Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Roger Nicholls 07-10-04, 09:05 AM	Hi folks, Ive got two questions. 1) How big is the planet itself e.g. does it have a diameter of 25000 miles etc ? 2) Is the weather pattern and global distribution similair to Earth's ? Regards Roger
ChrisTheS 07-13-04, 12:39 AM	The planet is slightly smaller than Mars by about 1200-1500 miles at the equator. Just looking at the continental distribution on the inside cover, I'd say that the weather patterns are a little bit wonky by our standards. However, because I can't be bothered to calculate the meteorological weirdness that would be caused by a lack of super-oceans and the gravitational effect of twelve moons, I'm just going to assume that it's 'similar enough.'
ender 07-13-04, 12:46 AM	Originally posted by ChrisTheS The planet is slightly smaller than Mars by about 1200-1500 miles at the equator. That's really interesting. Would that mean that its gravity is similar to Mars? That could have all sorts of interesting effects, such as greater jump distances, greater endurance (running distances, etc), increased carrying loads, etc.
Roger Nicholls 07-13-04, 12:49 AM	If im reading the map scale on the inside cover correctly i calculate the circumference to about 17500 miles. Can someone confirm this for me please. Regards...
ChrisTheS 07-13-04, 12:53 AM	Should, but doesn't. Krynn also should have less than 1g (unless the planet's bigger than the map lets on), but it's got Earth-type gravity. Similarly, Abeir-toril is bigger than Earth, but it also has only 1g gravity (I don't think the Underdark makes that much of a difference, but hey, faezress might have weird effects like that). Here, the concentration of Khyber shards might have some sort of effect... I don't know. Magical worlds don't have to obey the laws of astrophysics. Makes porting them into Dragonstar a bit difficult, though... but then, bringing Krynn and its disappearing constellations into a setting which doesn't use Spelljammer's cosmology is a bit difficult as it is. Same thing with the orbiting planes here...
TwinBahamut 07-13-04, 01:00 AM	Originally posted by ender That's really interesting. Would that mean that its gravity is similar to Mars? That could have all sorts of interesting effects, such as greater jump distances, greater endurance (running distances, etc), increased carrying loads, etc. Not necessarily. That statement goes requires two things to be true. 1) A planet with the circumference of Mars has a similar gravity to Mars. 2) Humans (or others) who live on a planet with the gravity of Mars would have the same strength as on Earth (or an earth-like world). It is possible for 1 to be false (especially with stuff like the planet being frormed from a few ancient god-like dragons). However, 2 is almost undeniably false. creatures develop to fit the enviroment. Real world humans who grew up on Mars would probably have weaker muscles than humans who grew up on Earth. Races which evolved on such a planet would probably not be Earth-like in strength. And, even if the people of Eberron can jump higher and have greater endurance than real world people, I wouldn't change the mechanics (namely because nowhere in the core books it states that the rules are designed for earth-like gravity).
eclipticavatar 07-13-04, 02:44 AM	Size of the planet doesn't matter, its the mass thats important.
ender 07-13-04, 03:13 AM	Originally posted by TwinBahamut It is possible for 1 to be false (especially with stuff like the planet being frormed from a few ancient god-like dragons). However, 2 is almost undeniably false. creatures develop to fit the enviroment. Real world humans who grew up on Mars would probably have weaker muscles than humans who grew up on Earth. Races which evolved on such a planet would probably not be Earth-like in strength. And, even if the people of Eberron can jump higher and have greater endurance than real world people, I wouldn't change the mechanics (namely because nowhere in the core books it states that the rules are designed for earth-like gravity). You make good points; its really just as well that I don't start tinkering with physics formulae to find new values (especially considering the fact that I am terrible with math). However, are you sure that #2 is false? I don't really know these kinds of things very well; but I remember some wonderful scenes from Kim Stanley Robinson's books, such as Nirgal's circumambulatory marathon of Mars.
