Map making and deciding how a GM can screw w/citys, How much control does a GM have with map Options

[Spark]

Ok to start the ball rolling, I'm a very avid GM who likes to make vis. aids for my PCs. Not only does it give them something to get a handle on and leads to creative geographical thinking it presents ome interestring puzzles. Such as how does a GM deal with major landmarks i.e. the Renraku Arcology in Seattle, by saying that I mean, how much freedom should GM's have over the lay of the land. I want input because I would like to see a certain continuity between my pther GM's vis. pers. of different and major places.

[Kanada Ten]

I think you put this in the wrong forum... If the admins see it, they might move it for ya.

I think a GM has complete control over every aspect of his or her vision of the Shadowverse. Their world, their rules, their maps.

However, one can certainly collaborate both with other GM's and Canon information on such ideas and so on. One of the primary purposes of the source material is to provide all players with a point of reference. The cities laid out in the books are archetypes which can be tweaked, left alone, or completely wiped away. The ability to use a standard or agreed upon idea (or ideal) can make moving from one game or GM to another easier. But I don't see it as required - nor could I as my world is vasty different from one champaign to the next depending on the game I wish to run.

[Firewall]

I voted for 'total control' but as a GM, I would tend not to mess with important land-marks. If I want to have different terrain, I will just move the game to Europe.

[Thistledown]

I try to give my players quite a few maps and aids as well. So far, I've been using mainly rural settings, so I can just point to a random area on mapquest or Topozone and look around till I get a topo map I like. For my Transys facility, I managed to track down present day maps of Caerleon and added my facility to the side of it. In an urban setting, I would probably just go with the given maps and change as needed. There's enough room that they don't really need to match up exactly with other GM's, unless you plan on merging your campaign with theirs at some point.

[Spark]

[L.D]

Just send one of them a PM with an explanation and a request. They might even delete you last post and mine if you ask them.

[John Campbell]

GMs can do whatever the hell they want to their game world. Using the Shadowrun rules does not, in any way, obligate you to use any detail whatsoever from the official FASA/FanPro game world.

[Arethusa]

Yes, GMs have complete control. But that obvious issue aside, without very good reason, GMs generally should stick to stuff that's been laid out (don't go moving massive landmarks, for example; doing so is an instant hit to immersion). That's not to say it's an absolute rule, but it's certainly a general one.

And I like the idea of a Shadowrun cartography society. Would go a long way to making this more immersive.

[Wonazer]

I would enjoy getting involved in a cartography society as well. Although, I feel I could only be useful for the Greater Seattle/Washington State area.

I say change what you want, but do not disregard your group's expectations.

[RedmondLarry]

Why would this question be better anywhere else? This is a great Shadowrun question.

GM's have complete flexability with their campaign world. That said, it would be good if most GMs play with Seattle as presented in the books, to make it easier for players to play in multiple games or move between campaigns.

[Kanada Ten]

[broho_pcp]

I would love to help with a cartography society, but my knowledge of small midwestern towns probably wouldn't help much.

[Wonazer]

[lspahn72]

[shadd4d]

It depends. For a European game, I'll download something from the internet. After all, Brandenburger Tor ain't going anywhere anytime soon. For American games, it becomes a tad more questionable, as some stuff does change, e.g. Aztlan and Mexico City for one. That's one of the benefits of the books that have maps in the back, like Bug City, Germany, Tir Na Nog, etc.

Don

[Nikoli]

Also, if there are any DS'ers that also happen to be architecture students, how about some input on HVAC locations, structures, etc.

I'm thinking that office buildings would be generally cookie-cutter, but I have some rather players that want to know where the ducts are for ventilation (for grenade rolling, etc.). I don't know anything about duct placement, so my guesstimates are wildly inaccurate.

[lspahn72]

[Nikoli]

Who said the plans on file were accurate?

[Thistledown]

An excelent source for maps of any kind is university websites. If you do some searching around, you can get to the complete floorplans of their buildings. For many schools, it's public access. Two examples are Cal Poly, and Iowa state.

My team did a run in a building based off the science lab at iowa state last week, and we're hitting the business and archtecture buildings at Cal Poly next week.

[Nikoli]

I tried that for u-dub, but all they have are low-res campus maps.

[Lindt]

Eh? What about architecture? Nikoli, PM me with your Email and Ill send a few JPGs of pretty typical stuff. Might throw in my newly worked out stuffer shack just for use with food fight =)

[Prospero]

GMs should definatly have full control. But, like most everyone else here, I'd say they should stick to cannon when they can unless there's a good reason. I don't use a whole lot of city maps in my games. I really liked the maps in the old Seattle Sourcebook and other than that, I generally use my knowledge/the players' knowledge of Seattle (since I just live on the other side of the state). On the occasion that I've run runs abroad, I usually don't worry much about stuff (i.e. make my own maps) since its only for a session or two usually.

@broho_pcp: You know, depending on where they are small midwestern towns might be really interesting in 2064. Lots of migration in the past from the Sioux (or into the Sioux, I guess) as well as all the border issues of the twitchy Sioux/UCAS /CAS borders. Those places have got to be interesting, I'd say. My hometown (Rock Springs, WY, a fairly small town) is right on I-80 just about exactly on the Ute/Sioux border and it has lots of oil and some other minerals right around it. I figure it's got to be hopping in 2064.

[Spark]

You know, I've been looking at the national SurveySatelitte Pics for different areas, i.e. Sydney etc. and their pretty accurate. Maybe people could put those together (with license for new buildings etc.) and put them on a site i.e. blackjacks etc.) It would take alot of time though. Which I don't have much of... :S It would be interesting to see a cartography society formed but it would be hard... I personally am a junior in highschool but am taking all university courses so you can imagine what kind of time I have. :shock:

[Kagetenshi]

The more the players can find their way around without consulting the GM, the better. The GM has total control, but he or she had better have a damn good reason for significant changes.

Correction: either a damn good reason or a very extensive map. The players should not be surprised by where the Arcology or the Azzie Pyramid are if they've lived in Seattle for more than a month.

~J

[Edward]

I concur with most above sentiments.

If you feal you must change something. Inform the players early. If you want to add a major landmark “the (GM name) tower” and it is going to be significant inform the players (or inform them so they will think it is important when it is not mhwawaw). Deleting eth arcolegy from existence would be silly for example.

Edward