Feedback Thread: Maps

[squeen]

@The1True : Here is the photo of the quick-sketch pencils from my phone. No contrast. I gooped it up in GIMP using dodge-and-burn and a fat brush knowing it was a throw-away. (elapsed time ~20 minutes)

Next step (which will take me hours and hours) is to either:
(a) ink the pencils with a micro-line pen and retake the photo with better lighting (then carefully shade it in GIMP)
(b) redo it in the CAD program I wrote for fixing maps (then carefully shade it in GIMP)

But that doesn't matter at this point because I will stretch, squish and otherwise deform the map as I work through keying. My major goal was to generate complex topography for exploratory play and get past a bout of Writer's Block. Also, this is a view of the Stronghold "pre-devastion". The modern-day version with be mostly ruins---having been blown-to-bits by a magical detonation.

I am just so happy to have found a layout I can stand to look at. I've thrown away three previous attempts that just sat there like a dead fish, failing to inspire. This one at least has my brain "filling in the key", and bubbling with notions of "how to fix the map". I can also "see" the place (mentally) in it's Halcyon Days , so to speak....stone ramps, aqueducts, lavish gardens, architecture designed to awe, impregnable walls, etc....(a fantasy world's Alhambra or Xanadu)...and for me, that's a good sign---it means the rough-draft did it's job and I can finally get-to-work.

This is the heady, fun, brainstorming stage---envisioning the details of "This was once..." , before mercilessly expunging all of that from the final text, like a good Brycian designer should! ;P

Most importantly, does a topologically-complex map invite exploration?

Anyhow, initial point being that Dungeonscrawl gets you to a really good place fast without all the mess and hassle. I think it is going to be a game-changer.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Most importantly, does a topologically-complex map invite exploration?

Not if the players don't get to see it... is this a player aide, or a DM overview map?

 

[The1True]

Switch to 2B or 2 HB pencils, your line is too light.

Take it into Gimp crank the contrast to a million (in Photoshop I'd use the Curves editor to crank the darks that I want) and then set the layer to Multiply. Voila, inking done. Do any further work beneath the ink layer. Alternatively, fill an entire layer with black and use a negative of your pencil line as a mask - this technique is particularly useful if you would like to colour your ink line. Say, green ink for your trees, blue for your water etc.

Dodge is nice, but we beat Burn out of our students and the interns at the studio at a young age. Burn is amateur-hour; it blows out your blacks and changes the temperature of your colours to warm hues which is rarely desirable. Multiply or Colour-Darken.

Do your shading in blocks or airbrush it, but lay off the smudge tool. It is the Devil.

 

[squeen]

Great tips! Thanks. (I like the Overlay mode too for darkening).

 

[The1True]

Overlay darkens AND lightens. 128,128,128 grey is completely invisible. Use this to pull off cunning tricks!

 

[squeen]

Hmm...must be implemented differently in GIMP.

Here's me painting over a grey line (0x808080 = 128,128,128) with a black brush in the overlay layer.
It got darker in the little strip. Also, I seem to need to paint with "white" in the overlay to lighten.

 

[squeen]

I found the equation for GIMP Overlay mode here

Plugging in M=0 (for black) gives you

And since 64.25 is less than 128, it does darken.

Similarly if you paint with M=255 (white), the pixel value on the lower layer (I) changes from 128 to 191 (brighter).

It does get a bit more complicated because I (accidentally) used a 26.5% opaque brush....

So I'm thinking it's a GIMP/Photoshop difference.

It does look like (from the math) that if I paint with a 50% gray (or maybe just use the brush at 50% opacity), I'll get the effect you mentioned (pulling towards the middle-gray). I'll have to play with it. I've learned that in general you want a base color down for painting anyways.

Cool beans.

EDIT: pure black (I=0) is the color you can't move---pre-multiplying anything by 0 gets you the same. Maybe that's why I tend to think of it as a better "darkener" than "lightener" and sometimes need to just paint with low-alpha white in normal mode to wash things out.

 

[squeen]

I also get the feeling in GIMP that Dodge & Burn, with it's 3 settings (shadows, midtones, highlights) might just be a short-cut to overlay painting with a white, gray, or black color. (Or something very close). I should look up the pixel-math to be sure.

