the more of these polls I read, the more I want all the competing facts about each city to be true. Maybe I'm alone in thriving on apparent contradictions, but I love the idea of a city that sometimes flies but when grounded lies in a flooding basin, that was carved originally out of the sea bed by warrior efts, that is ruled by a paranoid boy who may or may not be a god, and who has to keep his dwindling, luxury-addled citizens prisoner in their palaces with warships and the zealous guarding of ley-gates, and which is haunted by crabmen - who are either trying to return home to the sea or are the dream-detritus of the city's few litterateur children, and who spend their days whittling cargo cult fake magic items, perhaps maddened by the proximity of mysterious volcanic minerals in the city's walls.
I concur. There seem to be very few facts that are actually totally contradictory. And those that are, can certainly be engineered into being only apparently contradictory. Although from the general reaction of the polls, people are certainly preferring the prosaic, so this may be too much for the average reader. And I would have said Vancian-level weirdness myself.
Perhaps the final writeup should include an appendix listing the rejected ideas for each city, so GMs can pick any that they like, even if those didn't quite make it in? There are a lot of interesting ideas here that don't contradict the top three facts, but that didn't get the most votes. It might be a good idea to put them somewhere, so individual GMs can customize the world a bit...
(Or would that defeat the purpose of the exercise?)
Er, I mean, sure! You've already put them up on the Web and put a tag on those entries, after all - it shouldn't be too much trouble to collect them at some point, if you agree that would fit within the scope of the project.
River from 17 to 19
anonymous
November 10 2010, 22:26:59 UTC
The problem with a river connecting 17 and 19 is that it appears to start in the hills, flow down into the lowlands/ flatlands, flow up into the mountains and then down to the coast. Its not impossible to have a map in that location, but it says something about the other terrain in the area.
I.e. there must be a deep vally between the two mountain ranges north and south of the river (even lower than the land around 17) and/or else the land around 17 needs to be high tableland or the like - perhaps the hills south of that region indicate a rise to a high altitude region rather than simple hills rising out of flatter land...
Comments 10
That's some Moorcock-level weirdness right there.
Reply
Reply
I concur. There seem to be very few facts that are actually totally contradictory. And those that are, can certainly be engineered into being only apparently contradictory.
Although from the general reaction of the polls, people are certainly preferring the prosaic, so this may be too much for the average reader.
And I would have said Vancian-level weirdness myself.
Reply
I provide the weird.
And I do well by it.
So give me a city of stone and brick, that I may adorn it with nightmares.
Reply
Cool. Wasn't sure where to properly put it anyway.
Reply
Perhaps the final writeup should include an appendix listing the rejected ideas for each city, so GMs can pick any that they like, even if those didn't quite make it in? There are a lot of interesting ideas here that don't contradict the top three facts, but that didn't get the most votes. It might be a good idea to put them somewhere, so individual GMs can customize the world a bit...
(Or would that defeat the purpose of the exercise?)
Reply
Reply
Er, I mean, sure! You've already put them up on the Web and put a tag on those entries, after all - it shouldn't be too much trouble to collect them at some point, if you agree that would fit within the scope of the project.
Reply
Reply
I.e. there must be a deep vally between the two mountain ranges north and south of the river (even lower than the land around 17) and/or else the land around 17 needs to be high tableland or the like - perhaps the hills south of that region indicate a rise to a high altitude region rather than simple hills rising out of flatter land...
Carl
Reply
Leave a comment