Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2144031" data-attributes="member: 7240">The earth was round. It was not a planet; the sun and moon were planets in many round earth systems but the earth never was. The idea of a heliocentric system in which Earth was just another planet and, therefore, the other planets might be worlds is either a marginalized or non-existent view until the re-emergence of the hermetic texts in the 15th century. Earth=sphere and earth=planet are very different realizations and in most such systems planet did not equal sphere. Most earth=sphere systems emphatically denied the earth=planet position. Ptolmaic astronomy was premised on the idea that the earth was round but was not a planet. Thus, one mainstream pagan explanations of planets was that they were divinities. In most geocentric systems, planets, the moon and sun were all in the same class or similar classes and totally distinct from earth which constituted the stationary centre of the universe. I'm not objecting to the sphere thing. I credit that in a game with teleportation, non-spherical worlds can be inconvenient; I am just suggesting that there are a lot of ways for worlds to be easy to GM without having to be planets.I guess we could get into some kind of weird debate about the definition of &quot;magic&quot; but I think you know what I mean here. And even thought I don't mind your logical extension of my statement, provided you apply it only to Einsteinian physics not to Newtonian physics, no, that was not what I was saying. What I was saying was that in D&amp;D, there are four elements; the existence of the four terrestrial elements is an immediate indication that we are not using post-Newtonian physics (or arguably even post-Paracelsian physics).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="fusangite, post: 2144031, member: 7240"] The earth was round. It was not a planet; the sun and moon were planets in many round earth systems but the earth never was. The idea of a heliocentric system in which Earth was just another planet and, therefore, the other planets might be worlds is either a marginalized or non-existent view until the re-emergence of the hermetic texts in the 15th century. Earth=sphere and earth=planet are very different realizations and in most such systems planet did not equal sphere. Most earth=sphere systems emphatically denied the earth=planet position. Ptolmaic astronomy was premised on the idea that the earth was round but was not a planet. Thus, one mainstream pagan explanations of planets was that they were divinities. In most geocentric systems, planets, the moon and sun were all in the same class or similar classes and totally distinct from earth which constituted the stationary centre of the universe. I'm not objecting to the sphere thing. I credit that in a game with teleportation, non-spherical worlds can be inconvenient; I am just suggesting that there are a lot of ways for worlds to be easy to GM without having to be planets.I guess we could get into some kind of weird debate about the definition of "magic" but I think you know what I mean here. And even thought I don't mind your logical extension of my statement, provided you apply it only to Einsteinian physics not to Newtonian physics, no, that was not what I was saying. What I was saying was that in D&D, there are four elements; the existence of the four terrestrial elements is an immediate indication that we are not using post-Newtonian physics (or arguably even post-Paracelsian physics). [/QUOTE]

Verification