Are customers supposed to scan these smaller maps and blow them up in Photoshop, just to make them usable in play? Surely WOTC could make electronic versions of the un-included maps available online, either as a free download or through D&D Insider, so we could print them out at home. Or at least indicate which Dungeon Tiles sets are needed to build the maps in the adventures (though my sense is that most published adventure maps cannot be built with Dungeon Tiles).
How are folks new to D&D supposed to pick up a intro level adventure and run it right out of the box/books without the necessary maps? Newcomers aren't very likely to go out, buy a whiteboard with 1 in squares and draw all the maps themselves, so it makes the adventures very inaccessible.
Am I missing something? Not including all the necessary maps for an adventure seems like a major oversight.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4arch/ag&page=2
My advice: Buy an easel-pad of 1" grid paper. I got a pad of 100 pages for less than $10, and I've been using it for more than two years now -- I'm only just now running low on paper. Take some coloured felt pens and draw out the map by hand. You can be as quick or as detailed as you prefer, and it doesn't have to be time-consuming, either. (Pro tip: Use a ruler when you're drawing walls.)
Now with that said- I would release major kick ass adventures in a box set. Some primary (unique solos perhaps?) models and NEW dungeon tiles for the adventure included. Not only would this sell big, but it would be awesome. Please, PLEASE WotC do this.
Smaller adventures could continue to be sold as is with notes on which dungeon tile set is being used.
Box set of common miniatures would be nice too. Like what Games Workshop does. 10x skeleton box for 20 bucks or something. You could do this for orcs, kobolds, and goblins too. Or at the very least a minion's box set.
All of these options make the game more accessible and less intimidating for new DMs to jump in. People shouldn't have to go to resellers to get multiple minis. This is money that WotC is missing out on!
save a tree, if series of adventures in set in FR, give me a detailed map of the area, moreso than whats in the frcs.
if its core POL quasi setting then give me a map to each when I buy the module at the store, if it has an overland map.
and just give me the combined map online.
if somone wants the poster map, they can print it themseslves and just save wotc some money.
Note that nowhere did the OP request more poster-size maps. :P
Also, what I like to do is make 3D terrain using Fat Dragon Game's paper models where you can print what you need and with an exacto knife and a glue stick you can make a memorable adventure (you can reuse the pieces too!). Their PDFs are fairly cheap and can be found at RPGNow or DriveThruRPG.
Like what was said before, the 1"in grid paper pads, which are huge btw, are about $10 at most office supply shops.
This thread is like a litmus test for finding out who doesn't actually bother reading entire posts before replying.
Note that nowhere did the OP request more poster-size maps. :P
Obviously there is a difference between reading and understanding.
Even though he never used the word "poster" he did refer to the poster maps as being 5-10% of the encounters and was asking how he could get "usable sized" maps for the rest, implying that more poster sized pieces of paper with the different maps should have been included, or at least converted to a usable size to print (which isn't always easy since they don't always print the same on every computer/printer) As for the dungeon tiles, since those maps weren't made with specific tiles, there would be no point in telling customers which tiles to use since it's pretty obvious which ones to use.
When I purchase a published adventure module for D&D4, I was astounded that it only included maps for 5-10% of the encounters in the adventure. There are very small pictures of the other maps, so I know they exist somewhere, but they were not included in the adventure in a usable size.
Are customers supposed to scan these smaller maps and blow them up in Photoshop, just to make them usable in play? Surely WOTC could make electronic versions of the un-included maps available online, either as a free download or through D&D Insider, so we could print them out at home. Or at least indicate which Dungeon Tiles sets are needed to build the maps in the adventures (though my sense is that most published adventure maps cannot be built with Dungeon Tiles).
How are folks new to D&D supposed to pick up a intro level adventure and run it right out of the box/books without the necessary maps? Newcomers aren't very likely to go out, buy a whiteboard with 1 in squares and draw all the maps themselves, so it makes the adventures very inaccessible.
Am I missing something? Not including all the necessary maps for an adventure seems like a major oversight.
I have bolded the relevant portion of the OP, unfortunately the Map Gallery isn't as complete as most would like.
Bel
Oh puh-LEASE. His points were reasonable. He asked for either digital copies of the maps or pointers to the Dungeon Tile sets. He did not ask for poster-sized maps, which you and several other posters went on about at length. Slow down and read next time. I know the big print on the subject line is easier to read, but the little print is important too.
He asked for "usable sized maps", and pointed out that the other (non-"useable") maps that came with the module are small, overview-style maps. He then asks, "Are customers supposed to scan these smaller maps and blow them up in Photoshop, just to make them usable in play?" If he's not asking for modules to come with more than one poster map, then I have no idea what he is asking for.
(*More broadly, he's actually asking about how he can use the maps: Dungeon Tiles was one suggestion, and drawing out the map on grid paper is another. We've now established that an online map gallery exists. As for Dungeon Tile lists, folks have been asking for those for a while now; it will be only partial help, though, as several of 4E's modules were definitely not designed with Dungeon Tiles in mind.)
It's not my reading comprehension that failed here, i_can_see_forever.
I'm having a hard time understanding why anyone has a problem with this guy's requests. It seems fairly reasonable. And no, the basic adventure sets WotC does not tell you what Dungeon Tiles they use. And yes they are from sets that have been released. A good example is the Dungeon Delve book that uses a bit of tiles from the Hallway of Giants (or something like that) Dungeon Tiles. It would be nice if people knew which were being used in the adventures, so people would know what to look for online to get them. In the aforementioned case the dungeon tiles are OOP. You must get it from a reseller.
Dungeon Delve was written with the Dungeon Tiles specifically in mind, the other published adventures were not. Therefore, there are no lists for specific tiles, you are supposed to look at the maps in the adventure book, count squares, compare them to the tiles you own and make a room for the minis. It's not that hard, but how soon people forget 3E didn't include poster maps (well none of the ones I owned, don't want to speak in absolutes). So we complained that if you want us to use minis, give us some maps, at least for the big showdowns. Now we get one or two included in the module and people complain there should be more, WOTC can't win, maybe they should stop making them at all. Be thankfull you got any maps at all, they could have left that part of the game the way it was.
For one, the map is probably the most expensive asset in a gaming module, as they have to be visually appealling, yet coincide perfectly with the written adventure - which means more chance for errors.
Coming up with encounter scale maps, depending on the required size can greatly increase page count and MB size for download (for electronic versions.)
I'm working on my own setting and adventure arc, and because I am a cartographer, you can bet that the product will be chock full of maps. I'm even adding a Map Folio, as separate products one for printing on your own printer and one specifically geared towards VT apps like MapTool and Fantasy Grounds.
I do know that certain maps missing from Pyramid of Shadows and its predecessor adventure were done for free and are posted on the Cartographers' Guild's Finished Maps Forum. Neonknight one of the members has been working hard to post the missing maps at that site for free downloads. That's always a solution.
http://forum.cartographersguild.com
GP
Speaking as a pro fantasy cartographer, I've got a couple points.
For one, the map is probably the most expensive asset in a gaming module, as they have to be visually appealling, yet coincide perfectly with the written adventure - which means more chance for errors.
Coming up with encounter scale maps, depending on the required size can greatly increase page count and MB size for download (for electronic versions.)
I'm working on my own setting and adventure arc, and because I am a cartographer, you can bet that the product will be chock full of maps. I'm even adding a Map Folio, as separate products one for printing on your own printer and one specifically geared towards VT apps like MapTool and Fantasy Grounds.
I do know that certain maps missing from Pyramid of Shadows and its predecessor adventure were done for free and are posted on the Cartographers' Guild's Finished Maps Forum. Neonknight one of the members has been working hard to post the missing maps at that site for free downloads. That's always a solution.
http://forum.cartographersguild.com
GP
PS: This guy does good work in the RPG community. Check out his site!
Dungeon Delve was written with the Dungeon Tiles specifically in mind, the other published adventures were not. Therefore, there are no lists for specific tiles, you are supposed to look at the maps in the adventure book, count squares, compare them to the tiles you own and make a room for the minis. It's not that hard, but how soon people forget 3E didn't include poster maps (well none of the ones I owned, don't want to speak in absolutes). So we complained that if you want us to use minis, give us some maps, at least for the big showdowns. Now we get one or two included in the module and people complain there should be more, WOTC can't win, maybe they should stop making them at all. Be thankfull you got any maps at all, they could have left that part of the game the way it was.
What a load of crap...really. Be thankful?! Whatever. You be thankful how about that. I'll wonder why they list Dungeon Tiles under the 'What You Need' Listing in every adventure.
And to be clear. I didn't play 3 or 3.5 that much. I thought it sucked. I love 4e.
I've seen games like Heroquest, Advanced Heroquest, Warhammer Quest, Descent, Space Hulk, etc., etc...come out with boxes...tons of boxes of these maps and charge for them. You act as if WotC invented fantasy miniature battles. By the way when Heroquest came out for MB it had a nice big board, chairs, tables, doors, models (scores of them), adventures that used the board in an interesting way - all for $20 (in '92). Even marked for inflation that wouldn't top over $40 bucks today. There is no reason that a large company like WotC couldn't put something out and charge for it. Or at the very least - lease it out to someone who would (Fantasy Flight would do it I'm sure.)
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
EDIT: The post that this message is responding to was deleted by moderators. I'm not just talking to myself. :P
If you're trying to point out a recent or upcoming box-set module, I'm afraid you missed the news: Revenge of the Giants is no longer a boxed set. It's now just a hardcover book that comes with a poster map, like the FRCG did.
