Storm King's Thunder - Low Quality Maps

[Kricket]

I just purchased Storm King's Thunder (via Steam), opened it up and started poking around the Images. I was shocked at how low quality many of the maps look.

In the screenshot I'm attaching is "The Grandfather Tree", both DM and Player versions. The resolution of the player map is shockingly low, especially when you consider that each square in the map is supposed to represent 50 feet. Even if I half that to 25 feet, by the time a player is zoomed in enough to engage in combat comfortably, the map is a blurry mess.

The DM map is higher resolution than the player map, it's usually the opposite in other modules I've played like HotDQ or RoT.

It's not just this map either, most of the maps in this module are nearly unplayable at the scale they're meant to be played on.

Is there some sort of HQ Maps option I'm missing somewhere, hopefully? I'm about to buy these maps at 3k x 2k resolution from the artist's website and use those, but I shouldn't have to!

Please tell me there's a fix, or HQ map pack add-on, or something. Thanks!

[LordEntrails]

Hey Kricket, welcome to the forums.

I don't have STK so I can only tell you a bit. I know this has been discussed before, but if you are understanding this correctly, and I am too, then your apparent resolution doesn't match what I've heard elsewhere.

Note that normally maps that are made to be used for battle maps the squares should be at 5 foot intervals, not 50 foot. Generally best practice for FG is to use maps at 10 pixels per foot (i.e. 50 pixels per square). Also, quality should not be a printable level, as that will cause problems with player download. But, it sounds like you know all that so...

I also note that I can't view your attachment, it tells me it is an invalid format, but not sure if that is because of your post number or not.

There are some other threads you should check out:
- https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?34534-Storm-King-s-Thunder-Maps&highlight=storm+king
- https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?34536-SKT-Maps&highlight=storm+king
- https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?34272-Storm-king-s-thunder-high-resolution-maps&highlight=storm+king

[Kricket]

Thanks for the reply! :)

Here's a couple dropbox links to the images which you can hopefully view.
Previously attached image: https://www.dropbox.com/s/chuwxtr8kdp4imo/grandfather-tree.jpg?dl=0

And this second image, with a caption which is in the DM image and in the book, which says that each of the squares represents 50 ft. The grandfather tree is gigantic, with a canopy like 800 feet across. https://www.dropbox.com/s/5twxjfghul7vn1c/grandfather-scale.jpg?dl=0 Those aren't bushes surrounding it, those are other trees. This thing dwarfs the players. And halfings the dwarves!

As you said, it looks like this was scaled to 10px per map square, but I think that was done without considering what that square represents. (50 ft vs 5), so it looks like there's 1-2 pixels per 5-ft.

I understand that there are size and bandwidth limitations, but something a little higher resolution would go a long way. As is, I think if my players enter combat there, I'll have to switch them out to a generic grasslands type or just import a different map, like in one of the threads you linked me to.

Cheers

[damned]

Hi Kricket its totally to do with the size/resolution of the supplied maps.
The high res maps are not supplied to FG by the Wizards. If they were to include the separately available high res maps they would have to also charge more for them.
You might find there are also encounters without maps - thats because the book doesnt have maps for them.

The wonderful Zacchaeus has made some additional maps for you though :)
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?34534-Storm-King-s-Thunder-Maps

[Zacchaeus]

Hi Kricket. The DM map isn't higher resolution than the player map it's just smaller so things look sharper.

The problem with these maps is that they are produced for use with printed material and not really for VTT. So when they are squashed down to fit onto a page in the book they look fine but if they are blown up then they become very pixellated. The Grandfather Tree map (and many of the others) were drawn to a scale of 90px equal to 50'. In order to convert that to 50px=5' I would need to blow the map up by 550% of it's original size. This would make the map about 11,500px x11,500px. Apart from the fact that Photoshop will only handle an image of 8150x8150 or so the map size would be about 7-8Mb. We try to keep file sizes for maps down to less than 1Mb. Even at the lowest jpg setting a map of that size still comfortably exceeds that criteria.

And of course blowing it up to that kind of size actually makes the problem worst since when you zoom in the pixellation becomes even worse.

Another consideration is that the grid is 'baked in' to the map; so I can't turn it off and therefore in order to get an FG grid to fit I need to export the map to a size where that can happen.

Overall then what you have is SKT is a compromise between map size in terms of memory with the best quality that can be managed. And I have to say that super high quality isn't actually necessary anyway.

Whilst you can download Jared Blando's maps they will be in PNG format and so will look very sharp and nice. However they will also be huge. The Grandfather tree map is almost 27Mb and if you try to share that with your players even with a good internet connection it will take a long time and you could well run into memory problems with FG if you try to share too many images of that kind of size.

[Myrdin Potter]

If you run scenarios with Giants, you run into scale issues all over the place. I converted Cloud Giant Bargain maps from 20' per square to the standard 5' per square (I redrew the map). When I DMed the module, it was awkward because the maps were so huge. I ended up redoing the maps for the castles to 20' per square and doing maps for each room. I am DMing SKT for my regular weekly group and we use many included maps as props for "theatre of the mind" combat as the scale does not work well otherwise.

You can buy some of the original artwork (from the artist) and crunch it down to make the file size a little better. Zacchaeus fixed some of the maps to make the internal scale less distorted but still manageable and he did a map pack (can find in the maps forum) which is really nice.

[Zacchaeus]

I am DMing SKT for my regular weekly group and we use many included maps as props for "theatre of the mind" combat as the scale does not work well otherwise.

Can you expand on what you mean by this?

