| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
 Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 07:43:22
|
Some questions for you, dear scribe:
- In your humble (or perhaps not so humble) opinion, should the map of Faerun be stretched back out to its original, pre-3E shape?
- Should WotC provide a detailed (zoom in and out to views of cities and important dungeons, with keyed entries and the like) digital map of the Realms?
- If yes, should that digital map be free to all, paid for by yearly subscription or available as a free download via a code included with the 5E Realms Campaign Guide?
- What single feature must the 5E Realms map have to best serve you, and why?
- Please feel free to include any other useful-to-those-in-charge commentary about Realms maps.
REMINDER:
Please keep any negative commentary about previous map changes brought on by edition transitions out of the scroll. We've heard it all before and it does nothing to advance the conversation, m'kay?
|
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 07 Jan 2014 07:50:47
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 08:07:42
|
Sure, stretch it back out because "land is the only thing they're not making any more of." (Though 4E did in a very obtuse way, so that concept could be dangerous, especially seeing as we have the Sundering... da da dum.)
Then in the FRC[X] (whatever it'll be called in 5E), emphasize the wide open wilderness or the unruly monster and bandit ridden, petty kingdom riddled expanses. Highlight the concept of uncertain, porous borders (different from disputed borders, which should also exist a plenty). Add that complexity that drives some people nuts because there is no clear definitive answer. More than anything, I think that's what the Realms is missing, an emphasis on the sandbox feel from the old days with overland travel being long, harsh, and filled with unknowns but potentially rewarding. This in spite of the whole Points of Light concept during 4E, which was a we-did-we-didn't sort of roundabout.
As for the details on monetization, I'll leave that to Wizards. As I've said earlier, if they're up to it, they have the resources to produce the RPG greatest products and supplements ever, including fantasy maps or atlases. However, it does come down to whether they can make money from them, understandably since hiring the skills of a cartographer isn't free, or cheap I would imagine. |
 |
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1882 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 09:27:14
|
1. In your humble (or perhaps not so humble) opinion, should the map of Faerun be stretched back out to its original, pre-3E shape?
Yes and no. What I want is a map-pack of Faerun with different styles of global maps within (mercator, mollweide, polar as well as political, topographical, climate, etc).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Should WotC provide a detailed (zoom in and out to views of cities and important dungeons, with keyed entries and the like) digital map of the Realms?
Yes. In this case, more is better. I like choices and options. Give us pretty much everything and let we the player decide what we will use and what we will drop.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3. If yes, should that digital map be free to all, paid for by yearly subscription or available as a free download via a code included with the 5E Realms Campaign Guide?
Well, I would like it to be a free feature online. But I could get on board with a yearly subscription...provided that subscription gets you everything they will offer online and that it's a SINGLE subscription. The one thing I don't like about Paizo's approach is the numerous subscriptions you need to take full advantage of their features.
Otherwise, absolutely yes. A zoom in/out feature could be very helpful for both players and DMs. Also, it would be nice for it to be a downloadable tool instead of strictly online access (for when servers go down or things change at WotC or *gasp* the product line is taken over by another company one day).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4. What single feature must the 5E Realms map have to best serve you, and why?
DETAILS. So many details that it almost clutters up the map. I want every town, city, village and ruin in the world available on that map (and all in the proper locations too, please). At the very least, provide the bulk of these details on the map and make DARN sure that ALL of them are on the online map discussed above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Please feel free to include any other useful-to-those-in-charge commentary about Realms maps.
Maps are one of the primary things that attract initial players to a setting (it follows just behind the art work methinks...and the map is part of the art). A good, polished appearance on both the art work and the map is a must. The style needs to be pleasing (Eberron had good styles in 3e as did the 2e Realms' styles). The art may be fantasy, but proportions need to be realistic and should not be blocky in appearance. The maps need to have color schemes that clearly delineate topography without being too sharp in contrast.
We need the maps in multiple scales as well. The standard 90 and 30 mile scales are good methinks. But...we need to ensure that all areas in the Realms get a 30 mile map so that we can fit the entire continent together. Eventually, I would like to see additional 30 mile scales for the Hordelands, Kara-Tur, and Al-Quadim. And, although I don't think it will happen...the rest of the planet as well.
Final thought: WotC has a great chance to get everything right (or at least close enough so as to please the vast majority enough to make the setting soar again). Please, learn from past mistakes. You now know what works and you know what doesn't. Make decisions based on that information and the Realms will become a gold mine again. Cheers. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
Edited by - The Arcanamach on 07 Jan 2014 10:30:12 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 16:07:42
|
Thats a really tough question, and one I am not sure even I have an answer for (does that surprise you?)
On the one hand, I would love that. In fact, its weird that you made this thread because yeterday I almost started a similar one. I was working on one of my 'blended' maps - the ones where I try to form a compromise between the 1e/2e terrain layout ad the 3e/4e terrain layout.
Then I ran into a conundrum - the 4e map of Vassa didn't work AT ALL when I superimposed it. No matter what I did, it would not line-up with any map from any edition - it was 'its own thing'. And therein lies the problem - when we take those little, more-detailed maps of the Realms and try to paste them all together, it simply does not work. Back in 1e/2e they tried to keep the maps consistent - the Volo's Guides were marvelous at it; but since 3e, each regional map became its own separate entity, and I am not so sure it can all be put back into a cohesive whole.
