04-24-2016, 10:51 AM | #11 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Hrm. Let me offer a few thoughts.
1. Firstly, since the terrain is alpine, maybe your "arctic" terrain means simply an Alpine tundra, above the tree-line? Perhaps the region gets temperate, in a hurry, once you reach lower elevations? We have some of this alpine tundra in Colorado, as does Switzerland, and the Himalayas have a lot of it. 2. Don't worry too much about the big chunk of mountains, since this system produces maps on such a granular scale. A human in decent physical condition can walk 20 miles a day, while carrying food and camping gear, as long as he or she can get water along the way. That means your large region is no more than 180 miles by 300. For perspective, the distance from Denver to Grand Junction is 243 miles, along I-70, and that's across the mountains. The Rockies stretch for thousands of miles, north to south. 3. Given that perspective, your Region 1 and your Region 3 probably belong to the same mountain chain, it's just that the rivers have cut wide valleys through the chain, and most people (elves and humans) have settled in those. That's perfectly reasonable. So, you've got high valleys filled with evergreen trees, carved out by two rivers, where most people live. The valleys lie in the midst of high mountains that quickly rise above the tree-line and feature alpine tundra and large swathes of glaciers. 4. Your elk-folk don't necessarily have to be humanoid, right? They could resemble the vesta, in the Riddle of Stars books, by Patricia A. McKillip -- magical, semi-intelligent reindeer mystically tied to the land. The elves might understand them, and the human herdsmen consider them sacred -- which makes 'em damn fine eatin', if you're an ice-demon.
__________________
-- MXLP:9 [JD=1, DK=1, DM-M=1, M(FAW)=1, SS=2, Nym=1 (nose coffee), sj=1 (nose cocoa), Maz=1] "Some days, I just don't know what to think." -Daryl Dixon. Last edited by tshiggins; 04-24-2016 at 10:55 AM. |
04-24-2016, 11:51 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Feb 2011
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
I wonder if that "days' travel" measure is supposed to vary depending on the terrain, so a mountain range that's 5 "days" wide is much narrower than an open prairie that's 5 "days" wide.
That implies that, physically, mountain regions are smaller than other regions, and oceans are much, much bigger (since boats travel farther). On the other hand, the system already multiplies oceans by 3, but doesn't mention other adjustments, so it's certainly simpler to treat "1 day" as ~8 leagues. Augh I need to do homework but this system is crying out for optimization! |
04-24-2016, 12:06 PM | #13 | |||
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cumberland, ME
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think that, now that I know where some mountains are, I'll probably treat the northern river as being "East is upstream, west is downstream". It remains to be seen whether the branch at Snow Elf City is "eastern branch splits into two, traveling northwest and south" or "eastern branch merges with either the northwest or south branch and flows out in the remaining direction." (Edit: Upon Bruno's post, I decided I cared just enough to actually bother googling on my own, and came up with River Bifurcation. So it still remains to be seen exactly what's going on at Snow Elf City.) Last edited by Landwalker; 04-24-2016 at 02:34 PM. |
|||
04-24-2016, 12:56 PM | #14 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Quote:
Deploy the battlenuns... |
|
04-24-2016, 12:57 PM | #15 | |
Join Date: Jul 2013
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Quote:
Other than this: Very interesting project! |
|
04-24-2016, 01:48 PM | #16 | |
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cumberland, ME
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Quote:
|
|
04-24-2016, 02:10 PM | #17 |
Join Date: Oct 2015
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
It might be worth getting familiar with the Koppen climate classification system.
If you have a map of climates, you can, or should be able to, at least, look up a state or nation that predominantly shares the climate with the region you're building, and see what their agriculture looks like. Something else you might consider is to build your map, and then, once you have the "big picture" laid out, decide what it means pertaining to population. If you keep hitting evil, maybe the elves are the bastion of good in a sea of terror. Or, maybe you're about to hit "good", and this area is in the middle of a long, drawn out, conflict. Of course, this doesn't work so well if you're using such a system to extend an existing playfield. Last edited by SRoach; 04-24-2016 at 02:13 PM. |
04-24-2016, 02:20 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Quote:
__________________
All about Size Modifier; Unified Hit Location Table A Wiki for my F2F Group A neglected GURPS blog |
|
04-24-2016, 04:06 PM | #19 |
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cumberland, ME
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Chapter 4
The chapter in which I cross my fingers and hope things start warming up in the non-diabolic sense.
Chapter 4a: Rollin' Up a River
What the heck, let's do one more. Go for a three-fer. Chapter 4b: What Lies South?
----------- The World So Far |
04-24-2016, 07:15 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Oct 2011
|
Re: [Practicum] Procedural World-Building Test Run
Given the tiny outpost of Civilized dwarves and the larger areas of semi-civilized dwarves cut off from them, the prevalence of monsters and infernalism...the civilized dwarves could be the original dwarf home and capital under siege, with the other dwarf regions being now-isolated colonies and outlying provinces; a dwarf empire in a state of collapse. Just a thought.
|
|
|