I like the lighthouse/floating earth idea, but I'd like to modify it a bit.
Most of the cities we have done have been coastal, so I'd like to try something a little different. Like I said previously, I imagined the area being similar to Central Pennsylvania, Ireland, or the Scottish Highlands. I wouldn't mind the tropical idea that surfaced a few posts back, but that might be an idea for the second BaCT4 - only because I was under the impression we were trying to build something that would focus on the new core rules that could fit nearly anywhere.
Instead of a lighthouse, perhaps the town that the refugees came from used the dragon as power source for some technologies that they had available in their town (i.e. street lights, arcane cannons for defense, etc.) The cracking of the power crystal was the source of a two-fold problem: 1) outside hostile forces started to become more of a threat due to the defenses of the city being weakened. Since they had relied heavily on these defenses for a long time, most of the citizens had little to no experience with fighting. 2) Eventually the dragon would break free of the crystal.
On the night of a large scale attack by a group of insert hostile humanoid here, the dragon broke free. In a strange sort of irony, the dragon's hostility was the source of their ability to safely escape. Having no regard for life, the angry dragon assaulted both the villagers and the raiders. The few refugees who managed to escape managed to do so because the insert hostile humanoids here were held at bay by the wrath of the dragon. Unfortunately, the wrath of the dragon also slaughtered most of the population of the town; some of the refugees found themselves with missing family members and loved ones.
I love the idea of the original city being destroyed by a previously bound monster. I do have a problem with the bound creature powering "magical technology". I don't think that it is fitting with the points of light setting, as Worlds and Monsters explicitly stated that they were trying to stay away from such things.
When I went to reply to this I had another idea. What if the bound creature was a good creature bound by an evil city for unknown purposes (to power a ritual, gate, etc.). Long after the fall of the city, the forgotten bound creature (powerful enough to ravage a countryside) breaks loose and delves the surrounding area into chaos. The ruins of the evil race's city could even be the very place where the origin city was built, thus making it undeniably uninhabitable, and forcing our settlers to the rumored abandoned dwarven redoubt (or whatever we decide).
When I went to reply to this I had another idea. What if the bound creature was a good creature bound by an evil city for unknown purposes (to power a ritual, gate, etc.). Long after the fall of the city, the forgotten bound creature (powerful enough to ravage a countryside) breaks loose and delves the surrounding area into chaos. The ruins of the evil race's city could even be the very place where the origin city was built, thus making it undeniably uninhabitable, and forcing our settlers to the rumored abandoned dwarven redoubt (or whatever we decide).
Or, alternatively, the origins of the redoubt hail back to the inhabitants of the evil city.
Perhaps the rulers of the city, upon its founding, made a pact with some sinister power, and bound the good creature beneath the city as the price. In return, the sinister power guaranteed that the city would stand as a beacon of prosperity for, oh, five thousand years. A generation or two into the life of the city, the original corrupt rulers were pot down, and the city flourished. Meanwhile, the sinister power has been working it's vileness upon the good creature, keeping to the bargain even if the bargainers were gone. When the five thousand year alarm clock went off, the sinister power unleashed the corrupted good creature upon the city to show the consequences of faustian bargains.
Or, alternatively, the origins of the redoubt hail back to the inhabitants of the evil city.
Perhaps the rulers of the city, upon its founding, made a pact with some sinister power, and bound the good creature beneath the city as the price. In return, the sinister power guaranteed that the city would stand as a beacon of prosperity for, oh, five thousand years. A generation or two into the life of the city, the original corrupt rulers were pot down, and the city flourished. Meanwhile, the sinister power has been working it's vileness upon the good creature, keeping to the bargain even if the bargainers were gone. When the five thousand year alarm clock went off, the sinister power unleashed the corrupted good creature upon the city to show the consequences of faustian bargains.
I think this is a great idea.
But why the gold dragon?
My thoughts...
Perhaps the gold dragon originally helped the town to be founded. Going back to one of the original ideas, it was mentioned that a good dragon was helping to protect the town. Perhaps a few members of the original town council became unsatisfied with the dragon's "rule" over the town. The reason could be anything from feeling that the town was developing too slowly in comparison to a rival town or perhaps they just found the dragon to be overbearing and resented it. Perhaps the reason has been forgotten and various outlawed historical texts have a few versions of the story.
At any rate, at some point the unsatisfied council members made contact with a devil who appeared as a benign entity and promised that the town would be both prosperous and free of the dragon for no less than _______ amount of years. The devil only asked two things: the entire council (including those who had no qualms about the dragon) had to offer the dragon to the devil as a sign of submission, and the town had to build sculptures to worship the devil as a god and praise the devil in their religious services. In fact, the devil at the time claimed to be a deity; the false name that the devil gave became the local deity (or patron saint or whatever) of the town. For thousands of years the inhabitants of the town had/have worshipped the being who would be the reason for the town's destruction.
