calem
Tool Gatherer
Posts: 81
|
Post by calem on Sept 1, 2014 17:19:33 GMT
So...there has been a lot of chatter recently about the various pros and cons of different table-management methodologies. Tiles, with and without walls, modular floors and walls, etc etc etc. All of you with whichever style you use are talented at what you do, and the experience in playing at your tables seems like it would involve some serious wow factoring.
Not a single person, as it seems, adores the 2d mapped approach the way I do. I use a mapless system for just about everything. There's nothing on the table for the 75% of the game that happens outside of battle. That being said, I always draw out a room (on my wet erase battle mat when at home, or on a little dry erase sheet I have when travelling like at a coffee shop) for combat scenes.perhaps it has to do with my general lack of prep time, ory grognardian love of old school "imagine it yourself" style of play where I as a DM should be able to paint the bones of the scene in your imaginations well enough that your own mind, as a player, can fill in the rest.
So I frequent this forum for set-piece ideas. Things I can put in a 2d drawing that spice it up. Barrels, wagons, tables, bookcases, pit trap tiles, barricades and fortifications, etc. And you guys are awesome inspiration for all of that.
Here's then point of the thread....where are my map-fu black belts? Who knows how to really spice up a map, provided that it is likely to be drawn on the fly, so it can be put together quickly and without consuming table-time?
Secondly....what set pieces are truly missing from map-fuism? I know doors, tables, bushes & trees, siege weapons etc are great things to put down on the mat, particularly when those thigs can be moved (ballistae have wheels, doors open and close, logs can be thrown by wickedly strong ogres, etc...all of these elements can change the map).
So what do you think?
Map fu tip #1....rubble comes in two sizes...big blocks and little stones. It adds texture to the maps to have pieces that provide cover as well as pieces that are just difficult to walk over.
|
|
|
Post by onethatwas on Sept 1, 2014 18:01:22 GMT
There are plenty of people here who are Mapfu masters...there was a thread about the nuance of building world maps, and I recall someone saying they had installed a whiteboard just for thos reason.
When it comes to drawn maps, there are a few considerations to...well, consider.
1) Scale. If the map is overland or town, then having the map drawn before hand (with extra detail) and copied for hand outs is best. For dungeon maps, drawing it on the go based on a pre-drawn map, and on a white board, mat, or butcher paper works better. I know this seems straight forward and not necessary to mention, but it can help those who often get ahead of tjemselves in their excitement.
2) Detail on a dungeon map. What is too much? Too little? If you want an attractive map, with high detail, you're going to have to draw it beforehand, and to hell with fog of war. Otherwise the pc's will get frustrated with waiting times as you draw it out.
If you desire fog of war and just want a rough sketch, then you can work on your technique to be able to draw out the map in the moment.
A couple detail suggestions for adding interest to maps follow. Note thay the time expenditure for each can vary based on skill.
-start with simple shapes, then redraw over the shape of your rooms & corridors, using a "wobble" with your hand as you draw. This is fast and easy, and creates irregular appearing room edges.
-consider cross hatching in the dead spaces. This adds to the character of the map, isn't particularly hard to do, and clearly delineates where the moveable spaces are, and where the dead spaces are on the map. However, it can be time consuming.
-have a clear and easy to draw template for different terrain types. This can be as easy as drawing water with a blue marker, but waves can also work. Rubble could be dotted spaces. These should be easy to identify and universal for your group.
-background color. A white board is useful, but if you draw it out on a tan coloured mat, it can add instant aesthetic quality, making it appear more as a worn map.
-learn how to draw in changes to the map. If a collapse of a passage occurs, fill that area in with impassable rubble, for instance.
-Have a clear way of representing Traps and puzzles. I recoment a red marker (traps) and a purple marker (puzzles). Determining the appropriate level of detail here is also important.
-use of periphreals. 2.5D or 3D components can be a little jarring, but can also enliven a 2D map. Determine your method for when this is appropriate. also, consider 2D print outs for room features. A printed out lava pool can be slapped onto the map with tape on the back, and you have an instant feature. Same goes for arcane symbols, water, etc. think of how you can make these things work for you, and then do it!
So, hope those simple suggestions are helpful.
|
|
|
map fu +1
Sept 2, 2014 19:07:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by beetlewing on Sept 2, 2014 19:07:17 GMT
An initial time investment, but time saver in the long run could be to use a huge whiteboard as your map, then make some sheet magnet props to slap down during play. The images could be drawn, painted or printed, cut to size and stuck onto sheet magnets. Doors, traps, spell effects, rubble and just about anything else could be done this way. You could just make the stuff that's time consuming to draw, or stuff that you find yourself drawing over and over.
If for example a door is opened and closed repeatedly, simply rotate the magnet, rather than erasing and redrawing over and over. Portal closes? Remove the magnet from the map.
|
|
|
map fu +1
Sept 4, 2014 18:29:43 GMT
via mobile
Post by fayegrimm on Sept 4, 2014 18:29:43 GMT
I've been using a Paizo wet erase grid map while I work on building a modular set of props to make maps with. Just based on player reactions, the biggest addition has been texturing your floors and adding bits and pieces to it like carpets, furs, the wooden boards that make up the tavern floor or whatever. My first rooms always had. A lot of negative space and failed to pull the players in. When I gave them a room with rugs laid out, straw strewn about in the corners, and as few furs around it got everyone more excited and they started using all the environment more (even stuff that had always been there). Just be sure to keep it light enough that it doesn't obstruct the other details of the room.
