In AD&D, the 1st edition, players were obliged to draw a map of their progress in a dungeon (usually) and there was a mechanic for it - 1 turn (10 minutes) for their slowest movement I think. In those days it was cumbersome describing the dungeon features, especially irregularly shaped rooms or caves and caverns, to my players. They couldn't tell the difference between a passage turn to a side passage without me showing it to them. Today maps have become more essential due to the meticulous nature of combat system of 3.5.
To those who use photocopied or scanned player's maps from the dungeon magazines lately or to those who DMs who make the extra effort of making player's maps; how do you present them to your players, as a whole or piece by piece?
|
I haven't noticed alot of features that really require a designated mapper like in the early editions of D&D. There doesn't seem to be too many "traps" that throw the characters off balance or confuse their direction sense, and as a result, I've found that lately most of the people that I game with are content to not map out the dungeons anymore. I miss someone always having graph paper handy for mapping and a simple map key ready to copy symbols and take notes about traps, features, etc. encountered.
Hopefully 4.0 hits all the lax attitudes in the gut and goes a bit "olde school" with regards to mapping.
FH
This may come as strange, but in my 1st Edition days I had no problems in visualizing and running combat without the aid of tactical elements like miniatures and battle mats. But now I can't seem to effectively resolve an encounter without at least using makeshift counters on the table. Certain rules like flanking make it hard to play out combat without depending on some tangible visual aids. I feel like 3.5 had made me loose my DM's 'touch' in running fast, fluid and fun combat situations instead it made me into a ridged tactical freak! Well I can only hope that 4.0 will deal with issues like running encounters in the manner similar to the 1st or 2nd Edition; but I doubt of that ever happening due to the fact that miniatures and rules for running miniatures are today's norms in RPGs.
I have to agree that there are certain aspects of mapping that I find very troublesome as a DM. Now my Dungeons usually require a mapper as I'm really big on 3D dungeons and weird ways of moving around so they'll end up lost without a mapper taking care of things.
That said I find the whole part of the mapping process were myself and one of my players spend significant periods of time discussing with each other were the party is and were they are going. I've noticed that the rest of the players have mostly just given up being involved in this task except on the most meta of levels (Ogres? With special equipments? Oh man I bet that means leveled Ogres - I ain't messin with leveled Ogres - take us somewhere else Tim).
Essentially my problem with the whole set up is I'm having a good enough time and the designated mapper is certainly involved ... but I have 5 other players that are totally or nearly totally uninvolved and quickly falling into talking with each other about non-game related topics.
I've been trying to come up with a good system for getting the map to be on the middle of the table were everyone can see but so far both options I've come up with are beyond our means. One option is the utterly cool Dungeon done in Photoshop and projected onto the game table - but in the end even if we could afford that sort of thing we have no good place to hang the projector - mainly because the lady of the house generally draws the line at us actually tearing the place up to install things for D&D (Her husband on the other hand loves the idea of having a projector hanging from the ceiling of the living room for D&D and considered any potential loss to the look of the ambience of the living room to be totally worth it).
The other more conceivable idea I've had is using a battle mat made up of those detachable squares and pretty much have one player always drawing the map on the combat grid itself - detaching and dry erasing tiles as necessary as they move to far from that part of the dungeon. Meanwhile another player copies what he has done onto graph paper for the master map. I'm still somewhat interested in this idea but its not cheap (probably couple of hundred for enough tiles etc.) and my players are not really jumping up and down at the prospect partially due to the amount of work involved (two mappers and a near full time dry erase person would probably be required).
So I'm curious if other DMs have faced the issue of having too many players not involved in the mapping process and what was done to help compensate (if anything).
There was a magic item called a Scout's Journal in the Bazaar of the Bizarre, Dragon issue 334 specifically created to allow DM to just share a copy of maps with the players, without having to use game time scribbling in notepads (I submitted it up for that reason). Anyway maybe that item (or a variation of your own creation) would be a helpful to keep things moving at your table.
The other more conceivable idea I've had is using a battle mat made up of those detachable squares and pretty much have one player always drawing the map on the combat grid itself - detaching and dry erasing tiles as necessary as they move to far from that part of the dungeon.
This actually isn't too expensive, depending on how you do it. Tact-tiles, from wwww.bc-products.net, are great, and for twelve one-foot square tiles it's only about $60. You may also be able to find cheap used on Ebay. Even less expensive, though, is to put together a one-inch grid on a sheet of white paper and take it to Kinko's. Have it photocopied onto transparency sheets, however many you think you'll need. Set up a white posterboard on the table, or even a light-colored printed background (like a poster with trees if you're in a forest), and set the tranparencies up on that to draw your map.
