I think everything one will ever need to know about The Learning Curve narrative can be summarized by that one time an individual "blessed with the ability" to draw (in their own words) - as opposed to having developed their skill over time for the cost of effort, one can only assume - worked their necromancy, bringing to life a 5 months old inquiry as to the perceived benefits of the platform in order to bemoan said learning curve. Creating an account just for the occasion.

Unironically, I respect this level of dedication to an idea.

Imagine, if you will, going to a drawers' community asking the drawers why you should persue the format. Out of nowhere, an individual blessed with the ability to take pictures with a camera materializes, offering that the learning curve of drawing just isn't worth the trouble. And they should know, because they are quite skilled at learning new things that follow patterns they are accustomed to - of which drawing isn't one.

In other words - if I can't be bothered to get into the woods proper, this fact will invariably affect the quality of my mushroom pies and - as a further consequence - the position from which I make assessments of such pies. If this comes off as a tad bit salty - well your body needs salt and sometimes it is also an essential reading companion.

Let's take a brief moment to reflect on the apparent shift of meaning of the word "intuitive":

I get that one person's idea of a "steep learning curve" is going to be radically different from another's. To suggest otherwise would be as out of touch as saying - with a straight face - that a platform which generates tutorials is intuitive. The latter will never not be hilarious to me; how you opt to review the above collage of quotes is entirely up to your own sense of humour.

Coincidentally, the bang you will get out of Campaign Cartographer is also entirely depending on your own preconceptions. You get to decide for yourself, to a surprisingly high degree, how difficult things are going to be with the platform. Espeically if you consider yourself to be above tutorials. Again: if your amibition for your use of spreadsheets is to make squares for calendars that you print, don't expect that Excel will sort out quantifying your mushroom pie-cooking progress over time *for you* any given day now.

No - Campaign Cartographer is not trippping over itself in its eagerness to get out the door and tell you how to do things. But nor is it quick to suppress your potential for creativity. It is telling you, in effect, that any creative limitations you might run into are of your own making. Including getting started.

The exectution of styles and use of the available tools is in your hands - entirely. If you think your maps are a bit shit straight out of the box and it's all very frustrating it is because you can improve - both in regards to the tools at your disposal, and your visual expression: chances are that if you can't fail with your maps, you are operating in a severely restricted environment - creatively.

This is somehow elitist and standing in the way of the platform being rebuilt into something else. Come one now, why aren't you happy with the alternatives? I mean, there must be a reason why people keep coming back to how "if only" with Campaign Cartographer. It's almost as if people want the results you can get out of it, but...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I should probably point out that I have no opinion about Wonderdraft other than that the output on public display suggests that the options are a bit too limited for my taste. I am simply not seeing it for all the benfits of vectors and polygons, currently, and the avalanche of opportunity that comes with how the CAD environment allows me to achieve anything I could possibly hope for. So..for now: yeah, also, not too impressed with how WD requires a dedicated module for making combat maps. Yeah, there is Dungeon Designer for us with CC3+. But that's convenience, you see, in the same way we get various sourcebooks of practical implementations for HERO System or any other game really: such products are not rewriting the rules out of necessity - they are simply expansions within the premises of an established foundation. That we pay for. Because it's convenient. Mushroom pie time!

Anyway. To round things off and seeing as I've steered into the realm of flexibility; with a straight face, people will tell you how much of the flexibility of CC3+ really just is an expression of people's experiences - as opposed to the objective truth about its qualitites in this regard. Because it's got an outdated interface? What the florpunt does that even mean? Where does the illusion of the flexbility end, and reality begin? And more importantly: in which of the Nine Hells do I need to be in order for the Mark of Interface-Cain to be clearly visible on my finished products?

I'll tell you what it means; it means we're all a bit stupid in that we reject this other (actual) reality - where you just can't make maps with Campaign Cartographer - and persist in making the damned things anyway! Commercial-grade maps, even.

Ever the elitist fools, blind to the errors of our ways and flaws of the platform, we accepted and adapted to the premises of it. And what is worse - we seem to thrive.

Oh, and welcome to the forums.

Will probably need more light features for the rock walls. Other than that: bang on what I was hoping to achieve - softsharp cartoonish qualities. Will keep the canvas texture showing for sure!

It's great seeing all these different styles and approaches to the application! It really can be what we allow for it to be.

And, might I add, for a master-level procrastinator such as myself it was great to have an incentive to actually wrap up a sizeable project for once...

Thank you, @OverCriticalHit. You can check my community challenge entry this month for a file which showcases the "how". In written, the process is best described as drawing polygons.

Drawn on a straight line between two nodes (going from A to B and then rebounding to A) a closed fractal polygon will deviate from the line on account of the fractals. With a solid fill, then, you get the varying width along the line.

I tend to dial fractals down to 0 (arrow buttons) going one way, and up maybe one or two pips when going back. This way the width variation will always be relative to a straight line, getting a more "disciplined" appearance. "Drawing" circles becomes a matter of using the trace command etc.

Pros: draw anything

Cons: fractals will bog down process speed. Big fractal polygons will bog down process speed bigly. Details-light or not, it's not going to be the quickest route to a map.

Exectution could be better but alltogether an improvement I should think, @Loopysue . All that fuzz for a softer edge! :D