Board Thread:Suggestions forum/@comment-27831234-20180605023747/@comment-27831234-20180614064951

IronJaw333 wrote: I never said REMOVE the gondorian buildings, I just said remove them. And also, I misunderstood the "buildings" part.

This was a part of gondor before, yes, but it was just land, like the "normal" part of gondor. There would have been houses and stuff, not captain/hiring buildings and forts. So, i suggest that there would be little to no forts here, and the forts which WOULD be here would be broken and forgotten.

There would be a bunch of ruined houses and mines and a LOT of useless stone spires and the like, maybe an orchard or two?

But for the forts and the like? No. These would be the first targeted places, and there wouldn't have been too many of them to start with.

The rangers however? I agree. Perhaps, if possible, the ranger towers and gondorian forts would be in the very northwest of Hrandor, right beneath Gondor and ithilien. But further south and east? Only ruins of ruins and forgotten places would exist. I wholeheartedly agree however! Harandor should definetely be a bit more than an infinetely warring land.

'''An add-on to your idea: There should be a vast decrease in Rangers as you go further south and East. I mean, how could there be that many rangers on the borders of Far Harad??? How would they survive?! They aren't even real rangers of the north! By the time you get halfwayish and farther south of Harandor, there should be no rangers at all. ''' I never said have functioning forts. There is no reason for them to not have built forts when they controlled Harondor. "These would have been the first targeted places"... what? In medieval warfare, it is the soft things that get pillaged first; the farms, villages, then the castles and cities. People have been building forts and castles in dangerous and disputed places in many instances in history, like the crusaders, they built many castles