Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Module Map Flexibility
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 12:00PM #1
Ore
Date Joined: Jul 22, 2008
Posts: 1,138

I have a question about flexibility of map use while running LFR modules. I was digging through my stuff and I found a stack of folded maps from the D&D Minis game and I began to wonder if we were able to use them while running LFR modules.

Most of them aren't even close to the module maps but some are similar. Are we allowed enough flexibility to use these kinds of maps? For that matter, there are a lot of great maps in the regular adventure modules. Are those permissible for use if they are similar to the maps found in the modules?

Your thoughts? 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 12:28PM #2
Hibiki54
Date Joined: Sep 8, 2008
Posts: 1,103
Thats DME. Use a different map. Works well for me.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 12:42PM #3
Sartredes
Date Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: 242
If it's a private game, I say you can use a different map. If it's a public game, like a convention, where completion time is important, then I advise against it.

The adventures as written (including maps) are playtested to where they should be able to be completed in four hours. Changing the map can drastically alter how an encounter plays out. My experience is anything more than a small change to a map in an adventure tends to drag out that encounter, especially if the altered terrain provides added challenges (difficult terrain, cover/concealment that favors the monsters, pigeonholing the PCs, etc...) to the encounter.
-Sartredes
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 12:48PM #4
Ore
Date Joined: Jul 22, 2008
Posts: 1,138
It's good you mention something like convention play because, yeah, I would never use anything but an exact version of the map in convention play like that.

DME, hmm, yes. Smile 
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 1:26PM #5
kenobi65
  • Volunteer Community Lead
Date Joined: May 6, 2001
Posts: 1,919

Mar 17, 2010 -- 12:28PM, Hibiki54 wrote:

Thats DME. Use a different map. Works well for me.




I think it'd clearly fit under "DME 1.0"; it's not clear to me that it'd be technically allowed under "DME 2.0", which is considerably more restrictive.

I concur with Satredes:
- I wouldn't even consider it for a convention or other public play
- I might consider it for private play, but I'd be *very* aware of the changes you're making to the terrain effects as a result of the map.

"Of course [Richard] has a knife.  He always has a knife.  We all have knives.  It's 1183, and we're barbarians!" - Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winter"
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 5:51PM #6
Ore
Date Joined: Jul 22, 2008
Posts: 1,138
*nods*

Yeah, I will definitely have to keep that in mind. 
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2010 - 11:20PM #7
Elder_basilisk
Date Joined: Dec 16, 2005
Posts: 2,524
There is a question of whether or not it is permitted under the revised DME guidelines.

I won't comment on that. But if you assume that it is either permitted or you don't care whether or not it is permitted, then the key is to understand the impact that the terrain you select has on the encounters you use.

Using the maps from the minis sets or the Fantastic Locations adventures will rarely result in one-sided changes the way that a previous poster suggested. For the most part, maps that were designed for competitive play were also designed to be relatively even. Unless you try, you are unlikely to box players in. You do run the risk of unboxing players when it was the author's intention to screw them with placement and terrain. (Personally, I think that adventures that do that ought to be screwed up, but that's beside the point). If you are running one of the many many many higher tier adventures where the only way to get to the multitude of ranged monsters is over a wide chasm bridged only by a narrow, rickety bridge (that is, of course trapped) and the other side is guarded by boneclaws while the PCs' side provides no cover from any of the monsters, you will have trouble replicating that set of characteristics with a fantastic locations map. (Even Dragondown grotto and the dwarven ruins river map from the 2.0 starter set have more cover than that and the lack of an exposed victory area or a victory countdown will make those maps less favorable to ranged monsters than they were to ranged warbands in the minis game). In fact, the primary impact that using the poster maps will have is simply that they are bigger than the standard LFR encounter areas. The larger area will reward monsters and PCs with ranged attacks and mobility based powers and will allow monsters to split up in order to avoid being all pinned at once. That is, itself something to be careful of, but it will rarely have the dramaticaly disparate impact that previous posters have suggested.

