Maps

thaddeus6th

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
7,027
Location
UK, Yorkshire
I've just begun making the map for my WIP, and I was wondering how other people make them, and what sort of maps they like as readers.

My plan is to try and optimise a map so that it works properly on an eReader (increasing the font size, for example) and probably doing a separate, larger version for my website. Whilst eBooks are great, maps and other pictures can be of poorer quality on them.

Not sure if I'll stick with this method of drawing, but my idea is to do it using a pen and pencil and then putting it together on the computer. I'm a pretty rubbish artist, but hopefully doing things in detail one-by-one will make things easier. If that doesn't work out I'll see if I can make it just using the computer.

Bane of Souls didn't have a map because it almost entirely takes place in a single city, and urban geography doesn't play a particularly significant role in the story. My WIP, by contrast, is all about a journey so having a map makes more sense.

I used to really like maps when I was younger, but lately I find myself less concerned with them. I might even be annoyed if Joe Abercrombie did one for the Circle of the World, because I've got a mental picture of where all the nations are.

Mind you, I loved the ones in the Lone Wolf gamebooks, and when I was a kid making fantasy maps was one of the things that kept my interest in the genre.
 
Do it for your sake, but the writing itself will make or break the book. I don't think a map is something your include when querying agents, but if they take your book, maybe you can discuss it then. As for eReaders, the simpler the better. IMO, clean lines and defined boundaried will help more than shadowing and cross-hatching.
 
Sorry, I perhaps should've been clearer. This is for a half-done book to be self-published, so no querying required.

I agree entirely that the writing itself is what matters, but lots of people seem to quite like maps. I also think you're right about a defined boundary (which I'll be adding when it's done and clarity/simplicity.
 
I like maps too, and plan on doing one for mine as well. What about a series of maps, one that is covers the world, and one that is closer with more detail?
 
A world map would be impossible as I've, er, not decided on where everything is. I know where lots of countries/cities are, but there's also quite a lot I'm undecided on.

One map (possibly cropped) should do for the current work, but for the next (planning a trilogy) I do intend to have a kingdom map, and some more local ones.
 
I'm all for maps, the more the better. Orson Scott-Card got the idea for 'Hart's Hope' in its entirety from designing a map on a piece of onion paper he found and the simple ink stroke maps that Tolkien drew are gorgeous. Did you ever see the annotated tourist maps that Terry Pratchett released to go with the Discworld books? They're beautifully done and add a real extra dimension to the series.
 
I adore mapwork. I'd think that it's wise to at least sketch a basic one if only for your own use and reference, so that you'll easily remember where everything is, but as for maps to be included with your published work, wouldn't a professionally commissioned one be best? As SciFrac says, the writing will make the biggest impression, but a map that looks well-detailed and polished might make a better impression than a more hastily drawn one. (That is, if drawing isn't a huge strength of yours - I'm making an assumption here. :p)
As for style, I suppose that's all down to your theme. The cartography seen in traditional fantasy is often crinkled, brown, and covered with elegant script, for example.

All in all, I'd say go for it. I can't speak for everyone, but I love to look around and explore a good map or two. :D
 
I haven't, Rob, I'm afraid. Welcome to the site, by the way :)

Tecdavid: the journey's fairly simple, so the map's more for the readers than me. Come the trilogy, I imagine the map(s) will be far more helpful as I write it.

I'm not sure there's sufficient advantage gained from a professional map to be worth the cost of commissioning one. The cover's a separate issue as that's the hook that gets interest from many.

Mind you, it depends how good/bad my own effort ends up being. At the moment it's looking a bit better than I expected.
 
I'm a big map lover myself. In fact, I was just contemplating maps for my epic fantasy. I'd like one in fairly high definition for the web, and one in line art for Kindle. I've explored some fantasy mapping software and am finding out that's not a good way to go. Campaign Cartographer 3 sucks for the purpose, and it doesn't look like Dundjinni would be any better. The gaming geeks all say that everything else is worse, which I find hard to imagine. Guess I'll have to stick with hand drawing and maybe filling in with Corel.

