Curious to see how other groups handle dungeon mapping

[tchntm43]

The "old school" approach is that the DM tells the players how rooms are shaped, how long tunnel passages are, where doors are, and it's left to a designated player to draw the map as they go. I think some groups still do it this way (it's even hinted at in some introductory 5e modules that the group should designate a player to be the mapper).

When I started my first 5e campaign about 6 years ago, I picked up a sheet of 1-inch grid with a clear plastic overlay, and some erasable black markers. As the party explored, I would draw the map for them. The convenient aspect of this was that weirdly-shaped rooms that are difficult to describe could be represented correctly, and combat happens right on the map. But, it's not very exciting to look at.

About a year ago, I was introduced to the concept of visual tabletop displays and software like Arkenforge. I've used it ever since because it allows a visually appealing map representation and handles "fog of war" for exploration purposes really well. You can do other fun things like making the roof of a building disappear as the party goes inside, revealing the interior space.

However, I now find myself with my 3rd campaign group, and the person who owns the VTT display who is in the other two groups is not in this one, and so I'm back to low-tech. Honestly, I'm very spoiled now. :smile: It's hard to go back. The option I've been using is printing out 24x36 inch maps (with a 1-inch = 5 ft grid), which I either find online for official modules or create in Arkenforge if I can't find anything. Then I have cut up many sheets of black construction paper into small squares that I use to simulate the fog of war. It adds a bit to setup spreading it out, and I have to be careful revealing content, but overall it has worked pretty well and the group has been very impressed. The one player in the group who has been playing for decades says it's one of the most impressive approaches he's ever seen.

I know some people do something similar but with full size uncut sheets of paper, but the problem is with small rooms, you can't make the sheets fit the map (and I've even seen Matt Mercer struggle with this problem on some of his Critical Role maps where he used that approach).

But I'm wondering if other people have cool methods for this that might be even better.

Here is what it looks like, by the way (group playing The Sunless Citadel).
https://i.vgy.me/qRI63i.jpg

[Gignere]

The "old school" approach is that the DM tells the players how rooms are shaped, how long tunnel passages are, where doors are, and it's left to a designated player to draw the map as they go. I think some groups still do it this way (it's even hinted at in some introductory 5e modules that the group should designate a player to be the mapper).

When I started my first 5e campaign about 6 years ago, I picked up a sheet of 1-inch grid with a clear plastic overlay, and some erasable black markers. As the party explored, I would draw the map for them. The convenient aspect of this was that weirdly-shaped rooms that are difficult to describe could be represented correctly, and combat happens right on the map. But, it's not very exciting to look at.

About a year ago, I was introduced to the concept of visual tabletop displays and software like Arkenforge. I've used it ever since because it allows a visually appealing map representation and handles "fog of war" for exploration purposes really well. You can do other fun things like making the roof of a building disappear as the party goes inside, revealing the interior space.

However, I now find myself with my 3rd campaign group, and the person who owns the VTT display who is in the other two groups is not in this one, and so I'm back to low-tech. Honestly, I'm very spoiled now. :smile: It's hard to go back. The option I've been using is printing out 24x36 inch maps (with a 1-inch = 5 ft grid), which I either find online for official modules or create in Arkenforge if I can't find anything. Then I have cut up many sheets of black construction paper into small squares that I use to simulate the fog of war. It adds a bit to setup spreading it out, and I have to be careful revealing content, but overall it has worked pretty well and the group has been very impressed. The one player in the group who has been playing for decades says it's one of the most impressive approaches he's ever seen.

I know some people do something similar but with full size uncut sheets of paper, but the problem is with small rooms, you can't make the sheets fit the map (and I've even seen Matt Mercer struggle with this problem on some of his Critical Role maps where he used that approach).

But I'm wondering if other people have cool methods for this that might be even better.

