The Drunken Lizard Pub

Just found out about that feature and i must say it annoys me more than impassable fences. What do you think?

Heh, those should be checkboxes, really. I'm sure the Cartography skill works exactly as BW intended, though I personally would prefer it to act the other way. Changing the behavior wouldn't be entirely trivial, though, really, so as I mentioned in the other thread, I wouldn't expect to see it changed until Book 3 at the earliest. Time will tell if it's a priority for BW or not, of course. :)

No one disagrees with you that it would be better if maps never got overwritten with less detail. It's just not an easy fix to make for a relatively small gain, so BW has prioritized other things.

After recently playing the Fathamurk addon (thanks BW and BGames, excellent as usual) I thought I would re-roll another char to address some shortcomings my hammer-wielding, divination-casting "pally" was suffering from.

But I just can't deal with the cartography/automapping again. It is killing the replay value for me. I need maps in rpgs; there is no way around it[/i]. Anything visible on screen should be filled in on the map automatically, whether in line-of-sight or not. I can't bear to explore every inch of empty forest again from every angle possible in order to have a complete map. And I think we almost universally agree that you should NEVER overwrite a map with less detail if your cart skill drops.

Now I realize this will not be fixed (yes I mean fixed, not changed) in Book 2 and that's fine, but I can't see myself buying Book 3 if it continues to go unaddressed. We all know the answer to this poll.

I agree that it is annoying, but to be honest it won't impact my decision to buy Book 3. The rest of Books 1 and 2 were so enjoyable.

In my opinion, a skill is a skill. If I have Cartography at one level, I get one map. If I have it at a different level, I get a different map. The implementation seems fair to me.

I think BW has done a wonderful job of balancing his games. It is up to me to decide how I want to play them. After all, Cartography is always available - it's just a matter of how badly I want it. Of course, that is true for all of the skills in Eshchalon....

What MGC said. It's certainly not a deal breaker for me... I played through 75% of Book II before I even added the Cartography skill (I did score the compass a couple of times though). I don't see it as being an immersion breaking feature either: I would assume that most of the "mapping" takes place in the PC's head, and therefore it wouldn't be entirely outside of the gameplay for he/she to forget where things were once a spell wore off or an enchanted item were taken off.

Of course, I'm entirely of the opinion that mapping should be a little bit different.

IMO, if Cartography is that important to you, then that's where some of your initial skill points should go. My first few playthroughs of both books 1 and 2 included at least a point of cartography, and those characters turned out fine. (Well, my first Book 1 character had some problems, but it wasn't cartography at fault there.) You could also just edit your character file to give yourself the Cartography level you feel should be "standard" - it's a single-player game so there's no reason not to play it however you like.

zZZz wrote:Anything visible on screen should be filled in on the map automatically, whether in line-of-sight or not. I can't bear to explore every inch of empty forest again from every angle possible in order to have a complete map.

I'd actually disagree and go the other way, if anything, and say that stuff shouldn't be visible onscreen until you've seen it in line-of-sight. :) I wouldn't expect either of those behaviors to be modified for Book 3, though.

In regards to the exploration, the things "hidden" off into the woods wouldn't be at all hidden anymore if the minimap just filled in absolutely everything on the screen. That's something else I kind of disagree on. After my first runthroughs I rarely explore as thoroughly as I do on the first time through.

I think it'd be really cool if there was an option to make the mini map global in regards to your savegames. In other words, on subsequent playthroughs, your map would already be filled out based on where you had already traveled. A Fog of War could be implemented for areas you haven't been with your current character. For those of you who don't play RTSes, a "Fog of War" is a shaded, but transparent covering that masks areas you haven't yet uncovered, or can't see from your current position. It hides some of the details but still allows you to see areas on the map. Were I not at work, I'd photo-chop up an example.

A global map might also alleviate the unlearning of the Carto skill... although I see more opportunity for corruption of the map... unless some form of "redraw the map" could be implemented.

CrazyBernie wrote:I think it'd be really cool if there was an option to make the mini map global in regards to your savegames. In other words, on subsequent playthroughs, your map would already be filled out based on where you had already traveled.

I heartily endorse this suggestion: it would eliminate the tedium of remapping the entire world for every replay character, and it seems it would be relatively simple to implement. Let's not worry about the "immersion" aspect of it, the mapping is already quirky enough that it shouldn't matter (I remember an earlier post where someone pointed out how detailed the plotting of every individual tree was while huge bodies of water were completely ignored at certain skill levels).

xolotl wrote:I'd actually disagree and go the other way, if anything, and say that stuff shouldn't be visible onscreen until you've seen it in line-of-sight. .

The idea of not revealing anything on-screen or on the map until it is in l/o/s is interesting, but I think highly unusual for a 2D top-down game. I'm not sure it would improve the game for me, but it would definitely make exploration more challenging.

For anyone answering "Yes" to this poll, please offer an example of an old-school RPG that exhibited similar behavior, and why you feel this is a superior implementation.

zZZz wrote:For anyone answering "Yes" to this poll, please offer an example of an old-school RPG that exhibited similar behavior, and why you feel this is a superior implementation.

How many old-school RPGs had variable-skill Cartography in the first place, with maps that may vary depending on how skilled you are?

I am in the 'not liking the cartoghaphy skill' camp. Nothing a hex editor can't fix though.

My biggest gripe in Book 2 that REALLY has reduced my enjoyment versus Book 1 is the foraging/hunger/thirst. I find Book 2 very tedious in the regard (especially early on), and think it makes a big obstacle for the more casual gamer.

Jason

JasonJoel wrote:I am in the 'not liking the cartoghaphy skill' camp. Nothing a hex editor can't fix though.

My biggest gripe in Book 2 that REALLY has reduced my enjoyment versus Book 1 is the foraging/hunger/thirst. I find Book 2 very tedious in the regard (especially early on), and think it makes a big obstacle for the more casual gamer.

Jason

The more casual gamer can, of course, leave all the optional rules off so that tedium isn't a problem.

I admit to being an oddball in the cartography category as I generally don't bother with it until about half way through the game. I have no problem functioning without the minimap. The only place in Book 2 where it's an issue at all is the invisible maze in Fathamurk. It's also helpful if you're wandering the wilderness on a dark and stormy night, but otherwise I just turn up the in-game brightness and I have no problems at all.

Kreador Freeaxe wrote:The only place in Book 2 where it's an issue at all is the invisible maze in Fathamurk.

I've still got my hand-drawn invisible-Fathamurk-maze map sitting on my desk. :)