Adaptation Mapping Question - Ruins of Undermountain

[jharp]

To those that have run or want to run this area, I want to know how you feel the best way to break up the maps would be. I could do three map levels and leave your computers whimpering from the FG LOS or I could break it up based on the advice I receive. Absent any advice I'll likely just do three large maps. :) I've automated my LOS construction so it really is no big deal to me if it is one map or 10.

Please let me know your opinions and I'll try my best to make this area a LOS pleasure rather than a LOS nightmare.

Also let me know if you just make your own maps for such an area and likely will never use the maps that would be packaged with it.

Jason

[celestian]

I prefer a single map per level when possible. I'd rather not have segmented maps.

[jharp]

I prefer a single map per level when possible. I'd rather not have segmented maps.

I'm a little scared to do that with a mega-dungeon. It is my preferred choice to do that if possible.

[readymeal]

I'm a little scared to do that with a mega-dungeon. It is my preferred choice to do that if possible.

Morning Jason,

if you are converting it for the FG shop, i am afraid you have to split them up... there s a new map size allowance coming out at the end of the month which double the existing one... but surely not enough for your need.

I end up making a big one, splitting it up for the conversion sake and offering the big one for free on the forum (if you are remaking it yourself using a 3rd party software).

[sasaki]

Hey there. I'll weigh in with my opinion. I'm fairly new to FG and have only run 2.5 modules (I'm half way through B5 with my group, the module I submitted to FG). As a DM, I feel like lower resolution on a complete map is preferable to higher resolution on an artificially divided map. It's too much hassle getting tokens onto and off of different maps, especially if you are cutting the maps in odd places so you'll have to switch maps a lot as the party winds between different paths. If given a choice, now that I know how to handle maps, I wouldn't mind grabbing high res versions from the forums or FG Forge to swap into the original release in FG. That's what I did for B5. Of course, you won't have all the info pins for areas or the creature spawning placement anymore when you add the new maps to the module in a campaign. But those are not TOO time consuming to add....

[jharp]

Morning Jason,

if you are converting it for the FG shop, i am afraid you have to split them up... there s a new map size allowance coming out at the end of the month which double the existing one... but surely not enough for your need.

I end up making a big one, splitting it up for the conversion sake and offering the big one for free on the forum (if you are remaking it yourself using a 3rd party software).

I won't be making one with 3rd party. This is the original "restored by me" map. It is currently 3k x 4k.

[celestian]

I won't be making one with 3rd party. This is the original "restored by me" map. It is currently 3k x 4k.

4k by 4k is the new "best practices" map size.

[jharp]

I guess to comply with the grid requirements of between 50-100 (or is it 75-100px) my map needs to increase by 2.5x. I wonder how that will look in FG. Time will tell.

Jason

[readymeal]

I won't be making one with 3rd party. This is the original "restored by me" map. It is currently 3k x 4k.

for a whole level?

[celestian]

I guess to comply with the grid requirements of between 50-100 (or is it 75-100px) my map needs to increase by 2.5x. I wonder how that will look in FG. Time will tell.

Jason

You can use pix size of any size as long as it fits in the max map size recommendations. I've 100-200 px maps that are in the new range easily and they look so much better.

[jharp]

for a whole level?

Yes. The source material is fairly low. The pdf in the book is even lower at 1500x2500.


The map is 150x210 grids

[JohnD]

Personally I'd prefer a single map for each level, if that is possible, which from reading here, it seems to be.

[ChrisRevocateur]

With the size of Undermountain I'd very much prefer a decent resolution with the levels cut up into a couple sections. It's not what I'd WANT, but the resolution on a map that big if it were complete would be so ridiculously pixelated there'd be no real reason to use it as an actual dungeon/battle map. It'd be fine for a GM map that's one image per level, but because of the size limits please cut the levels up the minimum amount you need to to be able to fit the "best practices."