Smudge Tool may be the Devil---but the devil sure does like smoke and skin.
(FWIW: I only used it on the tree-lines of the forests in the map I linked---the rest of of muddiness was just sloppy Impressionistic painting.)

 

[Beoric]

Not if the players don't get to see it... is this a player aide, or a DM overview map?

DP has a point. @squeen, I have the impression that you play TotM, but I shouldn't make assumptions. Are the players going to see a version this?

 

[squeen]

@squeen, I have the impression that you play TotM, but I shouldn't make assumptions. Are the players going to see a version this?

I don't know what TotM is. Odds are I don't play it---as of right now I don't play any video games.

I would say this, or something like this, is solely for the DM. Maybe a simplified version with just the few upper ruin structures labeled could be found in the campaign world as a treasure map (and some of the underground maps as treasure in some of the undisturbed vaults of this stronghold).

But more generally, "no". They would arrive. See things (get up high and you'll see a lot), and have to choose which direction to go and what to explore. Maybe then, they'd get a map of what they see.

Local wisdom is: "It's deserted and been picked over by treasure hunters for centuries---why would you go there?". The party has to be determined and smart---this adventure would suck for casual players, or ones used to being led by the nose. They would have to be self-motivated to poke and prod into out-of-the-way places.

Here's a cut-and-paste of additional background I gave over at K&KA:

The conceit is this: the map is of the ruins of a Stronghold used by Elder Earth God worshiping Priest-Kings during the height of their empire (2000 years dead and gone). The Stronghold (and Temple) was demolished in a sudden explosion. Discovering the cause of the explosion can be a part of the adventure (because it hints at treasure). The map is closer to the original state of the Stronghold, before the explosion. Many of the buildings' remains will be just foundations in the modern day.

The emphasis is on exploration for low-level PCs. The ruins will be extremely sparsely inhabited and for the most-part low treasure---having been picked over for centuries. I very much wanted there to be a lot of topographical complexity, so that it really forces exploration effort from the party. To find something valuable, they will really have to scrounge around and remove serious obstacles. All the low-hanging fruit is long gone.

There's a motif of "channeled and controlled" water too---Alhambra style. i.e. water is slave to the Earth.

In the dungeon beneath, there are some "goblins" that will harangue the party as they try to explore. The big conceptual step is figuring out where the goblins originate from and following them there---take the battle to them, so to speak. Otherwise, it's hit-and-run tactics until the cows come home. The complex topography of the environment will make it hard to know where and when the next attack will originate. Visibility is poor. There are just too many hidey-holes, and the goblins know them all. Even if you brought an army, attrition would eventually get you.

Beneath the upper ruins is the "true" Earth Temple, that the goblins have taken fairly recently (100-200 years?)---Mines of Moria style. It's that lower dungeon that my players play-tested a few years ago now---returning to it multiple times over half a decade.

Back then, I hand waived the Upper Ruins, but for publication I want to flesh it out. There are going to be a few twists/illusions that need to be worked out "up top" too---but that's what needs to be fleshed out as I do the keying.

Each major building will have a small inset/battle maps with interior details.

There will be some some tunnels and treasure in the "cliff apartment" dwellings if the players can get up there. Also an aerial predator/scavenger---probably a griffon, that likes to pounce on injured party members left unprotected.

There will be one intact "tomb" that will be virtually impossible to find without gathering clues.

There will be a way to gather clues on how to open a Gate to the Moon and hints of a stolen artifact that was taken there.

The place is necessarily situated deep in a dangerous woods, and will require multiple visits to exploit. Getting the treasure back to town will also be a challenge.

A high-levels, this will be a cake-walk (except the lowest, submerged level). But I think that's ok, right? And still, a 1st level party, exploring during daylight, will not necessarily be very threatened. The longer they stay, the more commotion they make (or the deeper they go) the worse it gets. That's old-school AD&D/OSRIC in a nutshell (to me at least).

 

[Beoric]

TotM = "theatre of the mind". No miniatures, battle maps or (player) overview maps; maps are for DM use only.

