I've been trying to design maps for one of my bigger campaign projects- an Elden Ring inspired campaign with open-world aspects and heightened difficulty- but I've been worried about making the world too big. It's no Lands Between in scale, but it does contain several large regions and a whole kingdom-sized necropolis as the final dungeon. I'm really passionate about this project and everything I've added so far, but my main concern is that it will be too big for the players to explore within a reasonable time frame (I doubt my players are up for a 3+ year campaign).
So, I wanted to hear what the good folks here have to say: What's your ideal size for a campaign setting, and how big is too big?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former Spider Queen of the Spider Guild, and friendly neighborhood scheming creature.
"Made by spiders, for spiders, of spiders."
My pronouns are she/her.
Web Weaver of Everlasting Narrative! (title bestowed by Drummer)
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a large setting where the PCs never explore most of it, it's just a lot of work for the benefit so most people who use large settings leave things at a low level of detail until the PCs actually go there.
You can always add portals of some kind to streamline (and mainstream) travelling to far distant lands and make political alliances that would otherwise seem odd as well. Sure, they can travel slowly overland or make quick trips to hub cities.
It depends on the amount of time (IRL) you’re “wasting.”
If you have a huge world but the players can get to places fast, do that. If you have a small world but people take ages to get to places, you have problems. You want to make sure you’re making good use of time and space.
To me, 'too big' is if I create stuff for a world that I never get to use. I like sketching out things, then filling in details when I need them. As such, I have a world where there are only a very few major settlements. So far, I've used three out of five, and those are wonderfully detailed: Desert city (like ancient Alexandria, perhaps), port city (like ancient Athens, maybe), and mountain city (not entirely unlike Rohan). There are two more, an underdark city and an undead city. These have never been used, and have only the vaguest level of detail.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I can spend a year or more prepping a campaign setting. 10% of it gets seen. Maybe half of it helps me frame my mind for NPC's, motivations, etc. in the setting. The rest sits on the shelf and never gets near players. Because they can't do everything and it's one campaign at a time.
Too big? Whenever it feels more like work than fun.
I can't stop the ideas machine in my mind and enjoy letting them out. YMMV.
In order to start shrinking the campaign to a manageable size, stay focused on the last thought- a kingdom sized necropolis serving as the final dungeon.
Plop your players right in front of that and cut them loose, so you are skipping all the fluff and getting right to the mega dungeon. Try to keep it to one level at a time. Don’t blow yourself up trying to make the entire mega dungeon in one go. Try to always have the current level, and the “next” level ready. When the players discover the next level and it officially enters play.
So for example, I would get level 1, say the haunted ruins ready as well as level 2, the whispering catacombs. When the players enter the catacombs that prompts me to get level 3, the necromancy laboratory, ready.
To an extent, I find it good to think of world building as a hobby for me. I find it fun to decide what the major exports are from certain regions, what foods might a city be known for, what religions are more prevalent in what areas, what are the weather patterns, that kind of thing. Stuff the players end up not interacting with, ever. But it's fun for me. So, in that sense, it's impossible to make it too big, because I'm enjoying myself.
But in a more practical sense, I only have a finite amount of time, and its more important to really detail the areas they are in, instead of worrying about what the typical peasant's day is like halfway around the world. So, I try to strike a balance between what's necessary and what extras I have time to work out.
But really, you'll need to decide for yourself. Is it fun or you, and how much time do you have the time to get into details that might not come up in play? There's no universally right or wrong answer.
Players will likely never explore 90% of the world, just create a staring area with 5-8 towns/citys maximum and if they start to go off exploring start building the world more in that direction
I suggest sketching out all the continents on your world to know basically how it looks, kind of like the pre-game screen in Civilization when you're choosing a map type. Obviously, you need to spend more time filling in the lands where the party starts. But having the other continents allows you to build the world at your leisure as the muse calls. Then you start to build the lore, dropping hints in the towns as the party speaks to NPCs, or they meet an NPC from that land, who of course drops some plot hooks and mcguffins to see what makes the players' ears perk up. A princess in a tower guarded by a dragon you say?
To me there's no such thing, use as much or as little of the world map you create as you want/need. Sorry, if that's not satisfying, but IMO only you can answer that question. ;-)
I've always made maps based on the fun of drawing them and creating the world/setting itself without much thought about any specific adventures in mind during that process. Sure I'll add stuff that's a possible adventure site, but I (mostly) build a world and design adventures separately. The mostly is there because as I'm creating the world I'll be inspired with adventure ideas based on geography, settlements, et al. and jot those down in my notes to review later.
The Forgotten Realms is Earth-sized. Most of the map areas are empty though. And the parts that are filled in weren't done by just one person. And most every campaign or video game seems to be based around Neverwinter or Baldur's Gate on the Sword Coast.
So it's not about being "too big" it's about are you enjoying yourself when you're making these maps? Even if you end up not using them for your players, you can upload them to the internet for newbie DMs who have no idea how to make maps to use. So sate that map making addiction as much as you want!
