Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 marc Apr 21, 2005 18:33:55	Did you know that the Hollow world...actually existed.... check it out. http://www.2012.com.au/hollow.html
#2 zombiegleemax Apr 22, 2005 9:43:52	Nice site! As I'm sure everyone knows, the "Hollow World" concept has been around awhile. Edmund Halley created the idea in 1692, and an American named John Cleeve Symmes published a pamphlet in 1818 describing how it could be reached via the north or south poles. Even though scientists defused the idea by the early 20th century, Edgar Rice Burroughs still made good use of it for his Pellucidar series. I think it's great that D&D latched onto the idea themselves, but I don't think the implementation was the best. One of the elements of the original world of Pellucidar was that the interior actually had MORE land area than the outer world, because the oceans of Pellucidar matched the shape of the continents on the surface exterior. There's no reason they have to be that way, of course, but it meant that there was a lot of places to explore. Also, the idea that primitive and alien races lived in Pellucidar alongside extinct species was an idea of Burroughs. Mind you, it's a good one, I'm always a fan of "Lost Worlds". Unfortunately, I think Hollow World approached it a little heavy-handed. The first problem for me was the sheer over-involvment of the gods in its creation. (Yeah yeah, "Immortals", whatever...) I generally like my campaigns without divine powers dropping by for tea every hour and generally mucking things up. Much like what's happened to Forgotten Realms, where being an atheist punishes you more if you worship some evil demonic god from the netherverse. (Because he, apparently, has a good union or something.) I'd rather have a campaign where you don't know HOW the place was made, or why, or by who. Why define everything down to the last detail? The idea that the Hollow World is also the repository of every ancient culture is also an idea that sounds great on paper, but doesn't work out quite as well in play. For one thing, there is a physical limit to how big the place is, and they pretty much filled up the map, leaving no room for the DM's to play with themselves, except the extra continents on the side. The fact that Alphatia was added as a flying continent says a lot about the shortage of available land. The preservation spell is also a major "narrative patch" on the setting... how to explain why no one wants to change or adapt their culture? Oh, it's magic! Right. Needless to say, this could be catastrophic if players from the surface arrive. They could easily argue with the DM that using "surface" tactics would always work, because the HW cultures can't adapt to them. The addition of new restrictions on spellcasting in addition to the ones that were inherent to OD&D was annoying, to say the least. I'm not saying they didn't make logical sense in many cases. You certainly don't want a place where compasses and direction-finding are supposed to be difficult solved by a quick spell-casting. The problem is that they also have all the "unknown" spells, which include most of the staple arcane combat spells. I wouldn't mind so much, except they didn't add many new spells to counter the removals! Obviously, individual DM's can help this by downplaying the power and importance of spells, but it is still a fundamental alteration to the balance of classes. So, then you look at things from a 3rd edition perspective. And it's not good. With OD&D, additional restrictions aren't too much of a burden to shoulder. But in 3rd edition, they just don't work. Different is fine, but the players I know would not be interested in playing "limited" characters. It would be like saying they can't play fighters because "this culture hasn't developed intricate fighting schools or martial tactics" but they can play "warriors". This isn't cool. You don't want cultures that are "primitive" and "weak" compared to base classes. What you want are classes (and races) that are optimized for their environment. Consider the novel "Timeline" as an example... one of the elements presented was that modern human beings tend to view the past as "backwards, primitive, and stupid." Which is absolutely untrue. If anything, modern human beings are comparatively weak compared to their past counter parts in many areas. So, for a Hollow World campaign, I'd want to design cultures that actually thrive in the environment, where a modern class/race would actually have trouble. For example, instead of wizards, they have sorcerers, who have even MORE martial training than modern sorcerers have, and spells that enhance their ability to survive. In fact, I'd probably have totally customized spell lists for every culture. And prestige classes as well. A very good 3E mechanic here would be using prestige classes to enhance the normal classes, HW cultures would have a much larger percentage of them. For example, a Neathar warrior may, around level 4-5, take "Netharum Jungle Stalker" as a prestige class, which is like a specialized fighter/ranger combination. The depth and creative range possibilities here are very good. Anyway, sorry for the long rant. I actually think Hollow World could be a great setting, but it will take a lot more work to develop into something that would be "Dragon-worthy". (Beyond the usual requirement of being in 3rd edition.) Adamantyr
#3 zombiegleemax Apr 22, 2005 11:14:53	So, then you look at things from a 3rd edition perspective. And it's not good. With OD&D, additional restrictions aren't too much of a burden to shoulder. But in 3rd edition, they just don't work. People keep saying that, and I have no idea why. Different is fine, but the players I know would not be interested in playing "limited" characters. "The players you know". The players I know would enjoy the extra challenge. One of the best campaigns I've ever been in was a low-fantasy campaign where the DM decided we wouldn't get extra hit points when we went up in level. It radically changed the balance of the game, and it was fun. Your ideas for a Hollow World are good, and if you're really set on playing in the Hollow World, and you're playing with a group that abhors the idea of restrictions, well, I guess you've got some work ahead of you. But there's no reason groups that are more open minded can't just play in the setting as written without having to spend that much effort on a conversion.
