. Look at the history of the
> English/Scottish border for an example. You'd have a job drawing a
> definitive line on the map at any particular date and a generation
> or so later it would be wrong.
>
Yes, but most of the Gloranthan maps currenlty have the equivalent of "England" printed somewhere around Sussex, and "Scotland" printed somewhere up over the northern highlands and islands. Is the border a little north of the Themes? Somewhere in the middle? Just south of Scotland?
Most of the reasons against placing the borders seem to be of the nature "We can't tell you the exact value of Pi, so we won't tell you it at all."
Yes, borders vary, but having *SOME CLUE* of where they are is a helpful thing. Most of the readily available maps give no clue at all. Maybe those well steeped in things Gloranthan can tell you that the heavily populated part of Esrolia extends x leagues in from the coast, that there is then a buffer of y leagues that is sparsely inhabited but claimed by Esrolia, etc, but the newcomer has NO way of knowing that.
Sure some areas are heavily disputed or acknowledged as no man's land, but those can be marked too.
Also, in some areas regions are pretty well defined....after all, in Fronela, I'm sure people are pretty certain of where the ban was! I still have no idea if Loksalm projects much east of Sog City or not, and I've been playing since around when RQ3 came out.
Obviously it isn't a critical flaw. But the arguments that it serves no purpose, or is more misleading than informative, are, I think a little reflective of "that's the way it has always been, so it must be right." I'm not saying that the maps that are out there aren't great, because many of them are great. But even a rough sketch or speres of influence map would probably be useful to a lot of people.
--Bryan
Powered by hypermail