Nope. I don't think you get any useful information from the position of the stars -- unless there _is_ a longitude (or indeed latitude) effect per se, which seems to me not impossible, but might be "problematic" to hyper-rationalise in a flat world. (See "horizons, weak justifications of"...)
> If only the Pole Star were fixed then you would have problems, you would know
> which way the Pole Star was, but everything else would depend on the time and
> date. Fortunately we have the planets which do not rotate with the rest of
> the Sky Dome. Again, if you know where they are supposed to be then I think
> you should be able to work out where you are. How reliable the various paths
> are, and how accurate the observation is obviously in question.
I don't think they help at all. AFAIK, they all have the same appearance in one place, as they do with the other, with the Red Moon (and maybe Zenith?) being the exception.
> I disagree with this. It does not feel wrong to me. It remains difficult but
> there are far worse things to worry a navigator; doom currents, hurricane
> winds, sea monters and terrible fogs amongst other things.
None of which affect position-finding per se -- merely surviving... Besides, what about mapping on land?
Admittedly, if the continental maps one finds in Ye Olde Boxed Sets, and the like, are actually Gloranthan documents, then one might argue that seriously-good position-finding "technology" really must exist. OTOH, one might resist same as being quite wildly "anachronistic". (Yes, I know Glorantha isn't earth, but you know what I mean.)
Powered by hypermail