Most people are aware of how much we lost with the 3e map, but what most folk DON'T realize is that we gained a lot as well, in those regional splats. One of the biggest problems I've had with my re-paints (of old 1e/2e maps) is that I then can't place the newer features properly, because the entire N/S axis is so skewed.
Not trying to be negative - I am just pointing out the problems one faces when one tries to do an 'every edition' map. Its just not possible, unless they do create a 5e map that OVER-WRITES all previous maps, and they then use that ONE MAP moving forward for everything (which means it has to be scalable). What I am saying is, they need to say that the Sundering made those changes (if you need an in-game reason), and thats how the world is, end of story, and it would also somehow have to be retroactive (once again, blame the Sundering for 'changes to the timeline'). Why would they need to do that? Because when a settlement is described in 1e/2e as being "south and east of such-&-such", and then a 3e/4e map shows it north instead, we have a problem. you can't write 'support for all eras of play' lore when the maps do not agree with each other.
Whatever they do, they need to present it as "this is the way it IS, and its also the way it ALWAYS WAS". That would invalidate certain previous lore (the N/S thing I mentioned above), but it would give us a clean slate moving forward. Since we CAN'T create one consistent map for all eras, then that is my opinion - whatever they decide, they have to make it so for every edition, retroactively. I would love for them to go back to the old presentation (and blame the 3e/4e map weirdness on "changes that happened during the ToT that mortals were unaware of"), but if they don't, then fine. Just pick one and stick with it, thats all I am asking for. When i I try to paste a smaller regional map into a larger one (from the same edition) and nothing ines-up, that is a HUGE problem, IMHO.
I hope I kept this neutral-toned. I just thought everyone needed to be aware that what you propose is not as simple as it appears. Anything they decide WILL invalidate something else.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 07 Jan 2014 16:12:33 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 16:19:59
|
You know what - re-reading what I just wrote, I realized I DID create a fix for it. Blame it all on The Sundering (and more specifically, the ToT). The world somehow changed because of all the 'cosmic craziness' during the Avatar crisis, and no-one was aware of it (mortals, anyway). That way, no retro-active mandates need to be applied (the maps will all be correct for the edition they appeared in).
I know that when both Ed and RAS write they reference the older (1e/2e) maps. I KNOW this because I am very big at hunting-down every single geographic description in every single FR book I can get my grubby little hands on. This has lead me to realize that several of the authors do that - reference the original material (once again, its that N/S axis thing that comes into play here). For instance, the entire Cleric Quintet doesn't work with the 3e map... and yet he revisited that storyline with The Ghost King. RAS simply ignored the changes.
So, if the older maps are good enough for Ed & RAS (and certain others), and those are the ones they are looking at/thinking of when they write, then by all means we SHOULD go back to the previous (1e/2e) layout and blame it all on the Avatar Crisis for "making the world go to hell in a handbag". Besides, doesn't more 'open areas' mean more of the PoL setting they were shooting for in 4e? Spread things back out, give us lots of those 'fiddly bits' DMs can play with, and then emphasize the portal network that Faerûn is famous for; there was never a need to shrink the map, when everything is 'right next door' (with magic!)
Hell, if they really want to 'make the world a little smaller' (figuratively), all they'd have to do is is play-up a new Halruaan airship travel service. I know, I know... a bit to 'Eberron' for some folks, but if you don't like portals everywhere, it is another option. It would also help fix Halruaa itself - they would be 'people without a country', in a manner of speaking (like the seafolk/Atha'an Miere in WoT, except in the air, not the sea). Imagine Thay-like enclaves, except floating above (or just outside) large cities, where Halruaans arrange travel and conduct other embassy-like matters. In fact, they could even bring back Selûnarra and merge them with the Halruaan survivors, so that they could have a powerful floating city of their own somewhere (off-camera, perhaps?)
Sorry for going astray here, but I get excited when I get ideas about how to fix the lore and maps. Think of it as me 'being positive'.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 07 Jan 2014 21:52:06 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1882 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 18:05:14
|
Quick addendum: I would like something that states clearly the travel times from various cities/towns to others (foot, mounted, by air and by sea). The travel times should take into account cases where roads are paved vs. simple trails. It also would be nice to come up with a write-up on where portals exist and where they lead (a Known Portals of the Realms section).
As to Markus' statements: I prefer accuracy in mapping (which is why I would like a map pack with various types of maps in it). That said, if it's easier for the powers that be to simply stretch everything back out (mercator 1e/2e style) then I can live with it. But, personally, I would prefer if they require all future novelists to refer to a 'grand master map' that is both accurate and complete. They can always say that Ao 'set' the world into a given form and be done with explanations there. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 18:09:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
In your humble (or perhaps not so humble) opinion, should the map of Faerun be stretched back out to its original, pre-3E shape?
