Earth-like, Multi terrain Planets?

[Mamatried]

Earth as all the various terrain or environments we see in star wars, yet most planets are at least protrayed as having only one such environment or one very domienant such environment.

Are there any "earth like" muliti envornment plantes out there and are any known?

[Naaman]

I would think that Naboo might be... but hard to tell.

We've tossed this around before (I believe it was in the SpecForce thread that I started... discussing whether troops should specialize in specific environments and what not).

My position is that many planets do have multiple climates that vary with region, even though the films don't give us a chance to see that.

For example, Since Naboo looks so much like the temperate regions of Earth, it suggests that Naboo is in a "Goldilocks zone" in it's star system. Which means that, depending on the tilt of it's axis, it will have more or less variation than Earth, but I would expect some variation.

Also, if you look up Tauntauns on wookieepeida, you'll note that many of them were brought to Courescant to be used as mounts in the arctic regions of the planet (despite it being "one giant city," some parts get more weather than others). So there's that.
_________________
.
SpecForce Combat Elements
All About Lightsabers: Designing, Building, and Fighting

[Whill]

It is unlikely that planets capable of supporting Earth-like life (most of the life we see in the films) would all be one terrain. "Desert planets" capable of supporting Earth-like life are extremely unlikely because it is unlikely that they would have a hydrosphere of less than 50%. Most single terrain planets are the result of authors (and filmmakers) that simply do not care about those details of science. But I do agree with Naaman that if it is not explicit in the film that the planet is all one terrain, then I tend to think that there are other climates on the planet not visible in the film. And even shots from space or artwork of planets that do not seem to show oceans, the planets could have a Pangaea-type supercontinent with the ocean on the other side.

Naboo is definitely not a single terrain planet. It does have temperate forests with rivers and plains with lakes, and massive oceans filled with sea monsters. Film dialogue also refers to swamps. Naboo supports humans and ducks. Naboo is very Earth-like.

I'm into planetology so I like to create more realistic Earth-like planets with a variety of terrains if life evolved there. GURPS Space is a fantastic book that has a system for creating planets with a lot more science in the fiction, but it does involve doing some math. Even planets with no axial tilt are still going to have a variety of temperatures because the equator is still closer to its sun(s) than the polar regions. I did create one desert planet, but it has seas at the poles and massive underground oceans. The planet supports two major species that each inhabit a polar region with more comfortable climates. The planet used to be a lot more Earth like but it was anti-terraformed long ago.

As far as film planets I didn't create, I tend to tolerate the unrealism of them more than for my own. There is a guy on Facebook who devised this whole explanation that it is the Jawas who secretly control the Tatooine and work to pump moisture into the atmosphere. It was very creative. We each have our own tolerances for disbelief suspensions.


EDIT: typos
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage

[MrNexx]

I figure most planets have varied biomes, but we generally don't see enough of the planets to know that.

Tattooine, of course, has a lot of sandy desert, but also has rocky badlands, and I don't mind the idea that they have underground water, or perhaps a permafrost at the poles... something that puts SOME moisture in the air, but not enough for normal life.

Hoth, I figure is a big, frozen, sea, with a few rocky islands sticking out.

But someplace like Naboo or Alderaan or Yavin IV? They have climates. They have varied terrain. But the OT focused on fringe worlds, where the Rebels could hide.
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/

[CRMcNeill]

Something like this actually just came up over on Discord. There is precedent in sci-fi for a "desert planet" (Arrakis / Dune, specifically), but once you dig into the lore, you find that the reason for the aridification of the planet is due to the biological cycle of the dominant lifeforms (sandworms) who give off huge amounts of oxygen as a waste product, enough to maintain the biosphere. And even then, there are more temperate zones at the polar caps.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[garhkal]

IMO no planet is just one biosphere..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Grimace]

Galaxy Guide 8: Scouts, kind of touched upon the whole aspect of planet biospheres.

