Timeline for Where would mountains make sense on those land masses?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7 at 0:16 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | How could topography not be a fact of nature, wholly uninterested in anything political? Politics might embrace or arise from topography but if you want to reverse engineer your World so it starts from a topography that suits your outcome, are there no obvious problems? Flatland regions might be more likely to subjugation and is this your built World, or someone else's? Topography might have implications for military conquest. How could military fiction, political thrillers/espionage or any hero quest matter if this is your built world? | |
| Feb 2 at 20:16 | comment | added | Cogadit | @Pelinore You are almost right. Especially AlexP gave a good exercise | |
| Feb 2 at 20:14 | comment | added | Cogadit | @Nosajimiki I did. And I came to the conclusion that the community is right. I am overthinking it. I just continue making it up. Anyway if you would be interested in giving hints where you would put it, let me know, you will have it | |
| Feb 2 at 20:11 | comment | added | Cogadit | @RobbieGoodwin To me the topography gives geopolitical implications. A region in a flatland is more likely to be subjugated by foreign powers and would therefore have more variance in how the borders look. Also it gives different implications for military conquest. It helps a story if it is closer to military fiction or a political thriller/espionage. For a hero quest it would be mostly irrelevant imo. | |
| Jan 31 at 21:34 | comment | added | Pelinore | @Nosajimiki he did, must have gone with an edit, what it seems he was after were some useful rules of thumb and pointers he might apply to any map, so any specific map itself isn't really a necessity anyway, I presume from the edit message to all that he's found what he came for as well, so as he's new and that may be his only visit you could be talking to yourself there ;) | |
| Jan 30 at 20:32 | comment | added | Nosajimiki | This will be hard to answer if you don't post an image of your map so far. | |
| Jan 30 at 19:54 | history | edited | Cogadit | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 39 characters in body
|
| Jan 29 at 20:48 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | Can you say how having mountains in any particular position could help or hinder your story? | |
| Jan 29 at 18:06 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jan 29 at 18:04 | comment | added | Cogadit | @KEY_ABRADE Geologically | |
| Jan 29 at 14:14 | answer | added | Pica | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 29 at 12:54 | answer | added | YumYumPizza | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 29 at 11:26 | answer | added | L.Dutch♦ | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jan 29 at 5:39 | comment | added | JBH | @AlexP isn't wrong. There's a fad today to make everything as "realistic" as possible. It's not as valuable as you might think. However, if you really do want to chase that rabit, start here. (An argument could be made that all questions like this should be closed as a duplicate of the linked question, but I'll leave that to a Meta discussion.) | |
| Jan 28 at 22:21 | comment | added | AlexP | What I mean to say is that geography had been doing just fine for thousands of years before this new-fangled plate tectonics fad came in. Geography is primary; plate tectonics is a post factum explanation. Just draw your mountains as you want them, and then let geologists explain how they formed the way they formed. | |
| Jan 28 at 22:19 | comment | added | AlexP | Hello Cogadit, and welcome to Worldbuilding! You are overthinking it. To understand why I say you are overthinking it, perform the following simple experiment. Take a blank piece of paper and draw a rough outline of Africa; you may use this blank map as a guide. Then, without any external help, no cheating, draw on your rough map the mountain ranges of Africa, as well as you can, from your knowledge of the planet you are living on. Compare them with the reality. | |
| Jan 28 at 21:56 | comment | added | Pelinore | @KEY_ABRADE I'd presume he wants "Make sense geologically", making sense for the story isn't something we can answer not knowing the story and is something he'd already know himself (knowing the story, or such of it as may or may not exist yet) .. I would guess that he's looking for some usable rules of thumb that can be applied to the map he's drawn by anyone without a deep understanding of plate tectonics that will give superficially plausible results for those that do? | |
| Jan 28 at 21:33 | comment | added | KEY_ABRADE | Ignore the bot. We understand what you're asking, sort of. With that in mind: "make sense" in what sense? Make sense geologically? Make sense for the purposes of writing a story? | |
| Jan 28 at 21:32 | comment | added | CommunityBot | Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking. | |
| S Jan 28 at 21:30 | review | First questions | |||
| Jan 28 at 21:32 | |||||
| S Jan 28 at 21:30 | history | asked | Cogadit | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
