How important are pretty maps?

[KB9JMQ]

Well they don't have to be pretty but they do need to be clean and easy on the eyes.
I cannot stand a map that is overly busy or has so much crammed into you lose focus.

I have made several adventures for my group by starting out with nothing but a great map. When I see one I begin thinking "this layout would be great for this..." and I off and running.
The map is the most important thing. Just make sure it is clean and makes sense.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

In a module, I go for functionality over the aesthetics. I want it to be clean and easy to use.

That being said, when it comes to settings, I'm a complete sucker for a big beautiful map.

 

[Umbran]

I rank utilty far above aesthetics in maps. Pretty is nice, but I'd rather it be plain and useful than have it be nice to look at but hard to use.

Those who say that pretty is usually also useful have perhaps not spent much time looking at really old maps, created before accurate survey techniques. Gorgeous in terms of artwork, but as a map they were so inaccurate as to be nigh useless, in modern the sense we use them today.

I've seen a great many folks try to pretty up a map, and thereby eliminate, obscure, or clutter the information the map needs to convey. That just doesn't fly with me.

 

[Zendragon]

I want a useful map. Looking good is important and can be useful at the same time. If a room has a bed in it, the map should show that somehow.

 

[Davelozzi]

Function over form. I love a pretty map, but it has to be able to get the job done. Jaws & Eric are right, Chris West is the master at this; his maps are beautiful while remaining completely functional.

Rob Lazzaretti's maps on the other hands are aesthetically attractive but often lacking in functionality. He's made definite improvements over the days when his "maps" were really just illustrations, but even now-a-days I often find that his maps often miss important details and/or differ from the text descriptions in significant ways.

 

[Alnag]

Rob Lazzaretti's maps on the other hands are aesthetically attractive but often lacking in functionality.

Honestly, I hate Lazzaretti... if he makes the map, it is almost always not for me. I will skip that adventure or something because of that. Does that explain the importance of pretty map?

 

[tzor]

A DMs map should be functional. Nice looking, of course but not excesively so. After all a DM map is something that is not shared with the players because it has too much info on it.

A map for the players as a handout must be great looking. It needs to inspire them all in some manner. Note that this doesn't aways mean detailed with finery; a hand drawn map from a pirate is not going to have the same level of finery as that from the local scribner, but you can get the feeling in other ways, including ways to make the map look old and authentic.

 

[jgbrowning]

How important are pretty maps in an adventure module? Is it more important that they look good, or are easy to use, or are both equally important?

Thanks for your input!

IMO, if you have to make a choice, choose usablity over pretty. But it's better to not have to make that choice.

joe b.

 

[JustinA]

How important are pretty maps in an adventure module? Is it more important that they look good, or are easy to use, or are both equally important?

Easy to use.

Your map may be gorgeous and evocative of the setting... but my players are never going to see it. All they're going to see are my scribblings on the battlemat.

Now, on the other hand, if you give the map to me in some form that I can show it to my players (as a handout or a battlemap), then the aesthetic becomes a meaningful part of the equation. (More specifically I'm talking about a version of the map -- I still want my DM copy with all the useful notation on it.)

Good example of aesthetic maps that bring utility to the game session: Ptolus.

Bad example: Anything by WotC. Gorgeous maps... absolutely useless. You want to give me a meaningful web enhancement? Give me those maps without the DM notation.