TwinBahamut 07-13-04, 12:39 PM	I am fairly sure that it is the case. Remember, human muscles get stronger with use. The more they are used, the stronger they tend to be. This is true of all muscles, even those used for things such as keeping your body standing straight. On Mars, everything weighs less, and thus muscles need to do a lot less work in order to do anything. Thus, they tend not to grow as strong as muscles that need to hold up objects in a 1G enviroment. This is similar to the problem astronauts in a Zero-G enviroment face. Unless astronauts undergo strenuous exercise while they are in space, their muscles begin to degenerate from the lack of activity. However, I am not familiar with the books you are referring to...
Bluebrush 07-13-04, 01:59 PM	Originally posted by eclipticavatar Size of the planet doesn't matter, its the mass thats important. Mass and radius. Fun filled "My science teacher mentioned it in passing once so it must be true" fact: The world is not perfectly spherical, it's kind of a squashed sphere and bulges out along the equator. This means that on the equator you are further from the centre of the earth than you would be on the north pole. Not that much of a difference for the average person, but pilots of massive cargo ships sometimes find it advantageous to sail along the equator due to the reduced gravity.
Sebby 07-13-04, 03:28 PM	Originally posted by Roger Nicholls Hi folks, Ive got two questions. 1) How big is the planet itself e.g. does it have a diameter of 25000 miles etc ? Chris knows I disagree with him on that one. ;) Eberron may well be Earth-sized, although no absolute proof can be found in the book. Here are some clues that would support that theory: The inside cover map does not show the whole world You can see this because the curved lines in the oceans (currents? winds? depth?) do not match from side to side, indicating a missing portion of the map. So the length of the equator cannot be known for sure. The scale on the map is not necessarily the scale at latitude 0 (at the equator), as is usually the case for Earth world maps World maps suffer from the impossibility of representing a spherical surface on a flat surface. The process of projection always induces distortion in the flat representation. This results, assuming a cylindrical projection, in the scale being larger at the equator, and getting progressively smaller at increasing latitudes. The scale is also distorted in other projection methods. On a map showing only Khorvaire (p.135), the continent is roughly 5000 miles wide. I'll assume this scale is correct. Khorvaire is also 5000 miles wide on the inside cover map, according to the scale. It follows that the scale on the inside cover map is correct at a latitude bissecting Khorvaire, but is incorrect at other latitudes, because of distortion. All of the above assumes that the cartographers of this fantasy world bothered with drawing a realistic map, accounting for projection distortion, and I strongly doubt they did. So there are two possibilities: The map accounts for projection distortion: in that case, the scale at the equator is probably larger (this depends on the projection method) than the one shown (which would be correct at Khorvaire's latitude), and any measure of the visible part of the equator is larger than it appears. The map does NOT account for projection distortion: then all bets are off. It can't be an accurate representation of the planet, and only Khorvaire is about right. No reliable, realistic measure can be made on such a map, even of the visible part of the equator. What can be learned from all that is that as the length of the equator cannot be known, Eberron can be as big as you want. But even if you ignore all the above fuss about projections and distortions, a measure of the visible part of the equator gives 16,406 miles, for a minimum diameter of 5222 miles. So we would have the following diameters: (--) Mars = 4194 miles (---) Eberron = more than 5222 miles (------) Earth = 7926 miles Originally posted by Roger Nicholls 2) Is the weather pattern and global distribution similair to Earth's ? Regards Roger I'm with Chris on that one: similar enough. Probably. I don't know...
ChrisTheS 07-13-04, 09:30 PM	For people who REALLY want to be concerned about worlds with non-standard gravity, Dragonstar has plenty of rules for that (as well as rules for high-g and low-g racial variants). This one, however, is quite complicated enough without having to take that sort of thing into account, so even if it IS smaller than Earth (still could be, even though the map doesn't show it all) it's probably more trouble than its worth to figure out its mass...
ChrisTheS 07-13-04, 09:33 PM	I think I see the other reason my estimate was off... I was reading the '5000' on the scale as a '3000' instead... I think I need my eyes checked again.
