Problem with my map, and creating a believable world

[ascanius]

OK the problem. In creating the map I have done a good bit of research into land formations, plate tectonics, erosion and almost everything else to design a map that conforms to the laws of nature without having a degree in geology that is. Now, I wanted to place buttes and mesas on an open savanna but the problem is I cannot think of a logical explanation as to how they were created. This savanna is not a dry arid place with sandy soil but analogous to the African savanna with a large diversity of life. I had wanted to place them just south of a mountain range and a little south west of a very large lake. This means that there is not a lot of sand or wind. From what I can gather buttes and mesas are usually found in dry arid canyon landscapes. I have thought of moving the buttes and mesas south to an area, that is currently a extremely large desert, that is more suited to the type of land formation that they are. If I do this it would be easy to bring a water source there creating a fertile savanna. But if done this would change the a lot of aspects of a semi nomadic people that inhabit the bluffs to the east while creating an even larger open plain between north and south. It would make no sense for them to stay in the bluffs without water when they could move to the lower lands where water is more available, which would essentially be below them. Another problem is the inhabitants that would life among the buttes would be competing with these people for resources. What I wanted was for them to fare enough away where they could trade and have amicable relations without being in direct contact, the difference between a couple of days and many weeks of travel. Now if a leave the buttes where I had originally intended this would essentially cut the continent in half with a mountain range starting in the north west corner of the continent going south east. Then the buttes and mesas continuing across the open plain to a large bluff canyons that also go south east finally ending half way between east and west. Does anyone have any suggestions that I may have overlooked? Also and more importantly how much of the world has to be based on fact. For me I really don't like reading books where the laws of physics are completely ignored without some logical explanations as to the rules of that particular world. If a mountain can float I want an explanation. If it is a super dense lode stone with an extreme repulsive force, fine. In these situations I tend to analyze this to the point of why don't people cut chunks from it to use in flying ships and the like, I do this a lot with movies too. If the physics don't make any sense I tend not to like it. If magic is used as an explanation it needs to be a damn good one that conforms to the rules of magic in the book while terminating to some extent, ie why don't other people use magic to do something similar. For me if something breaks a pattern I will dwell on it for an explanation and if none are presented the book looses it's savor.
So to summarize how could I explain the formation of these buttes that somehow suddenly appear on a grassy flat plain. And second I realize that not everyone is like me so I am wondering what is the limit to everyone elses' "leap of faith" and do minute details really even matter. In all likelihood the explanation will never make it into the story but for my sanity, I at least need to know this stuff. I have 38 pages of notes which I consider to be a condensed overview compromising only maybe 5% of the details and information I have floating around in my head. Or am I just crazy?
Here is a address for the pic, and the password is guest12345 http://s1108.photobucket.com/albums/h406/ascanius1/
In the upper left hand corner is an arrow designating where I wanted to put the buttes.

[Eimingami]

Your dedication to realism and detail amazes me... Your lack of paragraphs confuses me. Please rearrange your post and I promise I'll be able to read it over, think about it, and give you a decent suggestion.

[Johnny Cosmo]

This is interesting, but as Eimingami said, that wall of text is making it hard to respond.

[Linqy]

I can only get through the first lines (which make it sound like you DO know what you're talking about) before my eyes start to scramble everything into a big blur XD

Paragraphs please!

[Xavorn]

Hello,

As the others already said it before me, paragraps, or there's no reading it through.
But nice realistic map... Perhaps too realistic?

-Xavorn

[The Blue Lotus]

Heres the thing, And I can read your posting so


You have to take into account a few things:
1) Age of your planet
2) geological movement happened long before you and your people arrived.
3) if something does not fit go the "Pangaea" route.

The plates are constantly rising and falling, oceans rise and fall as well. Not to mention "Drift" which seems to me your biggest issues at the moment. Drift can cause plates to smash together (Mountains), or parts of the plate to sheer off where eventualy they will met other plates ( californiaesq ) It will also cause vallies, etc.

Subduction would hide some of this from us ( the whys and hows leaving you with something that just "is". )

Volcanic action forms new landmasses all the time. This problem that you have seems to me could be solved with a better understanding of the (your) locations history. (Millions/Billions of years ago)

Water carves out all types of formations.
In New Mexico we have Buttes and mountains together... I have no idea how they were formed however. You could look into it.

I am of the oppinion that if it does not exsist it is just because it is now gone and we can't see it, or we just have not found it yet!

All the best I hope that helps just a little bit.

[The Grey Sage]

I find your map interesting. The problems I see currently:
1. the detailing on your mountians is confusing and distracting
2. there are a lot of disembodied lines with no visible purpose floating around
3. in the right hand part you divide the land into countries? but no where else, does this mean those are the only inhabited areas?
As for other feedback, I think the map is coming along nicely. As Lotus says, water might be an agent you can use to carve yourself the formations you need. A useful tip is to use different colors or highlights or fonts when labeling certian parts of the map. For example, you could label all countries with italics and all amd formations in bold. Just an idea. Thanks for sharing such a good map. I hope to see it when close to completion!

[Fiain]

I'm fairly new to this whole writing thing, but to me it seems like you perhaps worry a tad too much on realism. I mean, we are all fantasy writers, am I correct? Leave something to the reader's imagination! They honestly are not going to care with how a particular mesa came to be located in a certain area, and if they do, your story should be enough to distract them from any physical strangness your world may have. I know its a bit of a lame excuse, but certain things need clarification, like magical systems. Certain things dont. In my opinion, if you attempt to bog the reader down with this kind of information, they won't be bothered to read much more into your world, which obviously you put a lot of time and effort into creating. The average reader isn't going to bother with arguing about the physics of your world; they'll want the story to be good, creative, and fun; and the world simply has to be the canvas on which you paint your story.

[The Blue Lotus]

I'm fairly new to this whole writing thing, but to me it seems like you perhaps worry a tad too much on realism. I mean, we are all fantasy writers, am I correct? Leave something to the reader's imagination! They honestly are not going to care with how a particular mesa came to be located in a certain area, and if they do, your story should be enough to distract them from any physical strangness your world may have. I know its a bit of a lame excuse, but certain things need clarification, like magical systems. Certain things dont. In my opinion, if you attempt to bog the reader down with this kind of information, they won't be bothered to read much more into your world, which obviously you put a lot of time and effort into creating. The average reader isn't going to bother with arguing about the physics of your world; they'll want the story to be good, creative, and fun; and the world simply has to be the canvas on which you paint your story.

Now see I disagree.
I think that if you write with all the realisms of our own world, it makes your world that much more believable.
But that is just me... I have all the talent of a chicken pecking at the keys

[Fiain]

Now see I disagree.
I think that if you write with all the realisms of our own world, it makes your world that much more believable.
But that is just me... I have all the talent of a chicken pecking at the keys

Haha no that is a perfectly viable point of view; I think there are many differant schools of thought on this, and niether of us is wrong, per say. And maybe I should ask a question: would information like that (as in, why a mesa is where it is) be included in the actual work itself? For me, as a reader, grinding through a text full of geological terms and explanations that really have nothing to do with the story, would bore me. I agree that realism is good to an extent; it just doesn't need to be thrust in the reader's face. Ascanius, I'm glad that you are putting so much detail into making your world; I would just be warry of how much you tell the reader about the reasons behind things.