Yup. The Sundering needs to unmake the changes wrought in the physical and metaphysical Realms since 1357, and reverting to the shape of the 1e and 2e maps is part of that.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Should WotC provide a detailed (zoom in and out to views of cities and important dungeons, with keyed entries and the like) digital map of the Realms?
Yup. Paper maps are great as art, as long as they're actually artistic, and they're great for player handouts, but for the DM an electronic map is so far superior that there's no legitimate comparison. Player handouts (customized for each gaming session) can be printed out, and the artistic overviews of regions and continents can be hung on the wall and gazed upon with proper reverence.
A digital map solves the problems Markus brought up, and others, and is the only way to solve some of them.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
If yes, should that digital map be free to all, paid for by yearly subscription or available as a free download via a code included with the 5E Realms Campaign Guide?
Yup. (as in: "Do you want regular fries or curly fries?" "Yes.")
I would love for the map to be free. However, I have to acknowledge that if I were in charge of creating that map (which I would of course love to be, as many of us would be) I would have to charge some sort of ongoing fee because there would be ongoing work and I would need to pay my excellent people for their hard work. Because every time a designer or author adds a town or battlefield or other landmark that we've never seen before, it would get added to the map. Creation of a proper map is a herculean task, but it also requires maintenance to avoid becoming obsolete, and that maintenance is not trivial. There's a lot of information that can and should be stored on a map of the Realms, and all of that information needs to be added over time. Which means the data entry folks are earning an ongoing paycheck.
I'll also add, without being familiar with the specifics of Paizo's system, it sounds like it's modular and that's more good than bad. Using this map as an example... I think everybody would want it, but someone out there is probably going to reject the new map and continue using 1e/2e maps. But maybe they're interested in other parts of the online offerings. They shouldn't have to pay for something they don't want, which means one blanket subscription fee is less appropriate than a modular one.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
What single feature must the 5E Realms map have to best serve you, and why?Please feel free to include any other useful-to-those-in-charge commentary about Realms maps.
GIS: Having taken some geography courses in college, including cartography and GIS*, I can say with certainty that previous maps have been done by probably-well-meaning folks without the proper expertise. The electronic atlas was a step in the right direction, but the folks who made it were either (A) not given sufficient time/compensation to make a great product or (B) just unable to make a great product.
* GIS stands for geographic information systems, and basically means "maps + computers = awesome." When you see a modern-day atlas/map with layers that can be turned on and off to show (for example) population, income, streets, sewers, property values, property ownership, zoning/land use/etc... that's where GIS shines... every useful bit of information available, while allowing you to display just what you want to see, when you want to see it. Totally customizable. It requires a huge investment of effort to make the map, but minimal effort to use it and get a whole lot of value out of it.
As a side note, an atlas of the Realms which is produced using GIS will easily allow us to view/print maps in whatever projection we want, in addition to the spinnable/zoomable globe that the electronic atlas failed to really provide.
Price: Another key to success, imho, is that each piece of D&D's electronic toolset (character generation, map, and whatever else) needs to be as inexpensive as humanly possible. Subscription-based video games have lost hundreds/thousands of customers because the cost outweighed the joy of playing the game. The same will be true here, if the cost of using the online tools outweighs the perceived benefit. WotC/Hasbro cannot look at the map as a profit-generating tool. Profit should come from providing awesome lore. The map adds nothing to Realmslore... it merely makes it easier to share and use, and that doesn't justify price gouging.
My apologies if this seems to cross the line into being-negative. It's not intended, but it's kinda unavoidable when talking about how much better things could be than what they've been in the past. 
Awesome conversation to start, Jeremy... I hope more will weigh in on it, and that Hasbro will see it and like it. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 19:55:33
|
In your humble (or perhaps not so humble) opinion, should the map of Faerun be stretched back out to its original, pre-3E shape?
Oh ye dancing gods, yes!
Should WotC provide a detailed (zoom in and out to views of cities and important dungeons, with keyed entries and the like) digital map of the Realms?
That would be awesome!
If yes, should that digital map be free to all, paid for by yearly subscription or available as a free download via a code included with the 5E Realms Campaign Guide?
I would prefer free to all, but I think the last idea is the best blend between my desire for free stuff and WotC's desire to not give stuff away for free.
Another idea is that the initial map is free or comes with the 5E Guide, but later additions to it can only be obtained thru the DDI. Or perhaps a free basic map (with major features) and a premium one with the finer details.
What single feature must the 5E Realms map have to best serve you, and why?
Zooming in and out -- and having it legible -- would be great. Some of the existing maps are nice, but aren't all that legible...
Folks have mentioned distance... The 1E and 2E FRCS maps had transparent overlays, useful for measuring distance. Something like a grid/hex system that could be toggled on/off would be great. This would have to scale with the zooming in and out, of course.
Please feel free to include any other useful-to-those-in-charge commentary about Realms maps.
Accuracy is the biggest thing for me. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 07 Jan 2014 19:58:00 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1882 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 21:10:51
|
quote:
I'll also add, without being familiar with the specifics of Paizo's system, it sounds like it's modular and that's more good than bad. Using this map as an example... I think everybody would want it, but someone out there is probably going to reject the new map and continue using 1e/2e maps. But maybe they're interested in other parts of the online offerings. They shouldn't have to pay for something they don't want, which means one blanket subscription fee is less appropriate than a modular one.
I can partially concede this point. Paizo subscriptions are modular in nature (there is a novel subscription, a module subscription, a map subscription etc). I see how the player's cost MIGHT be lower by only purchasing those subscriptions that he/she is interested in. The thing is, though, Dnd has two long-standing magazines (and Polyhedron on top of that) along with other potential subscriptions. Perhaps Wizbro could allow discounts for multiple subscriptions if they go that route. I just don't want to spend money on Dragon, Dungeon, DDi, modules, maps etcetcetcetcetc. I prefer one reasonable price to get everything (and they still have to provide a good product if I'm going to spend money at all...I'm not committed to them yet). |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 21:31:59
|
The problem of a one price fits all subscription is when they put two significant portions of the subscription package on hiatus as they've done for Dragon and Dungeon magazine. Then what are we paying for? The same price for less material than we originally signed on for.
The individual subscriptions, as Paizo does it, means a customer can add or cancel subscriptions as they see fit based on the upcoming product for those subscriptions.
Also, many of the virtual tabletops have at least some freemium starting point. Subscriptions are nice if you can get the volume flowing in, but if competitors offer even minimally comparable alternatives, they're going to draw players away, diminishing the dominance of your product. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 22:08:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If yes, should that digital map be free to all, paid for by yearly subscription or available as a free download via a code included with the 5E Realms Campaign Guide?
I would prefer free to all, but I think the last idea is the best blend between my desire for free stuff and WotC's desire to not give stuff away for free.
Another idea is that the initial map is free or comes with the 5E Guide, but later additions to it can only be obtained thru the DDI. Or perhaps a free basic map (with major features) and a premium one with the finer details.
I realized I didn't get into the diigtal aspect (even though I made 2 long posts  ), but its easier just for me to quote Wooly here, who I am in full agreement. I agree with his entire post, but I only quoted the above for extrapolation:
I was thinking something along these lines myself. They need to generate income (otherwise 5e is a waste of time, right?), but the catch-22 is that if you charge for a map, then only your fans will SEE the map. Who is going to buy a map of something they have no interest in? So something along the lines of what Wooly proposed - there has to be a FREE version of the campaign map up somewhere for all to enjoy (and posters of it in the LGS's and bookstores, dammit!) We have to get the buzz going on this, and a beautiful fantasy map is a great way to pull people in. Bigger ones for displays, and maybe some smaller (15x12?) 'roll-up' maps available at stores for people who purchase the campaign guide (while supplies last - that will make the push for early-adopters).
Of course the CG should have an insert map as well - but the nicer one for the first buyers is a great gimmick (and also offer it to pre-pay customers, like they do with CG's). They can make it "available for purchase" (perhaps in several sizes) at a later date for folks who missed out.
That map - a STATIC one - should always be available as FREE download. That will represent the setting on the first day of 'year 1' of the 5th edition Forgotten Realms. Then create a DDi version, scalable & customizable, with all the bells & whistles (including constant updates) for the DDi. WE need some great artwork (including other stuff, like iconics) to get those gamers buying FR again, and we can save the deluxe goodies for people who actually spend the cash (and something like a zoomabale map, linked to other articles in the DDi, will get people to subscribe). Imagine clicking on a place, and not only getting a brief synopsis, but also a list of other resources connected to it, including adventures from every edition. Wouldn't that be a whole 'nother level of awesome? Actually make the map interactive with the Wiki.
And if they need someone to maintain it, who is tech-savvy, knows his way around drawing programs, AND has a great working knowledge of Realms geography, well... I know a guy...  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 07 Jan 2014 22:18:51 |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 22:25:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
there has to be a FREE version of the campaign map up somewhere for all to enjoy (and posters of it in the LGS's and bookstores, dammit!)
Yar. I definitely agree with poster maps. Compressed versions could and should be freely available online. A Schley, perhaps, or another rendering which is at least as much art as map. I favor a Faerun-wide map and also maps for Cormyr, the Sword Coast North, the Inner Sea, Impiltur, Thay, and each of the other regions we enjoy playing in -- my personal vote would be for the Old Empires. Those should all be large paper poster maps which we can frame as we see fit.
Totally separate from the computer map which the DM can use for all of the campaign's needs. The ones on the wall are art, and not held to the same strict standards of lining up with the bordering regions because nobody needs to hold a ruler up to it and measure distances. We buy it (or look at the thumbnails online) as art.
The computer atlas version would line up (across Faerun, not just along the borders of each adjacent nation) and the software would perform measurements for us with as much precision as desired. |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 07 Jan 2014 22:26:42 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 22:53:00
|
Lands change over time, borders change all the time, in the Realms we see vastly accelerated changes of terrain and weather and (in a few cases) even entire continents. Some things - towns, cities, ruins, roads, castles and keeps - might also change dramatically over short timespans without changing their locations.