The amount of time the deal was made for has passed; now the gold dragon (no longer good due to torment and being imprisioned for so long) is released and ravages the town. From here we can tie in the idea I had of this occuring the same night as an attack from a group of hostile humanoids.
One of the huge secrets of this idea is the true story behind the dragon and the devil. Possibly one of the refugees is even a clergy member of the church which praises the devil's false identity (cleric with a few warlock abilities); he starts to notice that some of his cleric abilities are working unusually or maybe not working at all.
A question was raised about how races such as dragonborn and tieflings would be viewed in the new point of light. Overall, I don't see where it would be a problem. I imagine that the original settlement that the refugees came from was a fairly good sized settlement, so I also imagine that it would have been more diverse than the typical thorp or hamlet. Certain individuals may view certain races in a less than positive light, but overall the community as a whole would welcome diversity in their population.
I'm both orderly and selfish. I act mostly for my own benefit, but I respect and help my community - Specially when it helps me. At best, I'm loyal and dedicated; at worst, I'm elitist and shrewd.
Ok so, A small cave or Dwarven redoubt, refugees from a large settlement.
So what if it wasn't some super magical fantasy event, what if the city just happened to be in the path of a murderous horde or even be caught between two opposing empires. With either of these the city could have had some production capability that was lacking, making it the sole producer of something. With the two of these the refugees would have a nice mix, and would have a resentment toward either the horde or the empires. So they had to find some defensive position, and it has now become a militia of sorts, they fend for them selves and strike at either the horde or the empires, gaining resources to increase the defense and offense capabilities of the new "town".
The consensus on our site seems to be (as others have mentioned) ruins of some defensive position that were build in/around a cave. Why the ruins are there is still unclear. In order to move on to clarify and eventually map out our location (thanks Syl!) I think we should focus our brainstorming on the origin and state of affairs in the cave.
I am suggesting our first round of voting in one (1) week. Up until that time we will continue to focus our brainstorming on the cave, its origin (i.e. dwarven redoubt, natural cave, etc.) and the "state of affairs" that the cave is found in (i.e. fully abandoned, home to a bear, etc.).
To formalize this, and in the spirit of former "build a city" threads, I would like three votes in favor of my proposal to make it official. If the proposal is adopted, I will compile the ideas, post them for review, make necessary changes, and facilitate voting next week.
I am open to ideas about how this voting will be conducted. I was thinking about two rounds of voting, the first would narrow it down to two or three ideas with the most votes, and the second would be a vote on those two or three ideas, the winners of which will be our official site and its state of affairs.
If this idea floats, we should also discuss a topic for next week's brainstorming and voting to be spearheaded by another poster, to share the wealth so to speak. Also, OP privileges should be determined at the end of the open discussion thread before we dive into the 4E Build a City Thread.
In summary: Vote on my proposal, 3 votes can carry, change, or veto the suggestion. Proposal: Brainstorm about the cave, voting begins in one week.
I do believe we are make enough significant progress on the origins of the refugees (a prologue if you will), that we can now think about turning our attentions toward a discussion about the new location. It might also be prudent to expand the discussion into two separate brainstorming sessions: one for the cave's origin, and one for it's current state. I think the former will also allow us to get more cohesive ideas for the latter. We do have several months to discuss the city, so there really isn't much need to apply any sense of urgency at the moment.
Alternate Proposal: Spread out the brainstorming over two weeks or so, and divide the brainstorming into separate sessions regarding the cave's origins and the cave's current state, respectively. And I'll agree, we can begin voting in a week.
I love the idea of the original city being destroyed by a previously bound monster. I do have a problem with the bound creature powering "magical technology". I don't think that it is fitting with the points of light setting, as Worlds and Monsters explicitly stated that they were trying to stay away from such things.
When I went to reply to this I had another idea. What if the bound creature was a good creature bound by an evil city for unknown purposes (to power a ritual, gate, etc.). Long after the fall of the city, the forgotten bound creature (powerful enough to ravage a countryside) breaks loose and delves the surrounding area into chaos. The ruins of the evil race's city could even be the very place where the origin city was built, thus making it undeniably uninhabitable, and forcing our settlers to the rumored abandoned dwarven redoubt (or whatever we decide).
Admittedly, I haven't had a chance to delve much into Worlds & Monsters (and only half-way through Races & Classes), but I was becoming rather attached to the bound creature in a lighthouse idea. I agree, I don't think that the creature should be powering the entire city, but a lighthouse shouldn't be too bad. Perhaps the lighthouse was built as a testament to the "devil-god's" 'benevolence' and 'protection', and the light to remind the citizens of their faith (blind or not.) Unfortunately, it also happens to be the place where the creature (I like gold dragon) is imprisoned. However, if it is contrary to the intent of the new rules, then I will be happy to compromise my position; this new city is meant to highlight some of the new features of a 4th edition campaign, and I would like to adhere to that concept if possible.
