The map we've been using shows a long hill at the other end of the viaduct rather than a peak.
>How come the gate has been swapping sides as often as we once suggested?
>It's incredibly well-protected. I'd seen the main gatehouse as being at
>"ground" level, almost, so you could have waves of troops hitting the walls
>around it. You'd need scaling ladders and so on, sure, but as it is the
>place just isn't attackable other than by flyers.
From previous sketches I'd thought there was a reasonably flat area around the gate. Access to that area being difficult except over the viaduct.
>In fact, why not destroy that viaduct, so as to stop any attacks at
>all? I'm sure it isn't being used as a supply route during the siege.
Anything that impressive is going to be tied into the city magic. The defenders could destroy it but don't know the consequences - it might destroy the whole gatehouse.
>Take the entire picture and divide the height by about four?
I seem to remember a similar comment when the sketch was originally done. The main city walls are very high - minimum of 120 ft.
>Thanks, Sam. I'd never have realised how far this differed from the stories
>we've been putting there without being able to see it so clearly. See it?
>With that picture, I can almost smell it!
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail