Why I like that POL has no map...

[Natural 20]

I like that POL has no map because it helps promote discovery and it reinforces the sense of adventure that is inherent in D&D.

Early maps produced by explorers of any ilk and era are limited to what could be seen or encountered by the adventuring party. The maps start out distorted and limited and then evolve as more adventurers document their observations cartographically.

To me this is appropriate for the rollout of 4th Edition. Of course I am a player and not a DM (yet), but either way I think the free-form, no map POL approach will be fun. For me, this news even makes me more optomistic about 4E than I was before.

 

[thundershot]

I like that too, because I play adventures from other publishers, and making my own map makes it easier to build my own map slowly. I used at least 4-5 of those AEG Adventure Keep towns in my primary 3rd edition campaign world. They were the first towns my players were introduced to, and they built all kinds of contacts and reputations and such.


Chris

 

[Sonny]

I think having something like an "official" PoL map is a bit of a slippery slope. It goes from being less of an implied setting to more of an actual setting. And with an actual setting comes the the temptation for Wizards to flesh it out with npcs, towns, and metaplots that end up invalidating people's version of the setting.

And yes, you can say who cares what the official setting does, you can do what you want in your game. But really, look at the effect bad setting supplements have on the Realms, Eberron, and Greyhawk. Everyone knows you can do whatever you want with those settings. It doesn't stop the feeling fans get that the setting they love can be ruined and become unusable for them.

I support the multiple PoL maps on D&D Insider idea, just as long as none of them becomes "official".

 

[Natural 20]

... and to elaborate a little I will add ...

For me a big part of D&D is the actual sense of adventure which I think harkens back to my time as a Boy Scout. Growing up in suburban DC, Montgomery County Maryland to be exact, it was possible at the time to actually hike parts of Rock Creek Park and still feel a little remote from civilization.

I remember a particular time when our "patrol" was on a 10 mile hike around and about Lake Needwood during a late autumn rain; very foggy out, and "atmospheric", so to speak. I clearly recall trying to negotiate my way through underbrush while trying to stay on a narrow trail. No maps, but maybe a compass and a pocketknife; my footfall on the squishy ground, gentle rain, a sense of the unknown - all added up to a very memorable experience. So now when I adventure in D&D it is in pursuit of that adventurous feeling. If we had had a detailed topo map, and I knew from it that just over that mysterious ridge "over there" that there was dense suburbia, then it would have been ruined the experience for me.

The lack of a POL map for the 4E rollout means to me that there is a new world to explore - all I have to do is put on my hiking boots, laminate my character sheets and don my Cloak of Rain Resistance +1, and I am good to go! 4th Edition adventures, and the various Points of Light - here I come!

 

[Li Shenron]

I often thinks that large-scale or world maps are one of those things that gamers' imagination fall short of. We're so used to have atlas in our daily lives, that we don't realize that it would be more appropriate for most D&D settings not to have world maps at all, or to have wrong/partial/approximated maps only, much like there were before the XX century.

 

[VirgilCaine]

I often thinks that large-scale or world maps are one of those things that gamers' imagination fall short of. We're so used to have atlas in our daily lives, that we don't realize that it would be more appropriate for most D&D settings not to have world maps at all, or to have wrong/partial/approximated maps only, much like there were before the XX century.

Some people make me sad with their lack of imagination.


You do know there's magic in D&D, right?

Where you can fly?

And maybe make magically accurate measurements?

Or, gosh, magically make maps themselves?

 

[Klaus]

As the original proponent of multiple PoL settings (maps included) from the designers, I think that would serve as examples of how you can build different campaigns with the same building blocks. Even as an experienced DM, I'd love to see that.

 

[Li Shenron]

Some people make me sad with their lack of imagination.


You do know there's magic in D&D, right?

Where you can fly?

And maybe make magically accurate measurements?

Or, gosh, magically make maps themselves?

But that's easy, very easy.

Now try to roleplay in world where there are no maps, and perhaps where knowledge of something specific is not generally as close as the nearest library, or where the equipment you want is not conveniently available on the corner store. It's harder, that indeed requires some imagination in order to picture how such a world could work, and how characters would behave. Using magic to recreate a world where practical issues work pretty much the same as real life is a piece of cake

PS I'm not suggesting either way, I'm just making a consideration.

 

[Stogoe]

Thanks for the disdain, Virgil, but I still don't want a map. It would push the concept of PoL from 'Lego Chest/toolkit' into 'actual named setting', which is no better than just reusing Greyhawk. I want your campaign's geography to be different from mine.

 

[Natural 20]

... good discussion going on here ...

To me, allowing the setting to be flexible by not pre-mapping POL, makes sense and is consistent with how I abstractly think about D&D the game. This is especially true at the outset of a new edition.

I am a relative newcomer to the game, however I predate the game. I started with 3.5 after re-entering gaming via Magic: the Gathering. I say re-enter because as a kid I play some AH games, just enough to "qualify" as a gamer. When I first heard about D&D all I knew about it was that players, in assumed roles, adventured into "dungeons" and along the way maybe encountered "dragons". The latter of which seemed to be a stand-in for any number of fantasy-based, scary creatures. Discovery of the dungeon, which the DM knew ahead of time, involved in-character exploration and "mapping as go" by the adventuring party.

At the atomic level the dungeon is a key fundamental unit. The game is not called "Settings & Dragons" after all. The setting can evolve to expand the scale of the adventure which in turn can establish a broader context for the game.

For me, a map-less setting at the beginning of a new edition helps promote that sense of exploration and adventure which is fundamental to what makes D&D the great game that it is.