Quote from: Ravenswing;1010392Sure ... but Glorantha IS an outlier for the importance it places on religion and the depth with which it develops it.  Even so, there's a big difference between "priests of water gods have the ability to cast spells to purify/create water" and "there are enough of said priests casting such spells often enough (to the exclusion of all other pastoral, religious and social duties priests normally have) to provide the fresh water needs of a city."

In Glorantha if you needed a significant water source for a city you wouldn't rely on a horde of individual priests you'd heroquest to get a water source. Heroquesting (cheating at heroquesting really) is probably how the Godlearners would have addressed the issue to create/modify/co-opt a deity and create a source of water for their city...which probably would have dried up a river or caused a significant drought somewhere else when that area's deity was co-opted or stolen to act as the water source for the Godlearner city.

QuoteI've yet to see a game system mechanically allowing it, or a published game setting beyond extreme outliers like Eberron or Spelljammer reflecting such ubiquitous magics.

I'm not a proponent of argumentum ad fireballum as the solution to much of anything, but at the point you have decided to rule out Glorantha, Eberron, and Spelljammer as outliers you are approaching defining the word "setting" so as to make your conclusion true by default, i.e. the only settings that count as non-outliers are the one's that support your conclusion.

Quote from: DavetheLost;1010249Now we get to why the world isn't flooded with clean water from these things.

Well, that is an interesting thought. If you do have a town supplied via magically summoned/created water, however it is used it is eventually going to go somewhere. Minus evaporation, most of those somewheres equate to 'roughly still in town.' If the town is at elevation, it becomes the effective headwaters to a new, magically-created river. If the town is in a valley or something, well... It'd be fun to have a town called "New Clearwater" next to a un-river-fed lake. When asked where "Clearwater" is, the locals point to the center of the lake and then head to the planning committee for the city of New New Clearwater.

Quote from: Bren;1010431I'm not a proponent of argumentum ad fireballum as the solution to much of anything, but at the point you have decided to rule out Glorantha, Eberron, and Spelljammer as outliers you are approaching defining the word "setting" so as to make your conclusion true by default, i.e. the only settings that count as non-outliers are the one's that support your conclusion.

I have to disagree here.  Glorantha, Eberron, and Spelljammer are outliers.  Bronze Age Anthropological Studies, Doc Savage Fantasy, and Sailing Ships In Space! are all pretty idiosyncratic settings in their own right.

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;1010439I have to disagree here.  Glorantha, Eberron, and Spelljammer are outliers.  Bronze Age Anthropological Studies, Doc Savage Fantasy, and Sailing Ships In Space! are all pretty idiosyncratic settings in their own right.

Idiosyncratic compared to what, exactly?

Quote from: Bren;1010466Idiosyncratic compared to what, exactly?

Most other generic fantasy settings.  Note I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I think two of the three of those are great (Glorantha and Spelljammer.)

What Chris said.  Eberron + Glorantha (and that's an arguably) + Spelljammer vs Lankhmar and Al-Qadim and Forgotten Worlds and Greyhawk and Thieves World and Majestic Wilderlands and Blackmoor and Harn and Dark Sun and Thieves Guild and Dragonlance and Rokugan and Golarion and ...

I'm pretty comfy with my assertion.

Over the years that I developed the Majestic Wilderlands, I woven in specific assumptions about the impact of magic, religion and technology on the setting.

1) Unless stated otherwise real world constraints hold sway. For example water transport is vastly more efficient than land transport.

2) The biggest barrier to the widespread impact of magical devices and spells is the lack of the philosophical base that out industrial revolution had. The Factory is as much a philosophy of work as it is a technology. And required several steps to get to the point where people could think of the idea.

3) The world of the Majestic Wilderlands is fundamentally an inefficient agricultural economy with hardly any surplus to support magic users sitting on their ass for the decade needed to start casting cantrips or first level spells. And for those who did do get that training, the people supporting expect a far more than being the city's water supply or sanitation department.

4) However magical devices and spells do effect the lives of the elite. To the point where their standard of living is close to what it was in the 18th or 19th century.

5) For everybody else magic does an impact, mostly because of healing clerics and clerics blessing crops, and my call on the matter is that life is about 20% better in the Majestic Wilderlands to a comparable cultures at the same time period in our history.

6) Religion is a bigger deal in the Majestic Wilderlands than our own history (which was a big deal as well). While outright theocracies are still rare, the ideas behind religion and the supernatural are pervasive. Then there is the cultural impact of the immortal elves. The makes most cultures in my setting far more technologically conservatives compared to our own history.  

When the issue comes up, my assumption is that intellectual life of the Majestic Wilderlands is in the midst of it first great expansion akin what was going on in 5th century Greece. This is due to the ferment caused by the breakup of two major civilizations within the last 400 years.

6) Last but not least, unless it instantly turns the PCs into godlike beings even broken magic system can be used to justify a medieval setting. Because there is a lag between when people are capable of great magic to when they fully explore the implications of that power. A medieval campaign is set in a time between the discovery of magic and before the philosophers who figure out how just revolutionary it is.

It all about defining how shit works in your setting, figuring how it started, where you think it ends up, and finally figuring out where in time you want your campaign to begin.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1010401Cisterns, water conduits, dams, wells, etc. Geographic features like Wadi. The Nabataeans were particularly good at this stuff (just look at a place like Petra).

Yes, yes, yes! There are many cities in deserts and semi arid areas that are NOT on rivers, like Jerusalem. WTF are people talking about here? I don't understand why there is a question. Also, see atoll cities like Tarawa or Majuro or Malé. Or Venice, for crying out loud!

Quote from: estar;1010675Over the years that I developed the Majestic Wilderlands, I woven in specific assumptions about the impact of magic, religion and technology on the setting.