Ah, but my point wasn't lost (I concede that I didn't keep up with that change, but I really wasn't that interested in it) since they still won't be including full size, usable maps with their "super adventure" and I doubt they used specific dungeon tiles to create the smaller maps.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Well I would like to apologize for my inappropriate comments. My frustration with people who come across as spoiled or ungrateful tends to override my brain/mouth filter and my snark gland goes into overdrive. The published adventures have improved with every generation I loved Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh as well as Eyes of the Lich Queen, but neither of them came with "usable" maps. Now we have them in a cost effective manor (not everyone wants to dole out $60+ for an adventure) and to hear people slam it because they want more is insulting to the rest of us who have been here for the long haul and spent so many years without. Again, sorry for my derogatory comments.
Okay, well that's kind of interesting how you apologize and then in the next sentence call those that want more maps as coming 'across as spoiled or ungrateful'. I normally would ask you to point out just where I or the OP came off that way. But please don't, lets just drop that because the moderators will probably have to delete our next ten posts and nothing constructive will come from that.:D
Instead lets focus on the rest of your post. I have never played "Sinister Secrect of Saltmarsh" or "Eyes of the Lich Queen", but they sound cool. As for the maps, it seems that your real concern (and I'm not sure if this is your primary concern or not- please let me know) is that you don't want to pay $60 for an adventure. Well, I don't blame you. Someone in an earlier post mentioned that maps are the most expensive part, but here was my reasoning for asking for the maps.
In the DMG it suggests building the maps first with the Dungeon Tiles, then setting that into your adventure. I know that games have done that before with adventures, so I made the assumption (possibly incorrect one) that the 4e module maps were designed with Dungeon Tiles in mind. The new Dungeon Tiles are $10 dollars now and I just thought an adventure came out and corresponding Dungeon Tile set could come out with it for $10 bucks. Now I wouldn't expect that for EVERY adventure mind you, but once in awhile I thought it would be cool. I still think they could say or suggest Dungeon Tiles that would work well in the adventures they publish (a little box on the back cover or something of the module).
Now with all of that said, I still would like maybe once a year a HUGE adventure with tons of stuff in a BIG box form that does cost $60 bucks. That's just me and we disagree on that point.
Now on your last statement. Asking for more is not insulting to you. That's in your mind. I never slammed WotC, their products or you. You say there is a slight, where there is none. And I've been playing D&D since 1989 and once I figured THAC0 out, playing it right since 1991. That's 20 years by my old mind's count.
So again I harbor you no ill will and I'm not trying to make you pay more for your adventures. I am a gamer and have no more or less validity here than you.
On a personal note, my comments were directed at only you and one other poster (since the OP hasn't really commented back) because your reactions were disrespectful and childish ("what a load of crap" ring a bell?). You came across as an arrogant jerk and immediately invalidated any point you may have had. My apology was directed at the community and moderators who read my posts (and yours I might add), and not to you, when you act like a troll, you will be treated like a troll.
Well, I see your concerns, but they are all based on assumptions. I personally don't want an adventure that has maps based on one dungeon tile set, that is far too limiting. And from reading other posts on here for a while now (I see you just joined last week so there is a lot of catching up to do) no one wants to spend more than $10 to track down the older sets either, which was one of the nice things about dungeon delves since they tried to use more of the newer sets. It's also limiting to the map makers, being told to use their imagination and be creative, but then pulling back and saying "but these are the only tiles you can use, and only half of them can be used for a room since they are double sided". So, they did as they have always done, create the maps and let the DM figure out the best way to recreate them, hoping that most people will buy their tiles and "make do" with what they have and not seek another company's (Chessex for example) product. You pointed out another post, which validated my argument, that maps are expensive to design and produce, that's pretty much the end of the argument. WOTC puts out an adventure every other month (on average) and to make all of them include every map would be foolish because in this economy (again, read other threads on the expense of DnD) only a select few are willing to dish out $60 every time for an adventure they will probably only use once and tiles (if they are included or released at the same time) that are only going to be used by WOTC designers once, it's a waste. So, based on all that, it is an unreasonable request, which is why WOTC won't be changing their policy any time soon.
On a personal note, my comments were directed at only you and one other poster (since the OP hasn't really commented back) because your reactions were disrespectful and childish ("what a load of crap" ring a bell?). You came across as an arrogant jerk and immediately invalidated any point you may have had. My apology was directed at the community and moderators who read my posts (and yours I might add), and not to you, when you act like a troll, you will be treated like a troll.
You are wrong on many fronts. You said I should be thankful that WotC gave me anything (I took in a very condesending manner). Which you backed up by your very immature posts after that. I was responding to that. You are the troll and that is why it was your post and not mine that were deleted by the moderators. That post you point to as trolling was not deleted. The facts are clear and simple. You jumped in this thread with (what I perceived) as a chip on your shoulder. My response was never a direct attack. Yours was. See the difference? You are the troll my friend. I may be new to 4e, but it was you that said I should be thankful WotC gave us anything. I thought that comment was absurd and challenged you on it. You then have degraded a perfectly viable thread into this. Do me a favor. Don't ever respond to me and I'll do the same for you.
a'dieu