The other big thing would be to make sure the map can be changed on the fly in case a brazier is tipped over or a door knocked down etc. Its a lot more satisfying for my players when they see the changes on the map after throwing the goblin into the brazier than it is when I just tell them its knocked over.
|
|
|
Post by ashrothedm on Sept 4, 2014 19:58:47 GMT
Nearly 20 years ago, some friends and I got some plexiglass, etched a grid into it, spray painted it, and flipped it over. It became out battle map as a homemade dry erase board. From my perspective, I prefer the aesthetic of the terrain piece, and even back then, crafting pieces was something we fumbled around with because we wanted to spice up the map. Here's what I would recommend, even with a dry-erase map-fu approach: Stencils. Make stencils of rooms and halls, pre-measured, out of cardboard. If you have the stencils ready to go, you can trace out really interesting geometry in a very short amount of time. Some Example Stencils: - Hegagonal or other n-polygonal rooms
- Hallways with niches and other fun shapes in them (like columns in the wall jutting out)
- Evenly spaced columns
- Holes spaced at different widths. Put a dry-erase marker through both holes and drag the cardboard stencil as a guide (like the music note thing used for chalkboards.) You can create (if rotated properly) perfectly spaced hallways in any shape and width.
- Various circles and elipses.
Those are off the top of my head, different dry erase things that I have done. With templates, the speed of laying out complex shapes improves the ability to deliver high quality maps without hindering the session.
|
|
calem
Tool Gatherer
Posts: 81
|
map fu +1
Sept 6, 2014 14:02:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by calem on Sept 6, 2014 14:02:48 GMT
The idea for stencils are fantastic.
I use my wet erase mat at home, dry erase when I travel, mainly because my mat is too big for a coffee shop table.
So....good set pieces, were I to sum up what I have here so far (some of my own thoughts mixed in as well) Rubble Rugs/flooring elements Tables Doors Ive also found that trees and shrubs are useful, the 2d bush markup just doesn't describe light cover the way a 3d version does. However...it makes a travel box harder to manage to have a ton of trees and such....so that sucks.
Mapping elements; Stencils of hallways & standard room sizes. That's an epic tip. Its like having modular tiles, but you only need one of each. Fan friggin tastic. Rubble comes in two sizes....draw big ones, fill in with small ones. Elevation of floors can be described with offset rectangles...draw a 3d box...one square offset from the other, with walls connecting the top & bottom...the same theory applies to floors, just without the vertical bars attaching the two. Walls are solid (hashmarks filling it in)...railings, fences and other elements are hollow. Or reversed to save time, if you have more walls than fences. Whatever, it just helps to make them different from each other somehow, so players understand the difference.
|
|
|
Post by DnDPaladin on Oct 1, 2014 2:39:01 GMT
hmmm... saying you are alone in doing this really doesn'T ring true. i for one mainly use my tiles and furnitures only during battles because thats pretty much the only time we truly need to know whats hapenning on board.
i used to create tokens before that and 2D things to make the stock work. i even almost bought pens for drawing on maps... but in th eend i figured it would just take me longer to draw things then having say, dices and the likes do the stuff i wanted. this is why i ended up crafting furnitures a few months back. because i thought dices were nice and all. but i'd rather see the true face of it instead of imagining it all.
but hey to each its own. if i had gone with drawings, i wouls of stayed pretty basic to stay clear on time.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2014 2:52:18 GMT
Several years ago I toyed with the idea of stamps. I would use pieces of foam shet and etch in lines to get my shapes (a lot like DmScotty's road stamp). I made top views of chairs tables a bookshelf and rugs. I also made a pespective image of a door. We only used them once as I discovered it would take a lot of paper and honestly it didnt look that cool. Maybe someone can carry the torch and expand on this. My problem is that now that my players have experienced 2.5 and 3d elements they dont want anything else (spoiled!)
|
|
|
Post by adamantinedragon on Oct 1, 2014 4:14:47 GMT
I have just about every game mapping option available. And still do, depending on circumstances. In the same game session sometimes.
Here's my "standard" game techniques for mapping.