And you can always use them for your next campaign. At the session zero allow your players to access them while they're creating their backstories. Even if you don't have something labelled it's better for the creative types because they get to name the region their character is from! Of course, if you have players that don't care about that sort of thing, then fall back on just enjoying making them.
For larger scales, what you typically want is ever-diminishing resolution as you get further away from a central point. For example, at the start of the campaign you might have
25 locations/named NPCs in your immediate area (within a mile or so, sufficient that you can mostly ignore travel time). For example, your local village.
25 locations/named NPCs within a day's travel. A few other villages, maybe a local lord's keep, a starter dungeon, etc.
25 locations/named NPCs that require a journey of days to weeks, but still basically routine.
25 locations/named NPCs where getting there is a major expedition, taking months or even years.
That's plenty to both make sure the local area has adequate detail, and to give a sense that there's a broader world out there, but it's far easier than the 100 million data points you'd probably need to map the entire world at the same level of detail as your local area.
For larger scales, what you typically want is ever-diminishing resolution as you get further away from a central point. For example, at the start of the campaign you might have
25 locations/named NPCs in your immediate area (within a mile or so, sufficient that you can mostly ignore travel time). For example, your local village.
25 locations/named NPCs within a day's travel. A few other villages, maybe a local lord's keep, a starter dungeon, etc.
25 locations/named NPCs that require a journey of days to weeks, but still basically routine.
25 locations/named NPCs where getting there is a major expedition, taking months or even years.
That's plenty to both make sure the local area has adequate detail, and to give a sense that there's a broader world out there, but it's far easier than the 100 million data points you'd probably need to map the entire world at the same level of detail as your local area.
That is low key some of the best map building advice i have ever heard Pantagruel666 however i would like to add to that, Sometimes the center of can move in a campaign
Lets say they leave the starter village and move off to another village, it would be better to change that village to the center if it seems like they are going to be in that area for at least 5-10 meetings
That is low key some of the best map building advice i have ever heard Pantagruel666 however i would like to add to that, Sometimes the center of can move in a campaign
Oh sure, and if that happens, it's time to regenerate any levels of the pyramid that have changed; it's very unlikely that your initial worldbuilding will be all you'll ever need to do. Note that this is the core difference between a personal campaign and a published one: you can do on-the-fly worldbuilding.
There is no such thing as too big there is only you are done or you have idea to flesh out.
Personally even if i am "done" i am not really done. I might wake up and with the idea to add a new level of the undercity to my primary campaign location or i will look at something on a map that i have "Finished" and i won't like it for whatever reason and suddenly i am remodeling the offending section of the map and making a bunch of new entries into the players material for my players to explore. Will they explore it all? Will i ever use it all? Probably not, but its all there if they want to run a game in the same world.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I've been trying to design maps for one of my bigger campaign projects- an Elden Ring inspired campaign with open-world aspects and heightened difficulty- but I've been worried about making the world too big. It's no Lands Between in scale, but it does contain several large regions and a whole kingdom-sized necropolis as the final dungeon. I'm really passionate about this project and everything I've added so far, but my main concern is that it will be too big for the players to explore within a reasonable time frame (I doubt my players are up for a 3+ year campaign).
So, I wanted to hear what the good folks here have to say: What's your ideal size for a campaign setting, and how big is too big?
Former Spider Queen of the Spider Guild, and friendly neighborhood scheming creature.
"Made by spiders, for spiders, of spiders."
My pronouns are she/her.
Web Weaver of Everlasting Narrative! (title bestowed by Drummer)
I'm running homebrew spelljammer, so I'm not one to criticize :)
It's probably not a problem to over prepare, but a lot of it's never gonna be used. (Unless you run future games in the same world. Which you can.)
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a large setting where the PCs never explore most of it, it's just a lot of work for the benefit so most people who use large settings leave things at a low level of detail until the PCs actually go there.
No such thing as too large. There is uncomfortable, unmanageable, and annoying. There's a fine line to you can't cross.
Monster Fact of the Day: Tarrasque
Tarrasque's have a magical regeneration and are able to reflect spells back at its enemies
Praise Jeff with Your Hole Heart and Soul with the Sign of
DoomJOY to Come!!!!!You can always add portals of some kind to streamline (and mainstream) travelling to far distant lands and make political alliances that would otherwise seem odd as well. Sure, they can travel slowly overland or make quick trips to hub cities.
It depends on the amount of time (IRL) you’re “wasting.”
If you have a huge world but the players can get to places fast, do that. If you have a small world but people take ages to get to places, you have problems.
You want to make sure you’re making good use of time and space.