Docrailgun 07-13-04, 10:56 PM	I know this muddies the issue a lot, but Keith has said in another post that Breland by itself is 2000 miles across. Breland's not 1/2 of even the map of Khorvaire... so something is odd. :) "In Breland, we're talking about a nation that's two thousand miles from edge to edge; there's a significant amount of room for climate variation and regional adaptation" Originally posted by Sebby Chris knows I disagree with him on that one. ;) Eberron may well be Earth-sized, although no absolute proof can be found in the book. Here are some clues that would support that theory: The inside cover map does not show the whole world You can see this because the curved lines in the oceans (currents? winds? depth?) do not match from side to side, indicating a missing portion of the map. So the length of the equator cannot be known for sure. The scale on the map is not necessarily the scale at latitude 0 (at the equator), as is usually the case for Earth world maps World maps suffer from the impossibility of representing a spherical surface on a flat surface. The process of projection always induces distortion in the flat representation. This results, assuming a cylindrical projection, in the scale being larger at the equator, and getting progressively smaller at increasing latitudes. The scale is also distorted in other projection methods. On a map showing only Khorvaire (p.135), the continent is roughly 5000 miles wide. I'll assume this scale is correct. Khorvaire is also 5000 miles wide on the inside cover map, according to the scale. It follows that the scale on the inside cover map is correct at a latitude bissecting Khorvaire, but is incorrect at other latitudes, because of distortion. All of the above assumes that the cartographers of this fantasy world bothered with drawing a realistic map, accounting for projection distortion, and I strongly doubt they did. So there are two possibilities: The map accounts for projection distortion: in that case, the scale at the equator is probably larger (this depends on the projection method) than the one shown (which would be correct at Khorvaire's latitude), and any measure of the visible part of the equator is larger than it appears. The map does NOT account for projection distortion: then all bets are off. It can't be an accurate representation of the planet, and only Khorvaire is about right. No reliable, realistic measure can be made on such a map, even of the visible part of the equator. What can be learned from all that is that as the length of the equator cannot be known, Eberron can be as big as you want. But even if you ignore all the above fuss about projections and distortions, a measure of the visible part of the equator gives 16,406 miles, for a minimum diameter of 5222 miles. So we would have the following diameters: (--) Mars = 4194 miles (---) Eberron = more than 5222 miles (------) Earth = 7926 miles I'm with Chris on that one: similar enough. Probably. I don't know...
Sebby 07-13-04, 11:28 PM	Originally posted by Docrailgun I know this muddies the issue a lot, but Keith has said in another post that Breland by itself is 2000 miles across. Breland's not 1/2 of even the map of Khorvaire... so something is odd. :) "In Breland, we're talking about a nation that's two thousand miles from edge to edge; there's a significant amount of room for climate variation and regional adaptation" Not necessarily. His measure may not be either horizontal or vertical. If he measures Breland along a SW-NE axis, it is a bit over 2000 miles. And consistent with the given scale.
MavrickWeirdo 07-13-04, 11:53 PM	Originally posted by Sebby Chris knows I disagree with him on that one. Eberron may well be Earth-sized, although no absolute proof can be found in the book. Here are some clues that would support that theory: The inside cover map does not show the whole world You can see this because the curved lines in the oceans (currents? winds? depth?) do not match from side to side, indicating a missing portion of the map. So the length of the equator cannot be known for sure. As I have mentioned before, Those "curved lines" extend beyond the top and bottom of "the map". (i.e. the northern & southern continents are "cropped" at a line on the page. The "curved lines" extend beyond those lines.) My guess is that the curved lines represent whatever the cartographer was smoking when he drew the map. :angel: (I am of course refering to the Eberronian who would have drawn that map. I do not mean to besmirch the character of Dennis Kauth or Rob Lazzaretti.)
