|
|
Post by spacemonkeydm on Jul 27, 2013 18:50:31 GMT -6
Can I get some tips on map making. I want to start a new campaign in a Mega dungeon ands all my maps seem to lack a flow and look like a train wreck. So any pointers out there?
|
|
|
|
Post by mgtremaine on Jul 27, 2013 19:06:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by scalydemon on Jul 27, 2013 20:55:52 GMT -6
Buy a black gel pen. Try some basic cross-hatching
|
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Jul 27, 2013 21:01:11 GMT -6
Start with graph paper and pencil and be prepared to throw maps out and start again when they become to overwritten to erase and redraw. I normally go through about 5 sheets before I ink the final one.
Alternatively, experiment with Sketchup in parallel projection mode. Nowadays I draw all my grid squares in that, print them out on A4, and ink over the top. That way they always fit on the page, instead of making the dungeon fit a standard A4 sheet with 5mm grid.
|
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Jul 28, 2013 11:38:00 GMT -6
I started a related thread in Underworld and Wilderness Adventures subforum, here.
I think one thing is to just practice a lot. Draw lots of maps.
Another is to consider playability versus looks. If you draw a map of great complexity, it can help to keep largely to right angles and squares, so as to not have to waste tons of time explaining very complex shapes and weird little variations. Ultimately, if I had to choose between what looks good on the page, and what will play well at the table, I'd choose the latter. I think Gygax's dungeon geomorphs give a good example of a complex map style, whereas Holmes sample dungeon gives a good example of a simpler structure. If you go more free-form like a lot of Dyson's maps, I think you need to keep things spaced out more so that the exact layout of rooms is not so important.
I think a tight Gygaxian mapping style lends itself more to weird map tricks and secret areas, whereas a more spaced out style like Holmes and many others is probably not as good for that approach. With Gygax's style, the map may be difficult to progress through, but weird "empty areas" will reveal themselves in play, giving players an idea where to search for secret doors and the like (assuming they are skilled and thorough mappers - and that is the exact point of this particular challenge).
I think a megadungeon could benefit from a wide variety of different types of maps, not sticking to any one style. My own current project varies the style a lot. I keep my Gygaxian stuff to 5 sq/inch and one square = 10'. I do more cavernous/freeform stuff, or more spacious stuff, at one square = 20 (instead of using the same scale with 10sq/inch).
Players will tend to appreciate lots of variety in terrain. Think of cool stuff; chasms, weird rickety bridges, big cavernous areas, underground fungus forests, hot lava, underground lakes and rivers; stuff to break up the never ending corridors.
I think most people just draw a big map or a bunch of maps, and then key it up, figuring what goes where. You could also do a more Moldvay-esque approach, designing much smaller maps with a hook or scenario, then linking them up like Stonehell does, perhaps in quadrants or whatever you like. This would be a more module based approach, and may help keep the whole thing from being overwhelming.
All my advice is to be taken with a grain of salt because I'm just not that good at this stuff.
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Jul 28, 2013 12:21:37 GMT -6
I take a lot of inspiration from mazes and graffiti, particularly the style called wildstyle. Draw tight knit passages that lead or progress to a particular place. Always keep in mind the end goal of a particular section or route. Fill in the map with crazy intertwining passageways and dead ends. Try not to leave more than a few squares blank at any given point on the map. Players will have to break-through walls or search for secret doors a lot in this style. Have feature rooms with odd geometric shapes and think about why someone would build it or how that shape would occur (un)naturally. Remember a dungeon might have lakes, natural caves, mines, specially built passageways, shrines etc and there is no reason you can't overlap these things on the map. To illustrate what I mean, here is a first draft I've been working on. It's for the North-West section of my underworld. I usually piece together six to nine A4 pieces of paper to make one section.  I have to colour in to follow and key the major points of the map. Also each of the draft passageways leads to an important place in the underworld and usually is the one way to that important place. Once I have finished outlining a general sketch I'll fill in those coloured squares with a maze of semi-connected passageways until there is almost no more room. I'll then mark weak points and secret doors before the final draft which I usually draw on a piece of game paper (it's like a battle mat for minis but paper instead of linoleum). |
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Jul 29, 2013 7:56:15 GMT -6
Awesome maps Bexley - thanks for posting, and for posting an example of Wildstyle in the Mapping STyle thread!
Another pointer that has helped me in mapping: try drawing some disconnected features on your grid before you start fleshing things out. In other words, draw some large rooms, 6x8, whatever. Draw some small rooms, 3x3, 3x2, 2x2, 2x1 etc. Some of your rooms should be bunched together, right next to each other, others with enough space for a corridor in between/all around. Draw some slightly odd rooms; circles, octagons, perhaps a hexagon, maybe some triangles. Draw some diagonal corridors, or some interesting snaking corridors, not necessarily connected to anything. Perhaps draw a cavernous area or a chasm or a lake. Now you should have a map with a handful of interesting features on it. Now connect them up in interesting ways. Make routes that aren't too obvious or direct. Some of your bunched rooms should have tons of doors added into the walls (I just draw a door right over the linewall). You can have room labyrinths where a bunch of rooms link to a bunch of other rooms, and some of those will link to meandering corridors. You want players to have the experience of trying to work north, but periodically being forced back south by indirect routes.
I find this disconnected approach to mapping makes my maps more interesting, organic, and much faster to create. It also easily results in somewhat Gygaxian maps (ie like the old geomorphs).
|
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Jul 29, 2013 20:11:53 GMT -6
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Jul 30, 2013 1:55:21 GMT -6
Awesome maps Bexley - thanks for posting, and for posting an example of Wildstyle in the Mapping STyle thread! Thanks man, I'm not too happy with those and they were thrown out. I hope everybody can draw some inspiration from wild-style, it's a great artform. This was posted in the other thread and, I might be biased, I think this is gospel. |
|
benoist
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
OD&D, AD&D, AS&SH
Posts: 346
|
Post by benoist on Jul 30, 2013 14:32:21 GMT -6
Neat! I like the map flow! |
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Jul 30, 2013 15:15:23 GMT -6
Bexley, I think it would be potentially helpful to hear why you decided to throw those maps out. Why were you unsatisfied with them? The images you posted represent, I would guess, at least 2 or 3 hours of work. How do you know a good map of yours when you see it?
I often throw my maps out too. I think the large dungeon format is psychologically taxing. I think smaller dungeons are easier not just because there is less work, but also because we are less invested in any particular one being awesome.
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Jul 30, 2013 20:55:26 GMT -6
Bexley, I think it would be potentially helpful to hear why you decided to throw those maps out. Why were you unsatisfied with them? The images you posted represent, I would guess, at least 2 or 3 hours of work. How do you know a good map of yours when you see it? I often throw my maps out too. I think the large dungeon format is psychologically taxing. I think smaller dungeons are easier not just because there is less work, but also because we are less invested in any particular one being awesome. I'm not sure I can explain it succinctly but I'll give it a go. I remained unsatisfied because it wasn't complex enough, it wasn't aesthetic enough. I'm an amateur artist with a useless BA in art history and so I have a good eye for my taste, when I finish a map section it just feels right or not. Unfortunately my judgement of what is a good map is as shallow as that. There is not much theory behind it, mainly just a "good" eye. The other main reason is, thanks Benoist btw it's very kind of you to say, I thought the flow was off because I had to use separate pieces of paper. I recently got some draft paper, so I can't wait to unleash on that! It's very exciting. I would say that there is about 4-5 hours work there. I'm kinda slow because I stop and stand back from the map and also develop plot hooks/arcs as I go. So I often go away and come back when I've had a story driven breakthrough. I'm not sure if anybody else keys in such a linear way but basically each route will have a little story or plot hook behind it. Why do you find them psychologically taxing? I love the blank page, the possibilities energise me and I like being able to just throw on some Bjork or Leila and loosing myself for hours. Perhaps that's why I also throw out maps that are coming up to the halfway point, the possibilities are running out and I have more ideas than I can contain on one map. As I mentioned before, I really prefer one sprawling 'underworld' than a levelled dungeon. Did any of that help/was interesting? I'm a bit verbose when it comes to processes, sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Aug 1, 2013 7:26:39 GMT -6
I appreciate the detailed reply Bexley! Interesting that you develop your filling/plot ideas as you are making the map. I like that idea in theory, but in practice I just start throwing stuff down on the page and worry about filling it later - otherwise I won't get it done.
I find the megadungeon difficult to work on because it feels like, in creating it, one is putting all their eggs in one basket. OF course that isn't necessarily true; you can have lair dungeons and wilderness adventures and so on, but if you are making a megadungeon, a lot of your work is centered on that one thing, so I tend to feel added pressure to get it right. That makes it hard to work on. I can get the maps though, no problem on that. I always liked drawing mazes, even as a kid, and I've done a lot of abstract ink drawings even as an adult, so sitting around drawing weird dungeon levels is no problem. It's putting it together into something meaningful for an adventure setting that is the problem. I'm still embracing the style, though, because I think there is a difference in play between a smaller dungeon and a larger one, and I want to explore that.
|
|