Here is what it looks like, by the way (group playing The Sunless Citadel).
https://i.vgy.me/qRI63i.jpg

I use roll20 and get the subscription for Fog of War/dynamic lighting. To be honest I don’t think I can go back even if eventually I go back to in person gaming. I will just have my biggest tablet logged into roll20.

[Chronos]

Most of my DMing experience this century fell during lockdown, so it was all virtual. Our group doesn't have proper VTT software, but I got the same effect by putting the maps in Google Slides, and making opaque polygons (mostly rectangles, but occasionally some other shape) to cover the rooms.

I did DM a couple of sessions face-to-face, for which I printed out the map, and used Post-it notes for fog of war. Similar to your construction paper, but easier to pre-set, and it didn't fall apart at a bump or breeze.

Mostly, when other folks are DMing, we use a laminated grid and dry-erase markers, and draw as necessary. For a couple of sessions, the other DM (who had also gotten used to doing it lockdown-style) had a virtual map, with a big monitor laid flat on its back on the table.

Way back in the day of "the DM describes and a player draws", I was always tempted to do a non-Euclidean dungeon, just to screw with the party. Fortunately, I never got the chance.

[Tanarii]

Players map if they have a mapper in-game. Otherwise they have to go off memory for where they've been, and rumors for where they haven't.

For properly jaquayed adventuring sites, this is actually important, accurate player maps are part of solving the puzzle of the dungeon. Even for less jaquayed adventuring sites, it can be very useful to have a map showing g where other groups have already been, tricks and traps pre-marked or detailed so you don't fall prey due to their hard-won experience, and kinds of creatures they've encountered. It's incredibly valuable to other player groups to sell if you're not not going back. Or barter for if you are going for the first time.

Maps made by NPCs are also a great reward for a DM to hand out.

[Cheesegear]

The "old school" approach is that the DM tells the players how rooms are shaped, how long tunnel passages are, where doors are, and it's left to a designated player to draw the map as they go. I think some groups still do it this way (it's even hinted at in some introductory 5e modules that the group should designate a player to be the mapper).

I have my prepped map on GIMP, and maybe a few notes stored on my tablet/phone. This map and notes can - and will - change based on how I think the party is going. There's no point at all giving my players a pre-drawn map because how do I know that I don't want to change it?

I tell my players that they should draw a map as they go. I've got other things I need to worry about. I can't be drawing the map for you. The same as how I can't be taking your notes. I find it's a great tool for players with characters who tend not to do a lot during combat.

If the player doing the drawing has a scale that they're consistent with, their map should turn out fine. Then, at the end of the session, I can take a look at their map, compare it to my map...Job's a good'un.


[Drawing a map by hand is] not very exciting to look at.

...And that's...Not okay?


About a year ago, I was introduced to the concept of visual tabletop displays and software like Arkenforge. I've used it ever since because it allows a visually appealing map representation and handles "fog of war" for exploration purposes really well. You can do other fun things like making the roof of a building disappear as the party goes inside, revealing the interior space.

If your...Table...Has an inlaid monitor, yes. That's incredibly useful.
I've considered building my own table. But unfortunately I already have a really nice table and I don't really need a table with a TV in it for one night a week.


But I'm wondering if other people have cool methods for this that might be even better.

I draw room-by-room with dry-erase markers and the D&D Adventure Grid (I think 21x24"?). It only slightly sucks when drawing 22-plus square rooms because the Grid isn't big enough for that. But in the rough decade that I've been playing D&D, the need to draw 10,000+ square foot environments doesn't come up as often as you think. It sucks when it does come up, sure. But it's really not that often.

I have no interest at all in drawing out a whole dungeon to scale before a session, and so I have absolutely no need for "Fog of War" mechanics or solutions...So I guess my advice is simply...Have you tried not doing Fog of War mechanics, and just drawing things room-by-room...And if your players want to backtrack (hint; They never want to backtrack), you can just redraw the room.

[JonBeowulf]

Roll20 "ruined" tabletop mapping for me. I love dynamic lighting & fog. My groups love dynamic lighting & fog.