To me, 'too big' is if I create stuff for a world that I never get to use. I like sketching out things, then filling in details when I need them. As such, I have a world where there are only a very few major settlements. So far, I've used three out of five, and those are wonderfully detailed: Desert city (like ancient Alexandria, perhaps), port city (like ancient Athens, maybe), and mountain city (not entirely unlike Rohan). There are two more, an underdark city and an undead city. These have never been used, and have only the vaguest level of detail.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I can spend a year or more prepping a campaign setting. 10% of it gets seen. Maybe half of it helps me frame my mind for NPC's, motivations, etc. in the setting. The rest sits on the shelf and never gets near players. Because they can't do everything and it's one campaign at a time.
Too big? Whenever it feels more like work than fun.
I can't stop the ideas machine in my mind and enjoy letting them out. YMMV.
In order to start shrinking the campaign to a manageable size, stay focused on the last thought- a kingdom sized necropolis serving as the final dungeon.
Plop your players right in front of that and cut them loose, so you are skipping all the fluff and getting right to the mega dungeon. Try to keep it to one level at a time. Don’t blow yourself up trying to make the entire mega dungeon in one go. Try to always have the current level, and the “next” level ready. When the players discover the next level and it officially enters play.
So for example, I would get level 1, say the haunted ruins ready as well as level 2, the whispering catacombs. When the players enter the catacombs that prompts me to get level 3, the necromancy laboratory, ready.
To an extent, I find it good to think of world building as a hobby for me. I find it fun to decide what the major exports are from certain regions, what foods might a city be known for, what religions are more prevalent in what areas, what are the weather patterns, that kind of thing. Stuff the players end up not interacting with, ever. But it's fun for me. So, in that sense, it's impossible to make it too big, because I'm enjoying myself.
But in a more practical sense, I only have a finite amount of time, and its more important to really detail the areas they are in, instead of worrying about what the typical peasant's day is like halfway around the world. So, I try to strike a balance between what's necessary and what extras I have time to work out.
But really, you'll need to decide for yourself. Is it fun or you, and how much time do you have the time to get into details that might not come up in play? There's no universally right or wrong answer.
Players will likely never explore 90% of the world, just create a staring area with 5-8 towns/citys maximum and if they start to go off exploring start building the world more in that direction
I suggest sketching out all the continents on your world to know basically how it looks, kind of like the pre-game screen in Civilization when you're choosing a map type. Obviously, you need to spend more time filling in the lands where the party starts. But having the other continents allows you to build the world at your leisure as the muse calls. Then you start to build the lore, dropping hints in the towns as the party speaks to NPCs, or they meet an NPC from that land, who of course drops some plot hooks and mcguffins to see what makes the players' ears perk up. A princess in a tower guarded by a dragon you say?
To me there's no such thing, use as much or as little of the world map you create as you want/need. Sorry, if that's not satisfying, but IMO only you can answer that question. ;-)
I've always made maps based on the fun of drawing them and creating the world/setting itself without much thought about any specific adventures in mind during that process. Sure I'll add stuff that's a possible adventure site, but I (mostly) build a world and design adventures separately. The mostly is there because as I'm creating the world I'll be inspired with adventure ideas based on geography, settlements, et al. and jot those down in my notes to review later.
The Forgotten Realms is Earth-sized. Most of the map areas are empty though. And the parts that are filled in weren't done by just one person. And most every campaign or video game seems to be based around Neverwinter or Baldur's Gate on the Sword Coast.
So it's not about being "too big" it's about are you enjoying yourself when you're making these maps? Even if you end up not using them for your players, you can upload them to the internet for newbie DMs who have no idea how to make maps to use. So sate that map making addiction as much as you want!
And you can always use them for your next campaign. At the session zero allow your players to access them while they're creating their backstories. Even if you don't have something labelled it's better for the creative types because they get to name the region their character is from! Of course, if you have players that don't care about that sort of thing, then fall back on just enjoying making them.
For larger scales, what you typically want is ever-diminishing resolution as you get further away from a central point. For example, at the start of the campaign you might have
That's plenty to both make sure the local area has adequate detail, and to give a sense that there's a broader world out there, but it's far easier than the 100 million data points you'd probably need to map the entire world at the same level of detail as your local area.
That is low key some of the best map building advice i have ever heard Pantagruel666
however i would like to add to that, Sometimes the center of can move in a campaign
Lets say they leave the starter village and move off to another village, it would be better to change that village to the center if it seems like they are going to be in that area for at least 5-10 meetings
Oh sure, and if that happens, it's time to regenerate any levels of the pyramid that have changed; it's very unlikely that your initial worldbuilding will be all you'll ever need to do. Note that this is the core difference between a personal campaign and a published one: you can do on-the-fly worldbuilding.
There is no such thing as too big there is only you are done or you have idea to flesh out.
Personally even if i am "done" i am not really done. I might wake up and with the idea to add a new level of the undercity to my primary campaign location or i will look at something on a map that i have "Finished" and i won't like it for whatever reason and suddenly i am remodeling the offending section of the map and making a bunch of new entries into the players material for my players to explore. Will they explore it all? Will i ever use it all? Probably not, but its all there if they want to run a game in the same world.