1. Theater of the mind. I use this a lot for overland travel or any sort of interaction where there is virtually no chance of an encounter, and no real need for detailed maps. 2. A large piece of plexiglas with a 1" grid etched on one side. I use this frequently by laying it over large terrain printouts. I use this when there is some need to keep track of movement, such as when the party is looking for a campsite or coming near a town or reaching some milestone on the map. 3. Several rectangular pieces of posterboard roughly 12" square laminated with plastic that I can draw on with dry or wet erase markers. Sometimes I use these to extend the area of the plexiglas, but more frequently I pre-draw terrain on them and place them down when they are needed. 4. 3D terrain elements, like small hills, trees, obstacles, fences, gates, etc. When I start putting these down, the players realize that things are about to get interesting. Frequently the next words out of my mouth after placing the elements on the table are "OK, roll for initiative." The 3D elements really allow the players to visualize the area, and to utilize the terrain tactically. 5. 3D pre-constructed buildings, bridges, towers, etc. These are almost always associated with boss fights, and when I stand up and turn to my shelves to pull down a Keep, or tower or guard room, they usually say something like "Get ready!". 6. Modular dungeon sets. I have three of these, one of rough fieldstone construction, one of more refined cut stone, mostly used for dwarven tunnels, and finally a set of cavern walls, stalagmites and cave rocks. These are mostly used when the group is going into a dungeon crawl situation. This is what takes up the most time to set up in advance, but it really looks amazing.
Since coming to this forum, I've also constructed and used 2D terrain, and I'm in the end stages of painting a 3D riverboat that will be used in an upcoming swamp campaign.
I love it all. And I think all of it has its place.
|
|
|
Post by Hamsterglue on Feb 3, 2015 20:01:01 GMT
We are currently using a 3'x4' piece of 30guage clear vinyl fabric used for marine upholstery and printed grid paper (this website is awesome for generating printable grids of any size and shape- just some tape and scissors away from hexagonal greatness). Static keeps the whole grid map in place and the vinyl is pretty much indestructible, rolls up and slides into a tube for easy transport, and CHEAP! If you order some just let the vendor know you want it shipped in a tube otherwise it could come creased. My next plan is to make my own graphic underlays and see how well they pair up with the 2.5next tiles im building.
|
|
|
Post by adamantinedragon on Feb 3, 2015 21:18:39 GMT
That is a great tip Hamsterglue. I will have to get some of that stuff.
|
|
|
Post by DnDPaladin on Feb 3, 2015 21:36:20 GMT
the only problem with let the players imagine it is that often they imgine the best scenarios for them and thus the game ends up being skewed up cause one player just hides thinking he can while in reality he cant. or that he think the place is bigger then it sems and moves around the creature with ease while he shouldn't.
exemple... i said to the player that the entrance of the cave was 30 feet large. and that the interior was going down to 20 feet large. they entered and met a ogre guarding the place. the rogue hides. when the battle starts i draw the thing with my tiles. that same rogue said. i thought the corridor was way larger, you said 20 feet large. and i said, yes thats 4 square large. and he said, yeah but its 20 feet it should be larger.
the thing is, 1 inch = 5 feet is not very accurate. and people if you just tell them distances can imagine the best possible scenario for them, reguardless of you describing the place well or not. thats why i preffer to visualise the thing. if they want to know what it looks like i just draw it quickly on a sheet of paper with Xs and Os for different stuff in the room. if a battle breaks out, i simply take on my tiles and put them down there and place the characters.
all that said, this is why i hate theater of the mind play. most often then not, the players and the DM do not even have the same image, reguardless of how the DM describe the place.
|
|
|
Post by onethatwas on Feb 4, 2015 2:56:22 GMT
Theatre of the Mind is really effective if you can account for discrepancies in interpretation and ignore the movement space rules. In that scenario you described, I, as a DM, could envision a rock outcropping in a 20x20 space significant enough to hide in. Having been to cavern locations in real life, it is easily possible based on what rock formations could occur in that space.
But, of course, the DM is in charge of what spatial details exist. No rock formations may be lacking in that space.Also possible.
But if you enforce the selected scale presented by D&D, then that space is quite a bit smaller visually, and elementsto hide in become scarce.
I personally prefer altering the scale of the "grid" (gridless play notwithstanding) to 3ft=1 square because it is a more accurate representation of space. That gives you approximate 7 squares in each direction to visualize features and place on a map.
Getting back to theatre of the mind...what is reasonable?
True story: I described a 20ft by 10ft corridor in a cave. The players could hear the ghouls in the room, but could not see them the party decided to proceed cautiously. Player 1 said, "I am sneaking and hiding." I ask him how he plans to do so, and the player said, "I am crouching near the wall and behind like stalagmites and stuff."
I didn't make any mention of stalagmitrs in the room, but because it added to thr visualization, I agreed, saying yes, there were stalgmites.
Now, spectacularly, said theif did not succeed, despite a really high roll, because he began the sneak, and the ENTIRE party decided to sneak with him. Sneaking 5 or 6 people through that space at the same time is pretty much an impossible task (realistically), so I imposed a -4 for each person who attempted to sneak through at the same time.
The player was pissed. The rest of the party was upset, but when I explained the circumstances, they understood.
Theatre of the mind is alot about enhancing narrative, and that trumps gridded play strategy for that style (IMO).
But for purposes of map making...I do encourage an altered scale. D&D scale tends to make functional maps a little diificult to acheive.
...a good analogy is basically trying to make a detailed and accurate Lego sculpture of the State of Liberty to precise scale, using a Lego man as the basis of scale and assuming he is average human height. You may get some approximation, but not accuracy or significant detail.
D&D map scale is kinda like that. Worse, even.
|
|