Angel Tarragon
Dawn Dragon
I'll be keeping two eyes out.mikeschley said:Keep an eye out.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Tomb of Horrors Map
- Thread starter mikeschley
- Start date
orbitalfreak
Explorer
Map looks good.
As for the poll, I find that all four traits are extremely important. A map that comes across badly artistically can fail to inspire the imagination. If it doesn't look good, then that sets up a psychological dislike for the map (or any piece of art), and thus less chance that I would bother trying to like it enough to study it to see if I would use it in a game. Now, this doesn't mean that it has to be tricked out with jewels, fancy borders, and a perfectly-shaded parchement-replica background. A map that is just a black and white grid, if done cleanly, can be just as useful and inspiring. Take for example, the maps of Phineas Crow on these boards; they are not decked out with lots of artistic or thematic elements, but are spectacular in their ability to be used in a game.
Utility factor is extremely important, as well. Conforming to a 5- or 10-foot grid may not be a natural, organic, expected way for a building to be constructed, but this isn't the real world. It's Dungeons & Dragons, a game that involves a lot of tactical combat in the age-old heritage of "killing stuff and taking the loot." Fudging reality a few feet here and there is almost always perfectly acceptable in order to make the map more useful. Combat-grid portability plays a role here, too. If there's a chance that combat, another type of encounter, or anything else where tactical movement may come into play exists, then being able to pinpoint your location becomes extremely important (to those of us who use minatures and battlegrids, that is).
Level of detail depends on what's being described. If a feature is important (columns, the evil altar, key pieces of scenerey or props), it should be placed on the map. Maps that are an overview (like the one linked above) don't necessarily need every tapestry, candelabra, and soot-mark painstakingly detailed; showing the features of interest (evil face, fire-trap, the pews [which are of tactical importance due to cover and movement restrictions]) is all the detail necessary. If you were instead mapping a house that is 20'x40', then more detail would be called for: furniture, storage containers, cabinets and shelves, and more of the minutae that may be necessary to keep track of in such a small location.
All of this is from a DM's perspective. Player handouts and props need not have such a utility-factor. If the characters encounter a treasure map, and you give the players a copy of it, then a simple charcoal-on-parchment sketch would suffice; the characters wouldn't be interested in a battle-grid. In this case, only artistry matters in the options above. Make it look like it was created. Adventurer's map? Should be sketchy, maybe drawn in parts with arrows linking areas that would extend off the edge of the page. A professionally-drawn strategic map used in a warroom should have lots of detail about terrain, elevation, and land- and water-based transit routes.
Short version:
DM's: Utility
PC's: Shiny
I love the ToH map, by the way. The only way it could be better is if it had a bare-bones b/w version to accompany it to make it easier on ink consumption.
As for the poll, I find that all four traits are extremely important. A map that comes across badly artistically can fail to inspire the imagination. If it doesn't look good, then that sets up a psychological dislike for the map (or any piece of art), and thus less chance that I would bother trying to like it enough to study it to see if I would use it in a game. Now, this doesn't mean that it has to be tricked out with jewels, fancy borders, and a perfectly-shaded parchement-replica background. A map that is just a black and white grid, if done cleanly, can be just as useful and inspiring. Take for example, the maps of Phineas Crow on these boards; they are not decked out with lots of artistic or thematic elements, but are spectacular in their ability to be used in a game.
Utility factor is extremely important, as well. Conforming to a 5- or 10-foot grid may not be a natural, organic, expected way for a building to be constructed, but this isn't the real world. It's Dungeons & Dragons, a game that involves a lot of tactical combat in the age-old heritage of "killing stuff and taking the loot." Fudging reality a few feet here and there is almost always perfectly acceptable in order to make the map more useful. Combat-grid portability plays a role here, too. If there's a chance that combat, another type of encounter, or anything else where tactical movement may come into play exists, then being able to pinpoint your location becomes extremely important (to those of us who use minatures and battlegrids, that is).
Level of detail depends on what's being described. If a feature is important (columns, the evil altar, key pieces of scenerey or props), it should be placed on the map. Maps that are an overview (like the one linked above) don't necessarily need every tapestry, candelabra, and soot-mark painstakingly detailed; showing the features of interest (evil face, fire-trap, the pews [which are of tactical importance due to cover and movement restrictions]) is all the detail necessary. If you were instead mapping a house that is 20'x40', then more detail would be called for: furniture, storage containers, cabinets and shelves, and more of the minutae that may be necessary to keep track of in such a small location.
All of this is from a DM's perspective. Player handouts and props need not have such a utility-factor. If the characters encounter a treasure map, and you give the players a copy of it, then a simple charcoal-on-parchment sketch would suffice; the characters wouldn't be interested in a battle-grid. In this case, only artistry matters in the options above. Make it look like it was created. Adventurer's map? Should be sketchy, maybe drawn in parts with arrows linking areas that would extend off the edge of the page. A professionally-drawn strategic map used in a warroom should have lots of detail about terrain, elevation, and land- and water-based transit routes.
Short version:
DM's: Utility
PC's: Shiny
I love the ToH map, by the way. The only way it could be better is if it had a bare-bones b/w version to accompany it to make it easier on ink consumption.
Arnwyn
First Post
I really like that ToH map - it very much meets the first three criteria, which are the ones that I find most important. (Though I'd expect mind natural rock walls that don't fit "perfectly" onto a grid - but I do expect that from straight walls, for the reasons orbitalfreak notes, above.)
I'm leery about the 4th criteria (simplicity or ease of transfer to battle map proportions) as I think it might unnecessarily limit the original map itself (how big is a "battle map"? How limiting would the location sizes be? Does this exclude interesting features like canyons and bridges?).
I'm leery about the 4th criteria (simplicity or ease of transfer to battle map proportions) as I think it might unnecessarily limit the original map itself (how big is a "battle map"? How limiting would the location sizes be? Does this exclude interesting features like canyons and bridges?).
Samuel Leming
First Post
What do I appreciate most in a map?
That it conveys the information that I need. None of the options given really expressed that, so I didn't vote.
As others have said, that's a really nice map.
Sam
That it conveys the information that I need. None of the options given really expressed that, so I didn't vote.
As others have said, that's a really nice map.
Sam
Dog Moon
Adventurer
I voted for artisticness and gridness. I like my maps to look nice, but I don't necessarily need a lot of interior decorating, only important features like thrones, pillars, etc, basically large things. The only reason I didn't vote for it was because I feel the first two are more important. If a map doesn't look nice, I don't like using it. Maybe I'm silly that way, I don't know, but I feel more comfortable using a nice looking map.
As for gridness, it just makes it easy to create on the mat when drawing out the room for the battle. Although not as realistic, I hate drawing anything which isn't effectively a squarish room consisting of two numbers both divisible by 5. It's neat to have a cool area on your map for a battle, but it's difficult to copy it exactly and have the players see what you want them to see. The caverns on my graph paper and the mat never look the same, but the 10x10 rooms do. It's also why I dislike strangely shaped room, like hexagons to weirdly shaped triangles [though in all seriousness, anyone who shapes a room in a strange triangle shape is just weird, IMO].
If you do have lots of details within the map, btw, it's important to have a key, even if some of the objects are fairly obvious [bed with pillows, for example] just to prevent any confusion.
P.S. It IS a good map.
As for gridness, it just makes it easy to create on the mat when drawing out the room for the battle. Although not as realistic, I hate drawing anything which isn't effectively a squarish room consisting of two numbers both divisible by 5. It's neat to have a cool area on your map for a battle, but it's difficult to copy it exactly and have the players see what you want them to see. The caverns on my graph paper and the mat never look the same, but the 10x10 rooms do. It's also why I dislike strangely shaped room, like hexagons to weirdly shaped triangles [though in all seriousness, anyone who shapes a room in a strange triangle shape is just weird, IMO].
If you do have lots of details within the map, btw, it's important to have a key, even if some of the objects are fairly obvious [bed with pillows, for example] just to prevent any confusion.
P.S. It IS a good map.
mikeschley
First Post
New White Plume Mountain Map
For anyone that's interested, here's a thread about the next map in the series of revamped D&D adventures. Tomb of Horrors was the first one I worked on, White Plume Mountain is my second, and more are to come.
White Plume Mountain Thread
For anyone that's interested, here's a thread about the next map in the series of revamped D&D adventures. Tomb of Horrors was the first one I worked on, White Plume Mountain is my second, and more are to come.
White Plume Mountain Thread
Cthulhu's Librarian
First Post
mikeschley said:Tomb of Horrors was the first one I worked on, White Plume Mountain is my second, and more are to come.
Any hints on whats to come? Please? I'll buy you a beer next GenCon...
mikeschley
First Post
Similar Threads
