June 2014 Entry: The Land of Evening's Shadow

[xpian]

I think that the dark, solid circles run the risk of getting lost amongst the dark, solid trees--I was having a little trouble picking them out. Something felt a little strange about so many towns around the southern lake. Could it support so many? Perhaps...it just made me go, "huh..." Will there be a compelling reason why no adventuresome souls have colonized the north west lake? Monstrous infestations?

[Tomalak]

Cultural conventions, actually. I see three major cultures in the area. One subsists of fishing and light agriculture around the southern lake, and has the best masonry skill. Another does some fishing, some agriculture, and is heavy on trade, and is up and down the major river. The third is the one in that hill region which lives mostly on herding and forestry, with the best mining and metalworking in the area. The only culture near that lake doesn't have much knowledge of fishing. So that area is sort of open frontier, and (as far as the mapmaker knows) largely devoid of settlement. I might put some nomads, like steppe-people or plains indians there, but they wouldn't have the same representation on the map - especially as the map was likely made by a riverman.

[jkat718]

I love the texturing of the grass, but the texture itself seems a bit off-scale in relation to the other textures. It almost makes me think of little plastic toy mountains in grass, especially because of the darkness of the hills and mountains in comparison with the grass.

Also, while I like the thought you've put into the settlement placement (both in volume and in depth), I do think it needs a little work. Firstly, I think that there are too many settlements, or at least too many of the same (apparent) size. You would normally have either all of the settlements use the same icon, or have one capital, one or two other major cities, and then a few other, smaller towns, with each tier using a different symbol. It may just be the way that you are testing the icons, but it looks like you just have them more or less alternating. Of the icons, I would choose the circled dot for cities and a ring for villages, and maybe a star or something else for capitals. That, or circled dot > dot > ring. I would also consider incorporating color in the icons.

[Tomalak]

Thank you for your feedback. Allow me to address each of your points in turn. First, I don't intend my maps to seem photographic - some mapmakers have remarkable skill in such things, mine are largely representative. That said, I wanted my grasslands to feel like grass, not simply be monotone green empty places.

Larger settlements are less common than smaller (which is why they seem to be alternating) but most of the tiny settlements are not pictured on the map. The circles are indeed tiny villages or hamlets, and are placed where they are mostly to reinforce the settlement pattern and show that the area is not abandoned. There aren't any really heavy farming cultures in this area, so I couldn't just place farmland. The circled dots are (correct again) actual cities, as opposed to towns (black dot). There are no capitals on the map, because there are no nation-states. Only cultures and settlements. I am most certainly going to change the way I mark settlements, but I am probably going to keep to the simple black markings, because colors would quickly get lost against the background.

Thank you for your input!

[Tomalak]

I have two ideas bouncing around in my head for alternatives to black-dot settlements. Neither is in it's finished form, but here's the first idea, in which small 'house' icons appear in clumps of varying size. Two to four in a single line or clump indicate a village, multiple lines indicate a town, and tiny icons in multiple long lines show a city. I like this idea because it invokes relative size visually, but I dislike it because it misrepresents the amount of space the settlement uses.
### latest wip ###

[Tomalak]

Here's the other idea, in which town icons are done away with entirely and replaced with names. I like this idea because I can avoid using icons that don't have the same art style as the background map, but dislike it because icons are so heavily relied on by typical mapmakers that doing away with them may seem odd to the viewer. While they are currently not in place, further labels for mountains, rivers, etc will be place on the map later.
Whichever type of town label I choose, specific details (font, icon, etc) are malleable, and I will select the most appropriate after I choose a style.
### latest wip ###

[Tomalak]

And here's a test image for the altered hills. Now, to bed - that I might see the effects in the morning with fresh eyes.
### LATEST WIP ###

[Meshon]

This is a good looking map, nice work! I agree that the colours could use some more work, the bright grasslands are kind of at odds with the dark hills and forests. Of course, that just makes those places look all the more forbidding! I'm eager to see what you come up with after applying fresh eyes!

cheers,
Meshon

[Tomalak]

Meshon, could you explain what about the forests or hills looks 'forbidding'? I don't see it.

[Meshon]

Meshon, could you explain what about the forests or hills looks 'forbidding'? I don't see it.

Forbidding in the sense that there are dangerous things living there. The bright grass is like Happy Gnome Land and the darker regions are places your average person wouldn't want to go because they're scary. Places with names like Dire Forest, Bleak Hills, or Tulgey Woods. Does that make sense?

It's not a negative thing.

cheers,
Meshon