#4 zombiegleemax Apr 22, 2005 11:53:02	People keep saying that, and I have no idea why. Never let it be said I wouldn't offer an explanation... even if it isn't quite the best. In the old days of gaming, players, generally, didn't have a lot of choice. Their ability scores were dependent completely on die rolls, which occasionally could be adjusted. Their classes were extremely restricted on those random die rolls; good rolls meant better classes and more power. The result was that regardless of skill, players could end up with powerful or weak characters. Given that the rules systems were usually poorly designed for balance and ease of use, this lead to a lot of "impromptu" gaming... the gamemasters would have to improvise for the unknown. It's not a big wonder the grognards of yesteryear consider modern gamers "pamphered" in comparison to how they had to do things... I mean, in the old old days, they didn't even have dice! And the dice that did exist were cheap and wore out quickly. (Just add your own custom complaint from here on out, you get the idea, I think.) Anyway, the improvisation wasn't a bad thing. It lead to a lot more role-play, and broke RPG's away from the war-game mindset, which was 'If there isn't a rule there should be one, or it can't be done." Early Dungeon adventures explored interesting and varied ideas for adventures and characters, because they could do so easily. I'd also say that Barbara Young, the editor of Dungeon for eight years of its run, had a large influence on what types of adventures were presented. So now, we have 3rd edition. 3rd is, in many ways, kind of a return to the war-gaming design. The rules have been stream-lined, sacred cows sacrificed, and every base covered to make a system that can be driven smoothly. The DM still has every freedom he had in the old days, but now there's a "system" he can trust. Of course, there's a downside... powergaming has rampantly increased as a result. This isn't entirely D&D's fault, though, the rise of computer gaming has also contributed to this style of play, since computers can't do improvised games, they're physically UNABLE to. (It is potentially possible to make an interactive dynamic computer RPG, but it's a major endeavor, even with all the computing power the average PC/console has. Plus no one really knows HOW to make one, yet. All I can say is it's being worked on.) However, this isn't a bad thing. Running a game is really hard. Running a game and having to make up your own rules is maddening. By making it easier and providing a solid framework, 3rd edition D&D has made DM'ing more accessible to everyone. Granted, it may seem like your average dungeon crawl doesn't have the depth and nuance of old games, but with more players and more DM's, there's a larger pool of gamers available! Not to mention with a consise rules set everyone likes, house rules are no longer required, just a nice option. 3rd edition also introduced the idea of "designing" a character instead of "rolling up" one. Ability scores can still be rolled, but they can also be purchased in a point buy system. Since character roll-ups could cause friction in a group (One guy always tends to roll fantastically well and causes jealousy and envy), the point-buy system has become very popular. Classes are no longer as dependent upon ability scores as they were. Although spellcasters need a minimum of 10 in a given score to cast ANY spells, there's nothing stopping anyone from making a wizard with a low intelligence. It's stupid, but it's not DISALLOWED. Fighters benefit from a high strength, but they don't NEED it. So, this is why restrictions on classes, races, and gameplay from what is normally in the "core" 3rd edition rulebooks don't work. The idea is to make playing things that make no sense "undesirable", not "restricted". "The players you know". The players I know would enjoy the extra challenge. One of the best campaigns I've ever been in was a low-fantasy campaign where the DM decided we wouldn't get extra hit points when we went up in level. It radically changed the balance of the game, and it was fun. Cool, sounds like you have a good group there. Obviously, the character of your group will always define your adventures... I'm sure you can think of a game type they may not want to play. Or genre, even. My brother loves superhero games, for example, but the descriptor for the rest of the group would be "polite tolerance". He can get away with running one for a few sessions, but no more. Your ideas for a Hollow World are good, and if you're really set on playing in the Hollow World, and you're playing with a group that abhors the idea of restrictions, well, I guess you've got some work ahead of you. But there's no reason groups that are more open minded can't just play in the setting as written without having to spend that much effort on a conversion. That is true. My thoughts are running towards "how to reintroduce Hollow World into 3rd edition?" And I'm trying to think of ways to make it "different" enough that the players don't say "I can't cast fireball? This game sucks!" Adamantyr
#5 zombiegleemax Apr 23, 2005 7:04:20	Maybe its just me, but that map of the Hollow World looks like it came right out of the PWA?
#6 culture20 Apr 23, 2005 12:44:21	With all the references to Earth and the "flying saucers" I'd seriously doubt this is from the Poor Wizard's Almanac. As Adamantyr stated, Hollow Earth has been a staple for fringe-culture types for centuries. Back to Mystara: One idea struck me recently. Alphatia, unlike any other transplanted culture, knows that it is inside Mystara, and has the ability to still affect the outside world with its flying ships... Doesn't this pose a greater threat to the sanctuary than the burrowers ever did?
#7 zombiegleemax Apr 23, 2005 20:31:37	With all the references to Earth and the "flying saucers" I'd seriously doubt this is from the Poor Wizard's Almanac. Turn to page 3 of PWA ac1010 and compare to the map from that site; it looks similar to me. Maybe Mystara served as inspiration?
#8 culture20 Apr 23, 2005 22:41:21	More likely the other way around; Max Fyfield drew that picture in the 70's (standard comic book art of the era).
#9 havard Apr 26, 2005 7:59:04	My favorite Hollow World type setting was always the french animated series "Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea." More info here. I even thought of using the series as basis for fleshing out some more HW countries, especially some of the Floating Continents. Håvard