When to skip illustrations

[Two orcs]

Maps, mood setting peices, technical details are all good. When does an illustration pull an adventure down instead of lifting it? What to be mindful of when inserting a picture? I'll get an obvious one out of the way, as Bryce harps on it often:

Cover art not matching the interior. Can mislead about mood, details and even quality.

Specific examples very welcome.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Depends on the illustration. The ones that you're expected to show the players are the most useful because the picture communicates exactly what the author is trying to convey, without fear that the DM is going to skew the intended message with his own "brand" of explanation. But even the little ones that the players never see (and probably don't even relate to the adventure) have their uses as markers for DMs flipping through products to easily find things ("ah, I was on the page after that weird spider illustration").

There are only two times I think an illustration detracts from an adventure:
1) The picture shuffles the information around and breaks up the flow of it, so that DMs have to readjust in spite of the picture to find the info they're looking for; or
2) the picture is jarringly bad or doesn't suit the tone of the adventure, which is just generally unpleasant to look at and so detracts from the publication.

 

[squeen]

I'm down with #2 --- if the illistration is too cartoony, or over-the-top serious "fantasy bad-ass cyper-punk dude", I'm likely to sour on the content too.

 

[Malrex]

I am a great lover of all art, so I struggle with this as I want to use all of it...lol. DP nails it for me when he says art can be used as markers--I thumb through a book quickly by its art--so I view it as a tool, but don't think many see it that way. I also just enjoy layout and mixing the pictures and words around.

But--Bryce nailed me on generic pictures. I talk about a imp...I have a picture of a imp...but the imp is sorta boring because everyone knows what an imp looks like. It would of been better to add a picture of the imp and what it was doing in the scene, or better yet, take the space to put a picture of a new monster. I get that now...but this is where your budget can constrain you.

Everyone knows you don't make much from publishing OSR adventures. So most may just purchase stock art or find free art that comes close to what you are trying to describe, or change their writing to match the stock art. If people had the budget or knew they could make their money back, I'd think you would see better art. So with that imp example, I added the imp in because I thought it was a cool drawing and I can use it as a marker as a tool. If it wasn't a good picture of a imp, it would of been easier for me to not use it (but I thought it looked fantastic). I could argue that it breaks up the words a bit too--but since I probably use too much art, that argument doesn't really work for my case.

I've been nailed by too much art (constantly..lol) but more importantly, how it fucks up the layout. It pushed the words out in a weird way so its jarring. I think that's a skill I'm still trying to work on during layout. I think I need to either commit--give it a 1/2 page or its full 1/4 space, or just take it out. For me, the problem in those instances is that I found stock art that I felt fit the scene so was trying to cram it in there. I'm trying to move away from stock art though (except for PWYW stuff) which helps you focus on the art--because you are paying for it.

Finally, like DP and Squeen said, there is some art that is just a turn-off and that's usually the artist's style. I have one in particular that I don't care for at all and it has caused me not to even buy the products.

I'm curious though about people's opinions about different artists. Is it jarring when there are 15 different artists in the same adventure? ..is it better to have only 1-2 artists for a adventure or does it not matter to much as long as the vibe is captured?

 

[DangerousPuhson]

I've been nailed by too much art (constantly..lol) but more importantly, how it fucks up the layout. It pushed the words out in a weird way so its jarring. I think that's a skill I'm still trying to work on during layout. I think I need to either commit--give it a 1/2 page or its full 1/4 space, or just take it out.

Handle layout of your text first - art not intended for the players is primarily used to fill in the big gaps still left in your layout once you've got the text all set up and grouped. Usually after text layout, you've got a page break that leaves half a page, or a bullet list which causes a big blank spot, or whatever - that's where the art is meant to go, to fill those gaps in the text. Not every gap, but definitely the ones that are highly noticeable.

It won't fuck up the layout if the layout is already done. I took a college course of editing materials for publication; standard practice is to set the text first and then add boxes into the gaps as placeholder for images, then finding the image that best fits the box (preferably one that also happens to relate to the adjacent text).

 

[squeen]

I think the exception to the layout rule DP states is that I think of inset maps as art too, and they need to be placed strategically near the text.

I also agree with Malrex's 1-2 artist rule.

 

[Malrex]

I agree about handling layout with the text...but when you are scraping for stock art..and you find a piece of art that works...you can get caught in wanting to put it in. Another reason why commissioned art can be better as the layout can be done first and then you know...

Inset maps--I'm personally experimenting with that. It has benefits of ease of use and can save money by not needing as much art. The downside is that it can make the pages longer, which isnt that big of a deal I guess.

 

[The1True]

Inset maps--I'm personally experimenting with that. It has benefits of ease of use and can save money by not needing as much art. The downside is that it can make the pages longer, which isnt that big of a deal I guess.

Maybe runs up the price of your final product? I'm definitely a fan of this inset map idea as an alternative to the convenience of a one-page dungeon without the mess/word-count constraints, but I'm concerned that it's going to run up page-counts like a mofo...

 

[Malrex]

Maybe runs up the price of your final product? I'm definitely a fan of this inset map idea as an alternative to the convenience of a one-page dungeon without the mess/word-count constraints, but I'm concerned that it's going to run up page-counts like a mofo...

I tried it for part of Vermilion for my Patreon awhile back. I admit, I like it when reading the PDF. If I talked about Area's 8-12 or whatever, then that section of map is on the same page. No flipping back and forth. I feel like if I do it that way, the whole map should be in the beginning of that chapter/appendix..then I break it up into insets, but I also like having the maps all in the back so a little conflicted about what to do with that.

It does raise up page counts for sure which does raise the price of the final product a little bit...I don't know if that's too big of a deal for a 30ish page adventure doing a POD through DrivethruRPG...but I have two projects that are both over 200 pages and I am concerned the price will be quite a bit bigger so I've been debating about it. Maybe every other page? I'm not sure...I need to find a 'rule' that I'm comfortable with.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Is not the price whatever you set it? I mean, yeah there's something to be said about being able to charge higher prices for more pages, but is that really the only option? If you add map insets on a 20$ product to increase user-friendliness, it's not like you're leaving money on the table if you keep selling it $20 - you're just increasing the quality of a $20 product, making it a better value for your customers (and thus increasing customer satisfaction and helping repeat purchases).

Especially with map insets - you're chopping up a existing map... not really a ton of labor. Kind of stingy to use it as an excuse to raise the price because the page count went up (even though the amount of content stays the same).

 

[The1True]

I think it costs more to publish the book if it's got a higher page count. At a certain point you're forced to pass the cost on to the customer or take a hit, no?

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Hard copies, I suppose. But surely that's not par for the course.

 

[squeen]

I tried it for part of Vermilion for my Patreon awhile back. I admit, I like it when reading the PDF. If I talked about Area's 8-12 or whatever, then that section of map is on the same page. No flipping back and forth. I feel like if I do it that way, the whole map should be in the beginning of that chapter/appendix..then I break it up into insets, but I also like having the maps all in the back so a little conflicted about what to do with that.

I feel very strongly about seeing the full (level) map up front. It drives me nuts reading about something first and then having to go look for the map. It feels like "OH! So that's what you were talking about! Why didn't you just show me that to begin with?"

Yeah, I know, I could just flip to the back first, but it just feels cheap and wrong---and if there are multiple maps, I'm always a bit confused which one goes with which section of text. (Yes, I am stupid.) A strong proponent of a Dr. Seussian "big-map, little-map, lots and lots of maps" approach, so an additional map booklet with the collected/duplicate maps (or in an Appendix) is the solution I think keeps the folk who want to have all the maps laying out somewhere happy too.

With inset maps you get two advantages --- ease of use AND visual indexing of the text. However, I don't typically add inset maps if the top level map can be kept to within one page flip of the keyed text. I'd only use them for larger-area stuff and little sub-areas not well depicted on the full map. Inset-maps are also a great way to annotate monster tactics in spacial complex situations.

 

[Malrex]

Yeah, I'm talking about hard copies only..raises the page count which can make binding a little more expensive for POD's. PDF wouldn't matter.

It takes me a little time to do zoomed in map insets during layout and can be a little tricky, but I would compare the extra time spent to the price savings of not having to buy art for the space instead.

Hey Squeen, I want to make sure I understand you...
Are you saying that you would prefer all the maps to be the very first thing you see when you open up an adventure, (pg. 1)
OR
The very first thing you see when it gets to the dungeon explanation part? (like pg. 4 or something)

Reason I ask is because I had complaints on Red Prophet Rises for having the maps in the book, right before I talked about the dungeons (the pg. 4 example). The complaint was that the map had to be looked for, somewhere in the middle of the book, rather than this person's preferred location of in the back. At least you KNOW where the map is if its in the back. Can't make everyone happy I guess.

For Vermilion, I have A-S Appendices. I was planning to have the map for each appendix in the beginning of each Appendix, then inset maps with the writing--where appropriate (some are longer than others), then I was going to make another whole book of just the maps (30-40 pages worth) as I felt weird making another whole appendix in the back with all the maps again.
Doing the same for Coppercore as its comparable in size to Vermilion.

But for a 30ish page adventure, I'm still conflicted. It doesn't FEEL right to have the maps as the first thing you see when you open the book, I can understand it being a pain to find when the map is somewhere in the middle of the book but in the beginning section of the dungeon explanation, but I'm in agreement that I hate reading about the dungeon before I see the map. I wish the POD options could have that detachable cover with the map on it.

