D&D 5E Showing maps to exploring players, yer or no?

[Fabio Andrea Rossi]

Fine EnWorld folks,


Once again I ask for your advice. I’m thinking of setting up a sandbox campaign in which “exploration” will play a large role. I’d like to use one of the many very well done fantasy maps up there (any suggestion is appreciated, by the way. I’m looking for a self-enclosed setting like a large solitary vale, an island, a mountain walled continent…) and I was wondering whether to give to the players in advance some version of the map they will need to adventure it.


Basically: “full cover, half cover of plain sight”? The pros and cons I see:


-Giving the players’ a version of the map perhaps not complete but with most of it plain and visible would be visually nice and give the aspect of “what’s that cave up there doing?”. I’m thinking something like an old adventurer map, a Duke heirloom parchment or something like that, with some scribbled notes to add some mystery to it. Also, I would have all of the work done as many of these exist already done. Finally, it makes sense to me not having to describe on each hex what they also see on nearby hexes. I never understood how to do this. I mean: you are in an hex and the adjacent one has a high peak. You should see it from 6 or so miles so players should be able to draw it. But, how do they know what’s on the mountain? They will need to “go to that hex” unless I plant lots of hints which make sense even at some miles distance. And, how they mark which hex they did explore and which ones they just saw from adjacent hexes? Plains and similar should also have longer sight distances. How this is done practically?


-Giving nothing. This would of course give much more value when they found up that mountain cave as they did really found it out by themselves. But…visually they start with a blank sheet, much less atmospheric that the “old map” thing above. Also, the “adjacent hex” thing is there.


-Giving something but not all: some form of high level description or depiction of the map and that’s it. This is perhaps the best option but I guess if the pain of having to remap everything is worth the difference in exploration with option A. Also, I did not find from my (limited) research such already done maps on the market, do they even exist?




As usually, thanks for your help!

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

I'd go with a hand drawn style map wi th little hills drawn on for hills, etc that reflects what they know of the world. Certainly not.a cartographic map, there wouldn't be an ordnance survey around! Somethingvlike themaps in the Sorcery! books By Steve Jackson.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

https://fightingfantasyproject.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/s1-002.png

 

[ExploderWizard]

I would say that it depends on the type of campaign you want to run and what type of exploration experience you want to have.

The less info the players have, the more mysterious the area will be. If you want to run a wilderness that no civilized men have explored and lived to tell the tale, then where would a map have come from? Then there is the semi-known locale such as the classic Isle of Dread. Here the area is known to exist but is largely unexplored. The players may have a map of what is visible around the rim of the island from the sea, but the interior is a complete mystery.

Then there is the known area that largely mapped out and is reasonably well known, but there may be not so well known places of interest marked on the map. Thus the players have a general lay of the land but may still encounter surprises. A cave might be shown on the map, but the bandit gang using it as a hideout won't be. This type of player map is very useful for beginning campaigns where there are multiple areas of interest within reasonable distance of a home base.

 

[iserith]

I'd recommend giving the players a rough map that shows a general overview of the terrain (jungle in this area, mountains in this area, etc.) and the major points of interest that you will prep ahead of time (dungeons, lairs, etc.). This map is a real thing in the characters' possession. It's important and valuable. By having it, they get some kind of bonus to avoid becoming lost (say, advantage on Survival checks or Perception checks to avoid surprise in the "Thar be lizard folk" section of the island). NPCs in the game want this map and will try to steal it. It's always at risk of being washed away in the river, burned to cinders in the lava flow, or lost in a gorge. Threaten the hell out of it.

On the hex map, the PCs should be able to see into all adjacent hexes to get an idea of the terrain. In some cases (such as mountains), they can see those hexes at greater remove. Being able to see the adjacent hexes creates a meaningful decision point. Fill in the hexes as the characters move through the terrain. Offer incentive, such as XP, for fully exploring a hex (however it is you define "fully explored"). Hide additional points of interest around the map. Offer XP for finding these as well.

 

[Galladrick]

More information is vital in a sandbox game. I wouldn't even be above giving the players the difficulty (generally) of areas on said map.

In a sandbox, while there is more freedom, this means nothing if there aren't really any choices to be made... there's only one way out of the forest, etc. Knowing that certain places are a certain way is no guarantee whatsoever that they are actually that way, but it's nice to be able to plan in a sandbox, because that is more a part of the style than a narrative driven game (I think).

Example: Four characters have set up an HQ in an abandoned bandit cave in the Lands of Light. They've learned there are bounties on all sort of skins in the area offered by a baron. The most expensive are in the yeti in the mountains and the crocs in the swamp. If they decide to enter the Duke's Swamp in order to find crocodile skins, it is entirely possible the entire area has been flooded and destroyed, with perhaps even an undersea nation moved into the flooded swamp. This is a bait and switch, however, and in my opinion, sandbox style games depend on trust. The players MUST be given all information that they might conceivably have in order decide how to go forward. This relationship may well REQUIRE the DM to reveal the setup of the lands at the beginning, even if only in a general way, so that the players don't think you are going to jump them with a GOTCHA choice right at the start. This isn't fun for the players, in my experience, unless it is providing a story element that begs to be resolved (say the swamp flooded because of a magical experiment gone awry, and the wizard responsible is somewhere under the waves, shifting the sandbox into narrative mode: save or recover the wizard, neutralize his experiment either by destroying or deactivating it)

In a more formally structured game (or even a less formally but none-the-less structured game), I think a fog of war is justified at minimum. Beyond this, I like to give players the benefit of the doubt with their character's knowledge of the game world. If they are playing more scholarly types, perhaps revealing more info to them or letting them know that they are familiar with said material even if it's not immediately relevant.

 

[david.ballway]

Pathfinder did this with kingmaker.

 

[Sunseeker]

Really depends on the state of the civilization and how long the lands have been "civilized". More developed civilizations and longer-standing nations are going to have more accurate maps. Less developed and newer kingdoms will not.


When I make maps for my games I make 3 maps:
1: the really detailed "cheat map" for me, it has all the locations and stuff set out on it.
2: the generally-accurate map. It has major landmarks on it, it might have one or two "secrets" marked on it in some manner, but it's usually a good overview of the land.
3: the "cheap" map. It lacks all but a few major landmarks, random things of no value at all might be on it, it's likely covered in sponsored ads from the local market. This is that 1cp map that you thought you were getting a "good deal" on.

 

[fewilcox]

The free HackMaster Basic demo module "White Palette, Ivory Horns" includes two versions of the area map. On is for the GM and shows where everything of interest is. The second is provided to the PCs an NPC and is marked only with the spot where his caravan got jumped by bandits. It has worked out very well every time I've demoed the game.

As a GM I find it a pain having to constantly remind players where they are relative to everything else, so giving them at least a basic map benefits me. Even if it's just pencil lines with Xes marking key towns and other locations, it still makes my life much easier. Of course, since my current HackMaster 5e campaign is also an experiment in cooperative world building, it's pretty easy for the players to remember where everything is since they decided to put it there.

 

[S'mon]

In my new Karameikos sandbox I show them the 8 miles/hex nation map, but the actual adventuring takes place on a 0.5 mile per square map, an area 23 miles east-west and about 15 miles north-south, and I'm not showing them that map, not even the player version in the book (Chaotic Caves). I did give the most experienced player some paper & suggested he draw his own map.