| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| wolberg |
Posted - 24 Sep 2010 : 21:00:25
I proudly present my own, self made Map of Faerun, based on the famous 3e map, and reworking all the 4e changes into it:
http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/1723/faerunrlarge3vs4v3.jpg
Hookay, having cartography as one of my hobbies for years, the really bad situation of the - sorry WotC - mediocre Faerun map for the 4e left me no rest. So I took the really good 3e map, and worked it over. Here is how I worked:
First it was clear that the NW of the map was almost unchanged. So I took the distance between Luskan and Athkatla as measure for the resize. On the western part of the worldmap it does function ok. Even there whoever made the mad just followed the coastlines VERY roughly. Sorry, but again... that 4e map we got is really really bad.
Now the issue is, it seems the person making the original 4e map used only regional parts of the full Faerun map, so in the regions, the distance match mostly, but over the whole map, it doesn't work. Sometimes cities are suddenly much closer, while others are much further away, which makes no sense, since when cities would move closer a mountain range would fold up. Which just isn't the case. If fact, the entire process of the underchasm breaking down and the lands in the south getting under the ocean makes no sense in any term of geological movement. There should be some new montain ranges as result of the pressure. Actually such a chasm breaking open would create such an earthquake, it would literally leave no single structure of Faerun standing - but let's assume it was unexplainable magic.
I took the assumption that the old 3e map was the correct one, in terms of distances, so I shifted the official 4e map around in places to make it fit to the setup of the 3e, which is way more detailled and superior. Also, as you see, I stuck artistically with the 3e map. Some place have been renamed, many are now "drowned" or "ruins of...", actually quite a lot.
In many cases I had to make a compromise between the 4e and 3e map informations. An example is Calimshan. In the 3e setting Calimport lies flat at the ocean with a horizontal coastline. In 4e Calimport is deep inside some bay. Now the Faerun guide of the 4e book mentions no such upheaval, so it looks a bit like some mistake. I extended the land similar to the 4e setting, but not that large, as a sort of compormise. So in some way the map is a matter of guesswork.
If you see any gross errors, like misspellings, forgotten markers or what, please feel free to let me know, and I will rework it in the next version.
I hope you guys are at least somewhat satisfied with my work. Feel free to distrubute it as much as allowed. ^^ |
| 6 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| idilippy |
Posted - 26 Sep 2010 : 01:31:59
I don't mind maps that are meant to be "rough sketches" of what the characters in the setting would see as long as the formatting matches that. Little things like adding a map-maker's signature, using a background that suggests old parchment, or anything that would identify the map as being made in character would have been enough for me to believe that's what the designers intended. As it is I think the "they meant it that way" argument is nothing more than an excuse for a pretty bad map.
That said, your map is quite good wolberg, even to someone(me) who doesn't use the post-spellplague realms. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 26 Sep 2010 : 00:42:58
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I had considered making one of these, but since this site was afraid to post my Returned Abeir map, I didn't bother. WotC is VERY protective of ALL of 4e, including the FR IP.
<chop>
So protective, in fact, that we don't see the FR logo on anything anymore, even the novels... or maybe this should be seen as saying something else... 
Very nice job on the map, wolberg. I don't play 4E, nor do I use the Spellplague as published, but this is a far better map than the one that went into the FRCG. As Markustay said, "they meant to do that," but it still didn't do anything to win over fans of the old Realms like myself.
I'm very interested in this new Neverwinter product... hopefully it will answer a few more questions than it raises, but I suppose that would be breaking one of Ed's unwritten rules of the Realms... so I'll just hope for something that makes me want to buy it, even if I don't play 4E.  |
| Markustay |
Posted - 25 Sep 2010 : 19:21:16
I had considered making one of these, but since this site was afraid to post my Returned Abeir map, I didn't bother. WotC is VERY protective of ALL of 4e, including the FR IP.
I will agree on the "really, REALLY bad" part though. 
Nice job - did you super-impose the new map over the old to make the changes?
From the few designers willing to comment on it (all of whom expressed their own disappointment), the 4eFR map is NOT accurate - it is meant to be a VERY rough 'sketch' of how Faerūnians themselves picture it looking like now. The nature of the map is intended for DMs to nudge stuff around as they see fit, without breaking canon, hence it's high degree of inaccuracy.
In other words, "They meant to do that". |
| Iluvrien |
Posted - 25 Sep 2010 : 17:44:07
I saw this on the WotC forums, it is nice to see it here. I look forward to seeing the future versions of it. |
| GRYPHON |
Posted - 25 Sep 2010 : 14:37:27
Nice... |
| Quale |
Posted - 25 Sep 2010 : 12:34:51
quote:
Originally posted by wolberg
If you see any gross errors, like misspellings, forgotten markers or what, please feel free to let me know, and I will rework it in the next version.
I don't see Myth Nantar, and Lantan is sunken |
|
|