And what I've found works really well, although it takes away the job of the mapper, is to draw out major rooms on tiles beforehand...normal 10-foot hallways don't get drawn, just important locations. I draw them beforehand and then put them down as the party reaches them. That way, there's no time wasted in telling the players what to map, and I can just get straight to the "in the far corner of the room, a large altar rests, covered in dust and grime..." portion of new-room description.
I never used mapping with my players. Instead, I would keep several pieces of scratch paper and draw out complicated areas myself so that I knew that they were getting the right picture. (In the few games that I did use a mapper, there were always mistakes that ended up with me taking the map and having to make corrections anyway.) With in the last three years or so, we started using miniatures, and have found that it really helps bring the game to life. It also helps force players to commit their characters to an action. I don't know how many times before miniatures I would have someone enter a room, then get attacked, then spend ten minutes argueing that they weren't really in the room. (I've had two players that have tried this over and over again.)
When I was younger, I use to scoff at the use of minitures, but recently we have had three new players join our group, that not only have no gaming experience, but they have no fantasy background other than Harry Potter, and no knowledge of anything Medieval. So the Miniatures have really helped them Visuallize the battles and encounters. (For Solstice I bought them Minis for each of their first characters and painted them up based on the colors that they gave me. now they act like little kids with them.)
I think in general meticulous mapping slows the game way down. It's a lot easier to have the party say that PC "X" is the designated mapper and assess a set time penalty (along the lines of 1e) if they choose to map. Then, if the dungeon is complex enough to require mapping, and the party has to find its way back out again using the map, just roll skill checks (survival or something else appropriate) to see if the mapper has done his job well. For published adventures, I also download the maps from Paizo if available, and if it's appropriate I show the parts of the map they've seen, covering the rest or cutting it off with scissors to be added later.
Since we don't have very many of the old style dungeon-crawls anymore (5 levels with 40 plus rooms on each level like ToEE), it's much less likely that the PCs are going to get lost in the average dungeon. If there is a question over finding their way out again, or getting lost, survival or track checks are in order.
I've also run quite a few dungeons in natural cave complexes, and having characters map those is a recipe for disaster--it's hard enough when all the corners are square, when they're not it's virtually impossible to provide an accurate enough description unless you just want to draw it yourself--in which case it's easier to have a spare map and uncover it piece by piece. If the characters are scared about getting lost, have them bring chalk and use a systematic marking system so they can find their way back.
Finally, mazes are a royal pain, and should be used with care, because they bog down very easily. Having searchable clues about the correct path is a good thing, if you must run one. Alternatively, you can have players make survival checks to figure out how to bust the maze systematically, with the DC higher if the maze has crossovers, the exit is in the middle of the maze, or there are many disorienting features. This way, when the players get bored of roleplaying rats looking for the reward at the end of the maze, you can just have them make skill checks to see how long it takes them to find their way out.
In short, I'm in favor of using battlemats or something comparable to help visualize encounters, and skill checks to simulate mapping and underground navigation without bogging down the game. Unless your players really find the act of mapping the dungeon to be very entertaining, for some reason.
in my case, i game using the program fantasy grounds, and the map can be 'masked' and unveiled bit by bit. similarly, there have been discussions on the fantasy grounds boards of folks using this feature, the dm using one computer and a networked 'player' computer displaying the map a bit at a time for the players.
just one of many possible ways to display the map nowadays.
As a player throughought all verions of the D&D rules, i have found that dungeon mapping is easiest if detail is ignored as much as possible. Our party would explore labyrinthine crypts, sewers, caves or what have you, and my map would always look the same, basically a flow chart, with boxs for rooms, usually with a little note in, and simple lines to show which rooms were connected. Of course, these maps were never totally acurate, but they got us in and out alive, and did not neccessitate the PCs walking around each chamber with a measuring tape.
Indeed, as a DM, even in 3.5, i find that that sort of mapping/note taking works out the best until it's time to make initiative checks. Once combat begins, acurate floor plans are a must. IMO, this means that the DM should be the one responsible for battle maps, not a player. Whether this means premade maps or hastily sketched outlines, it's much faster if the person making the map is looking at the DMs notes.