A single grand map cannot present all these details; WotC must choose to either publish a number of “snapshot“ maps covering interesting periods or to focus on a single grand map which details things as they exist within the “current“ era. I think (and I dislike) that WotC will strive to maintain maps which prefer their post-3E setting, they won‘t retcon anything (even to correct their previous retcons), they won‘t invalidate anything their authors and designers have thus far produced, and their most recent works (including planned works-in-progress) will always gain privilege over older materials which it makes “obsolete“ or “inaccurate“. So, while we might see Halruaa magically put right back where it belongs, we won‘t ever see any admission that it never disappeared during the Spellplague.
The relative “size“ of the land depends on which modes of transport are available. Characters who have to battle through endless orc encampments and monster lairs will rarely venture far from civilization, while those who can teleport of pilot a Spelljammer will want to lunch in Kara-Tur before visiting a Zakharan auction house to purchase exotic wood carvings to decorate their homes in Tantras and Waterdeep. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jan 2014 : 23:53:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Imagine clicking on a place, and not only getting a brief synopsis, but also a list of other resources connected to it, including adventures from every edition. Wouldn't that be a whole 'nother level of awesome? Actually make the map interactive with the Wiki.
I've been hoping for something along these lines for a while. Don't stop at adventures. Include a list of NPCs (and relevant locations connected to them) from the novels (and adventures/sourcebooks) that are based in, adventure in/around, or move through the various sections of the map. Perhaps a brief synopsis of the novels as well (likely via linking to a central Wiki). And then for WotC to get their due, have a link with each tidbit (novel or adventure) to a copy that can be bought and downloaded from WotC. In the case of adventures, perhaps include some type of notes for if you intend on using them in a different era than they were originally written to take place in. |
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
|
|
|
Cards77
Senior Scribe
USA
747 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jan 2014 : 01:43:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Some questions for you, dear scribe:
- In your humble (or perhaps not so humble) opinion, should the map of Faerun be stretched back out to its original, pre-3E shape?
- Should WotC provide a detailed (zoom in and out to views of cities and important dungeons, with keyed entries and the like) digital map of the Realms?
- If yes, should that digital map be free to all, paid for by yearly subscription or available as a free download via a code included with the 5E Realms Campaign Guide?
- What single feature must the 5E Realms map have to best serve you, and why?
- Please feel free to include any other useful-to-those-in-charge commentary about Realms maps.
REMINDER:
Please keep any negative commentary about previous map changes brought on by edition transitions out of the scroll. We've heard it all before and it does nothing to advance the conversation, m'kay?
1. Yes. I agree with above poster that the huge sandbox feel and that epic feeling of journeying to different or even neighboring regions has been lost.
2. Yes. Zoom in views of all cities and dungeons with keys is VERY important. Otherwise we end up endlessly flipping to different books, many of which have CONFLICTING maps of the same city/region, even from the SAME edition. A digital standarized map can be relatively easily made and would alleviate these problems.
3. Said map should be free if you buy the 5E FRCS, and if you do not buy the FRCS it should be available for purchase. All updates and errata should be included free of charge.
4. The MOST critical factor that the map must have is ALL of the locations, at least at some scale. I'm so sick of having one regional map show various locations, and then the full Realms map showing other various locations, making us constantly refer back and forth.
ALSO, it MUST have great METADATA attached to it. Including a table showing all distances (in miles) from one city to another. Such a table is easily compiled.
It also is critical that the scale of the map, match said distances.
*EDIT*
Also, it's absolutely CRITICAL that ALL locations are shown on the map, EVERYTHING.
As was echoed by other posters: The value of the map in attracting new and previous players, and satisfying current players CANNOT be understated. Even my wife sits and STARES at the map and then says "I want to go there!" That is just so critical. |
Edited by - Cards77 on 08 Jan 2014 01:46:53 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1882 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jan 2014 : 11:35:22
|
As was echoed by other posters: The value of the map in attracting new and previous players, and satisfying current players CANNOT be understated. Even my wife sits and STARES at the map and then says "I want to go there!" That is just so critical.
+100 here. I handn't thought about it in such a long time but part of my original 'pull' towards the Realms were how the maps, combined with really cool lore, made me want to visit many of those places. And if the 1e maps did, the 2e maps, rendered in such beautiful color, made that pull even stronger. I can't say the 3e maps did that for me though (they were a bit drab by comparison to the 2e). But still, this effect needs to be captured in the artistry of the map. Very fine thought indeed Cards. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jan 2014 : 13:42:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
As was echoed by other posters: The value of the map in attracting new and previous players, and satisfying current players CANNOT be understated. Even my wife sits and STARES at the map and then says "I want to go there!" That is just so critical.
+100 here. I handn't thought about it in such a long time but part of my original 'pull' towards the Realms were how the maps, combined with really cool lore, made me want to visit many of those places. And if the 1e maps did, the 2e maps, rendered in such beautiful color, made that pull even stronger. I can't say the 3e maps did that for me though (they were a bit drab by comparison to the 2e). But still, this effect needs to be captured in the artistry of the map. Very fine thought indeed Cards.
Preaching to the Choir - i said this same exact thing ("I want to go there!") to Mike Schley at Gencon. What he does for the setting cannot be over-stated.
I do not want this to go negative (we have so much to look forward to right now), but seriously, how many people looked at the 4e campaign map and said, "I want to go there"? More like they said, "Sooooo... tell me more about this 'Golarion' place...." 
