View Full Version : Northern Chalcedonia - a WIP

02-13-2012, 05:53 AM

Here is a map I am working on for my Legends of Nor'Ova tabletop RPG campaign. Legends of Nor'Ova is a unique game not based on any other RPG, with its own dice system, races, etc.

Anyways, this map is the continent of Northern Chalcedonia. It is part of the larger Chalcedonia continent system which consist of Northern Chalcedonia, Southern Chalcedonia, and the outlying islands. It is in the north eastern quadrant of the world called Nor'Ova. The continent is bordered on the west by the O'Lennon Ocean, on the north by the Aech Ocean, on the east by the Andron Ocean, and on the south by Southern Chalcedonia. The boundry between Northern and Southern Chalcedonia is a small but somewhat wide and very mountainous isthmus known simply as the Middle Lands. The equator of Nor'Ova runs through the center of that isthmus, which is where the map cuts off at the bottom. (the equator position is not fixed at this time, and may move further south to account for a larger southern continent if need be when I get to that point). The northern polar continent of Tyrasia can be barely noticed on this map.

This map illustrates Northern Chalcedonia during the Second Era of Nor'Ova's time line, an era of time that has come after a major muclear war (remembered only as the Great Magic War now) had reset the world basically. While it's only been 830 years after that terrible war and intial fall-out, the world has redeveloped certain technologies, such as steam engines, rail roads, guns, plumbing, and crude electricity. It would almost classify as a steampunk-like setting, however things such as airships and the like aren't yet available. As a side note, it is the radioactive mutation through generations that has given the ability to use magic.

The purpose of my maps is to provide a means and method of tracking overworld movement, and showing what places are around. Therefore I tend to draw things so that I can law a graph-grid layer on top of it (LofN uses a movement by block/hex system). I do not use complex mountains or trees for forest because I want to be able to track movement better with the grid, and well, I just am not an awesome artist lol.

So, here's the maps. Or I should say, here's the screenshot of the maps. I made a region screenshot to show the map only within GIMP. I am uploading a screenshot instead of the map file itself because the map is HUGE. It is 11520 px x 7920 px. Basically, I already drew the map on large vellum graph paper, so I set te canvas size to match the amount of graph pages it took to make the map. Heh, it is a continent after all right, so it should be huge :P. The first image is showing the entire Northern Chalcedonia continent, whereas the second image shows zoomed in on the most completed part of the map sofar, the area known as the Outer Limits, which is an island nation called the Kingdom of Nethisda. It is the Nethil Isle and surrounding islands. I wanted to zoom in on the most completed part to show how the different elements look sofar - forests, mountains, volcanos, etc.

So please, review the maps. They are far from complete, and let me know thoughts, critiqs, imrpovement suggestions, etc.


02-13-2012, 10:40 PM
The larger territory reveals a river violation in the northwest (assuming north is up). Rivers join up as they flow to the sea, they don't divide, except in certain specific circumstances, and rejoin fairly quickly.

02-13-2012, 11:09 PM
The larger territory reveals a river violation in the northwest (assuming north is up). Rivers join up as they flow to the sea, they don't divide, except in certain specific circumstances, and rejoin fairly quickly.

Another over in the east, the river splits almost immediately before going in two completely different directions.

02-14-2012, 02:41 AM
There are also three of lakes in the olive-drab color. It looks like the river connects with the lake, bounces away and wraps around it, then reconnects with the same lake. That kind of stuff doesn't happen.

02-14-2012, 04:16 AM
Are you so certain about that? Allow me to illustrate what I mean.

1.) The olive color indicates swamp/marsh/bayou type areas. In my home area that is common to see "lakes" with rivers like that, within swamps and marshes.

2.) THe Pascagoula River does just that, diverges into the East Pascagoula, aka the "Singing River" and the West Pascagoula before reaching the gulf.

3.) And here's the crux of them all. In a world so controlled and dominated by magic, how much can we rely on earthly knowledge and preconceptons of rivers anyhow?

For reference, I have attached two images taken from google maps. One is of the Pascagoula River, showing the split and the laking affect. Granted it's in a delta region. The other is of the Mississippi River, right north of the Lousianna and Arkansa border. A smaller river actually splits from the Mississippi there, and never rejoins it.

