| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
 Posted - 24 Nov 2008 : 14:59:17
|
I am in the process of recreating a part of the map of Faerun on my PC. As the basis I use the maps already published, but the icons used seem a little random sometimes (like people didnt really bother to check the size of a city when mapping an area).
Example:
Unapproachable East: The town Delthuntle is mapped as a black circle with a black ring around it. The description of the city doesnt give any number of people living there, but when I compare this with other "large towns" on the Thesk map in the same book they are simple black circles. Usually the "black circle + black ring" symbol stands for larger settlements and the simple black circle stands for smaller ones, so one of both seems a bit wrong.
This brings me to my questions:
1. Is there a list of cities (as complete as it can get) which includes the number of the inhabitants?
2. Since I want to make the map a bit more "precise" and include fixed symbols for certain ranges of city size how many categories do you think are useful?
So far I have:
- town (up to 1.000)
- small city (1.000 to 10.000)
- large city (10.000+)
- capital (special symbol regardless of size)
Since it is my intention to have two different layers for these symbols (regional / global) to be able to zoom in quite a bit, the information could include smaller settings too. Would more categories be helpful or confusing?
The first map is 70*70 cm and includes Damara/Vaasa in the north, Thay/Rashemen in the east, the northern parts of Mulhorand and so on in the south and up to the eastern Dalelands in the west ... roughly the NE quarter of the 3rd edition Campaign setting map. It is "the first", because this one already is close to 2 GB (Photoshop) and takes 15 minutes to save; Photoshop doesnt like bigger files.
|
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
|
|
Brian R. James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
1098 Posts |
Posted - 24 Nov 2008 : 19:55:53
|
| I used a similar city range for the Sembia map I'm workin on Pandora. For the smallest category (for towns of less than 1,000 residents) I used a solid white circle as the symbol. |
Brian R. James - Freelance Game Designer
Follow me on Twitter @brianrjames |
 |
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
Posted - 25 Nov 2008 : 12:51:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brian R. James
I used a similar city range for the Sembia map I'm workin on Pandora. For the smallest category (for towns of less than 1,000 residents) I used a solid white circle as the symbol.
For me it is a solid black circle atm, hehe ... with maps its all about good contrast to make them readable and my main landmass is very light brown. Thats why I had to tune down some of my landscapes on the map ... too much graphic goodness hurts sometimes, even if it could have looked more realistic.
I was thinking that a category of "hamlet" might be useful for detail maps, because a town of almost 1.000 can already (and probably has) have a town wall while really small settlements are much different in style. The whole point is to recognize characteristics of a settlement or map detail (like the type of forest - light/deep, sylvan/human/...) when looking at it.
A small preview of a corner of Aglarond can be found HERE
... it doesnt really look "right" yet(*1), but you can see the hills through the forest cover and the different texturings of the forest. Fertile / rocky ground for the basic "plains" is also intended, but I need to research the areas a lot more to add those details. So there is still lots of work to do ... painting the landscape was easy so far, adding the details is work.
(*1) I am still fussing over the roads and trying to figure out the actual size of the villages shown there and put them in the right category. |
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
Edited by - Pandora on 04 Dec 2008 12:51:22 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 25 Nov 2008 : 17:41:33
|
I use the same symbols but then use different sizes to correlate the difference. This goes for ruins as well as settlements. You can see my current list of icons HERE.
I use the 'triple circle' icon for metropolises, because I really liked the old FR maps that appeared on. The only symbol I completely changed from the FR standard was the one for castles - I didn't like it being the same shape as the ruins one, so I made it into another classification of ruins (I think I have three version IIRC). Now I just use the castle symbol for Castles and Citadels (also two different size, the smaller to represent Forts and keeps), and have seperate ones for different types of towers as well. I also have it where any city with a dot in the center is a port (thus far I haven't had to do a metropolis that wasn't a port, fortunately).
Like you, I believe in checking the lore whenever I place something, to make sure I am using the correct symbol. I think the Serpent Kingdoms Maps were one of the worst offenders when it came to bad-icon usage (those maps were only availble as a WE, and weren't in the book).
I have to add some more terrain and symbols to that map-key - I have some new ones I've added, like plagued Lands and 'navigable rivers' (ones ships can traverse easily).
Edit: I just realized I forgot to my put 'Taiga' (cold forest, mostly Evergreens) terain type on that.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 Nov 2008 22:59:26 |
|
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
Posted - 25 Nov 2008 : 20:40:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You can see my current list of icons HERE.
I intend to be a little more specific and there are quite a few cities that dont have the "right" symbol on the original maps it seems. Also the population figures for regions are kinda wayyyy off sometimes IMO.