Scholar and a Brutalman 07-14-04, 12:06 AM	According to this (http://www.enworld.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1612890&postcount=31) post from Keith on ENWorld, the map of Eberron shown is indeed the entire world. Though I'm not sure that can be true for the poles. (Of course, as a pulp world, Eberron may not have poles, but rather giant openings openings to the world below.) As for what kind of map projection it is, I'm no expert, but I suspect it's rendered in "Artistic License." One interesting question is how much of that world map is known to the inhabitants of Khorvaire. Scholar and Brutalman
Sebby 07-14-04, 01:03 AM	Originally posted by Scholar and a Brutalman According to this (http://www.enworld.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1612890&postcount=31) post from Keith on ENWorld, the map of Eberron shown is indeed the entire world. Though I'm not sure that can be true for the poles. I can't say for sure if he is wrong (he created the thing after all), but I can observe this: his answer and what we see on the map are in contradiction. But that is not important. There are still other reasons that make measuring the length of the equator accurately next to impossible. ;) And one of those reasons is the projection method used: "Artistic License Projection". Originally posted by Scholar and a Brutalman As for what kind of map projection it is, I'm no expert, but I suspect it's rendered in "Artistic License." That was also my guess. They are game book authors, not scientists: you start to try to make too much scientific sense of what they created, and it starts falling apart.
Scholar and a Brutalman 07-14-04, 07:20 AM	There are still other reasons that make measuring the length of the equator accurately next to impossible. I just realised there is a scale given for an equatorial feature: Aerenal. At a first look it seems to be about 550-600 miles east-west on the map on 217, and almost twice that using the scale on the world map. Which seems to confuse things a fair bit. How did you determine the scale on your map of Aerenal? Since I know next to nothing about projections except that one of the most common is called "Mercator", I'm off to look at Wikipedia. [Edit: after I realised that what I had written didn't make much sense.]
Sebby 07-14-04, 01:02 PM	Originally posted by Scholar and a Brutalman I just realised there is a scale given for an equatorial feature: Aerenal. At a first look it seems to be about 550-600 miles east-west on the map on 217, and almost twice that using the scale on the world map. Which seems to confuse things a fair bit. How did you determine the scale on your map of Aerenal? Since I know next to nothing about projections except that one of the most common is called "Mercator", I'm off to look at Wikipedia. [Edit: after I realised that what I had written didn't make much sense.] :tiphat: Good thinking Scholar, it had not occured to me. You're right, I did something with the scale of that map. For my map of Aerenal, I did not use the scale on the Aerenal mini-map (p.217). Instead, I used the scale on the inside cover map. There is quite a difference between the two: on the mini-map Aerenal is 625 miles wide, and on the inside cover, it is 1063 miles wide. At the time, I had based my decision on the fact that scale errors are common from one mini-map to the other (for example, common features on the Breland map are 25% larger than on the Aundair map, and this is not the only case). I needed a common scale, and the inside cover map was it. The way a cylindrical projection works, The scale at lat.0 should be the smallest. The further you go from the equator, the more things are blown up (larger scale). Given same size maps, the scale on the Aerenal mini-map is larger than the one on the inside cover. Hmm, that can't be right. It should be just the opposite if the authors had considered projection, or the same if they did not. It means that if you measure the visible part of the equator using this scale you get 9,646 miles. A 3,070 miles diameter. But more importantly, such a measure would mean that the planet is not spherical, but hourglass-shaped!. Which is of course, totally ridiculous. Aerenal does not provide a correct equatorial measure that would allow to determine the circumference at the equator. Ah, I just saw that you edited your post after arriving at the same conclusion. All that discussion amounts to a few conclusions: The authors ignored the concept of projection when they drew the maps; This omission does not, however, make the distortions due to projection magically disappear. Ignoring basic geometry does not make it go away; The cartographers or editors made quite a large number of scale errors between the mini-maps. The scale on the inside cover map, which is (proportionally) the same as on the continental map on p.135, may be used as a way to reconcile those scales (as I automatically did when I compiled my maps of Khorvaire and Aerenal, but for all I know, it too may be wrong!); This makes large measures taken on the inside cover maps completely unreliable, if you care; The best way to view the inside cover map, would be to consider that each landmass is drawn individually using a localized projection method that minimizes distortion on it (a rationalization of "the artist ignored it"), and then placed on the world map to indicate its relative position to the others. That way, inland measures can be safely considered to follow the "1 inch = 1,000 miles" scale on the map, but any measure at sea is unreliable, because if the distortion is not in the landmasses, then it is all in the oceans (again, basic geometry); Ignoring all that nitpicking is fine, if you do not care or realize that you'll actually be playing on a cylindrical planet with an infinite length "axis of gravity" (if you use a constant scale) or an unnamable, strangely shaped solid with even stranger gravity (if you use the mini-map scales). Yes, ignorance may indeed be bliss; :angel: If you give a problem to an overly analytical mind, no matter how inconsequent or artificial that problem is, there is no telling to which ridiculous extent and heights of futility he's going to take it. :angel: I'll stop with the long posts now. In my mind, this dog's long dead and needs no further beating. ;)
ChrisTheS 07-20-04, 05:13 PM	Oy... whereupon the befuddled GM said, "to heck with the scale, I'll just use the maps to tell where places are in relation to other places." And it was good.