I think one of the few things that kept some of us coming back during 4e was Mr.Schley's beautiful FR maps that came with later articles. Give us a map that makes our jaws drop; "if you build it, they will come." Hell, make it the background for banners strung across store fronts when 5e FR is released - I want people walking into LGS's just to know what all the fuss is about. Maybe even a few billboards strategically placed (imagine a Mike Schley map on a billboard in Times Square - that ought to get media attention).
Think of gaming like a relationship. What makes you approach someone in the first place? I know some of you are thinking of 'deep' responses, but the truth is, that person 'turned us on'. We liked what we saw, and we pursued it. Now, in the case of most relationships, we soon grow board of that, and we look for other things to retain our interest. Thats the part where the 'depth' comes in. FR is nothing if not interesting. BUT, most gamers will ever know how interesting if she just sits in the corner, with last year's hairdo and plain cloths. Put a mini-skirt and a push-up bra on The Realms, and watch the tongues hang out.
And yes, I just said we are all shallow - its part of our nature. We do not approach something we are not attracted to (this even goes for things like food). Make it appealing, make it SEXY, and people will flock to her banner. Then let the lore do the rest. Thats what makes a long-term relationship - the depth of the other. And you know what? Once you fall in love, you will always see it like you remembered it that first time - it will always be beautiful to you. Thats why I am still here.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 08 Jan 2014 13:48:01 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12020 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jan 2014 : 14:29:43
|
One thing to note about the old FR interactive atlas is that it was released 15 years ago (so it was designed & created maybe 16 years ago). I only mention that to stress the numerous improvements in technology since then.
So, would I like to see a new digital map? Yes. Should it be for the 5e world and not previous editions? Yes and no.... anything they produce that covers previous eras should start getting those map snippets available as an additional map section that you can download on the web site (note, I said download, as you should be able to have these on your laptop or tablet). The map should have overlays. The first overlay should be simply regional names (mountains, forests, rivers). The next would be country names. The next would be city sites and country boundaries (and if we have a layout of earldom/baronial/duchy boundaries, it should delineate those as well). Another overlay should be just a basic hex overlay for people to get rough mileage ideas. Thus, the base map is nothing but the terrain itself. This would make it possible to make an overlay by year, such that if a country were to fall, its easy to update just that overlay. You should be able to drill in on the cities for the city maps. You should be able to drill in on the city maps to building maps. Finally, it should be relatively easy to add a map linkage if the new map is in a standard format used by gamers (so bmp, jpg, possibly campaign cartographer, dundjinni, fractal mapper... personally I don't know much about these special map systems, but I know people use them) locally. In addition, it would be nice if there were another overlay called homebrew-shared which would allow people to upload their own homebrew changes, and you would only turn it on if you were willing to see the adds people have made (noting, all homebrew linkages should have their own different colored symbology).
Would I pay for this? Yes, a one time cost, just like I did for the FR interactive atlas. I look at it as something that if done correctly vastly helps the company as well, so its in their interest to perform updates. I shouldn't have to pay for updates or a subscription. If they want to add some major upgrade (like clicking a city name pulls up who rules it in that year, the mages, soldiers, plots, etc... for that city) later, then sure, I could be encouraged to pay for that... but just adding a city or dungeon map here and there and modifying country borders as a "new year update" should be free. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Derulbaskul
Senior Scribe
Singapore
408 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jan 2014 : 16:06:05
|
I will keep my reply fairly short and simple.
Make it really big. Make it really detailed. Get Mike Schley to make it. |
Cheers
D
NB: Please remember: A cannon is a big gun. Canon is what we discuss here. |
|
|
|
Thorn Illance
Seeker
53 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jan 2014 : 23:53:34
|
No, the map should stay as it is in 3e/4e. The 3e and 4e maps are by far, and I mean like, the 3e maps are over here and the 1e/2e maps are WAY, WAY, WAAAYYYY, over there, superior.
A zoomable map would be great! I loved the one that was generated by the fantasy cartographer HandsomeRob. I still have a copy of it, and plan on overlaying it with GoogleEarth at some point.
I think the map should be paid-only, as part of a DDi subscription. The DDi provides such an incredible value to players and GMs a like; laying in yet more goodies for DDi subscribers would be pretty much par for the course for Wizbro.
The only thing I would really like to come with the map is a disclaimer that reads "Maps in the real world, as well as in Fantasy, are never accurate. Use this map as a guide to develop your campaign and have fun." |
Edited by - Thorn Illance on 08 Jan 2014 23:54:46 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 07:06:34
|
I'm starting to see some buzz growing around the Net about D&Dnext. Sadly, still a lot of negativity - they are going to have to really pull-out all the stops to get past that. Still, people ARE talking, which means there is an interest. I think a re-launched Forgotten Realms could really put it over the top this time around.
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn Illance
I think the map should be paid-only, as part of a DDi subscription. The DDi provides such an incredible value to players and GMs a like; laying in yet more goodies for DDi subscribers would be pretty much par for the course for Wizbro.
The emboldened part sounds way too much like an ad - you MUST work for them. Even the 4e fans don't talk like that. 