Most recently (for the AoW AP)I've taken dungeon mapping to a new level, by pre-mapping the <entire> dungeon to scale on foam board. For any who are interested, I used a project board called "ghost-line", which has a grid already marked of in pale lines that are only visible from an angle. The boards cost a couple of bucks each for about a 2 foot by three foot sheet, and I managed to get the entire Whispering Cairn out of two boards. Many rooms and stretches of corridor can be used for different areas of the complex, but it is best to draw the map out on graph paper first, to make a pattern that can be cut up and rearranged to fit the most tiles out of one board. Once all the tiles are made, and a visible grid is marked off for combat(the "invisible" lines mark half inches, so I drew over every other line with a 'Sharpie'), then the dungeon can be laid out before the players as they move through it, much like "Space Hulk", if any of you remember that game. One additional advantage of this method is that every time a PC opens a door or looks around a corner, I pull out a piece of map, so it's not a dead giveaway to the players that an encounter is in the offing. So far the players have really enjoyed being able to move their minis around, and while it might seem as though this sort of table-top gaming would detract from the role-playing aspect of D&D, I have found just the opposite, with their minis standing around in an otherwise boring hallway, they speak to each other in character almost all the time, whereas before many of our players tended to table talk unless their character was directly speaking to an NPC, and even then they would break character routinely through out the encounter for meta-game discussions.
I well remember the bane that was player mapping--took too much time for the rare true payoffs. In college the time factor wasn't as much of a problem. But with full time jobs, then family, kids, group memberships, well, it became critical.
So I ditched it entirely. The party does have to designate a mapper of course. But I either create a players map-in sections to add piece by piece where that's important or just to throw them off once in a while-OR, as I use a lot of modified published modules, or just the maps from the modules, I scan the maps, and use Photoshop to alter the map to take out the secret doors, traps, or any other features players cannot see at first glance. Its fast and very easy to do all the maps for 2-3 adventure sessions in a few hours, including printing. We do use scale battlemaps for encounter in rooms, but it really helps to have a 1 page or 4 page taped together overview of a level for the players too.
Because it was done on the computer, even with my only average skill using those programs, there is NO WAY to tell the maps have been altered.
As a side benefit, by doing it this way I can also then create records of the adventures in pdf format, including maps and describing the PCs actions in important battles. The pdf's for our last, 3+ year campaign, totalled 600+ pages and maps of every area explored! Emailing a pdf of the last adventure right before the gaming session further speeds play and limits memory questions, like, where were we again?
The most important thing: Because our groups gaming time is limited, we maximize gaming time by players having pre-made maps-handing them a map without the secrets, then where useful handing them the same map after they find the secrets-shortens a lot of mapping AND description time and speeds their questions on room layouts. More gaming time=happier DM & Players!
I map for the players as we go, but I do it on large (posterboard-sized) sheets of 1" ruled pads (about $15 from Staples, Office Depot, wherever).
The point is we have ready-made map for our minis (pogs, actually). I'll usually have a few stray marks in pencil on the sheets ahead of time to help guide my drawing, but not enough to give the players a sense of what is coming.
Regards,
Jack
Director of Narrative
|
I've also run quite a few dungeons in natural cave complexes, and having characters map those is a recipe for disaster--it's hard enough when all the corners are square, when they're not it's virtually impossible to provide an accurate enough description unless you just want to draw it yourself--in which case it's easier to have a spare map and uncover it piece by piece.
I actually like when they get off track a bit. It makes it more realistic, like looking at early maps of the world. Perfect maps came along very late in the real world. We always enjoy looking at how off they were after the game when i show them MY map.
Our group usually has had a mapper for things that they think will be important, and in my current group the dwarf took Profession Cartography and is taking much enjoyment in mapping everything.
If the players' map looks identical to the DM's map at the end of the adventure it means one thing: Your gaming session is giving up to much time to maping.
I say the player's map SHOULD be quickly drawn souly by the vague description of the DM. The DM should not even mention the exact measurments of a corridor or room.
DM - "You slowly walk down this long hallway where it turns left at the end and there's a door in front of you."
Player - "I barge in, kicking the door down."
DM - "Beyond the door is a rather large rectangular room with many cots lining the walls and a table with a few chairs in the center. Obviously these are the sleeping quarters for some of the guards in this complexe. Actually, there are four of them playing knucklebones at the table. They look totally surprised by your intrusion."
At this time, I usually draw the 40 x 30 room (and the adjecent hallway) on my handy-dandy magnetic white board and place the relevant markers (numbers and letters), as my team rolls for initiative.
The map they make is rarely accurate (and don't need to be), and even sometimes gets them lost. In fact, it's fun to show the players the map of a dungeon after they've cleared it out and compare the maps.