Sebby 07-20-04, 05:19 PM	Yep. That's it in a nutshell. Admitedly, quite a convoluted way on my part to come to this same conclusion, but I don't like pulling things out of my behind without backing them up with at least some reason. An annoying trait I am proud of. And yes, I often get into trouble for it. :smirk: Have a nice evening,
Nightchill 07-20-04, 05:38 PM	The size of Eberron came up in the "ask Keith thread" just recently. Page 33/34 I think. Assuming some cropping, the circumference of eberron is 20k miles. The earth is about 25k. Not a huge difference and one that could be accountable with something magic (or a bigger iron core?) if you want that lovely 1g.
Sebby 07-20-04, 06:48 PM	Originally posted by Nightchill The size of Eberron came up in the "ask Keith thread" just recently. Page 33/34 I think. Assuming some cropping, the circumference of eberron is 20k miles. The earth is about 25k. Not a huge difference and one that could be accountable with something magic (or a bigger iron core?) if you want that lovely 1g. That is a plausible size. All the clues I have gathered or derived from the maps point to a circumference somewhere between 16k and 25k.
scwolf 07-20-04, 10:08 PM	Originally posted by ChrisTheS Oy... whereupon the befuddled GM said, "to heck with the scale, I'll just use the maps to tell where places are in relation to other places." And it was good. Until the day the players came to the DM and asked "Alright, we're in Passage and while our would-be 'sponsor' has offered to fund our trip to Pylas Talaear, we frankly don't trust the weasel. We'd prefer to go it on our own, we can take the lightning rail down to Sharn and from there travel by Lyrandar galleon the rest of the way. At 5 silver pieces per mile, how much will this set us back?" :twitch:
ChrisTheS 07-20-04, 11:23 PM	Whereupon the GM replied, "I don't do story problems." Although that raises a good point, which some people might want to solve some other way than arbitrary decision...
peterson 07-21-04, 08:38 AM	Anybody got some kind of Eberron Weather Pattern Program available for use by the public? Is such a program even possible? I'm basically computer stupid. Just a monkey who can type. Peterson
Sereno 07-21-04, 09:28 AM	Originally posted by peterson Anybody got some kind of Eberron Weather Pattern Program available for use by the public? Is such a program even possible? I'm basically computer stupid. Just a monkey who can type. Peterson I have a working weather program, here: http://www.paonline.com/zaikoski/ak/index.htm It's based off the old Greyhawk weather generator and it works fairly well if you restrict it to a month or two. It is possible, too, do generate a continuing storm at the end of a month that won't be reflected in the next run. Also, it can't generate a year's worth of weather at a time, changing settings as it moves through the months/season ... that *might* happen in a future version.
peterson 07-21-04, 09:42 AM	You know what Sereno? :bounce: You rock! Thanks for both the quick reply and the link! Peterson
crazysamaritan 07-21-04, 09:43 AM	Since DnD does not follow traditional physics, why are you attempting to make it work in a RL enviroment? I have no problem with the scale descrepancies, considering the act of mapping having been distorted by various means. Gravity is not the same as RL, since it is a velocity, not acceleration. a light wave that transmits in only greyscale also exists, unlike in RL (darkvision)
Sebby 07-21-04, 01:25 PM	Originally posted by crazysamaritan Since DnD does not follow traditional physics, why are you attempting to make it work in a RL enviroment? I have no problem with the scale descrepancies, considering the act of mapping having been distorted by various means. Gravity is not the same as RL, since it is a velocity, not acceleration. a light wave that transmits in only greyscale also exists, unlike in RL (darkvision) Ah but I do believe that realism has an important place in fantasy. Because the best lie contains as much truth as possible. Because it is easier to immerse yourself in a fantastic world if it is firmly grounded in the real one. Because having wacky and distorted geography does not contribute to any aspect of Eberron. But if they were correct, then they would add realism to the setting. Understand me: it is a given that no one can ever totally believe a fantasy D&D world. Most people saying "don't try to equate it to RL, it is a magical world!" point this out when they underline the futility of trying to make sense of D&D worlds. However, adding realism to D&D does not aim to do that. It is all about suspension of disbelief, an important concept to SF and fantasy writers. Suspension of disbelief means that the reader/viewer/player does believe in the fantasy on some subconscious level, even if he is fully aware it is not real. It is difficult to achieve, and it does not work the same for different audiences. Me, for example, I am a software programmer. I can't see a movie featuring computers without having something nagging me in the back of my head, because movies almost always do this wrong, either for lack of research (which is insulting) or to force it into the plot (which indicates a lame plot). For me, they ruin suspension of disbelief. But for some people, who know next to nothing about computers, it works. See Eberron as The Matrix: the magic, the creatures, and over-the-top heroic acts are what the world is all about. These can be covered by the "it's a fantasy world!" clause and accepted without question. But the twisted geography, unrealistically low population, unworkable economy are just "glitches in the Matrix" that ruin it for those who notice.
ChrisTheS 07-22-04, 02:08 AM	Gravity is actually neither a velocity nor an acceleration (although it is measured as acceleration: units per second per second); it is a property of mass that induces velocity and acceleration in other masses. While size and mass are not always directly related, smaller things tend, in general, to be less massive than bigger things, unless there's some anomaly in the elemental construction of the object (such as a uranium or adamantine core instead of iron). The only way in which the phantasmagorical nature of D&D would affect this natural property of matter is if the worlds in question were not planetoids--which is the case on planes other than the Material, certainly, but the various Prime worlds are, by and large, spherical celestial bodies composed of terrestrial elements and thus possessing mass, size, gravity, and all those nifty physics things. Darkvision is the ability to perceive normally non-visible radiation spectra as visible light. Because color is a property of the visible light spectrum, other wavelengths do not reveal the object's color; hence, darkvision is in black-and-white. This could, of course, be untrue; but because most living things are incapable of visually perceiving radiation beyond the boundaries of the visible light spectrum, there's no way to tell otherwise. D&D is still bound by the laws of physics; the presence of magic merely alters the subset of natural laws. Magic obeys rules, else wizards could not control it with procedures and formulae. Fantasy worlds have to make some sort of sense and be internally consistent, otherwise we have no reference point from which to interact with them. That being said, the reason why we're trying to apply real world rules to D&D is because we're geeks who enjoy nitpicking and haven't really got anything better to do. Whatever the conclusions are, they have absolutely no effect whatsoever upon the nature or playability of the game world as published, and are merely for our own amusement.
