Sneak Peek At Ghosts of Saltmarsh Maps

Here's a sneak peek at some of the maps to be found in the upcoming D&D Ghosts of Saltmarsh, courtesy of WotC's Twitch stream.

​

And Dyson Logos, one of the cartographers for the book, has shared some of his work which will be appearing!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I very much doubt their will be any boxed text descriptions in town referring to compass points. Both for the reason I mention - normal people don't talk in terms of compass directions - and the reason you mention - the adventure doesn't happen in the town in any case.

 

[smbakeresq]

I played this when it first came out 35 years ago, all three modules. A few notes:

1. It was extremely popular due to being very “believable” if you know what a mean.

2. If you played well you get a ship, a pseudo-dragon, and a aquatic elf friend, what more could you want.

3. The locations all fit perfectly with the theme, as opposed to a standard location shoehorned in.

4. Water - it’s hard to have a boring adventure when water is involved. DMs take your players under water, over water or even into frozen water (extreme cold areas,) environments make great adventures.

5. Plot “twists.” Everyone knows that the sleepy village is crooked, it’s a standard idea and the adventure is titles “The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh.” That’s ok because the series delivered the twists in the right way.


I can’t emphasize how big the ship was when we got it in the original adventure, all we did was sail that thing all over Greyhawk or get it out of trouble when we sent it out on trading missions while we were adventuring inland. Must have had 50+ crew members die, but somehow the Captain and First Mate always survived

By the time we got through with Lolth the boat was all patches but we still had it. A group member built a wooden ship model to use with lead minis, (yes that’s toxic lead minis we used back then.)

 

[Parmandur]

Heh. Missing the point. Every single boxed text description in the town will be oriented with that map. Presuming there is. Which means that I'll have to rewrite all of that as well.

Look, sure, it's not the end of the world. It really isn't. But, it's such a pointless thing to do. That map is oriented north to the top. There is no reason for that map to to be that shape and not be oriented that way. The only reason the artist did this was to be "artsy". It's not. It's a pointlessly annoying thing to do that makes the product harder to use.

Looking at the map, the issue seems to be the size of the town, which is on a Southern coast, and the desire to have a single page map. I've seen similar deviations from North on top in Rand McNally atlas books to use page space efficiently.

 

[Istbor]

Looks good. Like most Published Adventures, I have never heard nor played them. So this should be all new, fresh, and exciting.

(Played 100% homebrew since the early Aughts)

 

[oreofox]

It's absolutely fine for me like that (although I would also want a player map without numbers). If you find it difficult relocate it to an east coast and ignore the rose.

If you wanted to locate it on a west coast (e.g. Sword Coast) you could rote it 180 degrees or reflect it (easy enough to do on a computer).

I can read sideways, backwards or upside down - probably because I'm dyslexic, but assuming there is an unlabelled player map you can always write on the key in the orientation of your choice.

I am sure Mr Schley (I am pretty sure he did the map, as it looks like his map style) will have a non-numbered version for sale for a few US dollars on his website. Like the other adventures he has made maps for. However, rotating the map 90 degrees clockwise to make North at the top, will make the "Saltmarsh" and "Kingfisher River" have screwed up orientation. Unless neither are included on that particular map

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I am sure Mr Schley (I am pretty sure he did the map, as it looks like his map style) will have a non-numbered version for sale for a few US dollars on his website. Like the other adventures he has made maps for. However, rotating the map 90 degrees clockwise to make North at the top, will make the "Saltmarsh" and "Kingfisher River" have screwed up orientation. Unless neither are included on that particular map

This version is "setting agnostic", so it could be any river.

 

[Hussar]

I think that [MENTION=6776240]oreofox[/MENTION] is presuming that there will be a larger area map beyond the immediate environs of Saltmarsh. Not a terribly unreasonable assumption.

And, as far as exceptions go, such as in an atlas, I'd point out that those are real places where you kinda have to have the map a certain way, because it reflects reality.

We're talking about a fictional place that has NO canon related to it to force any particularly orientation whatsoever. Even the 3e map is buried in a late era 3e book that very few 5e gamers would have ever seen. It's not like they had to contradict anything to orient the map properly.

And whoever did the 3e version in the DMG 2 was wrong when they did that map as well. Again, there was NO REASON to orient the map that way. None. No practical concerns, no reality, no canon to contradict. It was done 100% to be "artsy" and different just for the sake of being different.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Then rotate the large scale map too. I think what you are failing to grasp is for most people rotating/reorentating a map is a trivial task. I'm quite happy to accept that there are some people who may find it difficult. Everyone has different abilities.

 

[Hussar]

Then rotate the large scale map too. I think what you are failing to grasp is for most people rotating/reorentating a map is a trivial task. I'm quite happy to accept that there are some people who may find it difficult. Everyone has different abilities.

Yup, you're right. Having to turn the book isn't that difficult.

What you are failing to grasp is that descriptions in the module will, very often, be oriented around cardinal points. Read a module. You can see many examples of it. So, simply rotating the compass rose isn't quite as simple as you say, since, it has issues that also affect other parts of the module.

But, again, the point you are failing to grasp here, and I'm beginning to feel like I'm simply being trolled, is that there is no reason, none whatsoever, to do this in the first place. None. In the face of overwhelming standards, the artist, for whatever reason, decided to ignore convention. And for what? There's no difference. There's no reality that needs to be described. it's a completely fictional place that has never, not once, ever been mapped or described before.

All these justifications like trying to fit a map into a space fall apart when you realize that none of them apply. This was a never described, fictional place. It doesn't matter if it's on the south shore or an east shore. Nothing changes by following convention, other than making the map easier to use. And since this is a game product, ease of use should be one of the most important criteria.

IOW, what is the justification for this? Why have north to the left? Give me a reason why THIS MAP, not other maps, not maps in an atlas of a real place, not geological maps, THIS MAP, ignores centuries of standards understood by people all over the world.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yup, you're right. Having to turn the book isn't that difficult.

I don't need to physically turn the book. I can read sideways/turn it in my head. I don't think I'm unusual in that.

What you are failing to grasp is that descriptions in the module will, very often, be oriented around cardinal points. Read a module.

Just had a quick flip through ToA and TFTYP. Found exactly one mention of north in a text box.

But, again, the point you are failing to grasp here, and I'm beginning to feel like I'm simply being trolled, is that there is no reason, none whatsoever, to do this in the first place. None. In the face of overwhelming standards, the artist, for whatever reason, decided to ignore convention. And for what? There's no difference. There's no reality that needs to be described. it's a completely fictional place that has never, not once, ever been mapped or described before.

Sure there is - to fit it on the page. You might not consider that a very strong reason, but to the artist, who I assume like me can easily rotate it in their mind, and is perhaps unaware that some people might find it difficult, there is no strong reason not to.

IOW, what is the justification for this? Why have north to the left? Give me a reason why THIS MAP, not other maps, not maps in an atlas of a real place, not geological maps, THIS MAP, ignores centuries of standards understood by people all over the world.

A reason? Perhaps, as you suggest, compass points are mentioned in the description boxes for the house in U1* (I don't remember, it is a long time since I read it). The space allocated for the town map in the design of the book was one A4 page. Such things are not easy or cheep to change. Perhaps it originally was intended to be a half page map, but the design of the book was changed later. Perhaps it was done to align it better with the Greyhawk map where it was originally located. The thing is, it doesn't need to be a good, strong reason if the book designers aren't aware that some people might find it difficult.



*Number 4 on the map.