 

[squeen]

TotM = "theatre of the mind". No miniatures, battle maps or overview maps; maps are for DM use only.

Yes and no.

If players want a map (of a dungeon) they have to make it or find it. That's said, if a player is mapping I help them...a lot. For example, they mapped the heck out of the maze of the Phase Minotaur (but it still had some errors!).

For complicated battles I have a laminated grid I draw the locale on with a crayon. I've got a few sets of the original TSR D&D miniatures I use for the monsters (mostly still unpainted after 40 years!). The players bought and painted their own miniatures after we started. We use them to get positioning correct for tactics....just not moving through the dungeon. If the topology is boring, we often don't bother getting them out.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Most importantly, does a topologically-complex map invite exploration?

I would say this, or something like this, is solely for the DM.

Answered your own question then: the DM is not the one who needs to be "inspired" to explore the place, so topological complexity is unnecessary (or at least, needs to take a back seat to being more utilitarian).

 

[Beoric]

Yes and no.

If players want a map (of a dungeon) they have to make it or find it. That's said, if a player is mapping I help them...a lot. For example, they mapped the heck out of the maze of the Phase Minotaur (but it still had some errors!).

For complicated battles I have a laminated grid I draw the locale on with a crayon. I've got a few sets of the original TSR D&D miniatures I use for the monsters (mostly still unpainted after 40 years!). The players bought and painted their own miniatures after we started. We use them to get positioning correct for tactics....just not moving through the dungeon. If the topology is boring, we often don't bother getting them out.

Yeah, that's pretty much how most of the people I played with did it until we switched to virtual tabletops. I wouldn't call that theatre of the mind, for the most part.

DP is right to the extent that the players need to be inspired, and can't be inspired by a map they don't see. So the question is whether the topological complexity of the environment inspires the PCs, which turns in part on the DM's ability to explain it. And I suspect it depends, it isn't as simple as topological complexity, it may depend on what kind of complexity.

But my thoughts on this aren't particularly clear yet, so I don't know why this is my reaction. I do know that I don't like maps that are designed to confound mapping. I used to like them in theory, but in practice I find it just makes it harder for the DM to communicate, and the players find it frustrating rather than challenging.

I will also say that I think the more complex the map, the more it needs to have clean, sharp lines to communicate with the DM. I don't think pencils cut it.

 

[squeen]

I'm not going for "to confound mapping" so much as "you see a lot of stuff, decide what to investigate".

Ultimately, when my eye see strange little corners and holes and I think "oh! I wonder what's in there". I am an explorer at heart. I like old book stores, caves, etc. I guess I'll need to play test this to see if that sense of picking your way through a complex landscape comes across.

"10-4" on the proto-map not cutting the mustard.

 

[squeen]

Here's a nice sketch from Del Teigeler's blog that is close fit for the front of the Temple as I've imagined it. (maybe a little too much is intact...needs some statues...also no desert)

 

[squeen]

Here's a pretty impressive on-line tool for creating isometric views.

Dungeon Builder - The Isometric Map Maker | Hobbyte

hobbyte.net

 

[The1True]

My 6 yr old's first map! (I added the numbers)

He's all ready to go for 6e! He even drew in a helpful railroad lol. My understanding is 3 is a Lavaworm, 4 some kind of ghost, 6 a lava pit (some strong Mario influence). I'm not clear on the rest. I didn't have the heart to send him back to Jacquay in some loops and sub-levels/alternate exits.

Anyway. D'awww, he hasn't learned to hate and resent the the thing that takes up all the old man's free time yet.
It'll come.
it'll come...

 

[squeen]

Made this crazy topological and perspective-bending anomaly to help me key the Ogre Queen's compound. I actual started with her house (#16) in a CAD program I wrote from scratch in OpenGL/C! I printed it out on heavy photo paper and went to town with a ink-pen and pencil.



My best trees (in the lower right) to date...I think---we'll see if I still love them tomorrow.
Needs a bit more work and some zoom-in insets. Hope it gets me over the writer's block. Lot's of ideas, but precious few words typed.

 

[Beoric]

Hey! I like that.