While it is true the designers have mentioned trying to avoid "magic as technology" in the default setting, if we have a single use (the lighthouse in this instance) we are not really promoting that; anyways its just like continual flame wrought large (if you had the spell continual flame and were making a lighthouse, even if you never used any other magic as a base for "technology" wouldn't you atleast use a bunch of castings so you had a permanent light source that could not be put out by wind and rain). In addition, if the lighthouse was created by the "devil-deity" or some other similar supernatural power, it is not something that can be easily duplicated by the people at large.
Hey there everybody. Sylvaroth, Johnny_Angel, PerennialRook, god to see you guys still alive and healthy in one-these ol' threads. I like this thread Dougan. You're doing a good job maintaining it and keeping a properly moderating attitude towards the proceedings. This will, perhaps more than anything else, ultimately allow for it's success. Kudos.
Anywho don't go with a tropical setting. They don't work, people won't respond to it. Keep to the standard England/Europe/Some of North America grassy hills and woodlands and etc. Now I've heard a lot of talk about being a coastal city and this could work some. What I would reccomend is to put them up high on a cliff with a large grassy area around them and then trees. Trees, Water, and Fortification are your three most valuable assets in creating a town.
Hey there everybody. Sylvaroth, Johnny_Angel, PerennialRook, god to see you guys still alive and healthy in one-these ol' threads. I like this thread Dougan. You're doing a good job maintaining it and keeping a properly moderating attitude towards the proceedings. This will, perhaps more than anything else, ultimately allow for it's success. Kudos.
Good to see you. And thank you. I am honored by your praise, and I shall endeavor to give it my best.
deanruel wrote:
Anywho don't go with a tropical setting. They don't work, people won't respond to it. Keep to the standard England/Europe/Some of North America grassy hills and woodlands and etc. Now I've heard a lot of talk about being a coastal city and this could work some. What I would reccomend is to put them up high on a cliff with a large grassy area around them and then trees. Trees, Water, and Fortification are your three most valuable assets in creating a town.
Good to be back :-)
While I agree that we shouldn't do a tropical setting at first (not basic enough), I think we could make it work if we put some effort into it. Although, I don't think we should make it as 'successful' as Tuskbay (which I thought was too busy anyway.) Building a tropical city should be a long, difficult, extremely grueling process. There are lots of hazards involved (harsh climate, illness and disease, malnutrition, hostile natives, limited resources), and if there isn't sufficient resources the city must struggle for that slim chance to survive. But, I do think we could make it work.
However, I think (think) that we're already forming a consensus around a redoubt in a sub-temperate mountainous region with a fertile valley and some forested areas (like Northwestern U.S. or Irish/Scottish climates), nearby which lies a coastal region with a similar climate (again like Northwestern U.S.) where our ruined city will reside. Switching to a tropical setting at this point means changing a lot, and I don't think that's in our best interest. If we'd like, we could bring this idea up in a year or so for our next installment and discuss some concepts then. For now though, we can keep what we have.
In any case, welcome to the project; we are priviledged to have you here. I hope you bring plenty of ideas to share and discuss.
Ahhhh, I see. So our redoubt will be nearby the coast and nearby the ruins but not on or within them. I understand now. Interesting.
I think, and thought a number of times in old Eckland, that it would be fun and interesting to have a river or rivulet run right through the town. As the town is near the coast it would make geographical as well as practical sense to build on a flowing water body and I've always thought it would be a fascinating idea for a town to have it wholly integrated around it's river. As a source of food, power, transportation everything. I'm talking houses on or above the water, a boat for every family (something like that italian city whatever it is), a half a dozen water wheels providing the basic power for a number of major agricultural buildings and whatnot. Stuff like that.
After reading the last 2 posts I can't help but make a connection between N.W. US (ex. eerie canal) and Venice (that aforementioned italian city) perhaps clearing and maintaining a series of canals and locks that lead to the ocean (and shipping lanes) could be a project for the citizens of our new city as well. These types of architecture are often destroyed before the rest of the buildings etc, because of the destructive power of the water in them. This does not even need to change the "freshwater spring in the cave" idea since the water in ruined canals and waterways is likely to be stagnant and undrinkable, maybe even full of monsters. It doesn't need to be "in" the city, tho it could, but I imagine it outside the city. Repairing it wouldn't be the most immediate project, but opening access to the ocean would cut down on shipping costs and create a thriving trade route.
