Sneak Peek At Ghosts of Saltmarsh Maps

Here's a sneak peek at some of the maps to be found in the upcoming D&D Ghosts of Saltmarsh, courtesy of WotC's Twitch stream.

​

And Dyson Logos, one of the cartographers for the book, has shared some of his work which will be appearing!

 

[Hussar]

That’s my point. There is nothing in the original module about the layout of the town. It is literally left to the dm to design the town. As in the module TELLS you to make your own map.

So yup has to fit in an A4 page. Great. It certainly does that. It’s perfectly scaled for that.

Still no reason to put north in the wrong place.

 

[SkidAce]

So how would you draw a town/city on a southernly facing coastline that has spread along the shore?

It would likely be wider east to west, and thus would be hard to fit on one standard page.

Rotate it so the north is to the left, and voila, lost of space to draw in the up/down length of the paper.

JMO.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

That’s my point. There is nothing in the original module about the layout of the town. It is literally left to the dm to design the town. As in the module TELLS you to make your own map.

So yup has to fit in an A4 page. Great. It certainly does that. It’s perfectly scaled for that.

Still no reason to put north in the wrong place.

I believe it's from the 3.5 version. It may well have inherited the orientation from there too. I didn't even bother to map the town when I ran U1 in the 80s, but now they are hooking in a bunch of other adventures, open word style. And it's not "wrong". Conflating "unconventional" with "wrong" is a very dangerous road to start down.

 

[Parmandur]

I believe it's from the 3.5 version. It may well have inherited the orientation from there too. I didn't even bother to map the town when I ran U1 in the 80s, but now they are hooking in a bunch of other adventures, open word style. And it's not "wrong". Conflating "unconventional" with "wrong" is a very dangerous road to start down.

I found that, yes, the 3.5 Saltmarsh map has this East on top orientation, and can confirm that this is following that example. And the use of space is probably the main reason. Maybe Hussar doesn't like the irreverence of North not being on top, but they would probably get way more complaints about "wasted space" on a map page.

 

[oreofox]

This version is "setting agnostic", so it could be any river.

I am referring to this image that [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] posted a few replies above mine:

This map looks to be made by Mike Schley, or someone very good at replicating his map style. On this map, there are numbers within circles, and 2 names: "Saltmarsh" at the top, and "Kingfisher River" on the left side. This is typically called a "DM Map", and those circled numbers will coincide with some text within the book detailing what is in the locations the numbers are. Mr Schley normally sells high res version of both the DM Map, and a "Player Map" which doesn't have the numbers. However, they do have the names still on them. So, the "player map" version of this Saltmarsh map will still have "Saltmarsh" and "Kingfisher River" on them (if he is consistent with his previous maps). Orienting the map to have North at the top, will make it look like this:

Turning the map screws with the name of the town, name of the river, and the distance ruler, which is also typically at the bottom of the image. It just looks stupid. Yes, this adventure is "setting agnostic", but Mr Schley still put a name to the river on the map. So it wouldn't really matter if you called it something else in your game. If you use this map, you will have to call it the Kingfisher River, edit out the name, and possibly making the map even worse, or tell your players to ignore the name. But that still leaves the lettering being messed up. A 4th option is to just ignore this map and use one of your own, which could possibly produce problems on its own. Would it have been so hard to make the map oriented with North at the top, and then when adding it to the book, rotate it counter-clockwise to give it the "portrait" layout?

 

[Hussar]

So how would you draw a town/city on a southernly facing coastline that has spread along the shore?

It would likely be wider east to west, and thus would be hard to fit on one standard page.

Rotate it so the north is to the left, and voila, lost of space to draw in the up/down length of the paper.

JMO.

I wouldn't because of the physical constraints of my product.

Now, do you mean a real location in the real world? Or a location that has been previously described in some sort of other product for a fantasy world? In a book? Then, sure, you have to fiddle with the scale a bit so that it fits into a portrait A4 paper.

Easy peasy no?

What I wouldn't do is confuse my customers by creating a map that ignores centuries of standardization in map practices.

Maybe we should have maps where mountains are drawn as round blobs with a line pointing out of the bottom? But, Hussar, you say, that's a tree. So what? You can just imagine a mountain as easily as a tree. You shouldn't be constrained by blind convention. After all, you can just as easily imagine that this is a mountain.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Turning the map screws with the name of the town, name of the river, and the distance ruler, which is also typically at the bottom of the image. It just looks stupid.

That's the thing - I can read the writing as easily sidewise on as I can the normal way around. Turn it upside down and I can still read it. Pretty much a required skill for any school teacher!

As for "looking stupid", it doesn't matter since it's the DM's map.

Addendum: Back when I was making street plans we would stick the street names along the roads, so they could have any orientation, and we would even bend them to follow the curve of a windy road.

 

[oreofox]

That's the thing - I can read the writing as easily sidewise on as I can the normal way around. Turn it upside down and I can still read it. Pretty much a required skill for any school teacher! As for "looking stupid", it doesn't matter since it's the DM's map. Addendum: Back when I was making street plans we would stick the street names along the roads, so they could have any orientation, and we would even bend them to follow the curve of a windy road.

I, too, can read it just fine sideways. But that's not the point. And you apparently didn't read the entire post. Mike Schley leaves the writing of names on both versions of his maps. DM and Player versions. Like I said in my post. Whether this particular image is the DM version or not, BOTH versions will have the names. And since this was made with East being at the top, turning the image will still have the names being sideways. It's an aesthetic thing. Especially when it comes to using a map for VTT use. Home use wouldn't really matter, since people typically sit around a table, and the orientation will be off for many of the people at the table. But more and more games are being played over VTT, where orientation matters more. Personally, if I had my way, there would be no writing at all on any of the maps for D&D. At least, the player versions. No numbers, no names, no compass rose. Nothing. That way would be easiest to use a map. What if I want my Saltmarsh to be on a northern coast? I'd have to either rotate it 180 degrees, or flip it horizontally. Both making for bad aesthetic thanks to the writing. Maybe I like the look of the town, and would like to use it for a coastal town in a homebrew setting, but I don't have a "Saltmarsh" or a "Kingfisher River". Having a wordless map would be the best solution.

 

[Guest 6801328]

But, again, the point you are failing to grasp here, and I'm beginning to feel like I'm simply being trolled, is that there is no reason, none whatsoever, to do this in the first place.

Now that’s irony. In the same sentence that you claim no reason exists, you identify one.

 

[Parmandur]

Now that’s irony. In the same sentence that you claim no reason exists, you identify one.

Mike Schley, cartography troll?