Aside from that, I think you may have missed the point - no-one is arguing over whether the 3e map - or the work Mike Schley did in 4e - was far superior art-wise to the older maps. We are just talking about putting everything back where it should be (where Ed had it), before 3e did weird things to the continent. We lost a lot of room (and terrain features), and tons of inconsistencies crept in. New art, but with the old layout, should appeal to fans of every edition. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 09 Jan 2014 07:07:14 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 07:23:50
|
Quick map factoid: the older map had enough blank space that Richard Baker was able to remove a portion of land from the Sharr "the size of California" without it making a noticeable difference.
As noted by Sean K. Reynolds on his website.
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn Illance
The only thing I would really like to come with the map is a disclaimer that reads "Maps in the real world, as well as in Fantasy, are never accurate. Use this map as a guide to develop your campaign and have fun."
Good advice, that. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 09 Jan 2014 07:26:25 |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 08:22:43
|
In other news, Markus and I are still apparently sharing a brain... but he got all the politeness. 
And darn you and your pointed reminders, Jeremy... "Promote what you love instead of bashing what you hate." Staring at me every time I want to pulverize something.
Moving on: I like a lot of Sean's lore, and I respect his mind. However, I will disagree vehemently with this definition of a noticeable difference. Notably, I've exceeded my quota for filling out web site membership forms for a while, so I'm just reacting to that factoid as if it were a quote.
The Shaar is a poor choice of places to point to, because it was 99% empty space, because the authors and designers left it pretty much untouched. That doesn't make it fair game for cutting... a real creative would create something. A designer who deserves the title never destroys. I point to Westwood and the town of Westbridge in retort.
Saying you can remove pieces of the map without making a noticeable difference makes a person sound like they're really not familiar with the map in question, and not invested in either the cohesion of the setting or even the general purpose of a map. We noticed.
I like Realmslore. Promoting it has led me to arm myself with an adamantine trout.
I spent longer trying to sanitize this post than I did writing it, and I apologize for whatever snuck past my censors. Grins all around, and I'll go back under my rock.  |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 10:26:11
|
Part of why I started this scroll was to allow people who feel like you do, xaeyruudh, to emphasize what's important to them.
I see you worked hard to keep your post clean--and I appreciate that--but I think you went a bit too far by suggesting the people who worked on the maps had no knowledge of or interest in the setting, when you wrote "we noticed."
I had to cut three paragraphs from this post because they were strongly worded and I realized you might take offense to them (that's the danger in making it personal).
Instead I'll say that I can appreciate how hard it is to change posting styles. You like to pulverize things and I like to pulverize those who like do the pulverizing. Change isn't easy and we're in the same boat.
Anyway, I cleaned my post up and this is what I got:
It's important to remember that creatives, such as game designers, are required to work within the constraints of a budget, of production requirements (including production limits, like limits on page count) and have a responsibility to deliver a product that's of practical use to the end user.
The game designers who worked on the 3E Realms map were in fact intimately familiar with the setting and--most importantly--100% vested in its success: the stated goal of the 3E Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting was to relaunch the Realms and carry the wave of success forward from the relaunch of D&D via the 3rd Edition rules. In this it succeeded.
I'm glad they reduced the map to one single poster sheet; better that, in my opinion, than entertaining the possibility of cutting even more pages cut from the FRCS* to pay for a second poster map depicting a whole lot of water.
But some feel it would have been better to have two map inserts, so the continent of Faerun as presented therein would retain its original shape. And I respect that.
Or there's the practical option of keeping it old school. Like Reynolds said in the post I linked to, "But some people prefer the older maps. To each their own. "
[Aside: The 3E map has served me admirably for going on 13 years (including a decade of near-weekly usage for one long-running campaign). Having all the details on one map that I could fold down to the relevant region of the Realms I'm running my game in was great. In my experience it's simply the best, most practical one-poster Realms map in existence.
It also compliments the level of detail in the FRCS, hands down the best single Realms product out there, and reflects the level of work AND detail that went into that book.]
*The FRCS, as I've pointed out before, was overwritten by 100 pages thanks to the amount of information they tried to pack into it, and those pages had to be cut from the final product. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 09 Jan 2014 11:13:50 |
|
|
|
Thorn Illance
Seeker
53 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 14:24:35
|
DDI is awesome. 5 bucks a month and I get everything published... It's awesome.
The old maps were ugly, and messed up. The new ones are pretty and work perfectly for that which they were designed. So I say definetly stick with the new style/fit.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I'm starting to see some buzz growing around the Net about D&Dnext. Sadly, still a lot of negativity - they are going to have to really pull-out all the stops to get past that. Still, people ARE talking, which means there is an interest. I think a re-launched Forgotten Realms could really put it over the top this time around.
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn Illance
I think the map should be paid-only, as part of a DDi subscription. The DDi provides such an incredible value to players and GMs a like; laying in yet more goodies for DDi subscribers would be pretty much par for the course for Wizbro.
The emboldened part sounds way too much like an ad - you MUST work for them. Even the 4e fans don't talk like that.
