Whose "property" are the PCs?

[fusangite]

I see that but I don't see how it impacts world building. Individual cultures' hypothesis on reality will impact the people who live there and how they intuitively interact with their environment. It is up to the DM to decide whether any given phenomena is universal, local, or a complete misunderstanding of the mechanism.

Exactly. My point here is that depending on which worldview is actually "true," different things will be universal versus particular. If the game world's universals are different from those in this world, then local cultures will have different things in common with eachother and will be predictable in different ways.

If, for instance, these ancient Greeks' views of the game world are true and correct, all cultures will have Platonists, Pythagoreans and Aristotelians. All cultures in warm places will have certain social structures because people's humoral balances will be different. Etc.

That's why, if a player doesn't completely know what the actual physics of his world are, he cannot create remote cultures himself because these cultures' attributes may violate the universal characteristics of cultures entailed by the structure of the game world. That's my point: you can't just say, "This culture is way over here and has never been in contact with this other culture; therefore I can make it like the Mongols," because a culture in that location (or anywhere at all, depending) being like the Mongols may violate the basic structure of the game world.

 

[fusangite]

No, not at all. I'm merely stating that in RW physics the rules are the same everywhere, whereas in a world with magic, they may not be.

The physics are not different from place to place. Magic is just subject to local conditions. The local conditions don't exempt these regions from having the physics apply to them. The moon has lower gravity than the earth but both environments exist within the same physical system. Wild magic and and dead magic zones aren't locally different physics; they are locally different conditions within the same system of physics.

Rather than rebutting each of your alleged universal laws in a repetitive way, I'll just rebut the one I can challenge in the fewest words:

Statement 3) assumes only that entropy is still in effect, so a creature must seek energy sources outside its own body. That energy source need not be food- it could be solar radiation, magic, alpha waves, whatever.

A Xorn needs to eat!? Given that D&D is premised on a system on physics that has more in common with Aristotle than Einstein, why is it necessary to import our world's energy conservation laws into D&D?

OK, that's a pretty factual statement that I can accept as true. I wouldn't want to GAME in that world- that kind of world would be pretty bland since the rule eliminates a LOT of cultural variation.

Well, by limiting some possibilities, we expand others. You have your own set of cultural universals premised on a physics that strongly resembles that of our world. You are assuming that switching to a different sociological or physical model that I am only shutting down possibilities for difference when, of course, my motivation for doing so is to open up new ones.

No. For the most part, all he has to do is design a character and ask me where such a character may be found as a point of origin If there is NO place in my campaign world in which such a PC could be found, THEN I have to step into the PC creation process.

Well, there is also the problem of how the character got from his point of origin to the place where the party and adventure are. For instance, in the real world, the 14th century had an urban culture in which there were essentially no domestic animals. But one couldn't create a party adventuring on the Pontic Steppe with a character from that culture in it because there would be no way to explain what an Aztec would be doing there.

This also presumes a pretty geographically big world, another thing that's up for grabs. LeGuin's Earthsea, for instance, is a world which radically limits the PC's culture of origin. Yet, I think it would be a great place to play.

Example: I was entering a pretty vanilla D&D campaign and the PC I designed appeared to be a female drow Mu/Th. In "actuality," the PC was an android from another dimension that had been programmed to be an NPC female drow Mu/Th in a LARP game that had somehow wound up in the campaign world...and it was utterly convinced that it was still in the game. At various points, the android would even discuss things or make comments that related to its percieved reality- and it had knowledge a drow Mu/TH shouldn't. Even its back-story was off kilter- while the android could recite its whole drow history, family, and why it didn't live in the old city anymore, no one in the campaign world had any idea of the places or events the drow was talking about- so the drow was written off as insane-by most.

Who was delusional- the android or everyone else- was NEVER answered.

Well, if that works for you...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Fusangite
The physics are not different from place to place.

You don't consider Wish to be a way to...alter reality? OK...

Fusangite
Rather than rebutting each of your alleged universal laws in a repetitive way, I'll just rebut the one I can challenge in the fewest words:

Statement 3) assumes only that entropy is still in effect, so a creature must seek energy sources outside its own body. That energy source need not be food- it could be solar radiation, magic, alpha waves, whatever.

A Xorn needs to eat!? Given that D&D is premised on a system on physics that has more in common with Aristotle than Einstein, why is it necessary to import our world's energy conservation laws into D&D?

