Hand Drawn or Computer Maps

[Raven Crowking]

Okay, here's the question: when purchasing a module, would you rather have hand-drawn or computer generated maps?

Thanks in advance,

RC

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I would go for Computer-generated maps that look hand-drawn

AR

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Both. Maps that the characters have access to should look hand drawn, and in an appropriate state of repair.

Maps for the DM should be computer drawn for clarity.

The Auld Grump

 

[Turjan]

Both. Maps that the characters have access to should look hand drawn, and in an appropriate state of repair.

Maps for the DM should be computer drawn for clarity.

This is how I also like the maps, with a small precaution: I have seen hand drawn maps in modules that looked far more professional and clear than some computer generated ones. Obviously, it's a matter of skills .

 

[Romnipotent]

Both. Maps that the characters have access to should look hand drawn, and in an appropriate state of repair.

Maps for the DM should be computer drawn for clarity.

The Auld Grump

exactly... although I've always wanted a multi layered transparency (or multiple maps) showing all those things you see in other atlas' like socio/political things, population density and the like. Maybe Im crazy

 

[trancejeremy]

Some computer generated ones look really good. I think some of the Necomancer Games stuff are done that way.

OTOH, many are just done rather crudely in Campaign Cartographer 2. Every single building is exactly the same. And there's very little detail, just basically a house shape with 1 or 2 lines for a roof. And the pixelation is not quite early 1980s dot matrix printer, but close.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I was thinking on exactly this topic the other day funnily enough. I suppose I just can't go past Todd Gamble's stuff and those of that style. However, there is the "Tournament Map" in Dragon 299 p45. I think by Arnie Swekel that really stands out for me in terms of hand drawn maps - although I'm sure it might have had a little photoshop goodness applied to it.
There's something about it that clearly captures the essence of a jousting and tournament area.

For purchasing a module, I like maps that are a little bigger than normal. The Banewarrens cartography by Robert Lee is an excellent example of clear, descriptive maps of good size and utility minus unnecessary clutter. They don't quite have the "prettiness" of Todd Gamble's but are excellent never the less.

A counterpoint to this would be the Kingdoms of Kalamar module "The Root of all Evil". While the cartography of Bob Burke and Craig Zipse is excellent, its smaller size makes it a little more difficult to use on the run upon a battle map, particularly some of the maps which have extra detail and clutter - the eight floor tower at the back for example.

On the whole though with the odd exception, I think computer graphics are the best - most hand drawn stuff has had some level of photoshopping anyway.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Orius]

Doesn't matter, a long as the map is easy to use in the game.

 

[IronWolf]

I voted no preference. As at least one other has mentioned I just want a map that is easily read by the DM.

 

[nopantsyet]

Prefer any map that looks good. That pretty much excludes ever map I've ever created.