elements have no existence beyond semantics, what are these planes doing in the cosmos?

We already know Newtonian physics does not work in D&D from the fact that magic does. Why should we not read D&D manuals literally when they tell us that there are four elements?

 

[Afrodyte]

I tend to imagine Earth-like worlds, although geography and cultures change quite a bit. I often imagine them to be similar in composition to Earth (same basic air and gravitation, similar weather patterns, biomes, etc.) though a bit more malleable according to the wills and natures of its inhabitants. In general, though, these worlds are significantly larger-- at least the size of Uranus or Neptune, although I've imagined Saturn-sized and Jupiter-sized worlds.

In general, I tend to differentiate worlds by their inhabitants as opposed to its physical features.

 

[Gez]

The existence of magic (which can be seen as "additional" laws of physics) doesn't preclude the existence of Newtonian physics, as you say.