DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Mostly Photoshop. You'll see some repeated elements in the waves, and the bevel effects really give it away.
The Lost Leagues / The Shadow Pearl
- Thread starter Two orcs
- Start date
Mostly Photoshop. You'll see some repeated elements in the waves, and the bevel effects really give it away.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
Getting back to the question of hex maps, this is what I am talking about. The party wants to go from hex 001.002 to hex 001.000. Here is a basic map of hilly country:
And here is the sort of thing I am proposing:
The hash marks represent changes in elevation (hash marks on the downward side). The trees indicate that woods separate the hexes. Both indicate that it takes additional movement to cross into a hex if you cross a hex border with that feature than if you cross a border that does not have such a feature (mechanics vary by edition).
The elevation/tree combination could be interpreted by the DM as either being doubly difficult because both trees and slope impede progress, or being easier because the trees give handholds for a really steep slope. It all depends on what slope the DM wants to impose. So it is open to interpretation, but it gives a little extra to inspire the DM.
I'm not happy with using the tree icon, but my first thought, using a green line to indicate a vegetation barrier, is a problem for the colourblind. If you wanted to publish something like that, you would have to either come up with some other kind of line (eg. dots or dashes), or make sure the shade of green had a distinct value so it would not be confused with red political borders, or both.
And here is the sort of thing I am proposing:
The hash marks represent changes in elevation (hash marks on the downward side). The trees indicate that woods separate the hexes. Both indicate that it takes additional movement to cross into a hex if you cross a hex border with that feature than if you cross a border that does not have such a feature (mechanics vary by edition).
The elevation/tree combination could be interpreted by the DM as either being doubly difficult because both trees and slope impede progress, or being easier because the trees give handholds for a really steep slope. It all depends on what slope the DM wants to impose. So it is open to interpretation, but it gives a little extra to inspire the DM.
I'm not happy with using the tree icon, but my first thought, using a green line to indicate a vegetation barrier, is a problem for the colourblind. If you wanted to publish something like that, you would have to either come up with some other kind of line (eg. dots or dashes), or make sure the shade of green had a distinct value so it would not be confused with red political borders, or both.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
That's how I generally use them as well, as "cliff", and "escarpment". Not necessarily sheer, but certainly very steep and impeding movement. You can usually climb an escarpment without special skill, but it can be challenging getting over the lip at the top. I also use them for hill formations where one side is much steeper than the other, like cuestas and strike ridges. Hash marks on both sides could signify a hogback ridge.
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Why not just bold a hex border and color it to denote a complication with passing? Red for impassible, Yellow for difficult, Green for "roll on this random complication development table" or whatever?
I don't think you need the "sheer" lines. There's not a lot of one-way travel in D&D, especially against a determined party. Going up a steep cliff is going to be nearly as difficult as going down a steep cliff, just as with rivers, mountains, canyons, and any other geographical feature that impedes movement.
I don't think you need the "sheer" lines. There's not a lot of one-way travel in D&D, especially against a determined party. Going up a steep cliff is going to be nearly as difficult as going down a steep cliff, just as with rivers, mountains, canyons, and any other geographical feature that impedes movement.
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
That's a good compromise, especially if the hex map already has colored hexes since that many contrasting colors might get a bit loud.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
Differentiated lines give you an indication of why it is difficult to traverse. And the hash lines are available in Worldographer and very easy to use. And sometimes you care about whether the players need to go up or down.
This isn't just a question of difficult/not difficult terrain, this is a nod to specific challenges that players have to overcome. Going up a cliff, down a cliff, or across a river are all different challenges. I mean, you could just say "takes n extra units of movement to cross" and be done with it, but that is a bit dull to me.
Double line is a good idea if I use a program without ready hash marks.
You aren't the only gamer I know who is colour blind. But colour may be the easiest solution. And then I could use solid, dashed or dotted lines to indicated degree of permeability.
I get what you mean about preferring more evocative maps, and ideally there would be both. Evocative, non-technical maps make me want to play D&D, whereas technical hex maps help me run it. Plus you could give the players the evocative, old-style map, and they would have to deal with the fact that no everything was on the map. They know there are hills because it is on their player map, but a technical map helps the DM give them the experience of hills, ridges, box canyons, etc.
I note hashes and coloured lines are easy for a DM to add to a paper map as they improvise terrain (or use use a random generator to create it - one of my side projects is to make an Appendix A style table for mapping out terrain as though it was a dungeon).
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
This isn't going to be 100% applicable because it technically is a "octagon" map developed for the micro rather than the macro scale... more of an adventure map than a setting map... but it encapsulates a lot of how I could envision hex maps working as a tool rather than just a visual reference.
Here's the "oct map" I created for my homebrewed post-apocalypse generation ship space survival game.
Some elements of note:
The colored borders around the octagons denote what is found there and the danger it presents to the party (red is dangerous situations, purple is environmental hazard, green is a place of respite or reward, etc.). It also denotes the complications of moving between hexes (of note: my game is on a spaceship - moving horizontally along the octagons means venturing through different connected sections of the same deck, moving vertically means going up/down a deck naturally by stairs or elevators or whatever, and moving diagonally means going to a different part of the ship through an unusual route like through the air ducts or by being smuggled in or whatever - The triangles connecting diagonal areas are colored to represent the difficulty of this non-traditional approach).
