No hate from me! I'm getting better with the mechanics of CC3+ but I'm constantly learning new things. And there are lots and lots of people with a better artistic eye than I have who give me great feedback. Even newbies who may not know how to do a particular thing in CC3 can point out things that just don't look right, or might be confusing. Just like with writing, an outside eye is always helpful because the writer or artist may be too close to the work to notice what might be unclear or confusing to the audience.

Thank you, everyone, for your very helpful feedback. This community is the best! Please let me know if you have any other thoughts or suggestions before I submit this.

Sakherma Ruins

Sakherma Ruins - Beneath the Mountain

Sakherma Ruins - Below the Ruins

Oh dear. No, should have an M.

Good lord, I'm a mess! Okay, fixing now...

I like how you've managed to give neighborhoods distinctive looks with colors and symbol type choices. Like the desert/middle eastern house types in the lower left, the blue building complex (temple?) on the middle right, the eight gray buildings in the center top. And I really like the bridge. Some day I want to do a major city with a massive bridge inspired by the historic London bridge -- the kind with shops and residences on the bridge.

As for dragging on for days -- that happens to me with so many maps! I usually have half a dozen going at once so I can take a break from one (while the ideas continue to percolate) while turning my attention to another.

It wasn't me, but I think it's a fantastic idea. I've always just used glows with the text to make it stand out against gridlines, but I really like the Color Key idea. My maps sometimes have thousands of magenta polygons, so why not a few more! 😉

My personal preference for this map is for the second one, where the hex grid only appears in the playable areas.

I love how map-mapping teaches us so much about so many things we might not have ever heard about otherwise - geology and cartography, of course, but also random bits of history, mythology, and more.

I'm glad you posted the larger one in the gallery because my aging eyes would have missed so many wonderful details.

Things I love:

• The wooden palisade. How did you make them? I believe Schley's symbols are straight segments.
• The rocky outcrop (like a natural pier?) that the Dalvik Tower is on.
• How you've done your legend. I've seen Ralf do that approach but I haven't done it myself yet. It's...legendary.
• Your creatively-shaped buildings like #59, Excellent Carts by Bardsson.
• Halfling neighborhood near Delvik Mere.
• The Zavebog Henge!
• Use of the latest symbols at Potter's Field.

Things I don't love:

• Nothing. I love everything.

I have a question about the best practices for creating/using larger maps for Virtual Tabletop systems (VTTs).

I am in the process of preparing some of my maps to be used in all sorts of VTTs, so I'm looking for information that can be applied generally to all systems, rather than advice that is specific to Roll20, or to DNDBeyond, or to other specific system. I've never personally used a VTT yet, not as GM loading maps nor even as a player using one, so this is all new to me.

I've been getting advice from ChatGPT but I know its information is sometimes out of date or unreliable, so I wanted to get expertise from folks here, especially advice specific to CC3 exports.

• ChatGPT says it's best to have two output versions, one at 150 pixels per inch and the other for slower connections at 70 pixels per inch. Does that seem like the best approach?
• As I understand it, 1 inch should be 5 feet in map units. And the pixel dimensions for the file should be designed with pixels per inch times number of inches (which would be the map units divided by 5). So for example: a map that is 40 feet x 80 feet would be (on the 80 foot side): 80/5 for the number of inches (16), and multiply that by the number of pixels per inch, so at a resolution of 150px, the 40x80 map should be 1200x2400 px? Is my math correct?
• ChatGPT recommended that the VTT output include one version that includes a 5-foot-per-inch grid and another version without a grid. (I gather that VTTs can add a grid but some GMs want a pre-gridded map.) These maps should be the player-facing map that doesn't have labels, and things like traps and secret doors are not shown. I'm wondering, though, if I should also have a version that does show the secret doors and passageways (but not the traps)?

But the big question is about Large Outputs.

• I'm trying to prepare a dungeon map prepared in Forest Trail that is 480x400 map units (imperial feet). By my math, that would be 6720 x 5600 px for a 70px/inch scale, and 14400 x 12000 px for the 150px/inch scale. I was able to create an output for the 70px version but when I tried to create it for the 150px version, CC3 balked and said it was too big.
• I'm reading the instructions in CA129 annual about large outputs, and it's very helpful. I'm sure I can get it to work, but my question is less about how to do it and more about should I do it? Would the resulting file be too big for typical VTT services?
• Alternatively, should I have a 70px/inch version of the entire map, and then 150px versions of parts of the map (like one section of a crypt, or one neighborhood of a town)?

Anyone who has experience with using VTTs or creating maps for them, I would really appreciate any advice. (I think it was hinted that Kurt was working on something about this for CC4, but in the meantime, I'll need an approach I can use with CC3.)

Thank you!