I'm running a BECMI game for a group that wanted the old-school experience so they're drawing it as they go. I give them a blank grid maps and they draw what I tell them.

[Carpe Gonzo]

For in-person games I don't have detailed maps, just a relational map of the rooms/nodes that is literally just circles and lines connecting the circles, with the names of the rooms inside the circles. Any notes for the nodes or paths are written next to them (e.g. number and type of monsters, DCs of traps, etc.) I can generally fit a wandering monster / random encounter table on the same page.

I have my map and then I give my players a blank map with the starting node. If there's an NPC familiar with the area (e.g. a denizen of a cave area the party is exploring) they can fill in part of the map for the players. Otherwise, it's up to them to draw it. It being wrong sometimes is part of the fun.

I find this system particularly appropriate for natural dungeons, such as a cave system or a series of connected clearings in a forest.

For combat, if there are multiple enemies, I'll draw the combat space on a grid as it happens and then erase when it's over.

[tchntm43]

...And that's...Not okay?

Well... the game is supposed to be fun above all else, right? So yes, if I have the choice between less and more exciting options, I go with the more exciting option. The players in all 3 groups enjoy playing on the full-color maps that look like the places they are exploring and are detailed, instead of using the drawn line representations.

I know that some groups use a 3D miniature setup (I remember more commonly seeing this with the Warhammer 40K players back in the day), where they use materials to build terrain and hills and cliffs, and they construct buildings and other structures, and they go to great lengths to paint everything. This is admittedly very cool, and I've thought about doing it, but I think it only works well for outdoor setups. Underground you shouldn't be able to see the entire thing at once, and creating fog of war for a 3D play area would be much more difficult (but not impossible, I'm imagining a solution using black cotton balls, but even so it would difficult to remove them without knocking over other 3D things that aren't supposed to move).


If your...Table...Has an inlaid monitor, yes. That's incredibly useful.
I've considered building my own table. But unfortunately I already have a really nice table and I don't really need a table with a TV in it for one night a week.

Usually players who use these build a box to hold a large tv and just put the box on top of the regular table. The screen is covered with plexiglass so it's fine to put minis, roll dice, and even write on character sheets on top of it.


I draw room-by-room with dry-erase markers and the D&D Adventure Grid (I think 21x24"?). It only slightly sucks when drawing 22-plus square rooms because the Grid isn't big enough for that. But in the rough decade that I've been playing D&D, the need to draw 10,000+ square foot environments doesn't come up as often as you think. It sucks when it does come up, sure. But it's really not that often.

The groups frequently use tactics like withdrawing into a hallway from a dangerous enemy to try and draw it out to flank it, or sometimes monster reinforcements show up from adjacent rooms... in both cases, combat can involve multiple rooms and connecting hallways.


I have no interest at all in drawing out a whole dungeon to scale before a session, and so I have absolutely no need for "Fog of War" mechanics or solutions...So I guess my advice is simply...Have you tried not doing Fog of War mechanics, and just drawing things room-by-room...And if your players want to backtrack (hint; They never want to backtrack), you can just redraw the room.
My players love the visually-representative maps and they love not having to do mapping. They get to focus more on role-playing with NPCs, remembering their character abilities, and figuring out what they should do next. I know that there are definitely people who like the old school approach, and that's cool. Everybody should get to play in a group that fits how they like to play the game.

[Jophiel]

For in-person games I don't have detailed maps, just a relational map of the rooms/nodes that is literally just circles and lines connecting the circles, with the names of the rooms inside the circles.
Yeah, during in-person games it was commonly just an "org chart" style of mapping for the overall location. When you'd enter a room that was worth showing details or needing combat, the DM would either draw it on a battlemat/whiteboard or else have a map of it ready to lay on the table. While you miss out on some of the 'wow' factor of the whole map reveal when you're done, it's faster, doesn't involve futzing with construction paper or Post-It overlays and it's much easier to avoid running out of space on the table. Which was a pretty common thing when gaming at the comic shop with maybe a foldable card table for the maps, sheets, dice, DM screen, etc.