So maybe I've done so more than should happen and could look into fixing them. Maybe such things could be considered as delta effects (except the "lakes" which are marsh land/swamp effects that are very much present on earth). But why are such things immediatly frowne upon in a fantasy world? I curiously would like to know.

Thanks, again though, for your critiq and responces to this. I'll look more at the map and see ho I can adress the river concerns, but the lakes are very much legal.

02-14-2012, 05:12 AM

Although I am still wanting to learn more about the previous critiqs, and on why that is (after all that is why I am here, to learn so I can make better maps :) ), I have taken the critiq's under advisement and made some changes to my WIP. You will notice that the splitting rivers are not splitting rivers anymore but are instead seperate rivers. You will also notice that while I have left the lakes intact, I have taken out some of the river connections that seem to be making these lakes unbelievable. While I have personal knowledge of the rivers and lakes splitting and such, I do live in a delta, and it seems that such things are things that happen in delta marshes only as I've not found any evidence of farther inland examples.

Anyways, here are the updated maps. As this is a WIP, there are more things on these maps as well than before. Please continue to review and advise of other issues and suggestions of/on improvement! Thanks!

02-14-2012, 06:57 AM
it does happen, obviously, but only on a very limited scale. My hometown of Hamburg for example has a river that "splits up".


Still, that should probably only happen small scale, not over vast distances, and only in flat areas etc. What should not happen is the river you have that splits up near the source and then flows into two entirely different seas (just north-east of the continent's center).

02-14-2012, 07:02 AM
Right. After thinking on it I agree with that. I even made changes to the WIP map and posted them here. However for some reason they are awaiting mod approval...

I wonder if its because I clicked the WIP button icon. I sure hope it's not making a new thread!

But anyways in my latest map, I seperated those split up rivers into new rivers, and even worked on the lakes in the swampy/marshy areas.

02-14-2012, 07:56 AM
1 and 2 ) There was no way of knowing beforehand that such areas were swamp/marsh/bayou types. I'm no geographist, but it's my understanding that those types of areas generally occur within a reasonable distance of the coast. Your samples are very much inland. There are some inland swamps, such as the Vasyugan Mire in Russia (http://g.co/maps/2uqnd). In fact, two or three rivers actually source from the swamp. However, it doesn't look like a big giant lake. You could always re-texture the area with typical swamp textures (a gross yellow-green with soem grassy bits) for clarification purposes. In my big, fat, not-so-humble opinion, those areas as currently depicted defy logic.

Both of your examples are very close to the coast, and that area in particular is relatively mushy compared to other areas. That river that "branches" from the Mississippi ... if you're talking about the Three Rivers area ... well. First, that "branch" river doesn't actually originate from there, the source is farther north. Second (and this is without any scientific founding), that branch looks way to straight and perpendicular to be natural. *Checks* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_River_Control_Structure. Yep. That right there is man's fault. Anyway, distributaries are common in delta areas, so your examples really don't prove your point, nor do they really disprove mine.

3) But then as you say, who cares! It's magic! ... *shrug* Don't ask for advice if you're just going to shrug it away with magic.

Have fun with your map, sir. :D

02-14-2012, 08:31 AM

Regarding the rivers: aye, and after further analysis I even came to agree with that, and edited my map. I uploaded it in a reply post here, but that post is awaiting mod approval. But yes you are right, the only places for river diveragnce is in delta regions. So what I did was I seperated the offending points, making the diverged rivers as seperate rivers with seperate starting points. I also made fixes to the lakes in the swamp areas.

Regarding the swamps: Yes, I understand that the swamps/marsh/bog areas aren't clearly noticable as such. After all, it's just an olive green color on the map thus far. While this is still a IP map, and no where near completed, you are right in that I do need to differentiate with the swamp areas better - heck on my hand drawn version it's only noticable as a swamp area because it is labled as such. Clearly an area in need of improvement.

So I'll look into the texturing of the area. I do want to be careful though, as the primary use of this map isn't decorative, but campaign overworld travel. As described earlier, I have a grid graph layer that is not visible in these shots and overworld movement is tracked by it, so I am trying to stear away from textures that could complicate movement and such, while still trying to illustrate the world environment itself. It is a very difficult balance to strike, and one who isn't much of an artist or mapmaker like myself has even more difficulty doing this. So if you have any suggestions in this area, I'd appreciate hearing them.

