|
Post by AnarchyDice on Jan 9, 2016 18:02:18 GMT
I'm working on a new style of dungeon tiles for my game. My old set are based on DM Scotty's original style of cardboard floors and walls with door slots cut into the walls. I've gotten a bit tired on not being able to customize my dungeons as much as I'd like but I don't want to go fully modular 2x2 tiles as I like being able to drop a whole room on the table at a time. Here's what I've cooked up to try and find a middle ground between the two. For now, I'm calling them roomscapes as a sort of play off of Scotty's Tilescapes, but I'm not set on the name and welcome any creative thinkers. I have more pictures up on my blog post, here. -Double layer cardboard (perpendicularly corrugation for strength). Cut up in increments of 1 + 7/16″ to fit 1″ plus two walls. -3/16″ Wide foam-core walls carved up with a ballpoint pen to make a brick pattern. -Construction paper banding around the whole exterior, adding the extra 1/32″ on each side, to hide the corrugation & strengthen the foamcore. -Doors & passages are made from plasticard scored and bent into a ‘clip’ to fit around the 7/16″ wide double walls. -My rooms have a textured wallpaper floor, copying the idea from TheGrinningSkull. This isn’t necessary but looks pretty cool. I got a bunch of samples off amazon to try before I splurge to get a roll of one or two of them that will last me the rest of my life. Roomscape Pro’s:
-DM can put add a whole room with one tile. -Doors can be applied at any point between rooms. -The modular pattern of rooms ensures that they can always fit together. -Wall mounted items can be clipped on in the same manner as doors, allowing windows, sconces, fountains, etc. Roomscape Con’s:
-It suffers in its modularity. Interior walls can offset this, but this system cannot accomdate floor changes like a 2x2 system or drawn maps can. -Transitions between rooms are not as smooth as mini's cannot stand as well on the raised threshold plasticard clip. -Roomscapes will need a 'dummy' wall piece for the plasticard clip if there isn't a second room on the other side of the wall. The same applies for doorways to non-roomscape transitions. I'd really appreciate hearing your thoughts, concerns, and comments about this style. What problems would you have with a set of room tiles like these? What would be annoying about this style of dungeon 'mapping' compared to what you currently use? I'm still in the prototyping phase so every comment will improve the final product considerably!
|
|
|
Post by Wyloch on Jan 9, 2016 22:20:25 GMT
This is exactly how I used to build before moving to the 2x2 form factor. It works great, and your prototypes look great too.
|
|
|
Post by SpielMeisterKev! on Jan 9, 2016 22:35:55 GMT
Howdy, I like whole rooms too. Ideally, they could integrate with a modular tile system for the best of both worlds. I feel that 1 1/4" like Wyloch's is good enough. The extra width just to be able to carve two rows of bricks on the walls is a trade off with overall dungeon size when you have it laid out, that I don't think is justified. I posted this back in march 2015... I went that direction influenced by this post from November 2014 Wyloch's OCD Modular Tiles Wyloch's tiles are more durable and polished than MY rooms and halls, but I like them both. And if I ever do make a set of wylock's (or any other) modular tiles they will integrate with my existing rooms and halls. That said, I love to see anything, anyone has crafted, and like to see how it was done. You never know when you will find some precious gem of an idea or technique. Keep up the good work. Sorry, this answer was not a choice in your survey... haha Kev!
|
|
|
Post by DnDPaladin on Jan 10, 2016 1:55:05 GMT
one way or the other, both methods have their pros and cons. the size dont matter unless you intend on playing on different tables sizes. i like thick walls to show they cant stone shape them. everytimes i have set smaller walls the players tends to think they can dig thru with ease. but thats a trade off for more spaces on the table.
whole rooms gives you easy setup... while block by block takes a bit more time to setup stuff even more if you go for big rooms.
so it really depends on your prefferences.
now onto your tiles themselves... i like your floors, and i think one single layer of wall is enough to show whats needed. i dont really like the step in the door though. hence why i preffer the 2,5d next and TITS setup. but per say i can say these tiles are well made and your system seems sound.
|
|
|
Post by dante3rd on Jan 10, 2016 4:00:49 GMT
Very nice craftsmanship with the tile and doors! I like the idea of doubling the cardboard for added strength. Using textured wallpaper for the floor texturing is very interesting, and gives the tile a nice clean design.
