Re: (TFT) Hex map

[Peter von Kleinsmid <pvk@oz.net>]

At 09:08 AM 2/16/04 -0600, Mark Tapley wrote:
...
> Mapping?! The utility of being able to condense the size of maps by 3-to-1 
> made the case for Megahexes for me. How do your parties' mappers deal with 
> this? Just map on a really big sheet of regular hex paper? Or just 
> approximate scribbled maps on clear paper? But then they lose the ability 
> to find (or make) shortcuts from one part of the dungeon to another, if it 
> loops back close upon itself.

If you want that simplicity, then yes, you lose it if you stop using megahexes.

However, using megahexes means you lose some other interesting things. 
Megahex-based maps make a task (mapping) easy for the players which would 
be hard for the characters. Do they have surveying talents and equipment, 
or are they creating this verbatim map using Literacy (woo hoo!) and IQ 12? 
If they don't have the knowledge, skill, equipment, and aren't spending 
lots of extra time, mapping out each room, then their maps should be by 
hand on plain paper, at best. This adds another level of mystery and 
challenge, creates neat artifacts (maps with guesswork and misconceptions) 
as players try to figure out things that would be trivial before, less 
artificially represents the situation, and can be a lot of fun.

I started refusing to give megahex-style information to non-survey-team 
characters after I saw how it was more interesting without it, even for my 
old maps which were originally drawn for megahexes.

Comes down to a matter of taste. Some players prefer the simplicity of 
megahexes.

PvK
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"