Myring City
It's missing something and I can't put my finger on it. The castle and the walls need to pop, but I'm not sure what would be best. I plan to add labels after I'm certain it's "done."
Take that outer glow away from the roads and apply it to the walls (or just get rid of it entirely). Right now, I'm reading the white things as walls because the black shading on the outside is reading as shadows for ambient lighting, implying that the white things are tall compared to everything else.
Put your names and labels and neat lines and everything else on there. I think it looks nice. Once you're at the end, if you still think it needs something, put a grunge brush or two over it. The lines are very precise so what it could be lacking is that human touch, varying line width.
If the radiance of a thousand suns was to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One...I am become Death, the Shatterer of worlds.
-J. Robert Oppenheimer (father of the atom bomb) alluding to The Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 11, Verse 32)
My Maps ~ My Brushes ~ My Tutorials ~ My Challenge Maps
Removed the glow (love the technique, but ultimately not sure it was working here).
I agree it looks pretty clean. I'll admit I always have trouble achieving that nice weathered look myself, but I think it's really what makes map. Maybe changing the color of the roads will help, too, the white just looks too sharp. Or a texture overlay of some kind. Good luck!
It looks very nice, but what it's missing is mostly the size imho. It looks more like a small town or even a village than a city; which is somewhat incongruous with the presence of big roads, a wall and what looks like a rather large castle (also, not a big fan of the look of the castle as compared with the regular buildings).
There are a few things about this city that, in my opinion, are fundamentally wrong. If you make a few adjustments, however, I think you'll be able to improve the appearance of the map.
--it is a bit strange that the lighthouse is not beside the sea, isn't it?
--why is there only one gate?
--a major pet peeve of mine on city maps is when buildings are added as separate structures. Historically, that simply never happened. This is a random map I found on Google Images that depicts cadastral boundaries in Rome. To understand it, the grey areas are the buildings, the lines represent property boundaries. Note that, while they may have courtyards, etc, they generally go right up to the street, and, most importantly, there are not spaces between each person's home.
------my advice to you, then, is to start joining some of your buildings together. You can leave gaps for courtyards, gardens, etc. This method can also let you leave gaps for narrow alleys (which will rarely stop in a dead end, by the way).
------there is also no reason that I know of, for the streets not to go right up to the edges of the buildings. Take, for example, that open space just above Boldrei's Temple: is it a public square? If so, is it paved? If yes, why not treat it in the same way as the roads?
------by following this advice, I think your city would look more crowded (and thus overcome feanaaro's correct observation about the size of this city), more realistic, and more interesting.
--the castle is a bit odd, I think. First, why doesn't it occupy that entire bit of land on the tip of the peninsula? Second, does it have any inner courtyards (called baileys), where horses can be stabled, soldiers can be drilled, etc? Maybe adding a curtain wall around the castle's precinct would be a good start.
Overall, your layout is very good (apart, I think, from the dead-ends). Generally, old towns do not have curved roads, but angular ones, that can appear curved although are really made up of segments of straight lines. Streets also do not have to be equal width: in many old towns, streets get wider or thinner depending on the buildings around them. In fact, historically, city streets do not define the areas of the buildings, but the buildings define the city streets.
Hope that's helpful.
THW
Formerly TheHoarseWhisperer
Most people in America who are drawing maps these days seem to be familiar primarily with the post-WWII suburbs with their curvilinear streets and detached homes. That sort of layout is only for rich folk (rich in the long-term grand scheme of things). As THW points out, streets have histories. Cities descended from border outposts may have a highly ordered central core with sprawling areas outside the original borders (see the Roman city of Timgad, Africa). http://www.pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu...432_kostof.pdf is an excerpt from an excellent book on the subject, Spiro Kostof's The City Shaped. He did some other books on the general subject, most of which I recommend (I wasn't so excited about the architecture one, for example).
It is the same in Australia. I think America and Australia are both too young to have the 'organic' urban form that characterises European cities, and is so popular in fantasy city layouts. I am aware some of America's cities are old and irregularly formed, like Boston, but many were founded after Renaissance and Enlightenment ideas of order and geometry. Hence the rigid grid in New York and Chicago. And then, as Waldronate points out, suburbia after WW2 introduced a whole new set of patterns and styles, and the city has never been the same. Australia, I think, is even more prone than the US and Canada. That said, I have seen some Old World people make the same mistake when it comes to their city maps.Originally Posted by waldronate
I'll try and write a detailed tutorial about historic urban form and post it on the CG sometime. Can't make any promises when that'll be, though, as it is a major task.
I haven't read his architectural history book, but I am a huge admirer of his work in The City Shaped and, to a slightly lesser degree, The City Assembled. A great pity that he died when he did.
Out of interest (and very sorry Zaianya if this diverts your thread), does anyone know of works that describe the urban form of Italian cities? I have read plenty about Roman and Renaissance times, but have had difficulty finding a good analysis of medieval Italian urbanism.
THW
Formerly TheHoarseWhisperer
--it is a bit strange that the lighthouse is not beside the sea, isn't it?
This really should have been explained; that's not an actual lighthouse. That's the term for a tower that magically lights up when the city is in peril (hey, it's D&D and I needed a plot hook).
--why is there only one gate?
There's a second one leading out, but I haven't quite added that yet. The body of water to the right is a river, and the road is meant to be going over a bridge (I was stumped on how to differentiate the bridge from the road). That's the next thing I'll be putting in.
--a major pet peeve of mine on city maps is when buildings are added as separate structures. Historically, that simply never happened. This is a random map I found on Google Images that depicts cadastral boundaries in Rome. To understand it, the grey areas are the buildings, the lines represent property boundaries. Note that, while they may have courtyards, etc, they generally go right up to the street, and, most importantly, there are not spaces between each person's home.
------my advice to you, then, is to start joining some of your buildings together. You can leave gaps for courtyards, gardens, etc. This method can also let you leave gaps for narrow alleys (which will rarely stop in a dead end, by the way).
This is a fair point. After consideration, I decided not to join the buildings simply because this is a map for a game campaign, and for the sake of the players, I'd rather they be able to differentiate the buildings (in this instance, clarity is more important to me than historical accuracy).
------there is also no reason that I know of, for the streets not to go right up to the edges of the buildings. Take, for example, that open space just above Boldrei's Temple: is it a public square? If so, is it paved? If yes, why not treat it in the same way as the roads?
This is an excellent idea--because that is, in fact, a paved square. After I address the bridge I'll try and fix this.
------by following this advice, I think your city would look more crowded (and thus overcome feanaaro's correct observation about the size of this city), more realistic, and more interesting.
This is a straight-up mistake on my part--it's actually SUPPOSED to be a town, NOT a city. Not sure why I titled the post this way. My bad!
--the castle is a bit odd, I think. First, why doesn't it occupy that entire bit of land on the tip of the peninsula? Second, does it have any inner courtyards (called baileys), where horses can be stabled, soldiers can be drilled, etc? Maybe adding a curtain wall around the castle's precinct would be a good start.
My only excuse is that I suck at drawing and simply needed to represent a very large building. Would it be better to add a wall, do you think, or just enlarge and add detail to the castle so it occupies more of the peninsula?
Overall, your layout is very good (apart, I think, from the dead-ends). Generally, old towns do not have curved roads, but angular ones, that can appear curved although are really made up of segments of straight lines. Streets also do not have to be equal width: in many old towns, streets get wider or thinner depending on the buildings around them. In fact, historically, city streets do not define the areas of the buildings, but the buildings define the city streets.
The point about the curved roads is a good one. I have terribly unsteady hands and therefore rely on the path tool to create most of my roads; I'll try to correct this for future maps.
Hope that's helpful.
Very much so! Thank you.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