Example: The Great Dale total population is given as 211.680 in the FRCS, but the biggest city is 8.820 AND the whole region is described as being poorly suited for agriculture. Where do the 200.000 people live when many "settlements" that are included in the map in Unapproachable East are "Thorp / Hamlet" sized and have far fewer than a thousand inhabitants? I seriously doubt they are all living in the forests ...
I know thats a lot of nitpicking, but thats something that strikes me as illogical and it should be corrected. As for the list of cities ... well I started my own one now and will try to fill it with as much solid information I can get. |
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2008 : 23:05:23
|
You do realize MOST of the villages, thorps, and small towns are NOT on the maps, right?
The world map only lists major settlements and ones of interest - there are literally hundreds of small settlements in every country that never appear on any official FR maps.
Take Shadowdale for instance - most people only know of the Settlement the Dale is named after, but several others exists, including the town of Freedale, all within the 'Dale' of Shadowdale. Mistledale is another that has several other official settlements named... and plenty more exist in both of those that aren't.
And if you don't believe me, look at a RW world map and see if you can find your town on it.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Nov 2008 14:49:46 |
|
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
Posted - 29 Nov 2008 : 09:16:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You do realize MOST of the villages, thorps, and small towns are NOT on the maps, right?
Well its a little disappointing that maps are working with different standards. If you look at the map of the Great Dale in Unapproachable East you will see that it has a lot of very small settlements. IMO this map has all settlements that are more than just a building or two.
The contrast to this is the map of Thay, which has several cities with 100.000+ citizens, but which is also a smaller scale. This map does have quite a few settlements marked with the same solid black circle that is used for the <300 villages on the Great Dale and that is what irritates / annoys me. It is very unlikely these settlements are just as small, but a look at the map should be more informative IMO. They didnt add a map key with guidelines to the size to any map, so it is a bit confusing because you dont know what to expect from a symbol. It is highly unlikely these settlements are only <1000 small, but rather they are the centres of collecting food from the small villages and hamlets around them to feed the 100k cities.
If you publish some information for a game / world like this it should be as easily accessible / understandable as possible. Thus being precise with the symbols should be a requirement IMO, just as thinking about the population figures is. I seriously doubt figure given for the Great Dale is realistic, because the map lists most settlements and these dont even add up to 10% of that figure (if you exclude settlements in the forests). The whole country is more or less "wilderness" and not described as fertile, so small settlements are extremely dangerous places to live in and thus unlikely to exist in large numbers.
In contrast I doubt the size of 100k+ for cities in Thay is realistic, because these probably need wayyy too much food and would produce a huge amount of waste that couldnt be handled well enough. One city of that size would be doable - close to the sea - but several is a bit much IMO. If you look at ancient Rome - which was of that size - it had an entire empire to feed and supply it. Having several cities of that category doesnt seem to work.
So adding these two "problems" (for nitpickers like me) together makes me pretty unhappy in that attempt to create a detailed world map with the same standards everywhere.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The world map only lists major settlements and ones of interest - there are literally hundreds of small settlemenets in every country that never appear on any official FR maps.
The world map only lists major settlements as it should be, but for me it is a problem of detail, small settlements and population figures as shown above. |
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Nov 2008 : 15:08:16
|
Well, Ed has addressed this before, and not everything makes it into game sources. MOST RPG gamers would find it a waste to list the details of a nation's farm economy in a limited-page sourcebook.
Whereas Ed does consider these kinds of details very important, TSR did not, and WotC even less so. Thats why we have 4e FR and 4e rules now - anything that doesn't have to do with encounters is left out.
Oh, and Thay uses magic in it's agriculture - even though it is a northern nation on a high plateau, its weather is tropical and they grow Oranges the size of Grapefruits there, so at least we have some explanation in regards to Thay.
Magic is also used elsewhere, like at Goldenfields, where Priests of Chauntea use divine magic to produce very high yields of large and delicious produce, which accounts for a major portion of Waterdeep's needs.
If you look at the Map of the Border Kingdoms that came with Power of Faerūn, you'll get a better idea of how many settlements are really in an area (compare that with the official Map of Faerūn), and even that is probably missing all the tiny ones (of less then a hundred people). The sources don't include all the info some of us would like, but Ed goes out of his way to try and explain that nitty-gritty stuff to us here at the Keep, and you'll find that the world does make sense economically, agriculturally, and everything else once he adds in those key points the game company(ies) feel are frivolous. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Nov 2008 15:08:52 |
|
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
Posted - 04 Dec 2008 : 17:04:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Well, Ed has addressed this before, and not everything makes it into game sources. MOST RPG gamers would find it a waste to list the details of a nation's farm economy in a limited-page sourcebook.
