Trees of the Erebannien and Spi

[Pieter Sleijpen]

Olesens wrote:
>
> I'm making a RT2 map of Southern Anuire and I need to know what types of
> trees are in the Erebannien and Spiderfell. Just want to know
> deciduious (sp, like poplars) vs. conifirous (sp again, like Pine).
> Something like "The Erebannien is 75% deciduious and 25 % conifierous."
> I thought the info might be in a Player's Secrets or someone with a good
> idea of forests had used one of them in thier campaign.
>

I would not be able to anwser this with utmost certainty, but I guess
the forests would be mostly decidious (for example oak). I think the
ancients forests in Poland would be a good example for both forests. For
the Spiderfell I am quite certain it is decidious, because natural
confierous forests are not very dark and looming. If the bottom is sandy
though, then there might also be confierous trees. Also realise that
this is not Earth so you can always make your own tree species.

Pieter Sleijpen

[Mark A Vandermeulen]

On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Olesens wrote:

> I'm making a RT2 map of Southern Anuire and I need to know what types of
> trees are in the Erebannien and Spiderfell. Just want to know
> deciduious (sp, like poplars) vs. conifirous (sp again, like Pine).
> Something like "The Erebannien is 75% deciduious and 25 % conifierous."
> I thought the info might be in a Player's Secrets or someone with a good
> idea of forests had used one of them in thier campaign.
>
> -Andrew

Well, lets see. About the only thing we know from the RoE book is that 1.)
some trees are valuable for their prized wood, and 2.) there are thorn
trees. Both of these indicate deciduous trees, so the 100% coniferous
option is out. About the only other thing I have to compare it too is the
temperate rain forest (the book mentions constant cloud cover and at least
semi-frequent rain showers). The only temperate rain forest I know is that
of the Olympic Peninsula in Washington state (USA), which actually does
contain a sizeable proportion of coniferous species. And, incidentally, it
CAN be fairly dark there, in part because even though the coniferous trees
have the typical needle-like or scale-like leaves of other conifers, there
are LOTS of epiphytes living on them and in their canopies. I would say
you could make your forest anywhere between about 25%-50% coniferous.

Mark VanderMeulen
vander+@pitt.edu

[Brian Stoner]

I'm inclined to agree. I live in western Oregon where we have primarily
Coniferous forests, and they can be very dark...especially on overcast days, as
seems to be perpetual for the Spiderfell. Wet forests like the ones in the
Northwest can have a lot of undergowth, which contributes to the general
feeling of darkness. But, most clues do seem to point to a primarily deciduous
forest for the Spiderfell. When I think of the Erebannien, I think of a
beautiful deciduous forest that turns all kinds of reds, oranges, and yellows
during Autumn. Whereas with the Spiderfell, I think of a dark deciduous forest
that simply seems to die each Winter...

Dearnen

Mark A Vandermeulen wrote:

> Well, lets see. About the only thing we know from the RoE book is that 1.)
> some trees are valuable for their prized wood, and 2.) there are thorn
> trees. Both of these indicate deciduous trees, so the 100% coniferous
> option is out. About the only other thing I have to compare it too is the
> temperate rain forest (the book mentions constant cloud cover and at least
> semi-frequent rain showers). The only temperate rain forest I know is that
> of the Olympic Peninsula in Washington state (USA), which actually does
> contain a sizeable proportion of coniferous species. And, incidentally, it
> CAN be fairly dark there, in part because even though the coniferous trees
> have the typical needle-like or scale-like leaves of other conifers, there
> are LOTS of epiphytes living on them and in their canopies. I would say
> you could make your forest anywhere between about 25%-50% coniferous.
>
> Mark VanderMeulen

[Pieter Sleijpen]

Brian Stoner wrote:
>
> I'm inclined to agree. I live in western Oregon where we have primarily
> Coniferous forests, and they can be very dark...especially on overcast days, as
> seems to be perpetual for the Spiderfell. Wet forests like the ones in the
> Northwest can have a lot of undergowth, which contributes to the general
> feeling of darkness. But, most clues do seem to point to a primarily deciduous
> forest for the Spiderfell. When I think of the Erebannien, I think of a
> beautiful deciduous forest that turns all kinds of reds, oranges, and yellows
> during Autumn. Whereas with the Spiderfell, I think of a dark deciduous forest
> that simply seems to die each Winter...
>

