Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7388634" data-attributes="member: 29398">I happen to live in the middle of the most geologically complex bit of western NA and from what I can tell they've got what's going on mostly figured out in terms of what is moving where and how fast, and what has resulted from which particular events in the past.&nbsp; They've also got a handle on what will happen next - the Juan de Fuca plate, for example, will eventually disappear - but they're no closer to predicting specific events e.g. earthquakes than before.Perhaps, but that &quot;certain point&quot; is more than good enough for our world-design purposes.True, though I think we know or can deduce a bit more than you're allowing for. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The why in this case doesn't matter all too much, just the end results that show up on the map.But, in game design a DM can always toss in the why if she feels like it.I guess I'd be that guy, then - I'd call you on the floating rocks for sure, if only to ask in-character &quot;How the ...?&quot;.As for the map, I'd gladly critique it if asked but otherwise wouldn't call you on it, though I might inwardly cringe if there was anything egregiously wrong.Same as I do with most of the maps included at the front of various fantasy novels - they're almost always cringe-worthy.&nbsp; Even Middle Earth has at least one bit that makes me wince every time I see it: the rectangular mountain range around Mordor looks more than a bit artificial... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Lanefan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7388634, member: 29398"] I happen to live in the middle of the most geologically complex bit of western NA and from what I can tell they've got what's going on mostly figured out in terms of what is moving where and how fast, and what has resulted from which particular events in the past. They've also got a handle on what will happen next - the Juan de Fuca plate, for example, will eventually disappear - but they're no closer to predicting specific events e.g. earthquakes than before. Perhaps, but that "certain point" is more than good enough for our world-design purposes. True, though I think we know or can deduce a bit more than you're allowing for. :) The why in this case doesn't matter all too much, just the end results that show up on the map. But, in game design a DM can always toss in the why if she feels like it. I guess I'd be that guy, then - I'd call you on the floating rocks for sure, if only to ask in-character "How the ...?". As for the map, I'd gladly critique it if asked but otherwise wouldn't call you on it, though I might inwardly cringe if there was anything egregiously wrong. Same as I do with most of the maps included at the front of various fantasy novels - they're almost always cringe-worthy. Even Middle Earth has at least one bit that makes me wince every time I see it: the rectangular mountain range around Mordor looks more than a bit artificial... :) Lanefan [/QUOTE]

Verification