Want your map to look better instantly? Don't use lined paper... Not saying you need fancy drawing paper, but even regular old copy/printer paper would be vastly better.
I agree, but sometimes inspiration hits and lined paper is all that's handy. Perhaps investing in cheap drawing software to correct the brightness & contrast can take out the majority of those lines?
"My main piece of feedback is, you are winning at life, sir, you are drawing a map on a door" - haha, that's brilliant :-) Thanks Nate and your contributors for another great video, so many brilliant maps in so many different styles.
I feel like I have a very realistic coastline method to make it look natural and detailed. I spend a lot of my time on Google maps just looking and the world especially in Europe you can learn a lot about tectonics and how land forms into interesting shapes. I think Scotland is my favourite area to draw from
Props to anyone that draws every tree and has strategically places them to make a wide dense forest. That takes a lot of patience and dedication most don’t have because it’s time taxing and what not. These maps are awesome so shout out to all the creators in this video and the ones we will hopefully see in the future.
A quick note on rivers: they tend to be straighter near their origin, often in mountainous regions where the water runs faster and carves through the rock over time. The flatter the land is the slower the water flows which makes it easier for obstacles to stop it and change the direction of the water to the sides that's where the snake like path it flows are more prominent. I'm sorry if my English looks really odd ^^''
I've found that having basic knowledge of plate tectonics, erosion, flow dynamics and soil types makes a huge difference for making believable maps. For example, if you find yourself wondering why your coastline doesn't look quite right and like all your islands are all these odd spiky balls (like 9:33 ish), have a look at a real map of, say, Norwegian fjords, and you'll see that those are formed with a direction to them, a flow. This is because the shape of the land is dictated by forces of nature. The ground is rock, old eroded mountains, in fact, so the stone will be a cross-section of layers all folded up and over each other. These layers have different compositions, so some of the layers take longer to erode away, leaving remnants in the form of sharp, parallel lines that make up islands. This is further affected by the direction and speed of the ocean currents around there. The best way, I've found, to make a good map, is to start with the biggest forces that determine the shape of your land, and work your way down to the smaller ones. Keep going smaller and smaller until you've reached the level of detail you're happy with/have time for (as each step will naturally end up taking longer than the previous, but add less to the overall picture). First, start with your tectonic plates, which ones are the lighter land plates, which ones are oceanic, so you know what parts will be mostly land and what parts mostly water. Then decide what directions the plates move in to create mountains and rifts and valleys and seas and canyons: the overall elevation and major features of your map. As a side effect of this, you'll also have determined potential hot zones for volcanic activity and earthquakes. After that, find out what sort of effect these major features have on their environments. Where do the wind and ocean currents come from, and what does that do? Is this region a dry, because the nearby mountain range filters out the humidity from the air passing over it? If this region gets a lot of rainfall, what does that do for the amount of rivers and vegetation? Then, go smaller: use your elevation and humidity to decide where rivers will flow and lakes will form. Look up some different kinds of rivers and you'll see that there's generally two types, based on the speed at which they flow (tip: search for meandering and braided rivers). Determine what your river looks like when it starts, and how it's changed by the time it meets the sea. The flow speed of shore currents and differences in tides drastically affect how your rivers meet the sea, whether you have an estuary or a delta, and how big those are. And go smaller again: now you know where your water flows and where it doesn't, you can determine the different biomes: where are the forests, the swamps, the deserts, the meadows, the plateaus, you name it. From there, you've got a great feel for your land, and the history that's shaped it. As we go smaller, so do the time frames in which these features form. Plate tectonics take hundreds of millions of years to show much noticeable difference. A forest may grow and die out in a matter of millennia. And so the natural step is this very small and insignificant thing that's been around for at most about 12 millennia in our world: civilization. The more permanent communities tend to form around areas where intelligent life can be sustained (makes sense, right?). Be it because there is lots of fertile land for growing food, or a sheltered bay with waters that are still deep enough for large ships to make port, or forests where lumber may be gathered, or along rivers, natural chokepoints and strategic locations to control local trade and military, you name it. The bigger the city, the more well-connected it must be to trade routes, resources and food sources; and vice versa. Annnnnd that's a lot of work. It can get very tedious. And most of the time, it is entirely unnecessary so don't bother. The most important thing about making cool maps is that they're cool; so have fun making maps and don't sweat it too much if you make a mistake or don't follow all the steps to the letter. Love y'all
Can confirm! I have a BS in geology and an MS in atmospheric physics and it has made a WORLD of difference in my maps compared to the ones I made as a teenager. My friends poke me regularly to ask if their climates and geography make sense for their maps. It brings a whole new level to it (completely unnecessary level mind you, a quality RPG/book map doesn't require this level of knowledge) that I find challenging and fun to design.
Now the question is how do you go about learning all that without years of study.. I know you said it doesnt matter much but as a fan of realism its a bit unfortunate..
I think this video is spot on. Quick fire keeps the reviews short and easier to swallow. The timing of the video is perfect to include more discord voters. I think this should be a regular thing as every map contest nears its end.
well i am german and can say that i never heard the word Groot in german. Maybe it's an older form of german or a dialect. I could imagine that because "Groß" means big or large.
@@anonymus3264 My home language is Afrikaans which is basically a drunk version of German. Groot is a word in afrikaans, so I assumed that it'd be in German too.
A lot of great map art beginners and long timers. I love seeing different styles and techniques and it's always great to get constructive criticism on your work. Have fun mapping all. Another great vid Nate. Keep up the great work.
One Thing I dont Like about your map is that there is very much , nearly only writing so it Looks a Bit boring. But I know that behind those names is an whole world It Just dont Looks Like that
It is meant to represent cities and villages, and because I tried to did it in a 19th century way I did without trees so I could have more roads, railroads, and settlements
Hey! I just wanted to say that (if you haven’t already) you could add more towns since towns are next to rivers and towns are in between towns so I think that could add character!
Something that stood out to me was that on map two (2:30) down the bottom where the mountain ridge meets the coast, I feel it could have done with the last peak sloping down to the sea as the way it is currently drawn gives the eye an optical illusion as if the coastline were being lifted up to meet the height of the mountains. Either that or I guess the coastline could have been made wider to indicate some kind of cliff edge.
Love all the different types and styles everyone has! This makes me want to finish up the game map I have. Big thank you to Nate for all the hard work he has put into this over the years!
Thanks for the feedback! I'm pretty impressed with how my map turned out considering my utter lack of artistic or cartographic experience, but I definitely agree that my rivers could use a lot of work. (I drew the Isles of the Hand, if anyone's curious.)
The map on 9:08 looks like something I would have drawn a few years ago. I looks exceptionally detailed and has very good coastlines and realistic looking islands. Overall very well done. My only criticism of this map would be to add in some kind of shading for the seas and oceans so that people will know exactly where the land ends and begins. Maybe just a personal preference, but I like to add some smoothness of coastlines mixed heavily with the rough edged coastlines. It makes for my eyes a more realistic looking map. But depending upon what your going for it may not be appropriate for your map. Hope this helps!
Great video! Part of the charm of this channel is how you come across as such a decent guy. I try to be nice as well, but whenever I critique something I'm afraid of coming across as too critical. (Because I am REALLY critical of myself!) You struck a great balance of providing useful criticism while not seeming mean. Good job!
Ey, Thanks For Reviewing My Map! I Think I Agree With Most Of Your Criticism, More Pointy Bits In The Coastline Would've Been Good, And The Scan Quality Is Pretty Lousy, Partially Because The Settings For It I Believe Only Picked Up Pure White And Pure Black, Instead Of Having Varying Shades Of Grey, And There Were Lots Of Places With Smudges And Things From Me Attempting To Erase Lines With The Pencil's Eraser. As For The Islands, It's Kinda Hard To Get A Lot Of Detail On Such A Small Area. I Can Just Say It Was Made By Medieval Cartographers, As They Tend To Round Coastlines A Lot!
Regarding Grootland's mountain gaps, I feel it's worth noting that in a fantasy setting, deliberately unnatural features can and should be forgiven. Mordor's 3-sides-of-a-rectangle mountain barrier makes sense, because it's not a mountain range, it's a wall constructed by a ...god, for lack of a better term. I forget if it's Sauron or Morgoth who made the borders of Mordor in the first place, but both of them, at the height of their power, were so far beyond anything we see in Lord of the Rings that it's entirely reasonable to such mountains form. Wheel of Time's various oddly straight mountain ranges are the result of fully half of the world's spellcasters going mad more or less simultaneously at the very height of understanding of that world's magic, and they're not the only signs, they're just the ones that are most obvious after 3000 years of erosion (aside from the marked lack of societies being beyond medieval technology). Maybe there's a gap for the road there because a powerful empire brought their magical might to bear on creating a level pass through the mountains. Good roads make good empires, after all. (Of course,that's a source for conflict of some kind: druids being upset with such a grand perversion of nature, displaced mountain tribes who find there's suddenly a broad valley running through the middle of their territory. This isn't to say your analysis that it's unnatural is a problem, it's just better to see it as a writing prompt rather than a flaw. It's not wrong, you just need to know why it's like that and not like it naturally should be.
For sure. My intent was not to point out flaws. Simply to point out things that seem odd to me, and there are often very good explanations, both fantastical and natural.
@@WASD20 Funny, the thing I was responding to was the fact that I felt you were framing it as a flaw by not pointing out the world building question it asks. Which is fine - pointing out errors is a part of offering a critique, since you can't really improve if you don't know what you've done wrong, I just felt that the thought was incomplete in that unnatural formations are acceptable when there's an unnatural reason for their existence. Funny thing about communication - sometimes people read into what you say things that you didn't intend to say.
@@kylejantjies7280 I did not. I'm just used to seeing a lot of weird BS in fantasy maps that makes sense when you actually know the setting. I've been fans of Lord of the Rings and Wheel of Time in my day, and am still a fan of the Stormlight Archive, whose entire world design is dominated by the cycles of Highstorms (comparable to a category 5 hurricane) that sweep across the world on a regular basis from east to west. Most of the characters don't even know what dirt is, because it's never had a chance to build up in most places. When I see a weird map, I immediately try to work out what situations the author has built into that world to make its particular type of weirdness make sense. Of course, I'm used to finding them in the endcover of a published fantasy novel, so I then get to read the novel and find out if my guess was right. I'm not even much of a cartographer, just a bookworm with about 25 years of experience with epic fantasy.
Honestly, the splits in the mountain where a major road was made perfect sense to me. I figured it was either a powerful mage or a large and/or advanced civilization that ripped through the mountain because it served their needs. Even a small tribe once famously cut a mountain in half so their people could get to the nearby town for medicine and supplies. It took them a lifetime, but they did it mostly by hand. The divided mountains on the map did not take me out of immersion at all, it made me more invested in finding out the map's story.
Something that I think would help out the map at 9:06 (MasterIsrael's?) would be varying line weights. Varying thicker and thinner lines for different parts of the map could help giving some more distinction between what's what. Perhaps a thicker line for the coastline and mountain tops, and the boarder of forests a bit thinner?
About the borders along river... Sometimes you have borders near a river that don't exactly follow the river. This shows the settlement is older bc the river has shifted due to ongoing erosion and deposition since the creation of the border
In the real world, rivers are almost never straight very long, unless they've been carved out of a solid stone base. This because as soon as anything falls in (like a dead tree), this affects the fluid flows of the river and starts a process where the path of the river starts to go serpentine.
For you to critique my map, does it have to be a stylized artistic map like these? Because I'm not very good with drawing, and the best I can do is just add in a key/legend and some little icons. I am good with geology and geography, however, and am good with planning out where everything would be, but making the things look like how they do here is a bit of a struggle for me, and I hope that doesn't disadvantage me here...just curious.
I think my advice to some of them would be, to pick a blank sheet of paper! Not one w squares and definately not a lined one. It is super easy to get a blank piece of paper and why waste your time doing map work on something that will "ruin" your map.
Every time I do a map I have trouble with mountains, especially when I want to make them smaller to fit the map, but it always turns out to be ugly triangles.
Some advice I'd make is to think on how the tectonic plates are placed as they add the mountains, I seriously think the maps lacked volcanic regions too. Places with many mountains also tend to have volcanic activities too.
I mean, just like mountains, volcanoes are such incredible things and many fantasy maps just forgets about them, it's sad :'v You don't need to add a devastated terrain around a volcano, it can be pretty similat to a mountain too, and there are many types of volcanoes too. The classic peak shaped (Ash cinder), the fissure, the shield, the dome, the composite, and the caldera. They can add so much to the looks of the map, specially to the regional ones.
I love the " you are winning at life sir" comment on the map on the door. I dn;t think I could bring myself to do that even if I did it in my future man-cave
I agree completely with your critique. Additionally, I feel the location of the legend along the bottom should have been swapped with the "Here be Pirates" note. The legend feels a little cramped as is.
10:25 i personally love the cragginess. Looks a lot like a real map. However the lack of water definition is very confusing. Seems like i should send in some of my maps. I've made maps for my Godbound campaigns, both massive islands, filled with intentional bullshit biome changes because of the setting.
Nate, not sure if you'll see this but do you have advice on how to make two different scales of the same map? For example, I have three region maps for my campaign ive made in inkarnate, but when it comes to trying to scale them down in order to draw the entire continent i run into a myriad of issues.
Very few country borders follow geographical features like rivers and deserts. Tall mountains are more usual but even then countries prefer to envelop them. And this is for a very rational reason. If you think about it, if your borders run along things like rivers where most cities and villages tend to be because of water access; you will be way more exposed to attacks and infiltrations. And invasion prep excuses like "oh we're not going to attack you, we're just doing a combat training drill outside your City" will be less challengeable on a diplomatic level if your border stops just outside the city wall.
That's a good point. I do definitely think that internal borders would follow rivers. I don't know too much about European geography (or, by extension, most fantasy geography), but, looking at a map of the US, borders between the States are usually either rivers or meaningless straight lines.
How do I get a map critiqued? I do all my maps in ms paint, so they’re not perfect (but I’m really good at paint, so they’re not bad), but it’s my most comfortable, proficient, and fastest medium.
I think it would be good to look at these more in a practical side than an artistic side. When people draw maps with mountains (even in real life), they don't often focus on getting the lines to properly fit the mountain's edges, rather, it's more of a statement of, "There's a mountain here." Same with rivers and cost lines. From afar, you don't have to get all the true jaggedness, because a.) you're giving the idea of where it goes, b.) you can't get the perfect depiction of it unless you're covering a very small part (highly zoomed in). So I don't thing mountain shapes and straightness over rivers/coast lines are a big deal. Some of those maps did definitely look more visually appealing than others (and you covered some of those visual elements), and those had a lot to do with that, but I wouldn't have used "this doesn't look natural" on people's mountain shapes. On the flip side, I liked when you covered some of the grand aspects of it like the kingdoms not following the rivers in Ryan's map, or like Grootland's breaks in the mountain ranges seeming unnatural. I would say the southern mountain range looked more like two separate mountain ranges that came close together, leaving a valley in between them. The northern mountain range, however, I agree looks like one solid mountain range with a line right down the middle which looks like plot convenience. It looks like we've got four tectonic plates making up this continent. The northern tectonic plate looks like it smashed into the central tectonic plate creating the northern mountain range (which is why the path down the middle looks unnatural), where as the south looks like an eastern and western tectonic plate that smashed into the southern corners of the main land (making it look like two separate mountain ranges which would have a path in the middle). The mountain range in the central western end of the continent should be removed as otherwise it looks inconsistent with tectonic plates, unless the east and west side were also two separate plates (which the rivers look to imply that), but then the mountain range should be more towards the center (where the plates collided) rather than on the opposite side.
Regarding the criticism about river borders on that one map with all the political boundaries - it's worth noting that water could be a major strategic resource in the right setting. Indeed, we have only to look at the significance of rivers like the Euphrates and the Tigris to find a real world example where civilization has struggled to control this precious resource pretty much since civilization existed as a concept. That would lead to most rivers being more centrally located within a country - the centre of the buffer zone in which wars are fought. Rivers that are near borders would be contested territory, with frequent wars and exchanges of territory as each side struggled to secure the river. The natural border in these conditions would be the borders of the watershed - ridgelines and such, since an enemy seeking to deny the use of a river could try to divert the flow of the headwaters, or poison the river. (You might say that it's hard to poison an entire river, to which my response is: Rio Tinto, Spain. Just start mining a sulphide deposit and dump the waste along the river, and you'll have the entire thing undrinkable within a few decades, if you're trying hard enough. Acid rock drainage is nasty enough when you're not weaponizing it.) Of course, this would not be a normal world, this would be a world in which wars for control of water sources happen with the regularity of oil wars in the 20th century. A world that's unnaturally dry by the standards of those of us on Earth. It would be one of the foundational ideas of the world building, and its effect on the political map of the world would be quite pronounced.
I would say that, coast lines very a lot. Some coasts are that very jagged messy type, but others can be smoother and rounder. I would say pay attention to what's on the coast as well as what is facing the ocean. If you have mountains running parallel to a coast line (think the West Coast of the USA) the coast will be smoother and less fragmented because the ocean can only wear away at mountains so much. But flatter, wetter coasts are likely to be quite jagged, with barrier islands creating a buffer between them and the ocean (Think the East Coast of the USA). Also, honestly, sometimes have simple areas on your maps. Filling it entirely with dramatic vistas is, to be frank, kind of try-hard...
Map 2 critique: it feels empty, and the naming conventions are unreal. The islands are also scattered weirdly. Otherwise, I like what you've got going on.
Map 6: the borders seem unnaturally free of border gore. Don't get me wrong: I dislike border gore, but if borders fall along natural features, they will be a lot less clean than that...
Map 7: the entire continent is shaped like a flattened circle. Reshape it! Have some fun! Also: a critique of many maps is the location of smooth edges. Where the land drops quickly to the sea (like near a mountain range) you see smooth edges. The opposite is true in shallow water. This map looks like every edge is steeply sloping.
I think some of them should darken their coastlines, like for me I have kinda bad eyesight (not enough for glasses apparently) so from afar it’s hard to tell what land and what’s sea at first, I dunno maybe I’m being picky, but there’ll all pretty great regardless
Amateur geologist/cartographer here, rivers don't really flow or move like the ones in the first map. As for composition it is a bit messy and generally cluttered. But all these issues could easily be fixed.
I'm still working on mine but when I'm done can I send it to you? My phone won't allow me to get into your invite; can I send it to you through this chat or email?
my comments on the map of 7:25 lettering here is not the best, it is not nice to have it go right through all the artwork. and also it not being close to where it should be, it seems all in long lines.
Just saying this is really kind of him, this is something that people pay for so consider yourself lucky to have our man here going over your map. He also has a Patron, just sayin.... www.patreon.com/wasd20
Oh this is great. I've been wanting to remake my setting map(s) and if I've got the chance to get your feedback I'm gonna have to make some time and do it because I'd really love to see what a pro thinks.
For the second map there is something weird going on where the mountains meet the sea at the bottom. The shoreline seems to eat into the height of the mountain, there should be a cliff here. Also a mountain range would extend into the sea whereas here we have a bay. Super shading.
"I'm gonna try and be more constructive than a shotgun" lol!
Want your map to look better instantly? Don't use lined paper...
Not saying you need fancy drawing paper, but even regular old copy/printer paper would be vastly better.
I agree, but sometimes inspiration hits and lined paper is all that's handy. Perhaps investing in cheap drawing software to correct the brightness & contrast can take out the majority of those lines?
"My main piece of feedback is, you are winning at life, sir, you are drawing a map on a door" - haha, that's brilliant :-) Thanks Nate and your contributors for another great video, so many brilliant maps in so many different styles.
I feel like I have a very realistic coastline method to make it look natural and detailed. I spend a lot of my time on Google maps just looking and the world especially in Europe you can learn a lot about tectonics and how land forms into interesting shapes. I think Scotland is my favourite area to draw from
I know this isn't going to create realistic shapes but i just use lakes and seas to make landmasses
Props to anyone that draws every tree and has strategically places them to make a wide dense forest. That takes a lot of patience and dedication most don’t have because it’s time taxing and what not. These maps are awesome so shout out to all the creators in this video and the ones we will hopefully see in the future.
A quick note on rivers: they tend to be straighter near their origin, often in mountainous regions where the water runs faster and carves through the rock over time. The flatter the land is the slower the water flows which makes it easier for obstacles to stop it and change the direction of the water to the sides that's where the snake like path it flows are more prominent.
I'm sorry if my English looks really odd ^^''
I've found that having basic knowledge of plate tectonics, erosion, flow dynamics and soil types makes a huge difference for making believable maps.
For example, if you find yourself wondering why your coastline doesn't look quite right and like all your islands are all these odd spiky balls (like 9:33 ish), have a look at a real map of, say, Norwegian fjords, and you'll see that those are formed with a direction to them, a flow. This is because the shape of the land is dictated by forces of nature. The ground is rock, old eroded mountains, in fact, so the stone will be a cross-section of layers all folded up and over each other. These layers have different compositions, so some of the layers take longer to erode away, leaving remnants in the form of sharp, parallel lines that make up islands. This is further affected by the direction and speed of the ocean currents around there.
The best way, I've found, to make a good map, is to start with the biggest forces that determine the shape of your land, and work your way down to the smaller ones. Keep going smaller and smaller until you've reached the level of detail you're happy with/have time for (as each step will naturally end up taking longer than the previous, but add less to the overall picture).
First, start with your tectonic plates, which ones are the lighter land plates, which ones are oceanic, so you know what parts will be mostly land and what parts mostly water.
Then decide what directions the plates move in to create mountains and rifts and valleys and seas and canyons: the overall elevation and major features of your map. As a side effect of this, you'll also have determined potential hot zones for volcanic activity and earthquakes.
After that, find out what sort of effect these major features have on their environments. Where do the wind and ocean currents come from, and what does that do? Is this region a dry, because the nearby mountain range filters out the humidity from the air passing over it? If this region gets a lot of rainfall, what does that do for the amount of rivers and vegetation?
Then, go smaller: use your elevation and humidity to decide where rivers will flow and lakes will form. Look up some different kinds of rivers and you'll see that there's generally two types, based on the speed at which they flow (tip: search for meandering and braided rivers). Determine what your river looks like when it starts, and how it's changed by the time it meets the sea. The flow speed of shore currents and differences in tides drastically affect how your rivers meet the sea, whether you have an estuary or a delta, and how big those are.
And go smaller again: now you know where your water flows and where it doesn't, you can determine the different biomes: where are the forests, the swamps, the deserts, the meadows, the plateaus, you name it.
From there, you've got a great feel for your land, and the history that's shaped it. As we go smaller, so do the time frames in which these features form. Plate tectonics take hundreds of millions of years to show much noticeable difference. A forest may grow and die out in a matter of millennia. And so the natural step is this very small and insignificant thing that's been around for at most about 12 millennia in our world: civilization. The more permanent communities tend to form around areas where intelligent life can be sustained (makes sense, right?). Be it because there is lots of fertile land for growing food, or a sheltered bay with waters that are still deep enough for large ships to make port, or forests where lumber may be gathered, or along rivers, natural chokepoints and strategic locations to control local trade and military, you name it. The bigger the city, the more well-connected it must be to trade routes, resources and food sources; and vice versa.
Annnnnd that's a lot of work. It can get very tedious. And most of the time, it is entirely unnecessary so don't bother.
The most important thing about making cool maps is that they're cool; so have fun making maps and don't sweat it too much if you make a mistake or don't follow all the steps to the letter.
Love y'all
damn that's a long comment, also thanks for the advice
I love how you wrote all of this and finished with a "don't bother" 😂😂😂
But you jave helped me. Thanks
How do people write better essays in the comments section than a real examination?
Can confirm! I have a BS in geology and an MS in atmospheric physics and it has made a WORLD of difference in my maps compared to the ones I made as a teenager. My friends poke me regularly to ask if their climates and geography make sense for their maps. It brings a whole new level to it (completely unnecessary level mind you, a quality RPG/book map doesn't require this level of knowledge) that I find challenging and fun to design.
Now the question is how do you go about learning all that without years of study..
I know you said it doesnt matter much but as a fan of realism its a bit unfortunate..
I think this video is spot on. Quick fire keeps the reviews short and easier to swallow. The timing of the video is perfect to include more discord voters. I think this should be a regular thing as every map contest nears its end.
Are we not gonna talk about how one of the maps are called “Grootland”?
I understand a bit of German and "Groot" translates to big, large etc.
Douglas Reyneke thats interesting. I know a bit of german as well since im quite close to it x3 but id never have thought of that
well i am german and can say that i never heard the word Groot in german. Maybe it's an older form of german or a dialect. I could imagine that because "Groß" means big or large.
@@anonymus3264 My home language is Afrikaans which is basically a drunk version of German. Groot is a word in afrikaans, so I assumed that it'd be in German too.
Anonymus that’s awkward lol
A lot of great map art beginners and long timers. I love seeing different styles and techniques and it's always great to get constructive criticism on your work. Have fun mapping all. Another great vid Nate. Keep up the great work.
8:01 If I Remember Correctly, Ryan Said His Map Was Made In Wonderdraft, By Combining A Bunch Of Maps From Azgaar's, So You're Right On Both!
Some great inspiration in this video. Love to see such a huge amount of variety in styles (b+w, hand drawn, digitally colored, door, etc)
Yay my map got into the vid, im The first one :D
Amazing job! Love the writing on your map. Such a clean style.
Thank you!
One Thing I dont Like about your map is that there is very much , nearly only writing so it Looks a Bit boring. But I know that behind those names is an whole world
It Just dont Looks Like that
It is meant to represent cities and villages, and because I tried to did it in a 19th century way I did without trees so I could have more roads, railroads, and settlements
Oh 19th centurie
Interesting
Its more practical than beautifull
Good luck with your world
I have my own too
Hey, thanks for the critique! Can't wait to submit the finished version of my map once my players are done exploring it.
Hey! I just wanted to say that (if you haven’t already) you could add more towns since towns are next to rivers and towns are in between towns so I think that could add character!
Something that stood out to me was that on map two (2:30) down the bottom where the mountain ridge meets the coast, I feel it could have done with the last peak sloping down to the sea as the way it is currently drawn gives the eye an optical illusion as if the coastline were being lifted up to meet the height of the mountains.
Either that or I guess the coastline could have been made wider to indicate some kind of cliff edge.
Love all the different types and styles everyone has! This makes me want to finish up the game map I have.
Big thank you to Nate for all the hard work he has put into this over the years!
You helped me a lot when i was doing my rpg with my friends,thanks
LOVE watching you videos! They really get the inspiration flowing~
Thanks for the feedback! I'm pretty impressed with how my map turned out considering my utter lack of artistic or cartographic experience, but I definitely agree that my rivers could use a lot of work. (I drew the Isles of the Hand, if anyone's curious.)
The map on 9:08 looks like something I would have drawn a few years ago. I looks exceptionally detailed and has very good coastlines and realistic looking islands. Overall very well done. My only criticism of this map would be to add in some kind of shading for the seas and oceans so that people will know exactly where the land ends and begins. Maybe just a personal preference, but I like to add some smoothness of coastlines mixed heavily with the rough edged coastlines. It makes for my eyes a more realistic looking map. But depending upon what your going for it may not be appropriate for your map. Hope this helps!
Great video! Part of the charm of this channel is how you come across as such a decent guy. I try to be nice as well, but whenever I critique something I'm afraid of coming across as too critical. (Because I am REALLY critical of myself!) You struck a great balance of providing useful criticism while not seeming mean. Good job!
This is such a great video idea! We get to see so many different styles of maps plus learn what we can do better! Happy mapping everyone!
Ey, Thanks For Reviewing My Map! I Think I Agree With Most Of Your Criticism, More Pointy Bits In The Coastline Would've Been Good, And The Scan Quality Is Pretty Lousy, Partially Because The Settings For It I Believe Only Picked Up Pure White And Pure Black, Instead Of Having Varying Shades Of Grey, And There Were Lots Of Places With Smudges And Things From Me Attempting To Erase Lines With The Pencil's Eraser. As For The Islands, It's Kinda Hard To Get A Lot Of Detail On Such A Small Area. I Can Just Say It Was Made By Medieval Cartographers, As They Tend To Round Coastlines A Lot!
Regarding Grootland's mountain gaps, I feel it's worth noting that in a fantasy setting, deliberately unnatural features can and should be forgiven. Mordor's 3-sides-of-a-rectangle mountain barrier makes sense, because it's not a mountain range, it's a wall constructed by a ...god, for lack of a better term. I forget if it's Sauron or Morgoth who made the borders of Mordor in the first place, but both of them, at the height of their power, were so far beyond anything we see in Lord of the Rings that it's entirely reasonable to such mountains form. Wheel of Time's various oddly straight mountain ranges are the result of fully half of the world's spellcasters going mad more or less simultaneously at the very height of understanding of that world's magic, and they're not the only signs, they're just the ones that are most obvious after 3000 years of erosion (aside from the marked lack of societies being beyond medieval technology).
Maybe there's a gap for the road there because a powerful empire brought their magical might to bear on creating a level pass through the mountains. Good roads make good empires, after all. (Of course,that's a source for conflict of some kind: druids being upset with such a grand perversion of nature, displaced mountain tribes who find there's suddenly a broad valley running through the middle of their territory.
This isn't to say your analysis that it's unnatural is a problem, it's just better to see it as a writing prompt rather than a flaw. It's not wrong, you just need to know why it's like that and not like it naturally should be.
For sure. My intent was not to point out flaws. Simply to point out things that seem odd to me, and there are often very good explanations, both fantastical and natural.
@@WASD20 Funny, the thing I was responding to was the fact that I felt you were framing it as a flaw by not pointing out the world building question it asks. Which is fine - pointing out errors is a part of offering a critique, since you can't really improve if you don't know what you've done wrong, I just felt that the thought was incomplete in that unnatural formations are acceptable when there's an unnatural reason for their existence.
Funny thing about communication - sometimes people read into what you say things that you didn't intend to say.
Did you draw Grootland?
@@kylejantjies7280 I did not. I'm just used to seeing a lot of weird BS in fantasy maps that makes sense when you actually know the setting. I've been fans of Lord of the Rings and Wheel of Time in my day, and am still a fan of the Stormlight Archive, whose entire world design is dominated by the cycles of Highstorms (comparable to a category 5 hurricane) that sweep across the world on a regular basis from east to west. Most of the characters don't even know what dirt is, because it's never had a chance to build up in most places.
When I see a weird map, I immediately try to work out what situations the author has built into that world to make its particular type of weirdness make sense. Of course, I'm used to finding them in the endcover of a published fantasy novel, so I then get to read the novel and find out if my guess was right. I'm not even much of a cartographer, just a bookworm with about 25 years of experience with epic fantasy.
Honestly, the splits in the mountain where a major road was made perfect sense to me. I figured it was either a powerful mage or a large and/or advanced civilization that ripped through the mountain because it served their needs. Even a small tribe once famously cut a mountain in half so their people could get to the nearby town for medicine and supplies. It took them a lifetime, but they did it mostly by hand. The divided mountains on the map did not take me out of immersion at all, it made me more invested in finding out the map's story.
Something that I think would help out the map at 9:06 (MasterIsrael's?) would be varying line weights. Varying thicker and thinner lines for different parts of the map could help giving some more distinction between what's what. Perhaps a thicker line for the coastline and mountain tops, and the boarder of forests a bit thinner?
About the borders along river... Sometimes you have borders near a river that don't exactly follow the river. This shows the settlement is older bc the river has shifted due to ongoing erosion and deposition since the creation of the border
In the real world, rivers are almost never straight very long, unless they've been carved out of a solid stone base. This because as soon as anything falls in (like a dead tree), this affects the fluid flows of the river and starts a process where the path of the river starts to go serpentine.
For you to critique my map, does it have to be a stylized artistic map like these? Because I'm not very good with drawing, and the best I can do is just add in a key/legend and some little icons.
I am good with geology and geography, however, and am good with planning out where everything would be, but making the things look like how they do here is a bit of a struggle for me, and I hope that doesn't disadvantage me here...just curious.
I think my advice to some of them would be, to pick a blank sheet of paper! Not one w squares and definately not a lined one. It is super easy to get a blank piece of paper and why waste your time doing map work on something that will "ruin" your map.
Every time I do a map I have trouble with mountains, especially when I want to make them smaller to fit the map, but it always turns out to be ugly triangles.
Some advice I'd make is to think on how the tectonic plates are placed as they add the mountains, I seriously think the maps lacked volcanic regions too. Places with many mountains also tend to have volcanic activities too.
I mean, just like mountains, volcanoes are such incredible things and many fantasy maps just forgets about them, it's sad :'v
You don't need to add a devastated terrain around a volcano, it can be pretty similat to a mountain too, and there are many types of volcanoes too.
The classic peak shaped (Ash cinder), the fissure, the shield, the dome, the composite, and the caldera.
They can add so much to the looks of the map, specially to the regional ones.
I love the " you are winning at life sir" comment on the map on the door. I dn;t think I could bring myself to do that even if I did it in my future man-cave
I thought I would see a video about good advices when creating maps
And I wasn't wrong! s2 So glad I subbed!
mountain valleys are very common in mountain regions, the most common types of mountain formations are chains so valleys occur,
I agree completely with your critique. Additionally, I feel the location of the legend along the bottom should have been swapped with the "Here be Pirates" note. The legend feels a little cramped as is.
I would love to see some tips on making a very large archipelago
YES! Do this more often please!
Your a awesome TH-camr Nate, your d and d tips and guides help me start the game and I'm a DM now! Thanks so much your Awesome!
And damn your one hell of a drawer! Your maps in previous videos are amazing!
10:25 i personally love the cragginess. Looks a lot like a real map. However the lack of water definition is very confusing.
Seems like i should send in some of my maps.
I've made maps for my Godbound campaigns, both massive islands, filled with intentional bullshit biome changes because of the setting.
That was a great point with the boarders and rivers. Legitimate
15:03 I know he says it but "THAT'S A FREAKING MAP ON A DOOR!?!?!?"
