Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
I was kind of hoping you were going to turn out to be our guru of maps.
Well I never can tell when the bug will hit me (as it always does) nor what it will be that I suddenly develop a deep-seated need to draw up. I wish I could do campaign-scale overland maps but my attempts have never satisfied me. As you can see from what I have up on my site my interests seem to wander around a bit.
I think it is pretty hard to do something "big", as there is really not anything to show for until the completion of a mass of work. I've been looking at the Sandbox tutorials (that I mentioned before) recently, because I think that sort of approach is a way to get something
now, but still work towards something big in the long term.
Ironically, from a mapping point of view, I would guess that Spelljammer asteroids would be fairly flexible for someone who wants to hop around. They have a definite edge and once you have mapped everything within that edge, there is nothing left to do.
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
Have you noticed that we have a Wilderlands forum? I'm sure that they would be interested in your City of the Invicible Overlord Map. I've just bought Majestic Wilderlands, so I know I'll be checking that one out.
That one was actually so easy to get the basics down because the original map was drawn out in such a graph-paper old-school fashion. It's all the little tweaks and details that take time. Modron was much the same way and so much smaller that I don't think I spent more than a couple days on it. And of course there's Tegel Manor and Thunderhold. But then I already had physical maps of all of these - it was just a matter of deciding to take the time to draw them up in Campaign Cartographer. And they're all in CC2. I have CC3 but I just haven't been able to force myself to start learning it or these maps would REALLY shine. Maybe eventually...
I've not got these original square maps, sadly.
But I have seen some obviously hexagonal Dragonlance maps, along with some really great adaptations by Margaret Weis Production.
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
I've got to say that the level of detail on your map is really amazing. I think that a GM could use that as a "master map" and crop out sections of it for use with material about specific districts.
Really, no more than was on the original map. Drawing the buildings was actually done rather "quick-and-dirty", but that actually works since it seemed to fit the "architectural style" that the original map suggested. Most of the buildings are odd-angles and haphazardly conjoined and positioned.
Well, whatever you did, it worked.
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
Did you ever make the underside of Bral? I don't see it on the site.
I recall that I did at one time, but that seems unlikely or I'd surely have it on file here somewhere and I don't see it. Maybe it was that I started to do it but gave it up. Even with the fortress the underside isn't as complex or as interesting to draw, it would almost certainly not have been needed by MY players, and other projects would have drawn my attention away from it. Then too it may have been lost in a HD crash.
Now that you mention it though it feels incomplete to not have it. If I can find my hardcopy Bral maps I'll probably take a swipe at it.
That would be really great.
I would guess that most of the work with the underside would be getting the contours right and lining the edges up to be a mirror of the topside. But you could have some tall plants on the underside (for players to hide in).
The
real "challange" would be to create Bral's underdark. Two networks of tunnels with a gravity switch in the middle.
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
I think that SJ fandom could do things like develop the castle at the centre of the Tears of Selune, individual asteroids within The Grinder or the
Stellar Islands, if we could build up our map making skill.
One thing I've learned in using Campaign Cartographer is that mapmaking tends to become a hobby in and of itself. People tend to draw maps less because they need or want them for a game than because they just enjoy the process itself. I tend not to draw maps of my own creation so much as draw Campaign Cartographer versions of existing maps for my own enjoyment.
I feel the same way about creating wiki articles for Spelljammer. I don't "need" the articles for anything other than to put down my understanding of a specific part of SJ...in words.
I suppose, from your point of view. the tiny set of maps from
SJR4 Practical Planetology, would be more interesting to work with. Those maps could be turned into larger (more normal) maps by someone with CC2 (or whatever).
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
The deck plans are a very interesting thing. I don't think I've seen anyone else do a fliter (I might be wrong, but if there is one, I don't know about it).
Well, in a sense, why would you? There's no "deck" to draw. It's too small. I only did it because I got it into my head that I wanted to draw the wings of a Monarch butterfly.
I'm sure a 3e player might enjoy having a deck plan for a flitter. It might come in handy for measuring against something like a fireball area of effect.
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
There is something about the original deck plans (and many of the original sphere maps) that don't quite look right to me. I think it is the fact that they don't feel like "proper cartography".
Deck plans are a somewhat specialized thing and the Spelljammer ships I think were concerned more with just getting something that fit an illustration than with something that made particularly good sense. If you've read any of my musings on the good/bad of the original Spelljammer material you'll note that I believe the designers really missed what Spelljammer actually was, or what it could be best at. When you give PC's a ship in space and tell them to go explore planets you are stepping solidly into the already well-worn shoes of SCIENCE FICTION. You're talking about the starship Enterprise - the Millenium Falcon - Serenity - even Spaceship Yamato. The game needed to provide deckplans for ships that would support the kinds of stories and adventures seen in the related movies and TV shows. It really needed to be ship-oriented SF like, say, Traveller; it was just dressed up in fantasy trappings from D&D. At least that's how I saw it. So you look at deckplans for a Tradesman and want it to be a fantasy equivalent of the Millenium Falcon and it just isn't. Neither is a Hammership appropriately reminiscent of the Serenity, nor is an Armada taking inspiration from the Enterprise, and the mighty Spelljammer itself is hardly Babylon-5 (though it could be).

Hmm. I have read some of your musings, but would like to go through them all again.
I've got to say that I also don't think the original AD&D Adventures in Space boxed set does the ships right. My main thing has always been that the ship combat just does not seem like it is AD&D - it seems like a tacked on wargame. I've never really thought about on-voyage adventure opportunities too much before.
I'm not a fan of making SJ look too much like sci-fi, but Robert S. Conley was suggesting borrowing from Traveller, so your argument is being backed up by commercial authors. And I've got to admit that
sometimes I already think it is a good idea...
...provided the sci-fi serial numbers are filed off and replaced with forged fantasy ones.
I'll agree with other people here (that an Age of Sail feel is better than a sci-fi dressed as fantasy feel), but I think that all of the things you mention are valid bits of storytelling to rob.
The USS Enterprise of Spelljammer would definately be something like an elven navy armada. It has multiple decks and is large enough that you could throw a witchlight marauder onto one end of the ship and there could be a long period of hand to hand combat before the crew either win or loose the ship.
The Millenium Falcon is a smuggling ship (pretending to be an honest trading ship). The same sort of thing could be done with SJ's ships. If you look at some of the ship redesigns done by Silverblade, he has grabbed
some of the "dead zones" that were not mapped by Jim Holloway. That gives you the smuggling compartments that would allow a ship to sneak things in past customs.
The big thing with Serenity/Firefly is the relatively small crew and a ship that is divided into fairly small crew cabins and a fairly large hold (where bad guys can sometimes hide). The dragonfly (in progress at the moment in another thread) could give you that sort of environment.
I don't know Spaceship Yamato, so I've got no comments on that (other than it is obviously something that sounds cool).
Another thing all three of these ships have is an iconic universe that backs them up. Enterprise has a Federation...rather like the Imperial Navy. The Falcon has an evil empire and a bunch of freedom fighters...perhaps like the Sun Mages of Clusterspace and the Hidden. Serenity has a variety of characters headed by a pair of ex-armed forces people who were abandoned by their own side. You might be able to have a pair of "good" Varen for that sort of role.
The main thing that SJ could learn from Traveller is to discover how to build worlds, systems and flow rivers a bit better. At the moment, we have a bunch of partial details that are all cool, but leave a lot of gaps. Looking at Traveller material, I see detailed maps that show me exactly how the universe sectors fit together.
I would like to see maps made for each planet and then for new locations to be "sandboxed" into the undocumented areas.
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
I wish I could lock you and Jaid in a thread and make you both have a debate. I've had some really fun debates about some of the weirder aspects of Spelljammer. Your writings seem to suggest you have an eye for spotting these oddities. Some really odd details come out of the woodwork when you look at SJ canon with a microscope. And when people bounce stuff off of each other, you can find hidden "easter eggs" inside SJ products.

Between the time when TSR died and 3rd Edition was released what I really really wanted most was to run another Spelljammer campaign. The players I had said they wanted more of it too. Problem was it just didn't work for me mechanically. I looked at it REAL HARD for quite a while and eventually concluded that it was just going to be more effort than I wanted to put into it to make it into what I wanted it to be.
I'm not quite sure where your "mechanical" brick wall was.
Are you saying that you ran out of modules and didn't have any new stuff to put in?
What did you try to do to "fix" your game?
Why do you think it failed?
Man in the Funny Hat wrote:
Big Mac wrote:
I think that contour lines (themselves) tend to break down a bit when you start having verticle sides to an asteroid. I can't really see a way to get around that.
That, my friend, is what
sculpture is for.

No that is what
Silverblade's Suitcase is for!
Joking aside, I really hope that your map can make Silverblade make a better Bral. He can create the multiple side views, that will show people how steep each of the sides of Bral are.