As to the location of these swamp areas, while it is not noticable right now, the idea is that the stretch where those swamps are is a recessed valley of sorts, with higher than average water tables and the like. I am not fully certain on how feesible or realistic that is, but that was my thought in designing it. A swampy interior was somewhat pivotal parts of the story and history of the area, but maybe a change is needed? I do want to make it right after all, otherwise I wouldn't be seeking advice. So I want to have thee swamps, bu maybe I should move them? Lots to think about here, and any advice you have would be greatly appreciated. It seems to me you are much more knowledgeable in geography than I. I admittedly only have a fleeting knowledge of it, having focused more on history than anything.

One thing I do want to mention though, those attached images are screenshots of the map. The image showing the entire continent is zoomed out to 9.65%. I mention this because you mention that the lakes were small. THey are pretty big actually. Putting the file up here in its original size whould be quite the upload for me and download for you, so I thought it best to make the screenshots.

Regarding #3: I have a feeling you might have misunderstood me there, not that I blame you. I do not always express myself clearly nor my intentions, so for that I am sorry. WHen I made my remark about magic and such, I was not trying to hide behind it. I was simply inquiring on how the rules of geopgraphy work in tandem with a world that is (a) not earth and (b) a magic-based/altered world. Of course I want advice and amnot shrugging it away. It was more of a curousity to me on just how flexible can the notions of mapmaking be with fantasy maps.

I do hope you weren't offended by that, nor that I offended anyone else. I had already learned a good deal from the earlier critiqs and edited the map in response, which did indeed make the map look better! I wouldn't be posting here my WIP if I didn't want ctiricisim and wasn't open to making changes and such. I simply question things, and sometimes I have a nack for questioning things in ways that well putt people off, making them think I'm being overtly defensive and not really caring about what they have to say. The reverse is the case, though, especially here.

I do wish that my last upload of the map didn't have to wait for mod approval. I wonder if I did it wrong or something to require that.... I think that if it had posted right away like the other posts did (oddly enough) then you would have seen that I actually did listen to yours and others critiq's and make changes despite my questioning - which for my part did read and sound loaded and such though I never meant for them to be. I also do hope that you will continue to critiq the map, pointing out things that I didn't know (like with the rivers and lakes and swamps) so that I can continue to make the map better, correct, and continue to learn how to do this better.

EDIT: I just noticed that you said that the RL swamp doesn't look like a big giant lake, not that it needs a big lake to make - which is how I read it first making me thik you were implying that the lakes were too small. My appologies. And you are right, swamps are not big giant lakes. I have seen, especially around here, marsh lands and wetlands around lakes.. but again I live on the coast, and these clearly are not coastal, giving more credit to the need to make a change there.

02-14-2012, 09:39 AM

I'm not sure what's the status on my other post with screenshots, but I've made some changes to the map since then. I also have been working on the whole swamp problem, and have an updated image to share.

I haven't worked out the whole swamp texturing thing yet, I want to first make sure the swamp is in a good location and fits well with the map and with how things typically work. So If I could, I'd like to get a critiq on the new swamp placement (and of course the rest of the map).

You may notice that I have removed some of the swamps. I have then exended the southern most swamp down to the coast. The blending at the swamp borders still needs some work I think, and maybe the extent of the swamp? I'd love to find a way to keep that souther lake/river area swampy for current story element purposes, but if it doesn't work then things can be changed.

Also please review the river changes, and other things!

Again, this is a screenshot, with the image zoomed out to fit the window. The original map is much larger than this...

02-14-2012, 10:15 AM
Looks better now. Geography geek point: you're right that rivers do sometimes divide but it tends to happen only when going around obstructions of higher ground, forming islands, or on totally flat land where the water meanders, and flat land like this almost always occurs near the coast, not up in the hills where your first version divided. You often see river divisions in deltas, estuaries and swamps. This is all down to the law of gravity - just like electricity, water flows down the path of least resistance. There are also man-made rivers and canals which link river systems, but these tend to be straight.

02-14-2012, 10:17 AM
Thank you for that explanation!

02-14-2012, 01:50 PM

I'm not sure what's the status on my other post with screenshots, but I've made some changes to the map since then. I also have been working on the whole swamp problem, and have an updated image to share.

Hmmm. I confess I did not see that previous post with the zoomed in areas. I must be a blooming idiot. Anyway, the zoomed in marshy areas aren't necessarily as bad as I thought they were, but it's really hard to decifer off of over-continental image I was referring to.

Anyway, referring back to your #3, we always refer to how things work here on Earth, because, well, it's the only example of an "M-class" planet we've got; the nearest approximation for Elseworld Physics and Geography is going to be our own. The same goes for magic. We cannot know what effect magic would have on a world with any kind of reliability

02-14-2012, 03:29 PM
Ah yes, that is definetly true and something that I should have considered.

It is an interesting thing really. I mean many strive to create new environments while others like to create alternate versions of earth itself. But the question always is just how different can new worlds be if they have all the same basic features of earth - water, soil, mountains, etc...

Clearly I am becoming aware that with similar elements one must expect that similar laws apply. And thanks to you and Rob I am more aware of those fundemental laws. When thinking back on it it does just make sense and applying the changes to the map to fit these laws does make the map look, feel, and flow better. So thank you for this instructional conversation. I have indeed learned a lot.

Regarding those zoomed in images they weren't there when you replied last. I had posted them before but for some reason they needed to be approved. I suspect that was because of my low post count, but its weird that the message I posted before that one went on through.

A couple of things that I am still trying to work out are the swamp placements and then thinking about removing the dark river borders. Any thoughts? Did you see my last upload with the changed swamp? If so thoughts? I want to get that fixed before I look into making it swampy if ya know what I mean.

Posted via phone so please ignore oddities.

02-14-2012, 10:36 PM
Minnesota gives a fair idea of what inland rivers, lakes and swamps can do:


02-15-2012, 04:06 AM
I didn't know Minnesota had swamps! Though I guessthat I shouldn't be surprised right? After all, Ohio had the Black Swamp before they drained it for fertile farming land.

I wonder though if those swamps could truly be classified as inland swamps? After all, the Great Lakes are like fresh water seas in their own right. If so, then it must be the over abundance of rivers and lakes in typically flat land. It would be interesting to see i there are swamps in the middle of the country (or any large land mass) as well. I don't doubt the possiblity, just would be interesting.

So thanks for the share!

02-16-2012, 03:52 AM
I guess the reason for all the swamps in the northern US/southern Canada is the (geologically) young terrain. The glaciers of the last ice age flattened the land and left rather soft material behind. I also suspect that the climate in this region (I guess it it cold in the winter and you get nice floodings in springtime when the snow melts) makes for additional erosion.

And I guess "inland swamp" means no mixing with salt water as in mangrove groves.

02-16-2012, 04:42 AM
Hmmm... possibly.

Where I live I'm praticlly surrounded by swamps, though I'd wager that the majority are of fresh water despite being near the coast. But then again, I could be wrong lol. I think I'll need to do research here, but it was always to my understanding that swamps were of low-level areas typically connected to a bayou, river, creek, or surrounding a lake or coast line. In the coast line situation, as with all others, dense reads and other marsh like plants provide a filter of sorts from the swamp to the larger body of water.

Again, I'll have to look that up to make sure on it... I could be far off base there, but that's what it looks like to me with the swamps here.

02-16-2012, 09:19 AM
I'd at the very least classify coastal marshes as brackish. Calling them freshwater when they're so close to the oceans just seems wrong. Another guy here did a regional area with wetlands/marshes, and I think they look pretty good. Check out The Empires of Try & Error (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?17635-WIP-The-Empires-of-Try-amp-Error)

02-16-2012, 12:03 PM
We're being a little sloppy with terms here. "Inland" started out referring to swamps near the center of a continent ... far, far away from any coast ... while "coastal" started out referring to swamps 'near the coast' ... which I took to imply within a hundred miles of the coast or thereabouts. Now we are splitting hairs over brackish waters or not.

Most swamps in Florida are freshwater, except for those directly connected with the Gulf of Mexico or other tidal water body. Minnesota is 100% fresh water swamps.

03-14-2012, 11:29 AM
Sorry I haven't replied in a while.

Long story short: Place I was living at, landlord contacted me and said he sold it, so I had to move. Luckily I found a place quickly, but it took a little bit before I could get internet and such back on.

In the meantime, I have been working hard on my map. I haven't done any texturing, instead I've been focusing on the parts I need done first (after all, this is the map we use in our RP campaign, gotta have it campaign ready - prettying it up can come once that is done I hope). I've made some slight changes to parts of the continent that I think look better, added in some more detailing (streams and such), and the like. I've also decided to call the continent Chalcedonia instead of Northern Chalcedonia. After some thought, due to the reason this continent is named as it is, having the southern continent that is connected to this one bearing the same name just doesn't make as much sense - from a story point of view anyways.

atpollard: Yeah that's the same here in coastal Mississippi. I went to the local alligator ranch (yes we have one) which is built on a swamp, and to the Institute for Marine Mammal Studies in Gulfport just to make sure, and was told that all of the coastal area swamps are fresh water, not brackish water. It is only the small portions, which are really marsh areas instead of swamp areas that are brackish.

In the end, whether the swamp is fresh water or brackish water, I am not certain if that plays any role or not with the way a swamp is illustrated on a map. I would imagine that swamps would simply be labeled as swamps. The type of water would only be important for local communities havesting the swamp as a source of food (allergies to salt water fish and whatnot). But I could be completely wrong here.

The river mess-up was definetly one thing that was wrong and am glad to be caught on and get fixed though lol. That was indeed a very amature mistake on my part.

Anyways, here's what I've got done so far.

The black dots on the mountains, those indicate cities, however those cities are actually in large caverns under the mountains (partially natural and partially "man"made).
The dark gray - mountains.
The olive green - swamps.
There is some marsh I put in around the bend lake in the Auster River, has to be there to replace the swamp I took out - story element.
the almost yellow color on the grass plains - arid, dry areas.
The light gray in the high plains/mountain valley - story element, inhospitable to plant growth
the brownish area - badlands
The red dashed lines - national borders
the different green around the mountains - high plains/plateau/type areas

I think that's everything? Oh yeah, I'm not showing the map with the "structure" layer in these screenshots. The structure layer shows quest related locations, and especially in the small scaled resolution of these images, would seem abit noisy.

So let me know thoughts and critiq's, thanks!

03-23-2012, 08:34 AM
I think you guys are rubbing off on me, or I'm actually learning something.

I was working on my map this morning, naming stuff and putting in labels, when I noticed something that seemed a little off. That long river in the western section of my map, that starts from the mountains, goes north, exits the mountains into the high plains area, makes a large turn south for a bit around the western edge of the mountains, turns west to exit the high plains into the lower plains, then turns back north to exit into the sea.

You see, I began to wonder "Why does it do that again?" Besides me drawing it like that of course lol. But what causes that river to make a south turn and then go back north, when it would have been easier for that river to just cut through at a north-westerly direction to empty into the sea. And why hasn't anyone else here, who are infinitely more knowledgable about these things and river rules, caught me on this? Surely this couln't be plausible with all that I have learned in here about how rivers run their course, right?

So I thought I may need to add a logical reason for this river to do that, ie, easier ground to cut through + obstruction. So, I put in some low level, small mountain ranges to fill the void plain created by the abnormally large loop.

I want to share that with you here, and for you guys to compare if you will with the maps I put I in my previous post. Please let me know if I was right to be concerned here, if this solution is a good solution, or if I am being silly and rivers do or could do that without said obstructions.

Some notes:
I kept the grid and structure layers in these shots. The small block on the grid indicated 5 sq. miles of distance (5 i. west to east, 5 mi. north to south). The game this map is being used with uses movement grid to calculate movements (ie, a person can travel x amount of blocks in a given time frame). Besides, it is also similar enough... I think... to longitude and latitude for navigational purposes, and acts as a built in scale IMO. So yay.

The 50% zoomed in map may show a confusing process. The whole larger river looks like it should be named the Crystal River with the Asteria River feeding into it. However, the prominent culture of the country this river is in has named the larger river the Asteria River indicating that the Crystal River flows into it. I imagine it would take some ascian geologists to unearth the truth depending upon current flow and river bed formation, but the ascians, and as a result the Empire of Ascia, are more concernedwith cultural and belief patterns than science, the Asteria River holds significance to them and thus would object to any river renaming in the near future :P.

04-24-2012, 03:11 PM
Here is (if I did this right) the full map. Not a screenshot of the map, but the map itself. It is a large map so may be slow to load, and for that I appologize.

I know I lack a lot in the art department. But I feel that the map is usable. I feel I learned a lot from the critiqs I got here, so thank you very much. I am lacking textures, and feel I could do more in that department, but so far every attempt I made has not been good there - yet.

