> Mikko:
>
> >I suspect most people will just continue to ignore the problem, which is
> >of course quite a working solution. But if one needs to know the
> >dimensions, then things go seriously wrong.
>
> What things go seriously wrong if one "needs to know the
> dimensions"? How will it affect game-play which is the
> only reason why the debate is supposedly taking place on
> this forum?
Are you serious?
In my game there are goldentongue traders, Lunar strategos (general), and of course stuff happening on clan and tribe lands.
Population density and distances are rather important at least to me.
> I can't think of a single reason in which
> heroes should whip out abacuses and contrast population
> densities against some mysterious standard of which they
> have no way of knowing.
The heroes don't need to know, the narrator does. The heroes will know whether the next clans tula begins at the border of theirs, or whether there's wilderness and unclaimed badlands. They will know is their country stuffed full of people like present day netherlands, or is it a land with lot's of untamed wilderness.
And they will know whether one can march from capital to the border in two days or two weeks.
> For most intents and purpose, the _apparent_ size (that
> which the hero experiences) of a region feels as large
> as whatever historical parallel you chose. The Lunar
> Empire feels large because it is portrayed as an empire
> that dominates the known world. Sartar feels the size
> of Scotland or Ireland regardless of its area. Troubling
> oneself with areas and population densities is IMO an
> arid approach that yields little joy.
>
> --Peter Metcalfe
I can understand that it's a guestion of narrating style and emphasis.
I for one need to know. I bet many of us don't feel it is important.
But as I said. It's the narrator that needs to know, and this effects how the heroes experience the world.
-Adept
Powered by hypermail