The colored areas behind the octagons represent the section of the ship that these adventures take place (for instance, everything in Areas A1 through H1 takes place in a part of the ship called "Madbi"). This is perhaps another way you could encapsulate terrain or biome or whatever on a map without actually filling in anything on the hex/oct.
The contents of each octagon are meant to be rolled up and written into the octagon as a reference using tables. Red octagons have table entries like "marauder clan" or "infested with mutants", green ones have stuff like "hungry man who will owe you a favor if you feed him" or "untouched cargo bay", grey have neutral stuff, and so on. Each table applies to each area of the ship the the octagon is found within; for instance, there's a table for Red octagons in Madbi, and a different table for Red octagons in Manetube, because you'll encounter different groups and obstacles in different parts of the ship. I roll up what the octagon holds, and notate it in the octagon directly so I can reference the contents. I also pre-roll the complications that crossing through borders between octagons might have and notate them in the octagon as well.
You'll hopefully also note that the octagons are presently blank - the reference has been moved to the side of the map rather than putting "B12, B13, B14" etc into every applicable octagon. I find this less intrusive, but then again, I'm using octagons not hexagons, and I recognize that this approach doesn't work well with the staggered offsetting that hexagons have over octagons which prevents them from making neat rows/columns. Yes, octagons are harder to get an accurate sense of related scale when compared to hexagons, but I argue that the role of the map as a DM tool is better served when such exactitudes are omitted from being captured, rather than working the whole map to be a perfectly accurate scale image. I am a proponent of not catering to obsessive nitpicking on my player's part, which I find detracts from play more than it helps.
Anywhoo, I realize this is a bit like me throwing a flowchart at you when you want to design a diagram, but maybe you'll find something to appropriate.
Here's the "oct map" I created for my homebrewed post-apocalypse generation ship space survival game.
Some elements of note:
The colored borders around the octagons denote what is found there and the danger it presents to the party (red is dangerous situations, purple is environmental hazard, green is a place of respite or reward, etc.). It also denotes the complications of moving between hexes (of note: my game is on a spaceship - moving horizontally along the octagons means venturing through different connected sections of the same deck, moving vertically means going up/down a deck naturally by stairs or elevators or whatever, and moving diagonally means going to a different part of the ship through an unusual route like through the air ducts or by being smuggled in or whatever - The triangles connecting diagonal areas are colored to represent the difficulty of this non-traditional approach).
The colored areas behind the octagons represent the section of the ship that these adventures take place (for instance, everything in Areas A1 through H1 takes place in a part of the ship called "Madbi"). This is perhaps another way you could encapsulate terrain or biome or whatever on a map without actually filling in anything on the hex/oct.
The contents of each octagon are meant to be rolled up and written into the octagon as a reference using tables. Red octagons have table entries like "marauder clan" or "infested with mutants", green ones have stuff like "hungry man who will owe you a favor if you feed him" or "untouched cargo bay", grey have neutral stuff, and so on. Each table applies to each area of the ship the the octagon is found within; for instance, there's a table for Red octagons in Madbi, and a different table for Red octagons in Manetube, because you'll encounter different groups and obstacles in different parts of the ship. I roll up what the octagon holds, and notate it in the octagon directly so I can reference the contents. I also pre-roll the complications that crossing through borders between octagons might have and notate them in the octagon as well.
You'll hopefully also note that the octagons are presently blank - the reference has been moved to the side of the map rather than putting "B12, B13, B14" etc into every applicable octagon. I find this less intrusive, but then again, I'm using octagons not hexagons, and I recognize that this approach doesn't work well with the staggered offsetting that hexagons have over octagons which prevents them from making neat rows/columns. Yes, octagons are harder to get an accurate sense of related scale when compared to hexagons, but I argue that the role of the map as a DM tool is better served when such exactitudes are omitted from being captured, rather than working the whole map to be a perfectly accurate scale image. I am a proponent of not catering to obsessive nitpicking on my player's part, which I find detracts from play more than it helps.
Anywhoo, I realize this is a bit like me throwing a flowchart at you when you want to design a diagram, but maybe you'll find something to appropriate.
Last edited:
L
logruspattern
Guest
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
Thanks, I will look at that.
L
logruspattern
Guest
The relevant pages are document page numbers 2 and 3. "Hills" on page 3 has what you want concerning elevation changes.
The map scale is 40 yards hexes. I think game turns are 1 minute. So completely different scales from what you're talking about. Might still be useful.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Dead links now... Why not post them inline?
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Both of them worked for me.
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Weird. I've been clicking the ones you quoted in your post and they work just fine.
Two orcs
Officially better than you, according to PoN
This project lives. Looking for playtesters of the mass combat to fine tune it. Sides are:
Werewolves
The Howling Baron
Sir Edric the Wolfpup
30 werewolf knights
50 wolves
Rebels
A party of 5th levels PCs as officers/heroes
45 hunters
705 peasants
Peasants are equipped with silver weaponry, bundles of wolfsbane or firebombs of ghost tar.
Werewolves
The Howling Baron
Sir Edric the Wolfpup
30 werewolf knights
50 wolves
Rebels
A party of 5th levels PCs as officers/heroes
45 hunters
705 peasants
Peasants are equipped with silver weaponry, bundles of wolfsbane or firebombs of ghost tar.