Interesting problem

[DragonStryk72]

Okay, so I've hit a minor snag in the kingdom building rules. As it is, my group has started colonizing the Stolen Lands, but this question is particular to something one of my players was asking about.

The group got an even of New Vassals, shortly after opening up their new gold mine, and so I figured it was a group of Dwarven Miners who had heard of the find and come to help. This has, interestingly, led to the issue- My players want to actually make a start on an underground Dwarven City, and I'm not opposed to it, I just don't know what it would cost BP-wise to prep the area. As well, if the city is underground, couldn't you still build a farm on top of, since the surface would be free.

I will state they are extremely excited about this idea.

[DM_aka_Dudemeister]

Treat it as Mountain Terrain, say that there's only enough room down there for X Districts (where x is what you're comfortable with) tell them that they can't build farms on that hex (as the underground city affects soil quality/irrigation) but they can expand their city overground (more districts using whatever the prevalent above ground terrain is).

The duke in my kingdom is a dwarf so that's how I'm handling it :-)

[DragonStryk72]

That explanation doesn't work on the farms, as I just finished reading my copy of Dwarves of Golarion, and dwarves do keep small above ground farms and pasture lands for cattle, so that doesn't really work on that level. The Dwarves would have long ago died out were that the case.

I think it should be somewhat more expensive than the mountain hexes though, as you have to account for the overhead amounts, with extra reinforcements and requiring a crafting roll either by a member of the party, or a dwarf npc.

[Valandil Ancalime]

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

Treat it as Mountain Terrain...

That's what we did.

[Philip Knowsley]

DragonStryk72 wrote:

My players want to actually make a start on an underground Dwarven City, and I'm not opposed to it, I just don't know what it would cost BP-wise to prep the area. As well, if the city is underground, couldn't you still build a farm on top of, since the surface would be free.

DragonStryk72,

As is always the way - I don't know where...but, there is a big long
conversation somewhere in this board about exactly what you're asking.
I remember reading it a while back - so it may not be in one of the more
recent posts.
You might try the 'early'ish' Kingdom Building one...?

[DM_aka_Dudemeister]

Well nothing really breaks by letting them use the area above for farmland.

Mountains is the most expensive/time consuming terrain listed. You're free to homebrew beyond that but it's barely worth the effort.

[Enthallo]

If they are dwarves building a dwarven city underground, I wouldn't think that it would cost any more build points than creating a normal city.

We have the same thing happening in my campaign -- one of our players is an outcast dwarf, but we made a side trip (mini-adventure) to the Five Kings mountains and redeemed his reputation. We now have dwarven outposts existing WITHIN both the gold and the silver mines, and farmlands above.

The hardest part about getting a dwarven city build is getting the dwarves. If you have dwarves building an underground city, it shouldn't be any more difficult for them as for humans building their own cities above ground.

I allow it with NO adjustment to build points. I figure they've got all the raw materials they need (stone) so there is little they need to bring in to make it work.

[Shizvestus]

You can have farms above ground, Dwarven cities are so fare underground that they do not disturb water tables unless they are right near surface access points. Think of Swiss farms and Swiss farming hamlets.

http://www.russelltours.com/sgh_files/images/Murren.jpg

[Ambrus]

I'd count the subterranean realm and the land directly above it as two separate (though adjacent) hexes.