I think it all depends on the underground. The only more or less natural
confirous forests we have in the Netherlands is on unfertile dry sand
ground. Of coarse, there are no real natural forests in the Netherlands,
but that is something entirely different. The trees are far away and
generaly open. An other factor is temperature, and I am not sure if the
climate in Washington is the same as in southern Anuire. In fact, I
think it is hotter in Southern Anuire. Then again, TSR leaves climate so
vague in their products, that that is entirely up to the DM's. So I
throw away biological sense, simply because TSR provides to few details
and I am not going to make them up myself. I personally like the idea of
the truely ancient forests of Poland and that is how I depect both
forests. Only the Spiderfell Forest will be darker and gloomier with
more spiders.

Pieter Sleijpen

P.S. Can someone explain me what exactle temperate and sub-tropical for
a climates are? In high school I always learned that there were the
following climate zones, based on temperature. Rain was an extra factor.
You could have wet seasons all year, only in the spring or only in the
autumn.

Arctic - never above 0 C
sub-Arctic - very few months above 0 C, never higher then 10 C
Land Climate - Hot summers, freezing cold winters
Sea Climate - Not to hot summers, not to cold winters
Tropical - Not much temperature variation.
Desert Climate.

Does temperate includes bothe land and sea climate?

[Brian Stoner]

Heh, I have never seen the climates catagorized the same way twice. Every class I've
taken and every book I've read has had different climate zones and types. For
example, I have never seen "Land Climate" or "Sea Climate". From what you have,
though, I would say that Sea Climate is closest to temperate..that is, it's not too
hot or too cold..however, it is more encompassing. Most of Western Europe and the
United States could be labeled temperate. It's kind of vague, but I think temperate
just describes the ideal range..from an American/European perspective. Sub-tropical
is the area between the tropical and temperate that isn't desert...which doesn't
really help, I know, but that's the best way to explain it. Other zones I've seen
are Mediterranian (which is most of the coastline of the Med. Sea, as well as
California.), Savanna ( fairly dry and warm, such as the grasslands of Africa, etc.),
and Steppe (fairly dry and cool, such as the open expanse of central Asia). Clearly
some climate maps use the prevailing vegetation to determine different
climates...which isn't too weird since there is a relationship. Unfortunately, no
two sources seem to use the same system... Here in the USA we did learn that
precipitation is part of the climate..so that may be a difference between the system
you learned and the ones I've encountered.

Pieter Sleijpen wrote:

> Pieter Sleijpen
>
> P.S. Can someone explain me what exactle temperate and sub-tropical for
> a climates are? In high school I always learned that there were the
> following climate zones, based on temperature. Rain was an extra factor.
> You could have wet seasons all year, only in the spring or only in the
> autumn.
>
> Arctic - never above 0 C
> sub-Arctic - very few months above 0 C, never higher then 10 C
> Land Climate - Hot summers, freezing cold winters
> Sea Climate - Not to hot summers, not to cold winters
> Tropical - Not much temperature variation.
> Desert Climate.
>
> Does temperate includes bothe land and sea climate?

[Kenneth Gauck]

"Land" and "Sea" climate could be a layman's way of saying "maritime
climate", or more technically Humid mesothermal marine, or by Koeppen
deffinition, Cb or Cc often with f; and "continental climate", Humid
microthermal continental or Da and Db often with f.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Brian Stoner
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 2:50 PM
>
>Heh, I have never seen the climates catagorized the same way twice. Every
>class I've taken and every book I've read has had different climate zones
and
>types. For example, I have never seen "Land Climate" or "Sea Climate".

[Pieter Sleijpen]

Kenneth Gauck wrote:
>
> "Land" and "Sea" climate could be a layman's way of saying "maritime
> climate", or more technically Humid mesothermal marine, or by Koeppen
> deffinition, Cb or Cc often with f; and "continental climate", Humid
> microthermal continental or Da and Db often with f.

