Regions

Its a relatively minor quibble but I am finding it difficult to work out the terrain type of the recently released regions. They are full of delicious flavour text and plot threads and its probably best that their place within the story of Empire has been focused on. Most of the terrain types are alluded to, but as I continue to view new releases with a partial ritual magician head on the question as to which ones support which magical fortresses could, (in my opinion,) do with more clarity.

By pure coincidence, I am just working out how to put a discrete table on the bottom of each page with that precise information in it.

(EDIT) Bah humbug. I gave up because it was ugly and jsut added the keywords to the text. Although I need to discuss the “hilly” keyword.

[quote=“Andy Raff”]By pure coincidence, I am just working out how to put a discrete table on the bottom of each page with that precise information in it.

(EDIT) Bah humbug. I gave up because it was ugly and jsut added the keywords to the text. Although I need to discuss the “hilly” keyword.[/quote]

Suggestions for alternatives: “dales” or “moorland” might work?

Heh. It’s not the word. It’s the fact that the Rugged Keyword specifically uses ‘mountainous’ as the descriptor and I’m not convinced I took this into account when I did the region keywords.

Oooo. City is a keyword.

Maybe include in the keyword descriptor of Rugged to include hilly areas as well as mountainous? Means that the area can be either or for rugged to works but the terrain isn’t ruined by having a “mountainous” keyword when it’s flavour text is rolling dales.

Rugged included mountainous and hilly. The issue is that there are no mountainious regions atm I think. But should be

There are mountainous regions (eg Hercynia) I’m just trying to work out if I used “hilly” as the descriptor because I didn’t want the keyword to apply, or because I meant mountainous. Like I said, It’ll be sorted out soon enough once the boss is able to take a break from organising the thing hes working on.

I love this level of detail. Will give armchair strategists like myself the chance to discuss all manner of stuff come event time.

However… there are 37 Regions detailed in the Gazeteer.
What are PDs aspirations for the timeframe of filling out that level of detail?

My timeframe is to get all the remaining “lost” regions (Holberg, Mournwold, Segura, Spiral, Liathaven, Karsk) done before the event. They’re the priority because there is likely to be strategic and tactical gameplay there, both for the Military Council and for plot writers.

Non-lost territories are a much lower priority except where I got distracted because I was working on something else (like Hercynia).

[quote=“Andy Raff”]My timeframe is to get all the remaining “lost” regions (Holberg, Mournwold, Segura, Spiral, Liathaven, Karsk) done before the event. They’re the priority because there is likely to be strategic and tactical gameplay there, both for the Military Council and for plot writers.

Non-lost territories are a much lower priority except where I got distracted because I was working on something else (like Hercynia).[/quote]

That was what I suspected, though it was Hercynia that prompted me to ask.
The Navarr ones are actually rather interesting as ongoing potential threats to the Empire that their Valorn represent… so it would be nice to have info on Therunin, too. I maybe the Never-Taken (The Barrens and Broceliande) should be the stretch goal. But then I’d also like everything and I know you’re a busy man.
Sorry.

Barrens is on my list actually; I’ve had a few negotiations about a map and suchlike, but it looks like I can put it off for another event with any luck.

Hercynia mostly came up because there are orcs there - and fighting vallorn requires more than moving troops around so I expect to get some advance warning on needing Broceliande done. I’m hoping that once I get a set of examples done I can ask someone else to do work on the remaining territories, so it’l get done quicker.