Currently I'm playing in a Roll20 game so it's the Fog of War setting described above.

[da newt]

I really like the idea of LOS and Fog o War, but haven't experienced it done 'right' yet. I don't like messing w/ computers (old Luddite), so I default to dry erase and just a few rooms at a time when I DM. When you can see it, I draw it.

I have played on Roll20, but my experience was meh probably mostly due to my fairly ancient computer. The LOS stuff did add a lot of realism to the game but it was also overdone (and was SLOW on my end). There were times when you should have been able to see things, but the computer said NO. I don't know how well that would translate to in person (all the different POVs), but it would be great to have an under table screen that could easily handle all the LOS and distance/AOE stuff. I'm sure others have figured it out, but I don't like playing remotely - the human interactions are never as good.

[False God]

The entierty of my "dungeons" these days are my random infinite dungeon, a big old stack of 3x5 cards that represent something like 30x60ft. They're made up of straights, corners, intersections and rooms. The dungeon "maps itself" as it gets laid out, but it's also up to one or more of the players to map it out. I map things on my side too, but thats for me.

But yeah I guess "just draw it as you go" is my answer. Works pretty well. A piece of graph paper can handle a LOT of dungeon.

[Tanarii]

My players love the visually-representative maps and they love not having to do mapping. They get to focus more on role-playing with NPCs, remembering their character abilities, and figuring out what they should do next. I know that there are definitely people who like the old school approach, and that's cool. Everybody should get to play in a group that fits how they like to play the game.
They're missing out on a major aspect of roleplaying, which is not knowing what anything beyond what they can see looks like, having to either remember or detail themselves the various paths, discovering secret paths / hidden doorways / hidden rooms because the map makes it obvious, and wondering how the hell this corridor/room could possibly overlap that room because of sloped passageways. Or just drawing the map wrong.

Otoh if you've got a non-jaquayed / linear adventuring site, no secrets that can be determined by good mapping, and you're replacing your fog-of-war behind them (not just in front of them) when it leaves line of sight ... or the grid / battlemat it recreated for their current region frequently ... given your cool looking battlemat per the pic you showed it's probably exciting enough to have a visual representation with grid and minis. Lots of players prefer seeing their environs on a grid to TotM and get all the enjoyment they need out of seeing where they are right now, and if the adventuring site doesn't require it don't care about a map of it.

Edit: it's important to distinguish what you're talking about here. A map of the adventuring site and a battlemat showing their immediate area they're currently in (a group of corridors and rooms) are different things.

When I'm using a battlemat, I'll lay out what they can see and roll it forward. They can use that to make their own fairly accurate map for the full adventuring site if they have a mapper. But really old school, the adventurers are assumed to be moving slowly enough they are measuring distances as they go with ropes and 10ft poles to get accurate dims for the mapper, but the DM is providing the info verbally. That's one reason the distance moved per turn (10 minutes) was ridiculously slow.

[tchntm43]

There were times when you should have been able to see things, but the computer said NO.
Roll20 can be very finicky about how barriers are shaped. We used it for a little while during peak COVID and it worked, but the first couple areas I did had similar issues where I couldn't get things to be visible, which ended up being because I didn't really understand how to use it properly.

[Kane0]

I have both a large table and whiteboard, so when DMing i have the luxury of putting the current battle map on the table map while i do a dungeon layout map behind me.
Im not DMing at the moment though. Current DM brings his own mat pre-prepared with battle maps and scrawls everything else om the whiteboard as necessary. He printed local area maps for us to mark

[Chronos]

An alternative to the "monitor in the table surface" would be to mount a projector over the table, pointing down. That way, the only thing you need from the table itself is a light-colored surface. Though you then do need some way to mount things above, probably to the ceiling.