I was trying to refrain myself, especially since I got Koeppen's system
about 6 years ago and am not quite sure on the exact definitions.
Anyway, is he correct in his assesment that both maritime and
continental climate's are called temperate? Which seems very odd to me,
because these climates differ quite a lot. But maybe it is my background
as a biologists, that makes me want to have some details on climates.
Then again, it might be better that TSR refrains from giving some more
details. Else we will have a strange climate pattern akin to the strange
geographical pattern of those mountains. (That only the Gorgon area has
got vulcano's is not that strange. In RL there is something as
"hot-spots", one has only to look at Hawai. Though I sometimes wished
where to expact earthquakes, vulcano's, tropical cyclones and tornado's.
Those large natural dissasters can alway's be nice to use.)

Pieter Sleijpen

[Olesens]

> That only the Gorgon area has
> got vulcano's is not that strange. In RL there is something as
> "hot-spots", one has only to look at Hawai. Though I sometimes wished
> where to expact earthquakes, vulcano's, tropical cyclones and tornado's.
> Those large natural dissasters can alway's be nice to use.

I was thinking about the same thing but I didn't think it'd be worth brining
up, but since it seems I'm not alone... I'd be nice to know where the tectonic
plates of Abyneris meet in order to gain a good idea of where earthquakes
occur. Any geologists or something like that here? I would really like to
throw in something on tornadoes or tropical storms/hurricanes, but it seems
Cerilia is modeled around Europe and the Middle East so I'm not really
knowlageable about natural disasters over there (aside from the occasional
occurance of a would-be Emperor of the World). An interesting net project
(like the OPC, Adurian Expansion, etc) would be something akin to Elminster's
Ecologies, ie. stuff on Cerilia-wide weather, general flora and fauna, fault
lines, hot-spots and "cirles (rings?) of Fire", flood areas, etc.

- -Andrew

[brandes]

>I was thinking about the same thing but I didn't think it'd be worth
brining
>up, but since it seems I'm not alone... I'd be nice to know where the
tectonic
>plates of Abyneris meet in order to gain a good idea of where earthquakes
>occur. Any geologists or something like that here? I would really like to
>throw in something on tornadoes or tropical storms/hurricanes, but it seems
>Cerilia is modeled around Europe and the Middle East so I'm not really
>knowlageable about natural disasters over there (aside from the occasional
>occurance of a would-be Emperor of the World). An interesting net project
>(like the OPC, Adurian Expansion, etc) would be something akin to
Elminster's
>Ecologies, ie. stuff on Cerilia-wide weather, general flora and fauna,
fault
>lines, hot-spots and "cirles (rings?) of Fire", flood areas, etc.


I seem to recall a statement somewhere (?) that natural disasters are caused
by the Great Troll under the Five Peaks . . .
Brandes

[Pieter Sleijpen]

Olesens wrote:
>
> > That only the Gorgon area has
> > got vulcano's is not that strange. In RL there is something as
> > "hot-spots", one has only to look at Hawai. Though I sometimes wished
> > where to expact earthquakes, vulcano's, tropical cyclones and tornado's.
> > Those large natural dissasters can alway's be nice to use.
>
> I was thinking about the same thing but I didn't think it'd be worth brining
> up, but since it seems I'm not alone... I'd be nice to know where the tectonic
> plates of Abyneris meet in order to gain a good idea of where earthquakes
> occur. Any geologists or something like that here? I would really like to
> throw in something on tornadoes or tropical storms/hurricanes, but it seems
> Cerilia is modeled around Europe and the Middle East so I'm not really
> knowlageable about natural disasters over there (aside from the occasional
> occurance of a would-be Emperor of the World). An interesting net project
> (like the OPC, Adurian Expansion, etc) would be something akin to Elminster's
> Ecologies, ie. stuff on Cerilia-wide weather, general flora and fauna, fault
> lines, hot-spots and "cirles (rings?) of Fire", flood areas, etc.
>

Personally I have done away with the geographical explanations for
earthquakes, simply because the mountain ranges do not make much sense
to me. I am not going to use them in Khourane, which in my eyes is
fairly stable. Of coarse, I am always free to use magic as the reason
for an earthquake. Tornado's can form everywhere under the right
circumstances, but I do not think there would be an area compareble to
the Tornado Belt in the USA. After all, there is no open connection
between the cold north and the warm south. There are several mountain
ranges in the way. The landmass of Cerilia is also much smaller then
America. Meaning that non-magical tornado's would be rare and small. I
do use tropical storms in the Khinasi area though, normally they are
active in the autumn.

Pieter Sleijpen