I was going to start another thread on the topic, but this one came up serendipitously and it fits in pretty well. What are everyone's thoughts on scientific accuracy in fantasy worlds? I looked again at Terry Brooks' map for the Sword of Shannara trilogy and once again it gave me a headache and queasy stomach. Rivers do not cross mountain ranges (except in very rare cases where the river was there first and the mountains rose around it, as with the curiously named New River here in the States), rivers do not empty into lakes without an outlet unless it's a dead salt lake, mountains do not arrange themselves in neat circles or squares to fit a plot.

My aforementioned world is more accurate in that regard, but there are a few rough edges that bother me. Am I just being too precisionist or have other people noticed this? On one hand I argue that it's FANTASY and so scientific realism is already thrown to the wind, but on the other, such things erode my suspension of disbelief. Comments?
 
I think that having a map is extremely important to ensure you are consistent in your references to the world you've created...I have a pretty detailed one for my fantasy novel but dont think I'll include it in the finished product - I find that when I'm reading a book I tend to put it all together in my head and when I refer back to the authors map it never seems quite right...!
 
I use PowerPoint, mostly using its Curve and Edit Points tools, and then export the individual results as, for example, .emf files.
 
I'm split on maps.

If I am reading a book, the maps at the front are just extra pages I have to flip past to get to the words.

For writing, maps help stop your questing hero from passing along the road from city A to B to C and later have someone take the same road from B to A to C.

I suppose my maps are what some people might call diagrams.

Of course, any decent writing-map should have large areas marked up with traditional phrases such as 'here be ambiguity'.
 
Nightdreamer, I take a fairly laid back approach to accuracy, providing there aren't any howlers (rivers going uphill, for example).

Matle: I agree on the importance of consistency within a given world, and I do have a couple of lore files (and have sketched out a very basic history from The Beginning to Now).

I've still got to decide on a few things, like whether to use dots or symbols for settlements (for lore reasons I can't use a tower or wall or castle, which would be the most obvious symbols otherwise in a medievalish world).
 
I think a map is a useful tool for you as the writer, to keep things in perpsective about where they are and how long it should take to travel to places etc. But I often ignore them when they are included in books. The only one I can remember thinking I thought was a useful addition were the maps in Joe Abbercrombie's The Heroes - showing how the battle had changed each at the start of each day.
 
I absolutely loved the Lone Wolf books. I'm determined to try and bring back some similar style choose your own adventure books for a similar age range at some point :)

I like doing maps, but I make sure I don't spend too long on them. It helps give me an overview of the geography of the world and from that I can sketch nations' histories and the like.
 
Not sure if you'll still be interested, but I'm pretty sure all the Lone Wolf books are available for free online (with Joe Dever's blessing).
 
I was going to start another thread on the topic, but this one came up serendipitously and it fits in pretty well. What are everyone's thoughts on scientific accuracy in fantasy worlds? I looked again at Terry Brooks' map for the Sword of Shannara trilogy and once again it gave me a headache and queasy stomach. Rivers do not cross mountain ranges (except in very rare cases where the river was there first and the mountains rose around it, as with the curiously named New River here in the States), rivers do not empty into lakes without an outlet unless it's a dead salt lake, mountains do not arrange themselves in neat circles or squares to fit a plot.

My aforementioned world is more accurate in that regard, but there are a few rough edges that bother me. Am I just being too precisionist or have other people noticed this? On one hand I argue that it's FANTASY and so scientific realism is already thrown to the wind, but on the other, such things erode my suspension of disbelief. Comments?

I like my worlds to be accurate (or at least geologically plausible). Middle-Earth gives me the shivers in that respect.

I'm combining my fantasy with science anyway (science fantasy, new genre...?) but I know the basics of the tectonic interactions on my continent. I've drawn a map but it's sort of outdated in my new version; I think of it more as my own reference point than something essential to the reader, though I guess it would be useful to join up the different strands of the story as they progress. Honestly, though, I think of the geology thing really as my own little quirk - I understand that the imagery is often more important than realism in fantasy. Wouldn't hurt to have a bit more of it around, though.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top