[WIP] Starting town for my D&D campaign need help/criticism

[DarkInfinity]

OK, so I'm new at this and kinda just throwing myself to the wolves. Here is the setup, I've gotten my kids (ages 4 and 7) interested in playing D&D. I have a campaign idea started. It's a simple, not a lot of tricks (yet), you have been asked to deal with some goblins raiding local farms. (it's a little more exciting than that, if you want to see the rough draft of the campaign notes feel free to ask)

Part of the campaign when discussing the recent attacks there is reference to a map of the local area on the table. I'm trying to work on that map.

Basic layout, there is a walled city at the base of a mountain range between those mountains and a river.
It's not quite a large enough city to warrant having a castle, so the Earl resides in what I am calling a manor house
There are several farms surrounding the city. (these are important to the map because the map is eventually going to show where the attacks have happened.)
There is a road from the city to the river where there is a bridge crossing said river.
Out side of the farming region there are forests (being around the foothills of this mountainous range, I was thinking evergreens, but I could be talked into deciduous.)

Other notes:
There is mention of markers on the map for where a war is drawing closer to the city (not yet shown on this WIP Map)


My own critiques and questions:

• Clearly scale is off here. Should I just put a marker for the city and not add the detail therein?
• Again with Scale should the river be more of a line than having too much width? And a marker for the bridge?
• I would love some suggestions on what to do to show trees... I tried but it's becoming a mess...
• Farms? What's a good way to show farms?
• Maybe this should be in the Regional section I wasn't sure where this actually fit...

Feel free to tear me down, I'm a big boy, and I realize there are issues with this map. It's a first draft, the more I know what to fix, the better the next draft will be.

Thank you for any advice.

[Cuin]

Nice! I think it's a great start. I don't think the scale is something to pick apart. Mountains are nearly never to scale when drawn on maps. I think the style of trees and farms are fine too.

My suggestions: 1) Mountains trees and farm houses are seen from the side, farms and the city are viewed top down, that's unusual. 2) Although I don't mind the scale, another perspetive issue is that the farms remain the same size from the shore line all the way to the mountains. Smaller farms further back towards the mountains might help. 3) I think a few more layers of mountains in the backdrop would add depth.

Often people will label the city with a dot as you've said, and add an inset that has a close-up/bird's eye view of the city.

[DarkInfinity]

Nice! I think it's a great start. I don't think the scale is something to pick apart. Mountains are nearly never to scale when drawn on maps. I think the style of trees and farms are fine too.

My suggestions: 1) Mountains trees and farm houses are seen from the side, farms and the city are viewed top down, that's unusual. 2) Although I don't mind the scale, another perspetive issue is that the farms remain the same size from the shore line all the way to the mountains. Smaller farms further back towards the mountains might help. 3) I think a few more layers of mountains in the backdrop would add depth.

Often people will label the city with a dot as you've said, and add an inset that has a close-up/bird's eye view of the city.

Thank you. This is what I need.

1) Now that you mention that I can't unsee the different perspectives... good call.
2) Good point.
3) I can do more layers.

Would it makes sense to put the close-up view in that top right corner? (so I don't have to think about what to put behind the mountains over there.) In most of the maps I've looked at on here the close up tends to be placed near the bottom edge.

Also, with the close-up is it fair once I take that out of the main map to change perspective and do a top down instead of a side view?

[Cuin]

Thank you. This is what I need.

1) Now that you mention that I can't unsee the different perspectives... good call.
2) Good point.
3) I can do more layers.

Would it makes sense to put the close-up view in that top right corner? (so I don't have to think about what to put behind the mountains over there.) In most of the maps I've looked at on here the close up tends to be placed near the bottom edge.

Also, with the close-up is it fair once I take that out of the main map to change perspective and do a top down instead of a side view?

Absolutely fair to change perspective within an inset.

I totally agree it is nice to put objects in places on your map that you aren't interested in filling in what would otherwise be there. I do that all the time.

As far as why most insets are along the bottom. Can't say I've thought of this before, but I'd say that city maps are dense and look "heavy". If they get placed up top they might look looming, hanging, or unsteady and would snag an eye right away...potentially distracting. Along the bottom, the eye would seem more likely to comfortably fall upon the inset at natural convenience.

[shamakratos]

Personally I think the way Tolkien did his trees was simple yet effective. (Though a little time consuming.)



Hope ya have a fun time playing with the kiddos!

[DarkInfinity]

Sorry I didn't get to post this earlier my phone does not play well with attachments on this site. This was attempt number 2. I think I got a little carried away with the mountains, and I did not do the close up yet. but I think I like where it is going.

[jambalayafore]

I like how the mountains are reminiscent of like the peaks over Salt Lake City.