5) For everybody else magic does an impact, mostly because of healing clerics and clerics blessing crops, and my call on the matter is that life is about 20% better in the Majestic Wilderlands to a comparable cultures at the same time period in our history.

6) Religion is a bigger deal in the Majestic Wilderlands than our own history (which was a big deal as well). While outright theocracies are still rare, the ideas behind religion and the supernatural are pervasive. Then there is the cultural impact of the immortal elves. The makes most cultures in my setting far more technologically conservatives compared to our own history.  

I think this is underexplored teritory in most RPGs, even RuneQuest Glorantha. How would demonstrably real and involved gods, magic, and supernatural forces impact the development of society. Spell casting wizards being just another example of this.  (probably majorly tangential to this thread)

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1010401Cities you can definitely do. There are almost always exceptions to rules, and cities can survive on hidden sources of water (underground, seasonal, etc). I think the key is you can justify a city that isn't by a major river on a map (especially if the people in the setting have something like Aqueduct technology). Cisterns, water conduits, dams, wells, etc. Geographic features like Wadi. The Nabataeans were particularly good at this stuff (just look at a place like Petra).

Given those, you can also have technology that carries water to other areas, so underground wayer, or water far away can be used to support multiple cities, or even a civilisation.

I admit that I partially chickened out on this question in my current campaign.  I'm doing one where magic has some fairly strong effects on the society--i.e. not standard medieval fantasy, but I kept to the cities on major rivers thing.  Though in fairness, part of the reason is that I like having rivers around urban areas for the extra interest it provides when sneaking, chasing, and that sort of thing.  Nothing like a bridge and a damp place to land when you fall off of one to liven things up.  

Instead, the magical effects are geared towards improvements to existing processes.  For example, most small towns on small rivers have aqueducts with astonishingly clean water in them, and this is due to a mix of the river goddess adherents, magic, and some magically-assisted technology.  Large towns have even more elaborate infrastructure.

Quote from: flyingmice;1010679Yes, yes, yes! There are many cities in deserts and semi arid areas that are NOT on rivers, like Jerusalem. WTF are people talking about here? I don't understand why there is a question. Also, see atoll cities like Tarawa or Majuro or Malé. Or Venice, for crying out loud!

... you mean communities on seacoasts, communities in oases, communities with wells, communities with aqueducts, and communities with 21st century technology, for crying out loud?  Oh sure.  I'm quite comfortable with 21st century Male having a six figure population, and anyone who thinks the burg would have as much as a fiftieth as many people as it has on medieval tech needs to lay off the wacky weed.

So sure, let's take Petra.  Petra survived because of a very sophisticated system of dams, cisterns, reservoirs and aqueducts that were both a prerequisite to its existence and carried a honking lot of flood water, and the city didn't long survive the system's decimation in an earthquake.  Now if you want to site a town in a desert, and there are economic reasons for it to exist as with Petra, and there's the peace, political will and technology to do so (because the Nabateans sure weren't going to pull it off if they had to fight off orc armies), sure, go for it.

But they are nonetheless extreme outliers.

Quote from: Ravenswing;1010731But they are nonetheless extreme outliers.

So just to make it clear, your point in this thread is that all cities in fantasy campaigns need to be right on the statistical mean? Outliers have no place in building a fantastical setting?

Quote from: Ravenswing;1010731... you mean communities on seacoasts, communities in oases, communities with wells, communities with aqueducts, and communities with 21st century technology, for crying out loud?  Oh sure.  I'm quite comfortable with 21st century Male having a six figure population, and anyone who thinks the burg would have as much as a fiftieth as many people as it has on medieval tech needs to lay off the wacky weed.

So sure, let's take Petra.  Petra survived because of a very sophisticated system of dams, cisterns, reservoirs and aqueducts that were both a prerequisite to its existence and carried a honking lot of flood water, and the city didn't long survive the system's decimation in an earthquake.  Now if you want to site a town in a desert, and there are economic reasons for it to exist as with Petra, and there's the peace, political will and technology to do so (because the Nabateans sure weren't going to pull it off if they had to fight off orc armies), sure, go for it.

But they are nonetheless extreme outliers.

So Petra is  now too fantastical for a fantasy setting because of orcs? No one said Petra and places like it were there norm, and no one said these places had to have huge populations, but I don't see anything wrong with including historical examples, even if they are outliers, in fantasy settings. And once you get away from Medieval Europe and look at the rest of the world, you often find very different conditions and numbers. I think if the fantasy world you create is more boring than the real world, then something is off.

Quote from: Ravenswing;1010731... you mean communities on seacoasts, communities in oases, communities with wells, communities with aqueducts, and communities with 21st century technology, for crying out loud?  Oh sure.  I'm quite comfortable with 21st century Male having a six figure population, and anyone who thinks the burg would have as much as a fiftieth as many people as it has on medieval tech needs to lay off the wacky weed.

So sure, let's take Petra.  Petra survived because of a very sophisticated system of dams, cisterns, reservoirs and aqueducts that were both a prerequisite to its existence and carried a honking lot of flood water, and the city didn't long survive the system's decimation in an earthquake.  Now if you want to site a town in a desert, and there are economic reasons for it to exist as with Petra, and there's the peace, political will and technology to do so (because the Nabateans sure weren't going to pull it off if they had to fight off orc armies), sure, go for it.

But they are nonetheless extreme outliers.

The original post was about rivers. Not sea water, wells, or magic. It was not stated whether this was now or a some time in the past. All of my points are valid, as are the points in the OP. They are not outliers. If you are on a land trade route, you don't need rivers to make a civilization. THAT was the reason for the OP.

By the way, I don't give a fuck what you think, Ravenswing. I just wanted to clarify. Rant on.