Talk:Sword Sharp (5e Campaign Setting)

Comments

Article Quality

It stinks that I gotta say it, but, this is not shaping up so far as being up to the quality standards of the wiki. Posting a campaign setting is a massive workload of information compiling, organization, writing and formatting. This, so far, is not any of that. We're usually a bit more lenient on campaign settings as far as completion because they're big projects and they take a long time to work through. If this ends up being a bunch of pages of improperly formatted nonsense, be warned now, it'll get canned into a user sandbox page out of the main navigation. --Ganteka Future (talk) 02:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC

Wow you REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLYYYYYYYYYYYY need to zip your (digital) Lips if all you are going to say is a bunch of junk. I know it's not done yet you grade it early (P.S. Check your discussion page under organization) XX the memenist Xx (talk) 15:40, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

He's not saying "junk", he didn't give it a grade, and he's entirely correct with his warning. This wiki allows for criticism, and while we are usually kind about it sometimes it is pointed. You will not receive positive comments only here. Surgo (talk) 20:43, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Feedback

You do realize that you're not going to get positive only feedback here on the wiki, right? The entire point of the wiki, indeed the reason it exists, is for criticism to exist. We're not good as a personal hugbox. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 12:15, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Well maybe if Ganteka was more positive then I wouldn't have to put the positive only please XX the memenist Xx (talk) 21:23, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

He was downright pleasant. You've in for a nasty surprise if you start getting feedback from someone with less restraint. This is a problem with the quality of work, not other people. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

when a guy just says negative things instead of complimenting on the campaign ( You can play as a goblin, Cool campaign bro!) that does not count as pleasant (you can claim part of Sword Sharp for your holy plushie empire) XX the memenist Xx (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, he's not obligated to, no one is. To be honest, I have just as harsh, if not harsher, criticisms of the whole sword sharp thing. I just felt that commenting on it at length wouldn't be productive when others are pointing out the problems now. Trust me when I say he is being downright saintly.

I decided to deal with my opposition by making a campaign setting in progress. It's 3.5e, but please do look at the arrangement and design of what I've made there. That's your goal of what you want to do. And yes, it's a lot of work. Campaign settings are a pain in the tuckus, I would not recommend them for beginners due to sheer workload. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 02:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I think you could potentially do something good with the geography and planes, I like the idea of the planes simply being physically farther away from the material plane on the physical world. It has interesting effects which you should expand upon, by example how do societies deal with the fact that they can physically walk to their afterlife? Can they bring back their old pals by walking and having them tag along on the way back? Do they even have an afterlife? Can they go to Elemental Plane of Earth to do strip mining? All interesting questions that you could answer to make the setting more distinct. --Leziad (talk) 00:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Actually it would be hard to walk to different planes due to the fact that A) The normal world has a diameter of 607,890 miles and 2) only up to 408,002 miles from the center of the normal world is charted down due to the fact that they already have a lot of land fit for living on, also that many people want to adventure past the "Dread Zone" where it is foggy and evil&powerful monsters dwell in great numbers XX the memenist Xx 19:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

It amuses me that the diameter of your world is almost 8 times larger than Jupiter, and almost ¾ths the diameter of THE FREAKING SUN. I mean, I know this is fantasy and you can say black is white if you want or that all cheese is sentient, but... but... this raises so many questions having to do with physics alone. So ok, just because I'm bored let's play with numbers a little. Simple math tells us an object with a diameter of 607,890 miles has a surface area of 1.16 x 10¹² square miles, or 1.16 trillion square miles.

Interestingly, a planet with a core composition of nickel and iron similar to ours of this size is theoretically possible, but that much mass tends to form stars, not planets. The largest rocky planet ever discovered is Kepler 10c, with 17 times the mass of Earth, nowhere near as large as this world you've made. (exactly how large is difficult to do with my pidgin knowledge of astrophysics; what I do know is that astronomers measure in terms of mass, not volume, so I'm kind of hamstrung as far as direct comparisons with existing celestial bodies goes.) The good news is the mass of the planet would not be sufficient to force the core to start stellar fusion, the bad news is that the surface planetary temperature would still be too cold to support life as we know it, depending on the planet's orbital rotation period, distance from the star, size of the star, etc. Also interestingly, the horizon on this planet would be much higher than the one on Earth. Looking towards the horizon on your world would feel like standing at the bottom of an enormous bowl and looking up at the sides.

So according to your geography, the world is 64% water. That's 742 billion square miles of open ocean. For reference, the number of square miles of ocean surface on earth is about 140 million mi². So your oceans are 5,300 times larger than Earth's oceans. Now. Okis, your largest continent of 12 continents is 2,537,908 square miles, about the size of Australia. That's respectable. Let's say the other 11 continents range between ½ to ¾ the size of Okis. That gives us an approximate land mass range between 16-23 million square miles. For reference, that's about the total square miles of either just Asia, or Asia and South America combined. Again, that's a pretty respectable amount of land to have adventures on. There's just one problem. Your planet is ¾ the size of the sun, remember? This area of land and this ratio of land to water leaves about 397 BILLION SQUARE MILES of land unaccounted for. Let's put that in perspective. You could take the surface area of every planet on the solar system (including Pluto) and add it together. Drop it into the missing area of your world. You could do that EIGHT TIMES and still not quite have filled up that missing space.

TL;DR: you may need to change the scale of your world. Or don't. Like I said, it's amusing. Spanambula (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

1) The thing is like pictured in the chapter 2 creating a multiverse It is flat 2) You did not add on Planet 9 and the other theorized planets yes scientist predicted that they exist according to the telegraph There might be TEN OR MORE PLANETS So it would be Way less than eight XX the memenist Xx 19:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps you should add the Dread Zone to your Cosmology page then? --Leziad (talk) 22:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm guessing you mean the visualization of the Elemental Planes on page 57 of the DMG, since that's the only picture of the planes in there. Yeah, just assuming everyone is going to know that's what you're imagining may not be such a great idea, but since "great idea" isn't really in your wheelhouse, it's no big deal. Silly me for not just assuming a flat earth. Regardless, you're still dealing with a world surface area of about 290 billion square miles, and your scale is still borked. Either fix your math, or don't give such precise values for everything, or just don't be surprised if gamers (because we are mostly nerds, after all) start wondering why your world's scale makes no sense.

Anyway, I agree with Leziad, you may want to include a brief description in your geography section as well as your cosmology section that your multiverse uses the One World model mentioned on page 44, with planes separated by dread zones or words to that effect. Spanambula (talk) 22:56, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Actually it does not use the one world model due to the fact when you walk from one plane to the other you will warp to that plane and Spanambula you Have 5e XX the memenist Xx 18:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)