this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
115 points (89.1% liked)
RPGMemes
10339 readers
511 users here now
Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I love these points. It's one of the things I run into a lot because I love doing maps for larps. Players all have places mentioned in back stories, or that were visited in past events, and they almost never show up on maps.
Yes, the quaint little village where you killed 200 werewolves was extremely memorable, but if we add every 250-peasant hamlet to the map, it will be solid black.
Yes, it matters a lot to you where your barony is, but just the borders of all the baronies alone will turn the map into a giant blur. And also, I'm not going to name 800 baronies.
So we have a regular worldmap, and a "storyline map" that doesn't exist in the world, only on the wiki. Many towns are notable because "players were here once"
That is such a better way to do it. One map for plot, one map for setting.
It gets even worse when your players tend to stick to one general area, cause then all the places they want to see on the map get bunched up. No, there aren't 5 times as many settlements in Ferelden compared to the rest of Thedas. We've just spent 2 games there and that's what all the books, comics and adventure modules focus on. I promise you it's more spread out than that.
Consider shrinking your scale. There's an impulse to draw entire worlds or continents, but then you feel obliged to operate at that scale. The "Known world" of my players for the last 3 campaigns is roughly the size of Florida, and they don't even see all of it, not by a long shot. In those 4 campaigns, they: