MEGAMAP - Why is the PC slow as a snail?
Cheesebelly
Member Posts: 1,727
So I had some time to stick things up and down, Art Attack style and got up with this gargatuan thing (which isn't complete yet, mind you)
Now, what you'll be seeing here is a resize, so you better check it out full size. Aside from minor inconsistencies, like some shadows, trees and grass color... it all fits perfectly like a puzzle. I mean, I didn't notice before now that there are some tree tops on the bottom of Candlekeep's map which fit perfectly with its southern neighbor. More over, Gullykin is a town above an ancient maze, cozily close to the ruins of a school and a place crawling with Basilisks... seems safe!
We can also now solve the mystery on why Gorion and PC were walking on the center of the map east of Candlekeep - because instead of taking the road which would take 50 seconds, they could take a shortcut to Friendly Arm Inn that could take 30 seconds, or 10 seconds to reach Elminster!
Now, my question is - why does the player need 12 hours to get from Beregost to the Friendly Arm Inn??? O_O
(PS - Cloakwood two is the only area here that didn't fit at all so far)
Now, what you'll be seeing here is a resize, so you better check it out full size. Aside from minor inconsistencies, like some shadows, trees and grass color... it all fits perfectly like a puzzle. I mean, I didn't notice before now that there are some tree tops on the bottom of Candlekeep's map which fit perfectly with its southern neighbor. More over, Gullykin is a town above an ancient maze, cozily close to the ruins of a school and a place crawling with Basilisks... seems safe!
We can also now solve the mystery on why Gorion and PC were walking on the center of the map east of Candlekeep - because instead of taking the road which would take 50 seconds, they could take a shortcut to Friendly Arm Inn that could take 30 seconds, or 10 seconds to reach Elminster!
Now, my question is - why does the player need 12 hours to get from Beregost to the Friendly Arm Inn??? O_O
(PS - Cloakwood two is the only area here that didn't fit at all so far)
17
Comments
@Permidion_Stark : well, I'd first let someone shape the whole map better with Photoshop or some kind of other program, to fix those inconsistencies between map (for instance, the rock in Gullykin is red-ish, the rock in Ulcaster is vivid yellow though, but the two areas fit very well together)
I believe there is meant to be at least a hundred miles between Nashkel and Beregost, however according to the condensed map above walking from Candlekeep to Nashke shouldn't take more than an hour or two strolling at a snails pace.
Good work though. I like it.
Or then it's probably Noobers fault, as he keeps the PC busy for hours and hours.
EDIT: According to this 4e Forgotten Realms map (it's pretty accurate still):
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/wd_maps/FRposterLarge_72.jpg
The distance between Candlekeep and Nashkel is roughly 240 miles (give or take). With 40 miles per day traveling it would take the PC 6 days to make it to Nashkel.
From Beregost to Nashkel is probably about half that, roughly 120 miles, so about 3 days worth of travel.
WHY does the maps fit in so well? If the playable areas are interconnected by something we don't see (except when waylaid), it would make no sense for the pieces to fit the big set surely.
Personally I always hated the travel times of BG1 and wish there was a mod that would divide them all by two. Travel times are meaningless but it seems kinda daft that by the end of BG1, it says I've been hunting Sarevok for like seven months. The pacing of the game get laughably screwed when you consider that.
Same for 'resting'. I wish resting was resting and not sleeping. 8 hours my arse. Have a different mechanic for sleeping.
I also added green borderlines around each area. Notice how the maps of the city of Baldur's Gate itself slightly overlap.
And here is a full size version of the map:
http://imageshack.us/a/img341/4067/bg1gc.jpg
It's interesting how nobody knows about the super secret mine in Cloakwood when it's just over the Friendly Arm Inn turf XD
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/wd_maps/FRposterLarge_72.jpg
(Note I wonder where Spellhold is on that map)
I think I would love for them to expand maybe BG2 south in an expansion pack. We got some of Tethyr (TOB is in Tethyr), so how about going all the way down to Calimshan, it is mentioned in the Trademeet quests.
To add say Candlekeep to BG3 they likely would have to get WoTC approval. Since we already visit it in BG1.
BG3 if it happens will be new IP, therefore not constricted by the old IP in terms of content etc.
BTW its all the same IP, an IP owned by WoTC. IWD, NWN, BG is all the same IP all owned by WoTC.
Also in IWD2 you visited Kuldahar, Dragon's Eye and Severed Hand although those places were already in IWD1.
Based on your thinking though then it could be possible we would see BG1 and BG2 areas in BG3.
We likely still won't see NWN or IWD areas in BG3 though. Why cause they have games devoted to those areas already. And I think WoTC would rather devote those areas to an IWD3 or NWN3.
But this wasn't about BG3 this was about expanding BG1 or BG2. The likelihood is that BG2 areas will not make it into BG1 and vice versus. Same with NWN or IWD areas. WoTC likely won't let them import areas into the old games that are in other games.
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/3134/an-entirely-unofficial-poll-that-has-no-bearing-on-reality-baldurs-gate-3/p1
BG3 will quite possibly not have such strict clauses on new content, in fact I think the BG1:EE and BG2:EE only have them as they are remakes of existing products. So BG3 in theory can be set anywhere at anytime regardless of the settings for BG1 or BG2.
Did you read the thread you linked to? It says in the topic of the thread Unofficial. There has been no official comment on a BG3. The only thing Overhaul has said on BG3 is that currently they don't have the rights to make it. Now they might be working with WoTC to get the rights to make BG3 but they don't have them and hence don't even have a story to go with it. So there is no way of knowing for sure if it will take place 100 years after BG2 or 5 minutes. Assuming it gets made. No offense but you would be wrong. Their all the same IP just different games. It's like saying all Star Wars movies, books, games, etc are each their own IP, their not they all belong to one IP.
What you have here is 1 IP, multiple licenses. All of the games are included in WoTC Forgotten Realms IP. They just happen to have multiple licenses.
BG:EE and BG2:EE are not new IP, their new licenses. If BG3 is made, the IP will be owned by WoTC. Overhaul/Beamdog will license the rights to produce and distribute the game.
Regardless of who is right here, one thing that for sure is that WoTC will have final say on the game. If WoTC don't want Candlekeep in BG3, it won't be in BG3.
Yes I have read the thread, which was posted by Phillip Daigle which is part of Beamdog. And of course its Unofficial because BG3 depends on BG1/2:EE success. But the point is that any new game set in the Forgotten Realms will use the newest ruleset----> timeline. As Phillip Daigle said and I quote again: A great example is Icewind Dale 2 which used the 3e ruleset and took place 30 years after Icewind Dale 1 which used 2nd edition. And again in Icewind Dale 2 they used same areas as Icewind dale 1.
5th at least looks good so far, mix of 2nd/3rd/4th taking the best of each, still holding out to see how multi-classing works, as so far doesn't seem like you can ...
One of my favorite AD&D modules was World of Greyhawk: Castle Greyhawk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Greyhawk_(module)
Now there is a world I would love to see in a video game, Greyhawk. Don't get me wrong I like all the D&D worlds; Ravenloft, Forgotten Realms, etc.. I would just love to see one set in Greyhawk. Doubt that will happen since from what I read WoTC is reportedly (could be just a rumor I don't know) abandoning Greyhawk in 5E