Whereas Ed does consider these kinds of details very important, TSR did not, and WotC even less so. Thats why we have 4e FR and 4e rules now - anything that doesn't have to do with encounters is left out.
Well they might have considered the numbers before giving them ... which might make you think everything else could be equally logical, checked and tested.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Oh, and Thay uses magic in it's agriculture - even though it is a northern nation on a high plateau, its weather is tropical and they grow Oranges the size of Grapefruits there, so at least we have some explanation in regards to Thay.
Magic is also used elsewhere, like at Goldenfields, where Priests of Chauntea use divine magic to produce very high yields of large and delicious produce, which accounts for a major portion of Waterdeep's needs.
Using magic to produce / help produce food is one thing, another is to transport the goods to the huge cities. Using magic for transportation is probably only possible for the really wealthy / important few who can afford that luxury, but the masses will require a huge amount of "normal" transportation. You dont have the capability to transport them in cooled transports like we have today, so chances are that some will spoil. As you said yourself Thay has a tropical climate to help with agriculture, but that doesnt help to keep the food from spoiling.
You also need a good way of disposing of the waste through:
a. a working system of sewers (this usually doesnt work well without a river or other source of flowing water) and/or
b. a good number of carts that carry them to nearby farms (and thus improving the productivity again) and/or
c. creatures that thrive on these (Otyughs, Shambling Mounds, ...) and which might be used as guardians.
So if you add both together you need a huge amount of carrying capacity to supply a big city. Amruthar (41k), Bezantur (136k), Eltabbar (123k), Pyrados (54k) and Tyraturos (68k) all lie within a 120 mile circle centered around Tyraturos and only Bezantur has access to the sea (although Eltabbar has a big lake, but there arent really other big cities to send ships to there). This means they need to have a very thorough organization for the distribution of food, since even a tropical climate can only produce so much on a certain amount of space. Keeping the roads in good shape is a very important thing and details like these help fleshing out the country if players go there ... a world is not an empty space inbetween encounters.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If you look at the Map of the Border Kingdoms that came with Power of Faerūn, you'll get a better idea of how many settlements are really in an area (compare that with the official Map of Faerūn), and even that is probably missing all the tiny ones (of less then a hundred people). The sources don't include all the info some of us would like, but Ed goes out of his way to try and explain that nitty-gritty stuff to us here at the Keep, and you'll find that the world does make sense economically, agriculturally, and everything else once he adds in those key points the game company(ies) feel are frivolous.
The map of the Border Kingdoms is really nice, because it has a map key for the town symbols and uses more symbols compared to previous maps. At the same time it shows a larger area (compared to the maps from Unapproachable East) AND includes very small settlements like hamlets. The reason is probably - at least in part - that Power of Faerun is from 2006, while Unapproachable East is from 2003.
At the moment I am a bit stuck with my map, because the colors I used are too strong and "swallow" all the names I put in (too many nifty Photoshop effects make the names look out of place). Just take a look HERE. Back to the drawing board ... |
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
Edited by - Pandora on 04 Dec 2008 17:12:00 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jul 2009 : 16:33:24
|
I was looking for something (info on Freedale) when I re-found this old thread, and realized I never responded to your last post - those are some really nice maps you have there - I am SO stealing that 'glow' effect you put around the letters within the forest (I HATE areas where it's hard to read the names). 
Beautifully done.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2009 : 00:20:50
|
After finally getting to this scroll, I have to say, I agree with Mark's last comment on this one. Very nicely done mapwork, and in answer to your question at the end of your slideshow, I would have to answer "lighter colours and minimal text outlining"... the text outlining is very effective, but lighter background colours would reduce the need for it in the first place, as well as making the maps more print-friendly. Just my two cents... you *are* still mapping, right, Pandora?
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
<chop>Whereas Ed does consider these kinds of details very important, TSR did not, and WotC even less so. Thats why we have 4e FR and 4e rules now - anything that doesn't have to do with encounters is left out.
<snip>The sources don't include all the info some of us would like, but Ed goes out of his way to try and explain that nitty-gritty stuff to us here at the Keep, and you'll find that the world does make sense economically, agriculturally, and everything else once he adds in those key points the game company(ies) feel are frivolous.
Crunch is what's frivolous, and the sooner that's figured out, the better off the Realms will be... but then, without crunch, game material is edition-independent, and we can't have that now, can we? |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 23 Jul 2009 00:27:26 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
map questions ... of sorts ...