Ultradan
In my wildest fantasy, the game would have a computer screen in the middle of the table linked to the computer behind the DM screen. This could alow me to reveal the dungeon bit by bit as the players make their way down into the depths. Sigh.
(Thinks to himself "Did I buy my Powerball tickets this week?")
i let my players draw small maps on graph paper for their own navigation thru dungeons and use either a whiteboard with 1" squares and dry erase markers or predrawn 1" scale maps for encounters. in the 3FoE adventure i plan on photocopying a lot of a4 sheets with squares on and drawing the mazes as the players walk thru basically because encounters can take place anywhere in this room. i used to just scrawl down a small map not to scale in 2nd ed but with flanking etc i find this way of handling combats a lot more satisfiying.
In the game I ran last weekend (Sunless Citadel - and the most fun I've had in *years*) I took to saying, "Yeah, the room you enter is pretty big, 'prolly 50 to 60 feet on a side. You're coming down the vines in the southwest corner. At the far northern end of the room, at the edge of your vision, there's a big opening, perhaps 10 to 15 feet wide in the middle of the wall. The east wall sports a door pretty close to this, as does the south wall at the farthest edge from you." I keep it pretty vague and then get to the important descriptions - that is, the animated brambles, skeletons, and dire rats tearing toward them, as well as an antlered bugbear carrying a mace that glows... um, black.
I do map things out on tact-tiles, and I kept another tile to draw a not-to-scale map of things for those who weren't there at the beginning of the adventure (I went from 1 player to 4 over the course of 2 weekends), but once everyone was acclimated with where they were, I stopped showing the overlying map unless they specifically told me they were keeping track of their position on paper.
Maybe its the fact that my group and myself are really old school, but we still do most of our dungeon mapping on five squares to one inch graphpaper with one square equaling ten feet. Even a large dungeon will fit on one of these sheets.
In most cases our group is usually small (three to four players and myself) so I usually end up with an NPC tagging along. I have found the NPC useful for a large number of reasons but one of the biggest is that it is usually is the NPC who does the mapping.
This allows me to avoid taking to much time communicating with a single player and also gives me control of another piece of the flow of information. The map is almost always simple but accurate.
As far as combat goes we use four squares to one inch graph paper with one sqaure equaling five feet since 1st Ed. It is very quick to draw up most rooms before combat starts and everyone is represented by the first three letters of their name and monsters are simple O1, O2, O3, etc. for Orc1, Orc2, Orc3, etc.. I also usually track initiative and monster's hps on the sheet.
We have used these methods for close to twenty years and they work for us. They are simple, cheap, fast, and most importantly the leave the bulk of the play in the players imagination.
(I went from 1 player to 4 over the course of 2 weekends)
I noticed this when I started gaming again myself. Maybe 7 years ago I tried to run a campaign which sort of petered out and then just kind of died - everyone had critical school, work, girlfriend or baby commitments. Then when I started my most recent campaign after a 7 year hiatus I went from 4 players to a friggen waiting list. I've been turning a couple of players a month away.
I think its partly that D&D is doing well these days and 3.5 is a good game, pretty easy to learn and player options coming out the wazoo - and neat concepts.
But also I think we've actually hits a good period in the lives of many of the older age group. There is young blood coming into the hobby and they have some time to game but also many of the rest of us are into our career track. We gave up gaming in the last few years of university and in the first few of our careers and it just had to come in second when the girlfriend became the wife and certianly with a new born around there was no time to game. But more and more the older generation is now more or less settled in and suddenly the appeal of some leasure time gaming is important to us.
The kids are bit older and the job is mostly secure and were paying the bills day in day out. We end up in a space thinking well if I can't afford to have any time for my hobbies now just when is there going to be time?
|
But also I think we've actually hits a good period in the lives of many of the older age group. There is young blood coming into the hobby and they have some time to game but also many of the rest of us are into our career track. We gave up gaming in the last few years of university and in the first few of our careers and it just had to come in second when the girlfriend became the wife and certianly with a new born around there was no time to game. But more and more the older generation is now more or less settled in and suddenly the appeal of some leasure time gaming is important to us.The kids are bit older and the job is mostly secure and were paying the bills day in day out. We end up in a space thinking well if I can't afford to have any time for my hobbies now just when is there going to be time?
Absolutely. I just started gaming again after a period of about 7 or 8 years. In between then and now I've earned a degree, moved from New Orleans to Philly, bought a house, and am working on the whole engagement thing. A lot has changed, but I found myself with the time and the desire to once again immerse myself in the hobby I love. All the guys in my new group are around the same age, and in similar positions.