Subterranian City Planning

[Ilanthar]

Excellent ideas, and very interesting comments here !!

I would say that I like the possibility of a quite vertical and chaotic underground city. After all (especially in mountains for dwarves...), it should follow the most friable rocks and that water might have already digged. Connected to underwater (flowing or not), that makes sense.

Geothermy is a great resource here, I think. It may aid to develop the growing of plants and fungi (therefore the presence of animals to hunt or use). We know that it could actually replace light if the minerals are numerous and in good proportion. Plus, a constant temperature is a blessing for an active biologic life (harvests are not limited by seasonal effects, cold-blooded animal are always active). It could direct the activities of the city, since the more you get down, the hotter it is.

And I had other remarks, but just forgotten it (I'm a bit looking for my words...). Anyway, excellent thread!

[madcowchef]

Seems like there is several questions that will effect a lot of the answers you can give as to how an underground city and/or region would be laid out on a map.

How far underground and how self sufficient?: Is the settlement either easily reached by straight large paths or only a small ways underground so that most of the resources such as food and air within easy reach, or are these subterranean cities deep underground with no, limited, or time and resource intensive access to the surface? There is of course a wide spectrum between those. The later seems to require more modifications to the real world than the former which is easily accomplished. A map of someplace built underground to take advantage of valuable but fairly easily reached resources or built into a hill for protection seems like it would look little different from the map THW posted or like an ancient mine complex. More vertical but otherwise with few features different than any city map.

How human like are the inhabitants and how earth like is the world?: Are we talking fantasy dwarves, scifi aliens, or something between the two? A fantasy race or scifi race that doesn't look almost completely human but was actually adapted to living underground (probably look a bit like everything that takes up this life style moles, mole cricket, fairy armadillo, etc.) then they won't be in fear of needing heat except for the use of it in the civilized pursuits of material science and getting the most nutrition out of food (or if they were from deeper still and found the colder temperatures further from the truly deep underground a bit chilly). Presumably they wouldn't need it for light either as few of the worlds subterranean inhabitants are big on it. More human like races will need far more of the things we do: heat, light, better ventilation. All this of course can be changed on less earth like world with different resources available be it from ecosystem, geology, or magic (hopefully the kind that creates as many problems as it solves because simple hand waving is boring). How common giant caves or tunnels leading between subterranean areas are will effect transportation and expansion a lot also. If these changes are included they will give you a very different layout depending on how abundant these resources are and how they fall in the world.

What material sciences are available?: Most fantasy races seem to spring into the world with fully developed material sciences that allow them to live where they do, and why not if the gods made them for it? Less divine races will need to develop their technology in a more reasonable way with the available resources underground if that's where they started or by taking above ground inventions and re-purposing them for their new life style. If you want dwarves that can breath using only ancient technology, the water wheel and the windmill are both ancient enough to reasonably appear in at fantastic setting, though it would be novel to use the sails of the windmill to push rather than catch the wind. Other worlds and other resources would spawn entirely different sets of answers as to how to accomplish the same thing.

Ok my head is filling with an obsessive desire to to fill in increasingly smaller details so I had better stop for now.

[madcowchef]

You make some very good ones about existing caves and resources GP. Your points about open vertical spaces definitely inspires. I disagree with you on about adaptions being an easy explanation for highly active creatures living in oxygen poor environments. From a biological standpoint unless you are going to wave away the matter in the interest of fun and fantasy, which I am all for in many settings, things that live in low resource, oxygen poor settings should look like the kind of organisms that fill that role in the deep sea: sluggish and often opportunistic. Deep sea organisms might be an interesting starting point for the kind of creatures one would find inhabiting such an environment in general, but not usually population dense enough to make for good civilizations. The level of bio-luminescent natural arms race found in the deep sea would certainly give a fantasy world's underside a interesting feel.

Looking at older building styles and thinking of the vertical nature that the life style lends itself to I'm wondering if those horrible thin steps or a lot of ladders would be a common feature. For moving larger loads they certainly don't make sense but for your average personal transportation ladders seem a common solution, though perhaps if you are cutting out rock steps are more sensible?