[Myrdin Potter]

The example from the OP. We'll drop one token on the map to indicate general placement, but we do not fuss so much with exact location and reach and such. I describe it as DM, players tell me what they want to do. They can see the map, but I don't use it as a battle map. 5e in style is meant to move away from the 4e battle maps everywhere theme.

The included maps are fine for that in all cases.

I do wish your "the North" map included the scale line that is on the other half of the huge regional map, though,

[Kricket]

Can you expand on what you mean by this?

I think this is what he means: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ni66twt71s7xv7s/token-comparison.jpg?dl=0

The maps are unplayable at their current size. I went ahead and bought the map from the artist, Jared Blando. Cropped out the right side with the side view, then scaled it down 50%. That's the image you see on the left, and is what I feel I should be getting from the module. 1000x1140 resolution, 339kb size. These are not deal-breaking numbers. The current map looks more like 500x500. It's hard to tell, since we can no longer open up the module files. (Or can we?)

[Myrdin Potter]

And for my use, I would probably just use the DM map as it does not have any items on it that looks secret and it shows the area much better.

The encounter map (player) is big and if a fight got really complicated and we needed it, I could use it, but the handdrawn grid on the DM map is good enough for me.

Pins linking to the story on the map would be a nice addition as well. Story tends to get hidden under large maps and finding the window in the middle of an encounter can be a pain.

Kricket - in this case, Smiteworks was given the DM map. I can 100% guarantee that Zacchaeus cropped part of it and stretched it to make the grid 5' and he did that trying to make a map in the normal scale for players. As a DM, you can always buy map packs but Smiteworks probably would have to negotiate with each artist and get WoTC permission to deviate from the published module.

[Kricket]

If WoTC doesn't provide a proper map, then yeah, there's nothing I can do except hope that WotC gets their act together and provides Smiteworks with the tools they need.

I'm just frustrated, I purchase the modules to save me time, and provide me with high quality maps for my players to play on. That has been the case with each and every other module, they've all been great. In order to provide that same experience to my players this time, I gotta spend an additional $30 or so to buy the HQ maps myself, resize them, then transfer pins to them in a custom module. Or I recreate them from scratch. (I'm pretty handy with Photoshop, so doable)

Thanks all.

[Myrdin Potter]

If you had bought the hardback, you would have just received the DM's map and had to make one yourself.

I am actually very impressed with how much Zacchaeus did considering what he was given and then he went and made a personal map pack to try and fill in some holes.

I think this module is the most driven by small quests all over the countryside and the least set locations that WoTC has done for 5e so far. Although CoS had pretty unusable for VTT maps of the castle included.

[Zacchaeus]

I think this is what he means: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ni66twt71s7xv7s/token-comparison.jpg?dl=0

The maps are unplayable at their current size. I went ahead and bought the map from the artist, Jared Blando. Cropped out the right side with the side view, then scaled it down 50%. That's the image you see on the left, and is what I feel I should be getting from the module. 1000x1140 resolution, 339kb size. These are not deal-breaking numbers. The current map looks more like 500x500. It's hard to tell, since we can no longer open up the module files. (Or can we?)

The Players map provided in SKT is actually 2200x2100 and weighs in at 336kB. The map was scaled so that the grid would be 20px per side instead of the usual 50px. So in your map you'll have to draw the grid to 10px wide. Here's a screenshot of the two different maps side by side. Which is best?

[Kricket]

I see now, I wasn't taking the grid lines into account. I never realized I didn't have the option to make them invisible or super-thin while extremely zoomed in. If they could remain super-thin regardless of zoom level, that would solve that.

I'll figure out something for my players when we get to these maps.

Thanks again!

[Zacchaeus]

It will all depend on what your players do as to whether they will see many of those maps. The other thing is I don't know if the maps Jared supplies come without a grid baked in. If they are gridless then you don't need to stick to the scale and you could therefore scale them to say 10' grids and that would increase the quality by quite a bit since you won't be zooming in so far.

[Kricket]

For that map, it comes with pre-baked 50' grids. I did some tests and I was able to create good looking (but high-filesize) maps at 5' and 10' grids. Which is fine, sending a 2.5 - 3mb map doesn't take all that long, and combat sometimes ends up being hours anyways. What's a few minutes? Especially if I pre-load it to them beforehand.

[LordEntrails]

For that map, it comes with pre-baked 50' grids. I did some tests and I was able to create good looking (but high-filesize) maps at 5' and 10' grids. Which is fine, sending a 2.5 - 3mb map doesn't take all that long, and combat sometimes ends up being hours anyways. What's a few minutes? Especially if I pre-load it to them beforehand.
As long as you and your players know to expect a longer than usual delay when they log in and you are willing to have FG stall while it downloads when each one does log in.

[Trenloe]

As has been discussed a few times on these forums recently:
1) file size effects share time (when first shared during a game or download time when logging in if the map is pre-shared).
2) Image resolution (pixel dimensions) effects memory used by Fantasy Grounds.

Commercial FG modules have to provide a compromise on both of these aspect - not everyone has fast upload and players with fast downloads and FG's current 32-bit architecture limits memory use to a little less than 4GB on 64-bit operating systems even if the computer has much more total memory.

If, as an individual GM, you're fine having long share times and carefully manage what's open and shared in FG to keep efficient memory use, then go nuts and make your own huge maps to looks super cool onscreen even when zoomed in. But the standard maps provided in FG modules can't do this (for the reasons mentioned above).

[dudeslife]

If you want the best quality maps possible you can always go to the Cartographer or Artist's website and he may be selling the maps. For example, Mike Schley sells all of his WotC maps for about $1.75 each. You get gridded and ungridded.

https://prints.mikeschley.com/p996068422