Please feel free to point out any more critiqs and comments you have regarding the map.

Also, the map is Open Publication Licensed, so feel free to use it if you have a desire to.

04-24-2012, 03:13 PM
Above post > map obviously didn't attach right. Must be too large. I thought it did, but that looks like an older map, I will try again.

EDIT: Yeah, the image is a 10.8 MB png, a big larger that the 4 MB limit. I'd have to scale the map by 50% or more to share it, which will loose some of the finer details...

04-24-2012, 03:27 PM
Yeah, do the thumbnail at the appropriate size the forum will take, then post a link to the full map - that's what I do.

04-24-2012, 06:23 PM
Certainly your Asteria River diversion southwards looks more plausible with the range of mountains there. But you don't even need that much elevation -- a couple of hundred feet of hills would be plenty. A way to indicate the Valley Of The Asteria indenting up into the hills would be to severely invade the mid-height color with flatland color. Hmm- except you're coloring biomes instead of altitude per se.... no matter. If the flattish river valley reaches upriver, the plains/ grassland climate zone can too. Something like this maybe?

Left-hand version to just suggest 'the river valley continues on upstream"; the right-hand if your story doesn't demand inhospitable wilderness all through there - a fertile river-bottom is plenty believable for hundreds of miles up beyond the plains proper. And that kind of paints in the "dividing ridge of rougher terrain" as well as putting outright mountains there would.

I applaud you starting to get questions sneaking into your process - those are what sharpen your world into something really workable. It's not so much "meh - it's fantasy - how much does it matter", as it is every little detail that doesn't have to be explained, your readers/players can fill in with their own imagination better. Of course other worlds will have some differing geological processes going on. But unless you have the budget of a James Cameron or George Lucas, you'll spend all your story time explaining the setting, when maybe the setting doesn't matter that much.

I like your landforms, by the way. Some people fail to put in a reasonable number/ size/ shape of islands - your percentage looks about right. I get the 'major ridgelines' thing you have going, but be careful with that. If a viewer doesn't pay attention those could look like actual single ridges splayed off of single mountains, which would visually shrink the extent of your continent by 10x or 20x.

04-24-2012, 07:53 PM
Gameprinter, that is a good idea. So I used my webspace to upload the full map.


Again, I must warn you, it is a large image... 10.8 MiB large. Please, if you have bandwidth issues, don't try to load it. It will only be painful.

jb, thank you for your remarks.

My map is more um.. biodome based than altitude based for sure. I seem to suck at altitude based maps lol. I want to get better at that for sure, but since I also needed this map to be done, I just stuck with what I am most used to.

The mountains I threw in to better fix that river issue with the Asterian... though plausible I guess given the amount of space each block coveres (5 miles), it just looks offsetting doesn't it. Hills or something would be better. I like that little cut away you did with map1 (the small cut away). I do have to be careful though with invading the gray area too much. You see, that area is story-influenced.

This is the map of the continent of Chalcedonia in the 2nd Era of Nor'Ova's timeline. There were two era's prior (Before the Era's and the First Era). If we were to compare to earth, this would be considered a future era so to speak. Anyways, around the end of the First Era, the dark god had took possession of a mortal political leader, and through him attempted to unite the world under his control as he prepared to cast Ablution (spell to cleanse the world ie... armageddon). Well not everyone fell quietly to him, and a nuclear war broke out between the global empire and the free nations. That nuclear war became known as the Great Magic War, for it destroyed most of society and technology, and towards the end the dark god did start unleashing magic against his foes). The epicenter of the global conflict is that gray area on the map. It is where the old capital city and the dark lord's palace was. As the dark lord was loosing he let loose a birage of magical power there, which has spoiled that area of land. The Asterian River that runs through it is clean now, but at one time well lol....

Anyways, that is a nutshell version of the events that has made that area, the Valley of the Forsaken, the way it is and why I don't want to allter it too much. Granted the scale of things though, what is too much is hard to say, and will require some thinking.

But yes, from what I've learned here I have begun to question many things about what I've done prior with my maps, and even feel ashamed of the foolishness of my thoughts at the start of this very thread.

As far as the ridges go, you may notice from the linked map that I have them named and have some mountain peaks labled. Obviously, that is hardly all of the summits in the mountains. Those are simply the most er... noticable... promienant...