[KenG]

Interesting thoughts and discussions. As for food for the dwarves I seem to remember there were stories of the dwarves raising flocks of sheep and goats that they kept in the high mountain passes.

Here is a link to the salt mines in Poland that have been used in many different fashions since being established in the 12th century.

Bochnia Salt Mine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[bartmoss]

What's your tech level or magic level? In a magical society, you can probably illuminate your caves any way you want (GM's/author's fiat).

In a reasonably high-tech society, you could use these: Light tube - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[lostatsea]

Interesting thread. Even in the "Real World" life adapts . Some times in the strangest ways. Even without Modern technologies Humans Have survived in the most inhospitable places of the earth. Likewise most members here see lifestyles with prejudice to how we live now and (WHERE) we live now. Most of us live in modern cities with all the convenience that en-tales. But a large part of the world's population doesn't have tv ,heat on demand or easy water or sanitation.
A modern city is hardly self -contained. I have no Farms " IN" my town and most of my clothing comes from china and my favorite fruits from South America. I don't see how self sufficiency would even be a criteria.

Air supply might only require some good cross ventilation. (Preexisting or manufactured). Also Carbon or other minerals naturally existing could be used to "scrub" the air .In a fantasy setting whole ecosystems might be able to support small villages. Mega cities even today need lots of outside support. Native Americans in the southwest built cliff dwellings. Vertical is a good alternative to urban sprawl. Where available.
The more primitive the "Society" the more they made do with what they had. Adapt/ move or die out . Oft times to deadly consequences. Note the number of ruins in our own world. The more advanced a civilization the more they alter their surroundings to suit themselves.

My first contest entry was a underground cohabitation between humans and giant ants/termites.It was very spartan and beneath a desert .They could survive on what they had beneath or could forage. They supplemented that by trading skilled crafts for raw materials. Each nest's Population was determined by what it could support on the resources at hand. Bed time for me. 4.30 am comes to early so I can commute to work. Hell even my job isn't self contained in my city.

[Wingshaw]

If I can go completely off topic for a moment, I'll address something that lostatsea said:

The more primitive the "Society" the more they made do with what they had. Adapt/ move or die out . Oft times to deadly consequences. Note the number of ruins in our own world. The more advanced a civilization the more they alter their surroundings to suit themselves.

If you are implying that old civilisations 'failed' and are hence in ruins, I would suggest a bit of a twist on that idea. The city of Catal Huyuk in central Turkey is one of the oldest ruined cities anywhere in the world. It also lasted for nearly 2000 years, making it longer lasting than all modern countries, several major religions, and the majority of the world's cities. Just something to think about.

Now, returning to topic, I definitely agree that no city, modern, historic, or fantastic, can be utterly self-sufficient and introverted.

[lostatsea]

No I didn't mean to suggest that all ruins were unsuccessful but rather that often cities were abandoned when they were no longer viable for some reason .
Sometimes they exhausted their resources. sometimes they out grew their resources and moved. Sometimes they were forced out by enemies. Sometimes they left due to religious beliefs. Sometimes a natural disaster or sickness ! Side note today's huge populations wouldn't exist if farming technologies hadn't vastly improved the amount of food production per acre. Technologies allow survival in areas otherwise nonviable. Less advanced cultures either adapt to what is available or have to leave for greener pastures or pass out of existence. Sometimes it is a combination.

As an off side I love the appropriate add below . "looking for underground bunker? Find it nearby with local.com "

[Wingshaw]

No I didn't mean to suggest that all ruins were unsuccessful but rather that often cities were abandoned when they were no longer viable for some reason .

Fair enough.

[madcowchef]

I think we all agree cities only exist where the resources to support them exist, and only continue to exist for as long as that's the case. You don't place your biggest city on a map where the requirements for a large city are abscent. Its about laying out what the necessary resources to support it are, so that you can find where they should be located for your map. As far as self sufficiency that's a sliding scale: on one end is the smallest city state, where a single city is supported only by the region immediately around it (which has implications when you are far underground); on the other is the underground equivalent of a massive trade city that couldn't possibly be supported by the region around it or which can easily make up for some lacking key local resources through trade underground Rome at its height. Cities are never self sufficient in the sense that in the city itself they are producing enough food to feed everyone, unless we are going for underground arcologies.