D&D General D&D Dungeon Map Design: Good and Bad

[Hussar]

@Lanefan, I like what you have to say and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

A couple of quibbles though. What's wrong with isometric? Again, I play on VTT, so, isometric maps are a ton of fun when done right. Really builds the scene. Which, thinking about it, does play into your clarity point. The maps I use are meant to be played on. As in played directly on all the time. So, obviously playing 5e D&D means 5 foot squares. (Or, better yet DO NOT ADD THE BLOODY GRID - I can do that in a VTT a lot easier) But, that also means that maps that are just black lines on a white background get stale VERY quickly.

I ADORE @Dyson Logos. He is a god. But, for VTT play, the Dyson Logos maps in WotC adventures don't work quite as well because they tend to be really boring to look at for long periods of time.

 

[Lanefan]

@Lanefan, I like what you have to say and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

A couple of quibbles though. What's wrong with isometric? Again, I play on VTT, so, isometric maps are a ton of fun when done right. Really builds the scene. Which, thinking about it, does play into your clarity point. The maps I use are meant to be played on. As in played directly on all the time.

Difference between online play and in-person, I guess. The maps I use as DM are in theory meant for only me to see; if the players want their own map they have to make it as they explore through the place.

So, obviously playing 5e D&D means 5 foot squares. (Or, better yet DO NOT ADD THE BLOODY GRID - I can do that in a VTT a lot easier) But, that also means that maps that are just black lines on a white background get stale VERY quickly.

I ADORE @Dyson Logos. He is a god. But, for VTT play, the Dyson Logos maps in WotC adventures don't work quite as well because they tend to be really boring to look at for long periods of time.

Boring is good, in this case. Ideally when running a game (and I only run in-person) I'm not staring at the map the whole time - at least, I sure hope not! - and when I do look at it I want whatever I'm looking for to be clear, obvious, and easy to find.

Edit to add: the problem I have with isometric maps is that inevitably there will be some key feature or other hidden "behind" what's shown, thus meaning I have to guess at its dimensions, location, etc. A top-down map fixes this problem.

There's certain situations where having both isometric and top-down maps showing the same thing would be useful - top-down to give spatiality and isometric to show how things fit together vertically - but if you can only do one, top-down every time, please.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

--- show elevation changes by actually putting elevation numbers on the map! Set the entry room as 0' altitude, then anywhere the elevation differs (including other levels of the dungeon!) show the floor's elevation variance from that original zero point.

Cool! I've been doing this for years. I also do it for ceiling heights. I put a line under the number to indicate differences in flooring elevations relative to the overall 0-ft. level, I put a line over the number to indicate a ceiling height.

This information is for me on the Dungeon Map, however it is nice to have these numbers on Battle Maps to (if nothing else) remind ourselves and the other Players that there is a ceiling.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

--- do not show things on the map that can move or be moved; this includes any and all dungeon occupants and most small furniture.

Agreed, but I don't like the chambers to be completely bare either. I like to have some dungeon dressing included in the Dungeon Master facing Dungeon Map where it can impart some of the character of the room. But yes, things that can easily move around like chairs, crates, and barrels might be best left off the map.* Beds, desks, and tables can stay.

There are exceptions though, like a maze-like warehouse full of crates and barrels.

* This advice is not for Dyson Logos and Mike Schley. Their maps are inspirational.

 

[Lanefan]

Agreed, but I don't like the chambers to be completely bare either. I like to have some dungeon dressing included in the Dungeon Master facing Dungeon Map where it can impart some of the character of the room. But yes, things that can easily move around like chairs, crates, and barrels might be best left off the map.* Beds, desks, and tables can stay.

There are exceptions though, like a maze-like warehouse full of crates and barrels.

Sure, fair enough. I'd rather rely on the room write-up to tell me what's where in the room, though, and only reference the map to check how the room interacts with what's around it - where the exits go, etc.

My bigger peeve is maps that show where the occupants are (most 4e modules are awful for this), as if they stand there like statues all day and never move around or take a pee break or go talk to their buddies.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I still use use the white bubble doors on my maps. Does anyone have strong opinions about those?

I don't like it when the doors are hard to see because the artist decided to draw them to scale. This makes then difficult to discern from windows.

I also like the extra room inside a bubble door to communicate information, like a dot for a locked door. I also indicate where the hinge is on each door using this space.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

My bigger peeve is maps that show where the occupants are (most 4e modules are awful for this), as if they stand there like statues all day and never move around or take a pee break or go talk to their buddies.

Yeah, you are preaching to the choir with me on that one. I think indicating the positioning of occupants supports a certain kind of play style. One that Fourth Edition in particular was pushing.

I have to remind myself that my preferred play style is just one of several, or maybe even many.

 

[Hussar]

Again, you have to remember though, for some of us, maps are meant to be played on. They are not meant solely for the DM. Which means locations of NPC starting points (not carved in stone, but, just the likely spots) is really useful. I mean, good grief, most room descriptions include the rough locations of NPC's anyway (there are three orcs sleeping in cots, two orcs playing cards at a table and one orc baking a pie), so visually representing them is great.

4e was good about showing difficult terrain as well. The maps included a little triangle symbol to denote difficult terrain. Fantastic.

Something I REALLY would like to see in adventures is two or three maps that show different alert levels. Most adventures are written from a single perspective and maybe the description tells you where different baddies move once the balloon goes up. Why not represent that on the DM's map. I should be able to look at the DM's map and know virtually everything about that room. How many and what are the occupants. What is the lighting? Are there any difficult terrain or something blocking line of sight? That sort of thing.

One big different about playing VTT is that lighting becomes a HUGE thing. When players literally can only see whatever their character can see it changes play immensely. I notice this in play all the time where the players have to start talking to each other about what they can see and where because LOS is blocking vision or some character's light isn't illuminating something.

 

[Lanefan]

Again, you have to remember though, for some of us, maps are meant to be played on. They are not meant solely for the DM. Which means locations of NPC starting points (not carved in stone, but, just the likely spots) is really useful. I mean, good grief, most room descriptions include the rough locations of NPC's anyway (there are three orcs sleeping in cots, two orcs playing cards at a table and one orc baking a pie), so visually representing them is great.

Indeed, but it's IME easier to adjust room descriptions on the fly than maps.

4e was good about showing difficult terrain as well. The maps included a little triangle symbol to denote difficult terrain. Fantastic.

Yes, all maps shoud do this if terrain is an issue/feature.

Something I REALLY would like to see in adventures is two or three maps that show different alert levels. Most adventures are written from a single perspective and maybe the description tells you where different baddies move once the balloon goes up. Why not represent that on the DM's map. I should be able to look at the DM's map and know virtually everything about that room. How many and what are the occupants. What is the lighting? Are there any difficult terrain or something blocking line of sight? That sort of thing.

Agreed. That said, given the difficulty and-or cost of getting just one map done, I think we're in dreamland hoping for several for the same space.

 

[Hussar]

Indeed, but it's IME easier to adjust room descriptions on the fly than maps.

Yes, all maps shoud do this if terrain is an issue/feature.

Agreed. That said, given the difficulty and-or cost of getting just one map done, I think we're in dreamland hoping for several for the same space.

Space is really the issue. There's just only so much page count. I remember back when Paizo was first doing their AP's in Dungeon and every month they'd put out a pdf of the maps. A web-enhancement map pack would be absolutely perfect for a lot of the AP's. Then again, for the AP's, there's so many maps out there in places like Reddit that it's really an embarrassment of riches.