Aside from that, I think you may have missed the point - no-one is arguing over whether the 3e map - or the work Mike Schley did in 4e - was far superior art-wise to the older maps. We are just talking about putting everything back where it should be (where Ed had it), before 3e did weird things to the continent. We lost a lot of room (and terrain features), and tons of inconsistencies crept in. New art, but with the old layout, should appeal to fans of every edition.
|
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 19:43:06
|
Just a couple of things for now. My thoughts run long (though not overly vitriolic this time) and I feel like I should rethink for a bit.
1. I appreciate your restraint as well, Jeremy, though I am open to arguments.
2. You weren't my target. Your defense of the 3e map is logical and I can understand your point of view. I disagree, but I understand.
As I think my first post in the thread shows, it's not the topic itself that makes me pissy.
Also, as a footnote to those who want free updates after buying the initial map/atlas. That ain't gonna happen, and there's no reason it should. The folks doing the updating (99% likely to be a contracting company rather than WotC employees) are earning a paycheck, and no company will provide you with the results of their labor without receiving adequate compensation to cover those paychecks. There are points to be made about corporate greed, but that's a separate issue. Updates will be paid for, or there won't be any updates. When you think you're getting free updates, rest assured that you're paying way too much for the base product. |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 09 Jan 2014 20:01:54 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 22:52:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Also, as a footnote to those who want free updates after buying the initial map/atlas. That ain't gonna happen, and there's no reason it should. The folks doing the updating (99% likely to be a contracting company rather than WotC employees) are earning a paycheck, and no company will provide you with the results of their labor without receiving adequate compensation to cover those paychecks. There are points to be made about corporate greed, but that's a separate issue. Updates will be paid for, or there won't be any updates. When you think you're getting free updates, rest assured that you're paying way too much for the base product.
I disagree. I've had a lot of software and games that got free updates after the initial purchase. Hells, you can still download the updates for the old Interactive Atlas from the WotC site! |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jan 2014 : 23:27:14
|
I don‘t see any real issue with updates. DDI subscribers will have access to maps and lore which are constantly updated and designed to support each other. Thus the maps will always be as “current“ as everything else, whether it‘s all updated daily or it‘s “expired“ along with the DDI subscription content.
As for price and value, everybody makes their own choice, everybody will have different wants and needs and amounts of cash to burn. My only comment is that DDI has always been a package deal, and even if all you want is the maps you‘re gonna get access to the entire package.
I hope that any map/lore updates presented by WotC will be optional and modular components. As opposed by, say, Microsoft‘s consumer updates which simply overwrite what came before. I wouldn‘t trust WotC to exclusively decide what goes on my maps because I don‘t think I‘d be pleased to find my favourite out-of-the-way locations are suddenly home to massive new cities or craters, or worse, have entirely vanished (or been mysteriously teleported and polymorphed) by contact with the Demiplane of Orwellian Retcons. If Realms maps can be accessed offline, and if map updates are available, and if I can select which ones I like or toggle them on/off or rollback at my discretion, and if I‘m not required to purchase other WotC products to use the maps, then I will happily buy into them. If I‘m just forced to login every time I want to zoom onto a map feature or accept an all-or-nothing package deal of whatever‘s current in (oftentimes objectionable) canon then I‘ll just stick with the maps I already have. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 09 Jan 2014 23:30:31 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36877 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 01:15:23
|
| I would certainly want the digital map to be something you can save locally. My preference is the one main map, which will be available forever, and then either later versions or super-detailed maps that are subsections of the main one. So one map for all of Faerûn, for example, and then maybe another for the Sword Coast North, and then another for the Dales, etc. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12020 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 01:15:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Also, as a footnote to those who want free updates after buying the initial map/atlas. That ain't gonna happen, and there's no reason it should. The folks doing the updating (99% likely to be a contracting company rather than WotC employees) are earning a paycheck, and no company will provide you with the results of their labor without receiving adequate compensation to cover those paychecks. There are points to be made about corporate greed, but that's a separate issue. Updates will be paid for, or there won't be any updates. When you think you're getting free updates, rest assured that you're paying way too much for the base product.
Which is why when they make map changes for their products, they should be using the same tool. Thus, the change is made for their product and is now available for updated download. The contractor gets paid. The problem only comes in if they're using a separate map system for customers and a separate map system for in house. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2014 : 02:20:37
|
That could work.
I'm guessing it would involve a larger purchase price for WotC to get the initial map from the contractor, though... the finished product that the contractor delivers will probably be an application, not source code or a toolset. The contractor will want some leverage when it comes time to update the application itself... WotC can either come back to them for the update, or pay someone else even more to start over from scratch.
I know I'm out on a limb here; I'm not in the field myself, and I've never watched/heard negotiations with a company having Hasbro's clout. I'm just guessing that the priority in creating a new electronic atlas (if it ever gets done) will be maximizing its profitability, and that means opting for minimal expense. So WotC probably won't have the toolset that it's created with, and will thus be unable to make updates.
This probably explains why the first electronic atlas was never used by WotC for their maps going forward from that point. Well, that and the fact that the atlas maps looked like rice cakes taste... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The Realms map in 5E/Next: stretch it back out?