Finally...inset maps. I think I'm pretty much sold on the idea. I think I may explore taking it a bit further. You see Bryce commenting that maps can hold a bunch of information--like monster tactics and/or lighting. The way I do my maps, I thought it would make it very cluttered and hard to see although I like the idea of it. But with inset maps, you can have best of both worlds because you can have your master map (clean), then zoomed in maps that have a bunch of different information on it (messy, but helpful), not to mention more details--like adding where the beds are, chests, etc. It's going to take a lot more work, but I could see that being helpful and kinda cool to do.

 

[squeen]

Hey Squeen, I want to make sure I understand you...
Are you saying that you would prefer all the maps to be the very first thing you see when you open up an adventure, (pg. 1)
OR
The very first thing you see when it gets to the dungeon explanation part? (like pg. 4 or something)

Yes. For me, the applicable map at the beginning of each descriptive (sub)section if very much preferred. I can understand for quick-reference why the back is handy (but not exactly natural-reading and contributes to a wall-of-text feel up front).

When Byrce did his first Maw adventure, he went with the back, but honestly it bothered me and felt awkward and uber-spartan.

Section headers on every page can help you find your way to the top-level map. I also put sticky-tabs that hang off the side of the page for quick flipping, but that's just my habit.

Ideally, I'd suggest (at least for larger projects) a separate map-booklet/PDF to try to satisfy all comers---even though we know that's impossible in reality.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

The optimal way, as I see it.

You'll want the full DM-eyes-only map* to be at the front of the dungeon/section, right before the room keys. You'll want inset maps** with only a few rooms on the relevant page spread involving those rooms. You'll want the Player-friendly (possibly gridless) map*** appended in an annex, or even in a separate document with handouts and scene images to show players.

* higher detail, has room key numbers, secret doors, traps, monsters, reinforcement routes, patrol routes, DM notes
** is ideally a black and white/monochromatic and otherwise simplified copy of the DM map cut into bite-sized chunks; saves page flipping
*** the higher detail DM map but with no room numbers and without the trap/secret/monster information captured; can be used as a battlemap

 

[Malrex]

Are player maps necessary for every dungeon? I usually only have player maps for treasure maps or Ill make one if they take over a building or something. My players map their own maps... I don't play online/virtual tabletop so not sure how to do all that stuff.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

I'd include a player version as an appendix, because it's very easy to turn a DM map into a player map (or Roll20, or printable battlemap, as it were) simply by hiding certain layers in the photoshop file.

 

[squeen]

I think "Tomb of the Serpent King" by Skerples gets the map thing almost perfect. A overview DM map up front, inset-maps, and a one-pager summary map in the back. My tiny gripe is that I think the inset maps could be smaller so that more text fit on each page---but that's being overly picky. (I'm also a fan of 1e PHB/DM font-size and small margins to maximize "at a glance" data absorption.)

It's free and worth checking out. (I think you can find it somewhere on the Coins and Scrolls web site too). I'm even tempted to order a hardcopy of this one.

What Skerples did, that I think is so underutilized in a hobby/PDF-self-publishing/post-cyberspace world, is iterate the adventure---publishing multiple versions with improvements based on community feedback. This is such a good idea. As amateurs, we need to hone our craft. In the paradigm of the Open Source Software bazaar this is paraphrased as "Release Early. Release Often."

Byrce reviewed version 1.0 here --- it's up to version 4.0 now. Very cool.

I should mention it has some really evocative art by Scrap Princess too. The chained-rat grabs me especially.

 

[Malrex]

I think "Tomb of the Serpent King" by Skerples gets the map thing almost perfect. A overview DM map up front, inset-maps, and a one-pager summary map in the back. My tiny gripe is that I think the inset maps could be smaller so that more text fit on each page---but that's being overly picky. (I'm also a fan of 1e PHB/DM font-size and small margins to maximize "at a glance" data absorption.)

It's free and worth checking out. (I think you can find it somewhere on the Coins and Scrolls web site too). I'm even tempted to order a hardcopy of this one.

What Skerples did, that I think is so underutilized in a hobby/PDF-self-publishing/post-cyberspace world, is iterate the adventure---publishing multiple versions with improvements based on community feedback. This is such a good idea. As amateurs, we need to hone our craft. In the paradigm of the Open Source Software bazaar this is paraphrased as "Release Early. Release Often."

Byrce reviewed version 1.0 here --- it's up to version 4.0 now. Very cool.

I should mention it has some really evocative art by Scrap Princess too. The chained-rat grabs me especially.

Where/how does Skerples get his feedback? Besides reviews, it's like throwing a dry pasta noodle at a wall.

I agree with you, I think the inset maps could of been smaller--1/4 size. He has a few of those. He also has some white space where I would of incorporated some art to capture the vibe. I'm not sure what version I have, downloaded it awhile ago. Its a great adventure.