As someone who isn't as hardcore about realism, my approach is just to use it as a sort of base to figure out where stuff goes (for example, determining where mountain ranges and resources are), but I don't bother adhering too strictly to it and if it comes into conflict with another idea I have I'll usually prioritize whatever that idea is.
For example, I wanted a desert with a mountain range along its eastern and southern sides. So I did it backwards, first drawing the map then figuring out some plausible plates for it and using those to come up with the surrounding areas that I didn't have plans for.
Though actually I'm not sure if realistically my world should even have plate tectonics, since it takes place on a terraformed moon, and AFAIK smaller planets/moons tend to have less active cores. I probably should research that a bit.
As someone who isn't as hardcore about realism, my approach is just to use it as a sort of base to figure out where stuff goes (for example, determining where mountain ranges and resources are), but I don't bother adhering too strictly to it and if it comes into conflict with another idea I have I'll usually prioritize whatever that idea is.
For example, I wanted a desert with a mountain range along its eastern and southern sides. So I did it backwards, first drawing the map then figuring out some plausible plates for it and using those to come up with the surrounding areas that I didn't have plans for.
Though actually I'm not sure if realistically my world should even have plate tectonics, since it takes place on a terraformed moon, and AFAIK smaller planets/moons tend to have less active cores. I probably should research that a bit.