Requiring Players To Draw The Dungeon Map!

[Raven Crowking]

What's your take on a PC with a supra-genius Intelligence and/or a Survival skill modifier (which incidentally includes Intuit Direction, in 3.5) of +20 or so? Could not such a character figure out where he's going, how many turns the party took down x or y corridor, the rough dimensions of a room, and so on?

Quite possibly. Of course, D&D no longer has "supra-genius" Intelligence.

I highly recommend using a line map instead of a full-on 2D drawing.

That's the method I tend to use as a PC, when I map. I also enjoy giving out the occasional line-drawing map that isn't necessarily obvious. There are many ways to map, and so long as some form of representation exists, someone is liable to attempt to use it. For example, a simple map of "LRRLLSRR" could indicate the series of turns needed to go somewhere. The PC who figured out what the "map" means could also realize that there must be a secret door where one of the necessary options doesn't appear to exist.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I've always hated [player] mapping as a DM; I've had many players who insist upon it, and it's driven me crazy having to sit around correcting their drawing and helping them sort out matters based on my dictation...

For those DMs who do use mapping: I highly recommend using a line map instead of a full-on 2D drawing. It's nice and fast, players can simply notate the corridor's dimensions next to the line they draw, and the same "challenge" of exploring is there.

Ditto and ditto. Especially for maps that don't go in straight lines. Can you imagine trying to make an accurate map of the Caves of Chaos based on someone describing it to you? I'd tear my hair out. I'd also be very tempted to kill any GM who said "Ha ha! That map you've been drawing for the last two hours is all wrong. You were under the effect of a Maze spell."

Being required to map would be doubly aggravating since I know that I (personally, not necessarily a given PC) would never get lost in such a setting. As an Eagle Scout of no particular skill, I'd rate my own ranks in Survival (that's always a fun game, isn't it?) around +2 or +3, and that's more than sufficient to never get lost in a setting where every tree and rocky outcropping is subtly different from every other. It's just a question of paying attention.

I quoted the section about "line mapping" because that actually can be useful. In fact, in a cave system / dungeon regular maps are pretty stupid, since it's not like going overland when you can be off by 15 degrees for a 1/4 mile - in a cave you can only go forwards or back, left or right. Two circles (one for the orc den, the other for the goblin menance) connected by a line that says "Tunnel, usually 20' wide, narrows to 3-5' at marked points; 1/2 mile" is more than sufficient.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Challenges still have to be fun. If the players don't find pleasure in the act of overcoming a specific kind of challenge, then it's got no place in that game.

Or maybe once they try it and get through it, they will appreciate the challenge and derive pleasure from developing that skill.

If the players don't enjoy the kind of activity that may require mapping for navigation, they have no business stepping foot inside a dungeon.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Quite possibly. Of course, D&D no longer has "supra-genius" Intelligence.

I know what you meant, but I think anyone with a 24 Int can be fairly described as either "a Super-Genius" or "that dude who makes Stephen Hawking look dumb."

 

[Irda Ranger]

If the players don't enjoy the kind of activity that may require mapping for navigation, they have no business stepping foot inside a dungeon.

Considering how many different ways there are to solve this problem, I am really glad I don't play in your group. I'm a big fan of dungeons, but I'm not a fan of Orthodoxy.

 

[Gentlegamer]

To all the "I require mapping" DMs:

I don't require mapping (but recognize that it is a handy tool that skilled players will make use of), but I will reply:

What's your take on a PC with a supra-genius Intelligence and/or a Survival skill modifier (which incidentally includes Intuit Direction, in 3.5) of +20 or so? Could not such a character figure out where he's going, how many turns the party took down x or y corridor, the rough dimensions of a room, and so on?

I will give "extra" info (such as more exact dimensions, angles, grades in slopes, etc.) and additional reminders of certain info (number of turns). This is to supplement the player's own mapping and notes (whatever form that takes). I would not allow such stats to act as a "saving throw vs. mapping." Similarly, I do not allow high Intelliegence to act as a "saving throw vs. puzzle."

 

[Raven Crowking]

I know what you meant, but I think anyone with a 24 Int can be fairly described as either "a Super-Genius" or "that dude who makes Stephen Hawking look dumb."

Depends upon what level Stephen is. He clearly convinced the DM to allow him to Point Buy, and bought heavily into Intelligence, and has improved his Intelligence thereafter at every four levels. It is quite possible that Stephen has much more than a 24 Intelligence in D&D terms. You know how some DM's pet NPCs get special treatment.....

RC


EDIT: We need to remember that 18 Int used to represent the highest intelligence that a human being could have through natural means. In 3e, what exactly is the highest stat a human can have through natural means?

 

[Gentlegamer]

Considering how many different ways there are to solve this problem, I am really glad I don't play in your group. I'm a big fan of dungeons, but I'm not a fan of Orthodoxy.

There's no "orthodoxy" involved here. Part of the game experience of dungeoneering is navigating the tunnels, caves, chambers, etc. Mapping aids in this navigation. The player who wishes to explore that kind of environment should not balk at the prospect of drawing his own maps as such an aid. If that kind of activity is not of the player's preference, there are other adventure locales (wilderness, city, simple dungeons) available. To me, that is like a player participating in other aspects of the game to refuse to take notes (of what certain NPCs have said, clues, etc.). It's really part and parcel of the game and its play experience.

 

[hawkman]

EDIT: We need to remember that 18 Int used to represent the highest intelligence that a human being could have through natural means. In 3e, what exactly is the highest stat a human can have through natural means?

To jump on the tangent wagon, I'd go with 23 using 3.5 Core Rules - start with an 18 and the 5 ability point increases (arbitrarily capping levels at 20 as I can't remember the bit about Epic Ability Score progression, if any, in the DMG)

 

[Raven Crowking]

To jump on the tangent wagon, I'd go with 23 using 3.5 Core Rules - start with an 18 and the 5 ability point increases (arbitrarily capping levels at 20 as I can't remember the bit about Epic Ability Score progression, if any, in the DMG)

Ability Increases

Upon gaining any level divisible by four, a character increases one of his or her ability scores by 1 point. The player chooses which ability score to improve. For multiclass characters, feats and ability increases are gained according to character level, not class level.

Although most of the tables only show information up to a certain level (often 30th), that level is by no means the limit of a character’s advancement. It can be generally assumed that any patterns on a particular table continue infinitely.​

So, one has to wonder why we cut this off at 20th level. It might well be reasonable to assume that anyone such as Stephen Hawking is, in fact, an Epic level Expert. Perhaps Mr. Hawking is, in D&D terms, 40th level. The problem, again, is that 3e (unlike earlier editions) doesn't proceed from an established baseline of human achievement.

Where Strength is concerned, we are given a very good idea exactly what a given Strength score means. With other ability scores, not so much.

RC