I hope this is the right place to post this.
My suggestion for the games is that for all modules sold that there be a place online to download printable maps for miniatures. Since pathfinder is so miniature dependent i think this would be a good idea. I spend hours building maps of dungeons that are the right size for mini's. The maps don't have to be picture quality, just the design so they use little ink. The corners of each page can be numbered so that each number is connected to a number on another page that way we can connect the pages together for a really big map.
Just an idea.
That's actually pretty time-consuming. You have to crop what you want out of the PDF, load it into an image editor and blank out everything except the map, zoom it just right so that the squares are 1"x1", and then print it out.
And if it doesn't fit on a single sheet of paper, you have to print multiple sheets and tape them together.
It would be pretty cool to have a downloadable map set.
It's funny, for Council of Thieves they included the encounter maps, but at the same scale as in the Adventure Path, and everyone griped (justifiably so in my opinion). Now, if they'd included encounter-sized maps for the encounters, that would have been awesome. Especially if they left off the key so they were reusable.
I like how in Kingmaker they (on rare occasions) are using existing flip mats and stuff - very handy.
For APs and mods, they could always put the maps on a single sheet of paper, with no text (save the legends) so that you could print that out a little more easily. Printing battle grids might still be a PITA too.
Using Game Mastery maps is cool for those (I liked how the Crypt of the Everflame module used the dungeon flip mat) but I imagine it would be annoying for AP users who can't afford/aren't interested in buying the game mastery maps.
And on the other end, I wish they actually put separate .pdfs out for the GameMastery maps too... it's annoying when you're writing your own adventure and you realize, "hey, this flip mat would be great for this encounter!" and then you realize you have no easy way of writing down where you want to put secret doors, traps, and other campaign notes. You can't exactly write it on the flip-mat you're using with your players.
That's actually pretty time-consuming. You have to crop what you want out of the PDF, load it into an image editor and blank out everything except the map, zoom it just right so that the squares are 1"x1", and then print it out.
Well, step 1: Get Adobe Reader 8 or earlier, which lets you copy literally the map and none of the text or keys on the map. Save hours of work in that one step.
Paizo is kind enough not to flatten the layers on their PDFs so this is possible.
|
Step two...download the free program 'posterazor' (found at sourceforge). This nifty little program will increase the size of graphic files and then divide it up into A4 sized pieces for printing out. It even leaves some overlap for glueing together.
The issue I have is that some of the maps are just not high enough res to blow up to battle maps size without excessive pixelisation.
|
I have been asking for this since the first AP. They keep saying it is too labor intensive as a free, or even paid download, too expensive to order from the artist, and too large a file.
I can see the expense part... you have to obtain additional usage rights from the artist, and pay for an extra map (without the text). I am pretty sure (not positive) that the files they get is flattened and has the text built in.
To me it seems a huge waste to have such amazing maps, and yet the players only get to see the crappy hand drawn maps the GM draws. In practice the published maps could still be graph paper maps and it would make no real difference. I still have to draw it on a battle map. So really 4/5 of consumers probably thinks Paizo and others still publish crappy maps like 20 years ago.
Maybe, just maybe they will finally agree. But I'm not holding my breath for it.
I have been asking for this since the first AP. They keep saying it is too labor intensive as a free, or even paid download, too expensive to order from the artist, and too large a file.
I can see the expense part... you have to obtain additional usage rights from the artist, and pay for an extra map (without the text). I am pretty sure (not positive) that the files they get is flattened and has the text built in.
To me it seems a huge waste to have such amazing maps, and yet the players only get to see the crappy hand drawn maps the GM draws. In practice the published maps could still be graph paper maps and it would make no real difference. I still have to draw it on a battle map. So really 4/5 of consumers probably thinks Paizo and others still publish crappy maps like 20 years ago.
Maybe, just maybe they will finally agree. But I'm not holding my breath for it.
So Krome, why aren't you using MapTool yet?
So Krome, why aren't you using MapTool yet?
For the same reason I'm not. Why should I spend the time re-entering the map into another tool so I can print a pretty map?
The point isn't to give the players a pretty map. The point is that since the DM *has* a pretty map already, it should not take so much effort to make it accessible as a battle mat.
|
|
So Krome, why aren't you using MapTool yet?For the same reason I'm not. Why should I spend the time re-entering the map into another tool so I can print a pretty map?
The point isn't to give the players a pretty map. The point is that since the DM *has* a pretty map already, it should not take so much effort to make it accessible as a battle mat.
And you are exactly right. It is a royal pain in the a$$ to remake a map when a great one already exists. Like I said, though, Paizo can save a lot of money on their games if they would go back to graph paper maps. Not like most people will ever know the difference.
I use Photoshop. I don't use MapTools because it has a fraction of the abilities Photoshop has.
And as a general rule I remake the map from scratch adding in more details than already existed. :)
THAT is why I don't use MapTools :)
I mean for play! Make the map in photoshop, play in maptool.
Like I said, though, Paizo can save a lot of money on their games if they would go back to graph paper maps.I miss those maps. I could actually draw them. :'(
If they did that, I wouldn't be able to play the way I do.
High quality art maps represent at least 60% of my commitment to this product line, as I play with a Virtual Tabletop exclusively.
Chief Technical Officer
|
I have been asking for this since the first AP. They keep saying it is too labor intensive as a free, or even paid download, too expensive to order from the artist, and too large a file.
I can see the expense part... you have to obtain additional usage rights from the artist, and pay for an extra map (without the text). I am pretty sure (not positive) that the files they get is flattened and has the text built in.
That's not an accurate restatement of the issues involved. From the bottom up:
We don't get flattened files anymore; that stopped being true in the very early days of the Pathfinder AP, back somewhere in the single-digit volume numbers.
Additional usage rights are not part of the picture. We have full usage rights.
File sizes do make such a concept unwieldy for some potential users, but it's not a show-stopper on our side.
Art expense is the main reason. I know a whole bunch of people out there think that all we have to do is "blow up the maps we have," but the truth is that the maps we have are designed for the size that we print them, and very few of them have anywhere near the amount of detail needed to look good at 1":5' scale. Getting maps made at that scale means a lot more work for the cartographer, and that means a lot more time spent, and that means a lot higher cost to us. (And more time spent per map *also* means we'd get fewer maps from any given cartographer in the same time, and that's problematic for products on monthly schedules.)
The real issue is spelled out very well in this post by James Jacobs. If you're still reading this thread, you need to read that post.
I'll add something to Vic's comment.
Some of the existing maps in Pathfinder issues work quite well visually as battlemaps when you do "blow them up". Some do not. For instance, Ft. Rannick's maps from #3 work in my game just great, but most of the Jorgenfist maps in #4 and runforge in #5 are depressingly sparse. Part of this is just higher level encounters taking up more space, with flying PCs and whatnot. But most of Rob Lazzarretti's wonderful work on 5ft square maps actually prints well to page and VTT. It's 10 and 20ft maps that suffer most.
If I had my wishes granted, the APs would keep to that benchmark of detail, but that's not always possible. My second wish would be to have doors and map objects that aren't nailed down given their own layer in the PDF. This would allow me to create more interactive maps than I can presently in Maptool. However, that might require a procedure change for the artists (who may not work in layers already, but some do) and may not be the most practical solution, but I would run with it if it were there.
|
|
Thanks for the posting Vic.
That makes sense and I remember that thread for a time ago. Record it down as my wish then. I love the maps in the books but I just wish I could pull the maps out and use it with my players. It would cut my prep time and make the scene run ALOT faster. It is my desire but until things change or this becomes possible logistically it will will remain a sweet, sweet dream.
|
|
I have been asking for this since the first AP. They keep saying it is too labor intensive as a free, or even paid download, too expensive to order from the artist, and too large a file.
I can see the expense part... you have to obtain additional usage rights from the artist, and pay for an extra map (without the text). I am pretty sure (not positive) that the files they get is flattened and has the text built in.
That's not an accurate restatement of the issues involved. From the bottom up:
We don't get flattened files anymore; that stopped being true in the very early days of the Pathfinder AP, back somewhere in the single-digit volume numbers.
Additional usage rights are not part of the picture. We have full usage rights.
File sizes do make such a concept unwieldy for some potential users, but it's not a show-stopper on our side.
Art expense is the main reason. I know a whole bunch of people out there think that all we have to do is "blow up the maps we have," but the truth is that the maps we have are designed for the size that we print them, and very few of them have anywhere near the amount of detail needed to look good at 1":5' scale. Getting maps made at that scale means a lot more work for the cartographer, and that means a lot more time spent, and that means a lot higher cost to us. (And more time spent per map *also* means we'd get fewer maps from any given cartographer in the same time, and that's problematic for products on monthly schedules.)
The real issue is spelled out very well in this post by James Jacobs. If you're still reading this thread, you need to read that post.
mmmm it was James that told me all of that other stuff in another topic... about a year ago I think.
And yeah I can absolutely see the extra cost due to size being a major issue. But I know that at least one cartographer replied to another topic saying that he normally created the map much larger than commissioned and reduced it to the size requested. Regardless, he would be foolish to not ask for increased pay for the larger submitted image.