Sebby 07-22-04, 02:46 AM	Originally posted by ChrisTheS That being said, the reason why we're trying to apply real world rules to D&D is because we're geeks who enjoy nitpicking and haven't really got anything better to do. Whatever the conclusions are, they have absolutely no effect whatsoever upon the nature or playability of the game world as published, and are merely for our own amusement. Oh, and that too. ;)
EscherEnigma 07-22-04, 03:17 AM	Heh. ChrisTheS got it in one. Of course, its also for the amusement of people who aren't quite talented and knowledgeable to do it ourselves, but who nevertheless enjoy other people talk about it so that we can pretend we're smart. Oh, and great maps Sebby (did you make them? If not, pass my regards to the creator). Haven't printed them out yet, but they're already helping me put the world into better perspective (its rather annoyign while reading chapter seven to be flipping back and forth between pages to see where things connect)
Nightchill 07-22-04, 04:10 AM	Originally posted by ChrisTheS Gravity is actually neither a velocity nor an acceleration (although it is measured as acceleration: units per second per second); it is a property of mass that induces velocity and acceleration in other masses. Not strictly true (worked for Newton though!). Photons (massless bosons, EM interaction particles) are bent by gravity under General Relativity. In this case, picturing gravity as a deformation in space, caused by massive objects, works better. So photons are affected by gravity, but not because they have mass (they don't) but because gravity changes the nature of space/time. About the 'colour' problem... Blueshifting infra-red or red-shifting ultra-violet em radiation would put them in the visible wavelengths. We see these particular wavelengths because our sun puts out most of its light in the 500nm range and, as such, our eyes evolved that way. The difference in 'colour' is just a difference in energy (inversely proportional to wavelength). Don't forget in d&d they had "infravision" (infra-red vision) which was full of so many bugs they scrapped it. Now we have "darkvision", which has no obvious physics backing :) If it was another wavelength then the images wouldn't be very clear since our pupil/aperture is the wrong size to observe them. I don't worry about physics in d&d at all, and I'm a graduated astrophysicist! I even have the falling damage rules as per the rulebook ;)
Sebby 07-22-04, 04:20 AM	Originally posted by EscherEnigma Oh, and great maps Sebby (did you make them? If not, pass my regards to the creator). Haven't printed them out yet, but they're already helping me put the world into better perspective (its rather annoyign while reading chapter seven to be flipping back and forth between pages to see where things connect) Thanks, The empty map is from WotC's site, I just added all the borders, towns, sites, roads, lightning rail lines and captions as they appear in the mini-maps from chap. 7.
crazysamaritan 07-22-04, 10:46 AM	double-post
crazysamaritan 07-22-04, 10:47 AM	Please note; I did not say there was anything wrong with setting up metaphysics for DnD, I was just questioning the advisibility of using Real-world physics to mimic DnD. In our world of Physics, there's nothing that acts the same as darkvision, correct? So what's the metaphysical basis? Magic. I also like to pretend I know what I'm talking about (just view my other posts :blush: ) So I've come up with a system for dealing with DnD light waves myself. higher (shorter wavelength) force effects --Standard Visible Spectrum low-light vision darkvision lower (longer wavelength) still a work in progress
Minister_for_Moral_Truth 07-23-04, 08:56 AM	Gravity is actually neither a velocity nor an acceleration (although it is measured as acceleration: units per second per second); it is a property of mass that induces velocity and acceleration in other masses. If we're moving into the realms of pedantry, it's acceleration under gravity which is in ms-2 (doesn't type in the forum) under the SI. The effects of gravity upon a body at a point are measured as a force per mass, being in Nkg-1 under the SI. IIRC, gravity itself is measured as a potential, at a given point, and is a vector.
fhilbrandt 07-23-04, 10:26 AM	In a fantasy setting, gravity works however you, as DM want it to, but that's beside the point. If the 20k circumference from Hellcow is correct, then the distance from equator to pole is 5k. Given the "world map" in the ECS book, then Sharn is at about 15 degrees north and Khorvaire extends to about 45 degrees north. Weather at Sharn should equate to about Cancun, while the northern Eldeen Reaches should have a climate close to that of central New York. The southern portion of Frostfell, shown on the map, should have a climate close to that of Maine or southern Canada.
Hanuman47 07-23-04, 12:00 PM	Just a quick thought about darkvision (and I agree that the current low-light/darkvision thing is a vast improvement over the never adequately wired into rules infra-/ultravision). In ancient times, people believed that vision happened because of rays of some sort going out from the eyes and coming back. This was before the properties of light were understood, of course, but who's to say that this isn't the case for beings with darkvision - they emit magical "seeing beams" from their eyes which bounce back and are read by "darkreceptors" in the eyes, receptors which are equipped to perceive intensity (shading) but not color. I suspect this would give rise to a cool side effect: the eyes of other creatures with darkvision, being sources of "seeing beams" would appear to glow.