Community world building

[Falconius]

Maybe Red can run this one and I'll just assist if needed.
Then I can just focus on mapping.

I am generally opposed to 'rules' per se, as I feel they often get restrictive quick.
I tried to run the last two with almost no rules, just the layout as guideline.
That's just how I am though.

As am I, the "rules" I suggested are mostly to ensure compatibility between maps. ie one 10ft wide corridor can simply be attached to another without the need for any layout drafts or other things.

[industrygothica]

I really, really, REALLY love the idea of mapping a huge, detailed underdarkish world. Really. But I would think that governing a project like that would take some serious effort and skill, what with all the multiple levels and various entry points and whatnot. Eww.

So, for me, my next favorite idea is just to create a virtual library of subterranean maps. Submit as many as you want, in whatever style you want. With the caveat that all maps keep to the same scale, the same resolution, and ingresses and egresses all be the same width to account for connectors, it could grow to be quite the collection. Maybe even the subject of a challenge or two to help stock it. Again, just my opinion... I just like dungeons, so I'm good with anything.


-IG

[Mouse]

I agree that managing a project like this would be a bit of a nightmare, unless we have either a basic layout plan, or a very scant set of rules.

So before you decide to scrap the massive underground complex idea, here are a couple of rules I thought might work, and a way of keeping the dungeons compatible and making it easier for Red to put them together like a giant patchwork.

• 5'x5' grid = 150x150 px (that's intended to be a normal/luxury resolution for battle maps - please correct me if I have it wrong)
• Width constraint on exits that cross the edge of the map
• A standard blend fringe (a single 5' grid square?) all the way around each map - a sacrifice band to allow Red to blend all our different background colours and textures together more easily. That would be like a 5' border that only contains the background texture and colour, and none of the map itself apart from the exits, which would need to continue right to the edge, and be of a set size to match up with other maps.
• A 'super grid' that could be 10 x 5' grid squares, and a need to stick to that grid for size of map. For example, a width or height of a number of super grid squares means that the whole thing will fit together much more easily than if we all map in random numbers of 5' grid square - like this.

In this example I have produced a 50x50 grid with a super grid of 10 grid squares, and chosen a map size for myself that is 3x2 super grid squares. This is shown in dark pink. The paler pink fringe is the sacrificial edge I would add to the map size for Red to be able to blend my background into all the neighbouring maps.

[Redrobes]

I can take a map with loads of passages and sticky out bits so long as the background is untextured. Then I can use the select by colour to go around all of the passages to make up the mask. So it doesnt have to be rectangular. I dont have to have a specific pixels per grid either but it helps if it is at least a certain resolution otherwise when zooming in some maps will go blocky.

We dont have to have a sacrificial band around the map if the map does not have to be placed into a specific position. So long as I could move it at placement time so that it fits it does not matter too much. I will need (and have always historically make up) a mask for every map submission in the community projects. Often that is quite easy, sometimes its very hard. The mask determines the amount of sacrificial space around the map. It would help if people were to make the mask for me which is a greyscale image the same size as the map where white is opaque (want to see it) and black is clear (allow existing map to show through or other map corridors to poke in). Then people can submit any shape they like. But I have always been prepared to make the masks to peoples submissions in the event that they dont make one.

Do we want to have a fixed background colour ? Say black ? Although its nice to have a nifty pattern going on its very hard to keep it consistent across many maps. A lot of the caves of chaos had black backgrounds anyway.

It helps me as a purely technical matter if the maps are up to 2048 pixels square. I can shrink maps to that size but thats the max icon size in my app. Otherwise if its much larger than this then I have to break up the image into tiles. I have an app for that so its not massively hard, but its a bit of a chore esp when were wanting a lot of little bits of dungeon to jigsaw together. So it sounds like most of the maps ought to be smaller than that anyway. 150px per 10' still means about 136' square bits of dungeon. Final zoomy maps are 16K so thats 1092' square of dungeon space to fill.

Doing 3D levels has always been a pain. I can link to other levels but I think it should all be on one level. Often on maps there are indications of height change but when one map overlays another with vertical drops and shafts that have to line up then its difficult - at least difficult for a community project - and difficult to represent in 2D.

Another point I could make is that it helps if the interface between maps is on a corridor instead of at a door. Since the door icons often have stuff on both sides of it then its easier if we butt corridors that are straight together. Only the walls are then in need of blending which is so much easier than doors and we can fade down both sides over a coulple of squares for a seamless transition.

[Chashio]

Just for fun...
https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/12...pse-dungeon-4/

Also... https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2015/10/

[J.Edward]

Hmmm, maybe we should shoot for geomorphs? https://rthorm.wordpress.com/tag/geomorph/
That seemingly would deal with a lot of this trouble... well, some of it, at least.

[J.Edward]

Or we could start from a very simplified corridor where dungeons run off from that corridor.
But, then we would have to assign areas again, which people seem like they aren't wanting to do.

[Mouse]

That's like a seamless pattern of linear objects (walls, corridors etc),but where the isolated contents of each block can be different, isn't it?

It could work very well, but not as well as if there was a basic overall plan, so you don't have to always have a corridor at point A, or whatever?

After reading Red's last comment my head is in a bit of a whirl at the moment. I think I will just wait and see what everyone else has to propose. The resolution will be fairly low on the zoomy map, but there's no reason why individual mappers can't have their bits of dungeon at higher resolutions in the Finished Maps section - just like we are doing with the City.

[Redrobes]

The zoomy map res is the same as that of the originals. 16384 / 150 * 10 = 1092. If you want more map then its less res. If you want more res then its less map. I think 150 pixels per 10' seems about right. 120 is a pixel per fantasy world inch of course so 150 is a shade under an inch res. Many VTTs used 100 pixels per 5 ft. Fine by me...

[Mouse]

ummm.........

Would I be right in thinking that you are recommending we do 60px per 5' grid square, instead of 150px per 5' grid - as I have in the example grid I showed above?