Monster Manual p260
Xorns are indiferent to creatures of the Material Plane- with the exception of anyone carrying a significant amount of precious metals or minerals, which Xorns eat. They can smell food up to 20 feet away. A xorn can be quite aggressive when seeking food, especially on the material plane where such sustinance is harder to find than it is on its native plane.

So, yes, they do.

Entropy is the reason why creatures experience hunger. Creatures deplete their energy reserves and must replenish them because they are not perpetual motion machines. The formulation of my defense of Statement 3 is because you challenged the original statment that a "Need for sustinance" was one of the only 4 universal driving forces on culture.

Fusangite
But one couldn't create a party adventuring on the Pontic Steppe with a character from that culture in it because there would be no way to explain what an Aztec would be doing there.

There is always a way to explain something like an Aztec near the Black Sea...a shipwreck (followed by extensive travel, voluntary or not) is one way, an organized expedition is another. Perhaps Columbus (or the Vikings, if you prefer) wasn't first, and the true adventurers actually sailed East instead of West...

Or Quetzecoatl did it.

Consider the speculation about the Cocaine/Tobacco stuffed Mummies or the Egyptian Heiroglyphs in Australia.

Hoaxes or genuine, they've stimulated new research into who discovered whom and when.

Fusangite
This also presumes a pretty geographically big world, another thing that's up for grabs. LeGuin's Earthsea, for instance, is a world which radically limits the PC's culture of origin. Yet, I think it would be a great place to play

What radical limitations are you talking about? LeGuin's Earthsea has several radically different cultures! Roke is dominated by men- indeed, it is a male-only society at the time of the first novel, but Ged must venture into a matriarchal society to complete one of his earlier quests. There are expansionistic, warlike societies, and others that are pastoral and meek. When running from his darker self, Ged meets people who live on great rafts in the sea. There are places where only dragons live...

And Earthsea has many islands on the world never more than sketchily described.

Fusangite
Well, if that works for you...

It did. It also worked for DM, the campaign and the other players.

 

[fusangite]

You don't consider Wish to be a way to...alter reality? OK...

How is Wish outside of physics in a way that other spells are not? The fact that it can do more than one thing does not mean that there is a hull breach in physics. All D&D spells are inside of D&D physics. The physics of a universe are the systematic rules of that universe. If the Wish spell were not subject to systematic physical categorization, it could not be defined in the PHB.

Entropy is the reason why creatures experience hunger.

Think of all the coherent systems of physics that human beings have invented over time. How many of them included entropy? Why is entropy a necessary feature of every game world's physics?

There is always a way to explain something like an Aztec near the Black Sea...a shipwreck (followed by extensive travel, voluntary or not) is one way, an organized expedition is another. Perhaps Columbus (or the Vikings, if you prefer) wasn't first, and the true adventurers actually sailed East instead of West...

Actually, no. The Aztec civilization could combine dense urban culture with the absence of domestic animals because of the existence of the avocado.

Or Quetzecoatl did it.

Right. As I have been saying for four pages, in order for this desired cultural phenomenon to occur, you have to alter the structure of the world, for instance, by making Quetzalcoatl real. My point is that not all world structures are compatible with all cultural possibilities, that there is an interdependence between the two. That in an historical earth game, the nature of the world prohibits people of certain cultures being in certain parties. But this is not a unique feature of an historical earth. All worlds, in different ways, prohibit and permit different cultures being played.

What radical limitations are you talking about? LeGuin's Earthsea has several radically different cultures! Roke is dominated by men- indeed, it is a male-only society at the time of the first novel, but Ged must venture into a matriarchal society to complete one of his earlier quests. There are expansionistic, warlike societies, and others that are pastoral and meek. When running from his darker self, Ged meets people who live on great rafts in the sea. There are places where only dragons live...

The fact that the number of cultures in the world is greater than one does not mean the number of cultures in the world is infinite. Just because different cultures have different characteristics does not that any culture can have any set of characteristics. You keep arguing that all worlds have a potentially infinite variety of cultures, when, in fact, no worlds do.

And Earthsea has many islands on the world never more than sketchily described.

Yes. But you know perfectly well that you couldn't just put any culture on one of these islands without violating the principles by which Leguin's culture coheres.

