If you can’t – or don’t want to – produce a map like the one I made above, that’s totally fine. Because I don’t want to lead anyone down the wrong path. Look, I know I said I wasn’t going to get into theorycraft here, but I’m going to. I start with a map because I like to start with a map. As long as you understand it’s totally unnecessary. Well, guess what? I almost always start by making a map. That only terrible GMs who don’t understand setting building at all make a map. Now, I know you’re expecting me to say at this point that I’m the only smart, sane person and I never ever start by making a map. When a GM sits down to design the setting for their upcoming campaign, the first thing they do is start drawing a map. Point is, this is the story of how I cranked out this map: the bare minimum I needed to get my campaign off the ground. Though I am kind of proud of how those mountains look.
#FEUDAL KINGDOMS BECAME THE NORM HOW TO#
If you’re expecting complex theorycraft and stuff about how the map becomes a visual representation of the setting’s backstory and how to use it as such, sorry. This is “well, I’m gonna need a map for my campaign and I’ve got a couple hours to do it.” This is slapdash setting building. This is not setting building as creative art. Let me be clear: this is NOT a careful explanation of the nuances of world and setting building. Yes, I know the map has no names or labels.
At least, I’m talking about how I built THIS map:įor THIS setting. Today, I’m talking about mapping the setting. In other words, how campaign building REALLY goes. Welcome back to A Very Angry Campaign, where I check in every few weeks and tell you how I got a dysfunctional, mostly core only Pathfinder campaign off the ground for a bunch of strangers without any sort of plan whatsoever. I realize that I haven’t actually talked a whole lot about building the setting for a campaign.