More PDF Suggestions for Paizo to Consider

[seasthyday]

Hi Paizo Team:

This thread continues what elicited good response regarding the PDFs that Paizo publishes for the APs, here: LINK

In addition, I'd like to suggest a few more changes:

1) Make the Graphic images of maps bigger -- I will often enlarge the maps and print them on a poster printer for use in the game. I have to use Alien Skin Photoshop plugin to get the maps enlarged with high enough resolution to print out at scale -- and even then, the pixelization and loss of quality has been commented on by my players. In this electronic age, just make the PDF maps a full page size, please! Otherwise, they are little more than a pretty graphic that no one but the GM sees...

2) Provide a GM version of the map, with room numbers and secret doors, but also a PC version, that has been cleaned of GM-only information. Again, this helps your graphics be "usable" without lots of GM photoshop work to edit out the 'spoilers' in the maps you provide. You used to do this under the WoTC process, but the PC version of your maps seems to have fallen by the wayside -- and I miss them!

3) Paizo has the opportunity to excel in this area. PDFs are a "cheap" way for Paizo to make the GM's job easier, and these resources certainly made my life easier when I subscribed to your WoTC products... so please amp it up several notches and be the outstanding resources you clearly have shown us you can be.

Others may have more suggestions, too. Feel free to elaborate. Looking forward to Paizo's comments!

[Anguish]

I agree with your points. I'd love to see the maps released as free web enhancements. I get it that Paizo sells map packs, but I've got two issues with that. a} they're always released after the AP is finished shipping which means anyone who starts an AP before the last module ships is hosed. b} it feels a lot like re-buying what you've already got. I think it would be a huge value-add to even reserve GM maps and 1:1 maps as web-enhancements for subscribers.

I don't think it'll happen because it's still more work on an already overworked staff, and it potentially competes with a paid product but it's nice to dream.

[roguerouge]

I concur.

[seasthyday]

Anguish wrote:

I agree with your points. (sic)

I don't think it'll happen because it's still more work on an already overworked staff, and it potentially competes with a paid product but it's nice to dream.

Well, I'm not sure that it's quite that much more work: the map has already been created (likely at 1:1 scale) -- they have simply reduced it down to fit on the page. So, as a web enhancement, making what was created available at the time of publishing would be a nice aide.

And frankly, if money is the problem, then sell the PDF enhancement pack as an optional product. There is no doubt that I would pay for it as a PDF (since I print the maps and illustrations myself anyway.) My guess is that many others would find value in this, too.

Perhaps if more people weigh in on this issue, Paizo will realize that people love their products and are willing to pay for them. Just make them available!

[James Jacobs]

I've gone into more detail as to why we can't do larger, higher-res maps, but it boils down to two things:

1) File size: The bigger graphics files become ENORMOUSLY huge. Many folks would not be able to efficiently handle and manipulate these files, needless to say download them. They'd end up taking a LOT of room up on our servers, which are big but not infinitely big.

2) (and this is actually the main reason) Cost. We don't pay cartographers by the map... we pay them by the print size. The maps they build are meant to be viewed at the size they're printed at, after all; when we want to make a poster map of a map, we have to pay the artist for the increased size and they put more detail in. It's no big deal shrinking a map down in size; that's free. Expanding them up is very much NOT free.

So a map that is higher detail and higher res requires more work on the cartographer's part in order to render images and elements on the map in more detail so they don't start pixelating. That would mean an increased cost to Paizo, which would mean an increased cost to the customer.

Technology ever marches forward, though, and soon I suspect that technology will favor having enormous files with lots of detail. Paizo and their resources aren't there yet.

[seasthyday]

James Jacobs wrote:

2) (and this is actually the main reason) Cost. We don't pay cartographers by the map... we pay them by the print size. The maps they build are meant to be viewed at the size they're printed at, after all; when we want to make a poster map of a map, we have to pay the artist for the increased size and they put more detail in. It's no big deal shrinking a map down in size; that's free. Expanding them up is very much NOT free.

Wow, good to know, James! I had no idea that cartographers were paid that way. I guess it makes sense that Paizo provides them at the size they are.

Generally, I've had good luck blowing things up and printing them at scale size.
However, I still miss the PC-version of the maps, with spoilers removed. Even if they must be small-sized, a PC-version makes it much more useful. If you can consider that for future efforts, that would be great. (And again, paying for the resource is something I -- and many others -- are more than willing to do. Afterall, our investment in the AP is already well underway at that point.)

Thanks for the reply!

[Cormac]

seasthyday wrote:

However, I still miss the PC-version of the maps, with spoilers removed.

You should be able to copy just the map layer without room numbers etc. using adobe reader 8 (you cant do that using adobe 9)