Checking the Geology of a Map

[ColinChapman]

Maybe?

Sorry, but when it comes to maps I am a visual guy, so I need to see it to be sure. When I make maps usually there are multiple versions before I settle on something as I experiment with what works (and looks good).

Your description sounds generally OK, but if we look at the real world you have the order of the lakes wrong. Small streams go to small lakes into medium rivers and then large lakes into large rivers into the ocean. So, the question would be why does a large lake drain into a smaller one? How does that smaller one not overflow when there is so much water to flow into it?

Part of your answer is all of the marshy ground, but marshy ground is usually found at the inflow of a river into a lake, not the outflow. Not to say it never happens, but marshes at the entry to a lake is common because there is an elevation change that is allowing the water to pool, rather than continuing to run in a river. When a river leaves a lake, it is generally not marshy because again there is a change in elevation that is causing the water to flow down to the next level closest to the sea (or perhaps even to the sea).

Basically, water is always seeking equilibrium, which is generally "sea level" however that is determined.

Hope that helps more.

That does help, thanks. In my next update, I'll revise the lakes/marshes as I add the rivers.

 

[Omand]

Why I don’t sweat getting every detail of maps “right”:

Game Designer Points Out Map Of New Orleans Does Not Make Sense And We Can’t Unsee It Now

James L. Sutter is a 34-year-old game designer and author, and last week he took to Twitter to share his hilarious critique on the real map of New Orleans.

www.demilked.com

It may not sound like from my answers, but I generally agree.

I know full well that my maps are not perfect or "right" compared to the real world; and yes the real world has such fun locations as New Orleans that actually should be part of the ocean based upon the subsidence of the land it was built on. Engineering can work wonders and water can flow in very interesting ways.

My personal choice is to try to be at least semi-realistic in most cases, which means following what I consider general rules of logic and verisimilitude. But everyone has a different tolerance.

Have fun and do what works for you.

Cheers

 

[ColinChapman]

Okay, added the rivers and revised the lakes and marsh. Any thoughts?

The portcullis symbols represent dungeons. The black dome is an entrance to the underworld. The ruins are ruined towns and villages from before the undead apocalypse, though I need to add a few more. Any suggested hexes?

Would anywhere make sense for a small plateau to be located?

 

[Omand]

Sure, looks good. Likely not 100% "correct" in the real world, but close enough.

For a plateau, maybe consider K4, K5, L4, M4, M5 as possible locations.

Or, you could put it up where you originally had it in your first draft if you add a bit more higher land around it. Some more hills and small mountains. Or it could be in D3 and the rest of the uplands are just off the map, so out of sight?

Cheers

 

[sevenbastard]

If I was a player I would have no questions.

If your worried about the plateau throw in something like this to your world lore.

Sages have many theories on the plateau, some therorize it os a natural phenomenon, others that a gate to Elemental plane of earth once was located beneath it, others it was part of a fortification raised by an ancient sorcerer.

 

[John Dallman]

Looks reasonable. Players do sometimes care about this: I once pointed out to a DM that the lack of a river just there didn't make any sense unless someone had moved it underground or similar, and a whole new plot line appeared.

 

[aco175]

There are always exceptions to the rules in nature. Plus, depending on the timeline most anything can make sense. There are dinosaur bones on top of mountains and at the bottom of oceans. You can make a plateau on the western side of the rivers towards the other sets of hills if the rivers have been flowing long enough to wear through the land leaving a valley system.

 

[Theory of Games]

Great map @SpaceOtter

What's weird to me is a GM sharing the big map with players. Guess I'm old-school: the party starts in a hex and explores, with one player/PC mapping the terrain as they go.

To me it brings a greater sense of discovery to the table. Wonder.

 

[ColinChapman]

Great map @SpaceOtter

What's weird to me is a GM sharing the big map with players. Guess I'm old-school: the party starts in a hex and explores, with one player/PC mapping the terrain as they go.

To me it brings a greater sense of discovery to the table. Wonder.

Who said it's for my Players? This one is for the GM (me) only.

After two centuries being locked away in their mountain enclaves during the undead apocalypse, the players will have some (outdated) maps, but will find the post-apocalyptic world different to say the least. In part because nature will have definitely overrun and bounced back in places, but also because many places will be ghost towns. Quite literally. They'll look at the old maps and say, "The town of Hollowfast was supposed to be over this hill." then stumble into its abandoned, undead-infested ruins, for example.

They'll also come across Deadlands (areas twisted by the presence of large numbers of undead), Sorcerous Blights (areas wrought strange by the use of powerful magicks in the war to stop the Dead), weird beasts of war created to fight the Dead now amok, creatures mutated by alchemical effluvia, Fey Demesnes (which they might accidentally wander into, where time flows strangely, and everything is alive. Oh, and the fey are treacherous, cruel, baby-stealing things...), battlefields where Myrmidons (golem-like construct warriors) still scurry, their programming twisted over time, etc.

And my players are not on this forum; they are the kids at an after-school RPG Club I run where I teach. The campaign is about exploring and reclaiming the world their recent ancestors knew.

I think this will have... Wonder.

 

[ColinChapman]

Sure, looks good. Likely not 100% "correct" in the real world, but close enough.

For a plateau, maybe consider K4, K5, L4, M4, M5 as possible locations.

Or, you could put it up where you originally had it in your first draft if you add a bit more higher land around it. Some more hills and small mountains. Or it could be in D3 and the rest of the uplands are just off the map, so out of sight?

Cheers

Thanks, mate.