[Mamatried]

while we all seem to agree that most if not all planets have different bimes, I am more referring to worlds like tattooine, jakku, scarif, hoth etc, all being shown as having one biome, now the "ice ball" planets we do se in the real world, same I would suppose with desert and maybe ocen world, however
I for one want to see a star wars "ground action" spanning a planet as diverse in biomes as earth, I don't think I see this in Star Wars in general

Now comes a little question, the "terrain" tab in most planet write up, these I suppoose are meant as the sominant terrain, making earth with 70-80% water a more or less terrain "ocean and continents" world, limiting in game terms the biomes though without removing them from existence.

[Yora]

[KageRyu]

I find the reasoning for lack of diversity and justifications were covered very well in the core 1st edition rule book (I am unsure if the same section is in later editions) - and the reason is because Star Wars is Space Opera. The emphasis should be on fast action, grand locations, twisting plots, and moral dilemmas. Getting bogged down in minutia will slow down the pace and flow of adventures as well as creating them. For the reasons covered at length in the core 1st edition book I have always disliked trying to apply too much "real World" science and logic because you will soon find doing so breaks lightsabers, brings hyperspace travel to a screeching halt, causes cities to fall from the clouds, etc...

Now, there is no reason you can't have multiple environments on a single world in Star Wars - I would suggest focusing on maybe the 2 most prominent. Trying to detail a whole world with the richness of terrain or biodiversity of of an Earth Like world is a daunting task - and unless the players are going to spend a lot of time there it is an unnecessary effort to undertake really.
To consider - in a contemporary campaign would a player group visit every apartment, stairwell, building, basement, garage, subway, back alley, and sewer in New York? Do you need to map them all? No, only the important ones to the plot.
_________________
"There's a set way to gain new Force Points and it represents a very nice system, where you're rewarded for heroism, not for being a poor conductor to electricity." ~Jachra

[Yora]

Though the question remains why putting two locations on two different planet would be better than just putting them on the same planet? (And it seems quite clear that Star Wars creators have long ago come to the agreement that it is.)

The only thing I can think of is that it's an opportunity (or excuse) to travel through space.

Why move between two locations on a plane when you can also move on a space ship? They are essentially equal, but space ships are cooler.
_________________
"Adventure? Eh... Excitement? Eh... A Jedi does not crave these things."

Iridium Moons Retro-futuristic Space Opera

[Raven Redstar]

Planet hopping portrays a feeling of vastness, like any planet could exist somewhere in the galaxy, oh look this is a jungle world!
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________

[Whill]

Right. It wouldn't be Star Wars if they didn't go to different planets in different star systems.

Grimace, thanks for the reminder about GG8. I wish Star Wars authors (and filmmakers) always had that in mind, but oh well.

[garhkal]

[TauntaunScout]

Some planets in WEG publications are explicitly Earth-like, multi-terrain, planets.

Desert planets (whether its realistic or not) are a staple of space adventure because of 1) filming in California and 2) the old DUNE books. Heck even Arrakis had ice caps though.

All the "swamp", "jungle" or "forest" planets are at the least gonna have ice caps, oceans, and actually be a mix of forest/jungle/swamp depending on how far you are from the poles/equator and land's relative elevation. A "forest" planet is really just a barely inhabited, totally pre-industrial planet. Like earth for the vast majority of its existence, a world of wilderness.

If I were to judge it based on science and not the latest "Visual Dictionary" or whatever, Hoth is probably in a long ice age that has reached all the way to its equator. I'd guess it's only been an "ice planet" for about 30,000 years and will probably be a "forest" planet in another 30,000 years. That's a long time to an Solo but not long in the 3 billion year history of life on Hoth.

Side Rant: I really hate the "Luke should have died in the tauntaun" thing that cites a bunch of temperatures from West End. That means West End got the temperatures wrong, because Luke DID survive. Duh. Also tauntauns have natural anti-freeze in their blood (like Terran moose) so it's not gonna produce the same thermodynamics as leaving him wet with water.

Officially in the 80's, Endor had deserts. This came up in multiple Ewoks media.