Hello,
I'm just reading the Pathfinder #18 entry about the Land of Black Blood. The Entry about the central lake "The Caltherium" states:
This central pool of black blood covers almost a square mile of territory
If I rephrase it, this means it is slightly smaller than a square mile.
Now if I look on the map on page 50 the scale indicator shows, that 2.2cm are 40 miles, if I take a very very rough measurement by this scale, the Caltherium is 9360 square miles large. (I calculated length times breadth)
This leads to the question how big this vault really is.
To clarify this I took out the guide to the darklands on page 46 of this publication you will find map of Orv ... unfortunately without a scale indicator.
OK... so I took out the map of the inner sea region which can be found in the Gazetteer, which has a scale indicator. I'm living in Europe to you may forgive me for using the metric systems, since I have no ruler with an inch scale.
On the map of the inner sea region found in the Gazetteer
4.3cm = 240 miles.
Lake Encarthan measured from Tamran to the mouth of the Sellen River on the opposite side measures
7cm = 390 miles
Now I went back to the map of Orv where you can see lake Encarthan just left of The Land of Black Blood. Taking the same measurement the show tha Lake Encathan is 3cm across meaning
3cm = 390 miles in "real" Golarion.
Now I measure the Land of Black Blood across its breadth where the Caltherium is supposed to be. It is roughly
2cm = 260 miles which is exactly the size to the Vault as given on page 50 of Pathfinder #18.
Therefor the description of the Caltherium must be wrong, because everything else is in accordance with the rest of the world.
Greetz
Ganzir
Golarion is larger on the inside than on the outside. All that mass in there, plus the crazy energy/magic/whatever in the vaults will mess up stuff pretty good.
Creative Director
|
The description is indeed wrong of the lake; the article was written without the map, alas, so we had to change all of the descriptions that included measurements in the article... we missed one, alas. FORTUNATELY, it's not one that's vital; you can cut that entire reference from the article that causes problems without fear.