 

[kigmatzomat]

That's why, if a player doesn't completely know what the actual physics of his world are, he cannot create remote cultures himself because these cultures' attributes may violate the universal characteristics of cultures entailed by the structure of the game world. That's my point: you can't just say, "This culture is way over here and has never been in contact with this other culture; therefore I can make it like the Mongols," because a culture in that location (or anywhere at all, depending) being like the Mongols may violate the basic structure of the game world.

I can conceive of no constraint that would prevent any culture from forming, excluding the gods smiting people who do so. The events that form the culture may be radically different but the culture can be justified. The players almost never care about the causality of the culture; just the immediacy.

There will almost always be twists and wrinkles from my thought process that were unexpected by the player. However since most people have only the most tenuous grasp on past cultures, as long as those changes don't oppose that simple definition they are happy.

 

[fusangite]

I can conceive of no constraint that would prevent any culture from forming,

I think this is the moment for me to bow out of this thread. I don't know what you think has been going on in the conversation we have been having but obviously it's sufficiently different from my perception that further dialogue is fruitless.

Happy gaming guys!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Dissapearance will not stop a rebuttal...

Fusangite
How is Wish outside of physics in a way that other spells are not?

It allows violations of cause and effect.

Fusangite
Why is entropy a necessary feature of every game world's physics?

Without entropy, nothing loses energy. Creatures do not need to eat, they do not fatigue. Things that are heated do not cool. There are no shadows to hide in since light energy does not dissipate. Thrown/ranged weapons have infinite range.

Dannyalcatraz
There is always a way to explain something like an Aztec near the Black Sea...a shipwreck (followed by extensive travel, voluntary or not) is one way, an organized expedition is another. Perhaps Columbus (or the Vikings, if you prefer) wasn't first, and the true adventurers actually sailed East instead of West...

Fusangite
Actually, no. The Aztec civilization could combine dense urban culture with the absence of domestic animals because of the existence of the avocado.

That is a classic non-sequitur. What does that response have to do with what I posted?

Fusangite
But you know perfectly well that you couldn't just put any culture on one of these islands without violating the principles by which Leguin's culture coheres.

Earthsea doesn't have a single "coherent culture," as I already demonstrated. If, as I think you mean, LeGuin's "world" has principles that would perforce prevent certain kinds of societies from arising, I'd have to disagree. With the exception that Earthsea has few large landmasses, I see nothing so inherently alien about Earthsea that would bring me to that conclusion. The main consequences of a world covered by archipelagos as opposed to large continents is that either Naval or Aerial power is neccessary for military strength, and no country can be as rich in natural resources as someplace like Russia or the USA- every country would have to deal with scarcity/population growth issues early on...

And obviously, nothing at all prevents LeGuin from dropping in any culture she pleases. The big squawk about the Sci-Fi channel's treatment of Earthsea was that they changed things that didn't need changing, like giving Roke the "Harry Potter" treatment.

 

[ThirdWizard]

It allows violations of cause and effect.

Okay, not my argument, but I'm gonna have to call you on that. It does not allow violation of cause and effect. Even if it were somehow possible for it to cause violation of cause and effect, that wouldn't be a violation of physics, because by definition the laws of physics cannot be violated. If you think the laws of physics have been violated, it isn't the nature of the universe that is wrong, it is your understanding of it that needs to be altered.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I understand...but when a spell reads (in part):

PHB p302
The wish forces a reroll of any roll made within the last round (including your last turn). Reality reshapes itself to accomodate the new result.

You CAN generate hiccups in causality:

Cause: opponent's successful attack
Effect: you're severely damaged

Cause: you're severely damaged
Effect: you expend a wish wishing the attack had failed

Cause: you expend a wish wishing the attack had failed
Effect: opponent's previous attack fails

Cause: opponent's attack fails
Effect: you're not damaged...you don't expend a wish...but your wish is still expended as are the XP and material components of the spell

When the wish "reshapes reality" it completely undoes a little 6 second portion of cause and effect...but for 1 particular effects that no longer has a cause. Its a classic time travel paradox, albeit at a small scale.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Well, its a bit more odd than that. You do actually cast your wish spell. You don't get to go back and redo your action (when you cast the wish), so in both scenarios, you did cast wish spell. In other words, you can't say that since your wish made it so you were never hit, instead of casting wish that round, you will cast meteor swarm instead. How the character sees this is, of course, up to interprietation, but I would have everyone be aware of both events, personally, to avoid said paradox. The DM wouldn't have to handle it that way, however.