Does your tile system deal mostly with uniform rooms with even walls? Do you have any plans for organic shaped environments like caves, or curved elements?
|
|
|
Post by AnarchyDice on Jan 10, 2016 16:22:27 GMT
Wyloch, thank you for the compliment. It means a lot seeing your usual high quality tiles on your channel.
Kev, I thought I had seen something similar before. How did you do the brickwork on the sides and top of the walls of the tiles?
Paladin, I was mostly getting tired of my old set with the doorslots cut out from the walls in that I was limited in what dungeons I could do without crafting custom rooms all the time. I agree with the increased setup time for the block by block method which is why I'm going for this sort of mid-point.
Dante, I started doing the double cardboard for strength (and weight) after my first two rooms warped a bit when I PVA'd on the textured wallpaper. It also helps smaller rooms not be lifted by the clips. My system right now deals with uniform rooms and even walls, but I'm thinking I'd handle cave or organic environments with modular wall pieces. I might even mix in some 2x2 form factor spaces (using my same sizing grid as the rooms) to get some ability to create unique rooms. That could let me get the best of both worlds now that I think about it, being able to use single-piece rooms for the generic or common shapes and then build up the unique rooms when needed.
Thanks all for the compliments and for letting me bounce ideas off of you.
|
|
|
Post by runningwolf on Jan 10, 2016 18:14:02 GMT
I've had times when I've needed rooms in addition to the modular stuff.
Like you pointed out in your original post there are pros and cons of any way you do things. And as said above always like seeing the work around people do because guaranteed most of us have run into the same types of problems.
|
|
|
Post by onethatwas on Jan 11, 2016 19:26:32 GMT
I see a few benefits to this model, but some cons that tend to make it not my taste. The biggest problem I have is in room planning and construction. While the basics are simple, having those extra steps of planning make this less convenient for me...I would rather hand a basic formula that is super easy to reproduce, up to and including the very very basic form suggested by DmScotty with his original 2.5D method.
However, it is a really good concept, and the fact that others can use your idea to form their owns (A hybridization of ideas that work) really makes this an awesome addition to the forum. Thanks!
|
|
rengar
Cardboard Collector
Posts: 26
|
Post by rengar on Mar 1, 2016 22:54:45 GMT
Nice work. I love the wallpaper idea. I have to see what I can find in my area for paper. Hand painting the stone is one of the most time consuming parts.
I have been working on a similar concept with the same goals in mind. My goals are focused towards eliminating specialty rooms. I want to move to inserts in place of them. This would allow the most re-use of tiles while maximizing the system’s flexibility. No true modular system will be without a few limitations. But these should be able to be minimized with some forethought in the base design.
One of the limitations in using a base block size of 3x3 or 2x2 is the extreme exceptional growth you get just by adding one block to the width of a hall.
Take DMG’s 3x3 system. A standard hallway is 10 feet wide. This means that a simple 10x10 room is the same size or smaller than the normal hall way. It also means that a 5x5 closet or cell is not able to be crafted, unless you break or tweak the system. If you want to have a wide hall denoting a special walkway such as to the path to the throne room, you go from 10 feet wide to 25 feet simply be adding one standard base block. To me, this limits the flexibility too much. It also tends to foster very large rooms. For my play style, I like to keep the party in more confined spaces. This forces them to strategize who should go dawn a hall first, or weather a fireball is a good idea in a small space. It also allows me to put more dungeon space on the table at once.
I started to build a 2x2 system. This provided the basic hall to be set at five feet wide. This meets my preference. However, it too has the exceptional growth issue like the 3x3 system. It’s growth is simply at a slightly slower pace. You go from a 5 foot wide hall to a 15 foot hall with one standard base block added. At first I thought I could work with or around this limit. I have found that it still bothers me too much.
I am now experimenting with a 1x1 base block. The default block is a solid space. It only opens up when expanded. The key is that with the base being 1x1, I can expand it in the same format I design dungeons in (5 foot increments). This stops the exceptional growth issue. The best part is that the tiles I already have are still useable under this new base size.
I am hopeful that this solves all of the restrictions I have encountered with the large base blocks.
Thanks for sharing your designs.
|
|