realistic geography

[alsih2o]

i notice that many folks strive to make their geography make sense, downward flow of rivers deciding current strength, maountain and plains in appropriate places, land and sea interaction.

this strikes me as odd, in a world where valleys aren't just rumored to be made by 2 giant snakes fighting, but where it is true (!!) shouldn't d.m.'s and game companies be making more geogrphic surprises to keep the players on their toes?

 

[Vaxalon]

I agree entirely.

Take a look at my campaign setting for an example of that.

 

[HellHound]

Here Here!

I totally agree.

I suspend my disbelief while playing D&D. Someone was talking about these world generators that produce "realistic" worlds, with predictable rainfall based on geography, and so on (global climate, axial tilt, you name it).

But really, how on earth will this create a world of epic fantasy like the world of the Young Kingdoms from the Elric! saga? That's what I play in, a world that is a chunk of LAW-created land that is afloat in a mass of chaos.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

Well, even if the valley was made by two giants fighting, the river flowing into it would still flow downwards - gravity generally wouldn't change.

But I see your point.

In the world I'm working on now, I have a large inland sea that was created when one of the old gods was killed and thrown from the heavens - the impact created a big hole

But even still, the water got into it from gravity...

 

[alsih2o]

meepo, with all respect, i think you are wrong, why not the upward shed tears of a mighty but saddened undergroung god?

gravity need not have anything to do with it, heck, even in the real world gfround water rises to fill many areas....why can't the earth cry because of some horrid event that took place there?

 

[BluWolf]

I used to be ssooooo obessed with reality and detail. Geography, ecology frickin ornathology.......

And while I as the world creator thoroughly enjoyed these aspects I realsied that is impacted the overall enjoyment of the game for the players very little.

Dragon did an article series a few years ago on creating campaign worlds an one of the best peices of advise in there was;

"Don't waste time on things that don't impact the current game."

I'm paraphrasing.

So in my current campaign world I have never done a world map. I have a general idea of what the world looks like from 15 miles up but I don't have it drawn out. The characters wouldn;t see a map of it so my players don't either.

 

[Hand of Evil]

While I agree with you I fear the words 'it is magic'!

I do create fantastic landscapes and interesting places, with interesting stories behind them, I just wonder how many would let them fall threw the cracks, or not use them.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

::cough::

The geography of my world was created by a PhD in geophysics who works for the US Geological Survey.

And I'm pretty darn proud of that!

 

[kenjib]

All of the divine/magical features of a fantastic geography are great, however they need to be justified, as yours were. A valley carved by a giant snake, a sea created by the wrath of a god on a decadent kingdom now sunk beneath the waves, all of these are great. However, a river that runs all the way through an island from one side to another just because the person who made the map doesn't realize how rivers work is still crap. A river that starts in a lowland plain and climbs up a mountain before heading down the other side, with no magical reasoning behind why the river flows uphill, is still crap.

The magic terrain features are great, but they need to be justified. Otherwise things should default to real world principles of geography -- unless a different and consistent set of rules for physics is in place, but this is just another was of saying it's justified. Otherwise the players can't always solve problems they encounter in a reasonable manner.

Let's say they want to divert the flow of a river to flood an evil mine. If the flow of the river was created incorrectly, the player's can't really come up with a plan to do this because the underlying principles they must rely on to create a plan just don't make sense.

 

[seasong]

I prefer my campaign settings to be logical and internally consistent. For some of them, that means realistic geography. For others, it does not.

My Ell'jaret setting, for example, has an oddly shaped plateau because a very powerful mage ripped the upper half of a mountain off and used it as a crushing weapon on a foe. There is a valley which curves down sharply... because it is a magic-eating mouth. Heck, there's a whole island (the dark realm) which looks very out of place, because it is - a god pulled it from the mainland and set it off to the side to run some experiments in accellerated evolution.

Nothing wrong with that, and my players like playing there.

My AO setting, on the other hand, is as gritty as I get. Continent shape, general weather, etc., is all as close to realist as I can make it. In the area the campaign started, there are a few years of harsh summer droughts and bitter winter cold every two decades caused by a warm ocean current that raises and lowers over that period. I don't do tons of research, but I try my best.

Nothing wrong with that, and my players like playing there.

In both cases, however, my players know what to expect, and can generally have faith that anything they stumble across "fits". And I put a fair amount of effort into that with either one.