The other thing to be aware of is what the terrain does. It's relatively simple for most LFR maps. There is blocking terrain, difficult terrain and that's it. Every now and then there is a table, desk or similar structure that comes with its own rules. With a lot of the fantastic locations, though, you will need to decide how you will treat forest terrain (does it block LOS; how much of it does it take to block LOS, etc), market stall terrain, water (is it all difficult? Does it require swim checks?), spiderwebs (what do they do?) etc. Using those maps to run MYRE adventures, I have found that players generally respond well to terrain rules from the minis game (which is handy for me because i remember them and they are designed to allow simple rules and quick determinations) but you need to explain those rules to the players so they know what they are seeing and how they can interact with it.

Before the revision to DME, I used Fantastic location maps for East 1-1. The first encounter works very well on Temple of the Prismatic Flame. (I think giving the fire bad and magma hurlers more room to manuever makes that a little bit more deadly, but not a lot). I used Dungeon of Blood for the next two encounters, but if that seems a bit evil for a dwarven temple, broken demongate would probably work quite well instead.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 18, 2010 - 12:23AM #8
Crodocile
Date Joined: Nov 15, 2004
Posts: 818
I think if the map adds atmosphere and doesn't change the encounter too much, go for it.  Last weekend I played in an adventure and the DM used a dungeon tile that fit the setting of the encounter perfectly but was somewhat smaller than the map in the mod.  Did it change the encounter?  Probably.  Did we care?  No, because style and atmosphere are important in a role playing game.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 18, 2010 - 5:14AM #9
Kurald_Galain
Date Joined: Aug 24, 2007
Posts: 1,628

Mar 17, 2010 -- 12:42PM, Sartredes wrote:

If it's a private game, I say you can use a different map. If it's a public game, like a convention, where completion time is important, then I advise against it.



I don't see how changing a map necessarily makes it slower. Sure, certain changes would make it slower (e.g. adding hazards) but other changes would make it faster.

I'd say that making minor changes to a map is valid under DME, for instance making it a bit smaller or moving pillars around or placing a door one square to the left, or having four thorny bushes instead of three. I note that such changes happen quite frequently by accident, too, as sometimes a DM in a hurry doesn't exactly copy the map given in the adventure, and I don't think that's a big deal.

Making major changes, such as adding a pool of lava that wasn't there before, sounds similar to adding a monster that didn't previously exist in the module: that is, not valid per DME.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 18, 2010 - 9:39AM #10
Alphastream1
  • Dragon Slayer
  • If only he would apply himself
  • Dammit Jim, this is Star Trek, not D&D!
Date Joined: Jan 31, 2006
Posts: 4,636
Maps can have a substantial impact on play. I've seen some big tactical differences between play in adventures with a different map and with the actual map. For example:
  • Width and bottle-necking can hurt one or another side and change the value of AoE and zones dramatically.
  • Length can dramatically alter how quickly melee combatants can close and how range 5 or even 10 powers can be used effectively
  • Cover, especially complete cover, can really change the game for ranged combatants. Barriers can greatly alter the movement both sides will take. I once added pillars for fun, then realized I had really hurt one of my large monsters and the ability of my foes to flank.
  • Placement of terrain (such as a pool of water) and traps can have an impact
  • The overall size of the map impacts how much movement is possible, which is especially valuable to enemies (there is generally tactical value for the monsters in forcing a party to spread out, but no negative to the foes - they don't have healing powers in most cases)
  • Authors are increasingly choosing sizes carefully. Stairs of a certain length, a bridge and pit of a certain length - these can all see substantial playtesting emphasis. A map change can really alter what the author was trying to do.

Having said all of that, other variables are generally more important, but in using any custom map I try to consider what I may have changed and whether I need to compensate for it in other ways. In both of my authoring efforts I have at least one map where I altered things down to an exact square due to deliberate efforts to have the encounter play out a certain way. That one square can throw the balance off to favor one side or the other. It won't happen every time, but it will happen sometimes.
Follow my blog and Twitter feed with Dark Sun campaign design and DM tips!

Dark Sun's Ashes of Athas Campaign is now available for home play (PM me with your e-mail to order the campaign adventures).
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing