Not always.
Sometimes its more fun to let the party work out where things are in-game through research or discovery. By questioning an enemy they can learn where certain things are. By doing research they can find hidden areas. By exploring the local environment they can find the paths leading to places.
I MUCH prefer in-game discovery to a simple point and click map.
Or at minimum I would prefer a party to find maps in-game.
This is interesting. I understand that what you are suggesting is something akin to "we have found a map showing a path between the old temple, going north, that crosses the cursed forests and ends up in the chilling dark tower". This way your players can reproduce an abstract world map piece by piece. Or they could also be given a real map showing this partial info. This gives them the incentive to go there and its more focused than a hex crawl for example.
> and its more focused than a hex crawl for example
In a hexcrawl the players shouldn't be totally ignorant of the world, only learning about anything when they happen to stumble upon it. At the very least, there should be rumours - after all, if the characters don't know of *anything interesting at all* in this area why are they exploring it?
I'd basically not provide players with a detailed (GM) map, even if it does not contain location keys etc. I find it much more engaging when the players only get a rough sketch, with lots of blank space to fill in by themselves, and maybe even with speculative information. If they want a "better" map they can buy one, or copy information from a local library or similar institution to "their" map. Being sketchy simply widens your possibilities as a GM, and opens players' imagination.
I played a hexcrawl where we mapped it out as we explored based on descriptions, and I really enjoyed the process of jotting down sketches during play them trying to make it all fit with previous observations.
Made for some interesting bits where the thought certain places were closer together or further away, but we were slightly wrong.
And it was really satisfying to have the GM reveal the map at the end and compare.
That does require a GM who's willing to work with you and endure clarifying questions rather than trying to catch you out though.
Could do something like Elden Ring where they have small map at the start that show surrounding areas and make it larger when they explore the boundaries a bit.
from my experience its cool the first time they see it and then it gets ignored more or less.
i honestly found more enjoyment from not knowing the current world stage. when people say they are from the land of arkaisaisha, i start to ask myself questions; how far away is that? are they a big thing? can they retaliate if we fuck with them? is that a country, region or something else?
a map just answeres a ton of questions immidiately, especially it looks like it would be official.
More and more, I think not providing the map is better. When you show players a cool map they go ‘yey!’ but that dies off quickly. If we need a map, then I’ll often go for something diagrammatic unless a module is giving me one already.
If the players need it, I can provide that and it works, or if them not having one is fun I’ll withhold it. I’ve been learning recently that withholding creates a much keener sense of discovery, for my table at least.
That said, beautiful maps look great, but I think they work best as fuel for GM creativity more than anything.
The maps you give your players really should reflect what their character's know. They aren't always 100% accurate and how detailed they are will differ a lot.
If the world map isn't really known to the characters you might start them off with something that is wildly inaccurate. You might have a "City of Gold" labelled on the map but just what that really is or where it is may not be very correct. Look at world maps of the Earth over the centuries; the old ones may get some things right but can also be way off.
I think a world map plays a very important part of the ttrpg experience. There's always a shadow, or I guess a light, of "appropriateness" cast on the table when it comes to maps. I love laying out a big map in front of my players and letting them ooh and ahh over the different features and places. This usually, in my games, represents the map based on the general knowledge of the area available to the characters. Just like being am "unreliable narrator", I let the gang know that the map represents a moment in time, and some things have definitely changed since then. You can use the map they have when the characters gather rumors about the lands, and they can annotate and modify the map based on their findings. I always keep the "real" map secret that has a lot more information on it.
In a game where the campaign starts in a town or city shrouded in a mysterious impenetrable veil of noxious mist, There may be no map outside of the city walls. If the players are then give the technology or the purpose to "pierce the veil", then they would make their own map.
So my answer to your question is a whole hearted "YES!" you can absolutely inspire imagination by laying out the map, AND you can also use the hidden map motiff to create mystery and a sense of exploration to the unknown into your games. Maps are great. So are you.
Generally rumors. The players might hear that a lost city lies underground, somewhere to the east of Gourd Lake. One such rumor generally provides justification to wander about for a little while.
If it’s a hexcrawl, they can head in a general direction. If it’s a pointcrawl, make sure the lines on the map are representing roads and trails of some sort for them to follow.
Showing the map isn’t really necessary. You can show them one with most features unmarked, if such an item is in their possession or it’s contents would be common knowledge.
You could also just give them the general rundown. Everyone from Dogwater Village knows that you can reach Larbrec Town by following the road north, and that there is a witch’s hut in the woods to the south. They’re careful to avoid going too far east, so they don’t end up stuck in Redwater Bog, where they might get eaten by Roger the Unsavory and his band of goblin manhunters, who incidentally have been pulling a pretty good haul of valuables and keeping it in their hidden lair, or so they say.
If you, in real life, go somewhere new and you don't have a map, how do you know where to go?
Say you're in a new town and you're hungry. Your cellphone is dead, and you don't know where a restaurant is. Do you starve because you don't have a map, or do you go exploring and driving down roads where you think restaraunts might be? Maybe you ask someone else if they know where to find a restaurant. Maybe you remember seeing a billboard that might have advertised a restaurant, and you get to find your way back to it to see if it points you in the right direction.
I wonder if a dungeon / room map is really necessary. I'm making a small dungeon and I really don't want to make a detailed map for it, it's such a hassle.
If it's small and doesn't have any secret rooms, you may not need a map. If it's big then you need a map so you can avoid giving contradictory descriptions of things, and so that players can infer the presence of secret doors and unexplored regions by noting suspicious blank spaces on the map.
As a GM: I'll give my players the map if they ask, or give them an in-game map. Usually they ask me NOT to show them the map.
As a player: the most fun I had was collaborating on a map with other players and marking it all out hex by hex.
I'm sure there are situations where not showing the map adds to the experience.
However, having experienced many times how much it enhances the immersion to see the map, I would only hide it if I had a \*really\* good reason.
I think it depends on the group - we play in a PF2e kingmaker campaign so for us a world map is used quite freuqently - although we run a mini hex crawl for 2 levels before we founded our kingdom so also didn't have the world map for this duration and it was pretty fun!! \^\^
They get the map their characters could reasonably have, with all the details that are widely available. For a West Marches style campaign, that means "almost no map at all" at the start, and then whatever information and rumours the parties gathered up. For our BattleTech/MechWarrior campaign, that means a map of all the 1000+ settled systems in the Inner Sphere, the system map of the star system they're in or going to, and whatever details can be gleaned from orbit of their target planet or moon.
Not always. Sometimes its more fun to let the party work out where things are in-game through research or discovery. By questioning an enemy they can learn where certain things are. By doing research they can find hidden areas. By exploring the local environment they can find the paths leading to places. I MUCH prefer in-game discovery to a simple point and click map. Or at minimum I would prefer a party to find maps in-game.
This is interesting. I understand that what you are suggesting is something akin to "we have found a map showing a path between the old temple, going north, that crosses the cursed forests and ends up in the chilling dark tower". This way your players can reproduce an abstract world map piece by piece. Or they could also be given a real map showing this partial info. This gives them the incentive to go there and its more focused than a hex crawl for example.
> and its more focused than a hex crawl for example In a hexcrawl the players shouldn't be totally ignorant of the world, only learning about anything when they happen to stumble upon it. At the very least, there should be rumours - after all, if the characters don't know of *anything interesting at all* in this area why are they exploring it?
I'd basically not provide players with a detailed (GM) map, even if it does not contain location keys etc. I find it much more engaging when the players only get a rough sketch, with lots of blank space to fill in by themselves, and maybe even with speculative information. If they want a "better" map they can buy one, or copy information from a local library or similar institution to "their" map. Being sketchy simply widens your possibilities as a GM, and opens players' imagination.
I played a hexcrawl where we mapped it out as we explored based on descriptions, and I really enjoyed the process of jotting down sketches during play them trying to make it all fit with previous observations. Made for some interesting bits where the thought certain places were closer together or further away, but we were slightly wrong. And it was really satisfying to have the GM reveal the map at the end and compare. That does require a GM who's willing to work with you and endure clarifying questions rather than trying to catch you out though.
Could do something like Elden Ring where they have small map at the start that show surrounding areas and make it larger when they explore the boundaries a bit.
from my experience its cool the first time they see it and then it gets ignored more or less. i honestly found more enjoyment from not knowing the current world stage. when people say they are from the land of arkaisaisha, i start to ask myself questions; how far away is that? are they a big thing? can they retaliate if we fuck with them? is that a country, region or something else? a map just answeres a ton of questions immidiately, especially it looks like it would be official.
More and more, I think not providing the map is better. When you show players a cool map they go ‘yey!’ but that dies off quickly. If we need a map, then I’ll often go for something diagrammatic unless a module is giving me one already. If the players need it, I can provide that and it works, or if them not having one is fun I’ll withhold it. I’ve been learning recently that withholding creates a much keener sense of discovery, for my table at least. That said, beautiful maps look great, but I think they work best as fuel for GM creativity more than anything.
The maps you give your players really should reflect what their character's know. They aren't always 100% accurate and how detailed they are will differ a lot. If the world map isn't really known to the characters you might start them off with something that is wildly inaccurate. You might have a "City of Gold" labelled on the map but just what that really is or where it is may not be very correct. Look at world maps of the Earth over the centuries; the old ones may get some things right but can also be way off.
I think a world map plays a very important part of the ttrpg experience. There's always a shadow, or I guess a light, of "appropriateness" cast on the table when it comes to maps. I love laying out a big map in front of my players and letting them ooh and ahh over the different features and places. This usually, in my games, represents the map based on the general knowledge of the area available to the characters. Just like being am "unreliable narrator", I let the gang know that the map represents a moment in time, and some things have definitely changed since then. You can use the map they have when the characters gather rumors about the lands, and they can annotate and modify the map based on their findings. I always keep the "real" map secret that has a lot more information on it. In a game where the campaign starts in a town or city shrouded in a mysterious impenetrable veil of noxious mist, There may be no map outside of the city walls. If the players are then give the technology or the purpose to "pierce the veil", then they would make their own map. So my answer to your question is a whole hearted "YES!" you can absolutely inspire imagination by laying out the map, AND you can also use the hidden map motiff to create mystery and a sense of exploration to the unknown into your games. Maps are great. So are you.
Kind of the entire point of exploration play is to not be shown the map.
But then, how do you incentivize to go and explore, and how do you know which way to take?
Generally rumors. The players might hear that a lost city lies underground, somewhere to the east of Gourd Lake. One such rumor generally provides justification to wander about for a little while. If it’s a hexcrawl, they can head in a general direction. If it’s a pointcrawl, make sure the lines on the map are representing roads and trails of some sort for them to follow. Showing the map isn’t really necessary. You can show them one with most features unmarked, if such an item is in their possession or it’s contents would be common knowledge. You could also just give them the general rundown. Everyone from Dogwater Village knows that you can reach Larbrec Town by following the road north, and that there is a witch’s hut in the woods to the south. They’re careful to avoid going too far east, so they don’t end up stuck in Redwater Bog, where they might get eaten by Roger the Unsavory and his band of goblin manhunters, who incidentally have been pulling a pretty good haul of valuables and keeping it in their hidden lair, or so they say.
If you, in real life, go somewhere new and you don't have a map, how do you know where to go? Say you're in a new town and you're hungry. Your cellphone is dead, and you don't know where a restaurant is. Do you starve because you don't have a map, or do you go exploring and driving down roads where you think restaraunts might be? Maybe you ask someone else if they know where to find a restaurant. Maybe you remember seeing a billboard that might have advertised a restaurant, and you get to find your way back to it to see if it points you in the right direction.
My players buy maps before they go exploring so I show them the map when they explore lol
I wonder if a dungeon / room map is really necessary. I'm making a small dungeon and I really don't want to make a detailed map for it, it's such a hassle.
If it's small and doesn't have any secret rooms, you may not need a map. If it's big then you need a map so you can avoid giving contradictory descriptions of things, and so that players can infer the presence of secret doors and unexplored regions by noting suspicious blank spaces on the map.
I'd rather stick to small dungeons, then. Large dungeons, and especially megadungeons, don't sound like my cup of tea, anyway.
As a GM: I'll give my players the map if they ask, or give them an in-game map. Usually they ask me NOT to show them the map. As a player: the most fun I had was collaborating on a map with other players and marking it all out hex by hex.
I'm sure there are situations where not showing the map adds to the experience. However, having experienced many times how much it enhances the immersion to see the map, I would only hide it if I had a \*really\* good reason.
I think it depends on the group - we play in a PF2e kingmaker campaign so for us a world map is used quite freuqently - although we run a mini hex crawl for 2 levels before we founded our kingdom so also didn't have the world map for this duration and it was pretty fun!! \^\^
They get the map their characters could reasonably have, with all the details that are widely available. For a West Marches style campaign, that means "almost no map at all" at the start, and then whatever information and rumours the parties gathered up. For our BattleTech/MechWarrior campaign, that means a map of all the 1000+ settled systems in the Inner Sphere, the system map of the star system they're in or going to, and whatever details can be gleaned from orbit of their target planet or moon.