Nate, not sure if you'll see this but do you have advice on how to make two different scales of the same map? For example, I have three region maps for my campaign ive made in inkarnate, but when it comes to trying to scale them down in order to draw the entire continent i run into a myriad of issues.
Very few country borders follow geographical features like rivers and deserts. Tall mountains are more usual but even then countries prefer to envelop them. And this is for a very rational reason. If you think about it, if your borders run along things like rivers where most cities and villages tend to be because of water access; you will be way more exposed to attacks and infiltrations. And invasion prep excuses like "oh we're not going to attack you, we're just doing a combat training drill outside your City" will be less challengeable on a diplomatic level if your border stops just outside the city wall.
That's a good point. I do definitely think that internal borders would follow rivers. I don't know too much about European geography (or, by extension, most fantasy geography), but, looking at a map of the US, borders between the States are usually either rivers or meaningless straight lines.
How do I get a map critiqued? I do all my maps in ms paint, so they’re not perfect (but I’m really good at paint, so they’re not bad), but it’s my most comfortable, proficient, and fastest medium.
Epic great tips and awsome maps! References is key as always when doing artistic stuff based on something.
I love critique and contest videos. One of these days I will find the courage to post one of my own.
I think it would be good to look at these more in a practical side than an artistic side. When people draw maps with mountains (even in real life), they don't often focus on getting the lines to properly fit the mountain's edges, rather, it's more of a statement of, "There's a mountain here." Same with rivers and cost lines. From afar, you don't have to get all the true jaggedness, because a.) you're giving the idea of where it goes, b.) you can't get the perfect depiction of it unless you're covering a very small part (highly zoomed in). So I don't thing mountain shapes and straightness over rivers/coast lines are a big deal. Some of those maps did definitely look more visually appealing than others (and you covered some of those visual elements), and those had a lot to do with that, but I wouldn't have used "this doesn't look natural" on people's mountain shapes.
On the flip side, I liked when you covered some of the grand aspects of it like the kingdoms not following the rivers in Ryan's map, or like Grootland's breaks in the mountain ranges seeming unnatural. I would say the southern mountain range looked more like two separate mountain ranges that came close together, leaving a valley in between them. The northern mountain range, however, I agree looks like one solid mountain range with a line right down the middle which looks like plot convenience. It looks like we've got four tectonic plates making up this continent. The northern tectonic plate looks like it smashed into the central tectonic plate creating the northern mountain range (which is why the path down the middle looks unnatural), where as the south looks like an eastern and western tectonic plate that smashed into the southern corners of the main land (making it look like two separate mountain ranges which would have a path in the middle). The mountain range in the central western end of the continent should be removed as otherwise it looks inconsistent with tectonic plates, unless the east and west side were also two separate plates (which the rivers look to imply that), but then the mountain range should be more towards the center (where the plates collided) rather than on the opposite side.
Regarding the criticism about river borders on that one map with all the political boundaries - it's worth noting that water could be a major strategic resource in the right setting. Indeed, we have only to look at the significance of rivers like the Euphrates and the Tigris to find a real world example where civilization has struggled to control this precious resource pretty much since civilization existed as a concept.
That would lead to most rivers being more centrally located within a country - the centre of the buffer zone in which wars are fought. Rivers that are near borders would be contested territory, with frequent wars and exchanges of territory as each side struggled to secure the river.
The natural border in these conditions would be the borders of the watershed - ridgelines and such, since an enemy seeking to deny the use of a river could try to divert the flow of the headwaters, or poison the river. (You might say that it's hard to poison an entire river, to which my response is: Rio Tinto, Spain. Just start mining a sulphide deposit and dump the waste along the river, and you'll have the entire thing undrinkable within a few decades, if you're trying hard enough. Acid rock drainage is nasty enough when you're not weaponizing it.)
Of course, this would not be a normal world, this would be a world in which wars for control of water sources happen with the regularity of oil wars in the 20th century. A world that's unnaturally dry by the standards of those of us on Earth. It would be one of the foundational ideas of the world building, and its effect on the political map of the world would be quite pronounced.
A map on a door. What a great idea!
The map of Isles of the Hand remind me of the PALM from Tigana. Great book, you guys should read it.
great format, looking forward to your thoughts on my map once im finished :)
I would say that, coast lines very a lot. Some coasts are that very jagged messy type, but others can be smoother and rounder. I would say pay attention to what's on the coast as well as what is facing the ocean. If you have mountains running parallel to a coast line (think the West Coast of the USA) the coast will be smoother and less fragmented because the ocean can only wear away at mountains so much. But flatter, wetter coasts are likely to be quite jagged, with barrier islands creating a buffer between them and the ocean (Think the East Coast of the USA).
Also, honestly, sometimes have simple areas on your maps. Filling it entirely with dramatic vistas is, to be frank, kind of try-hard...
Is there a good app or software to draw maps?
Map 2 critique: it feels empty, and the naming conventions are unreal. The islands are also scattered weirdly. Otherwise, I like what you've got going on.
Map 3: needs more clarity. I had no clue what was what. (Sounds and looks like one of my early maps)
Map 4: could use more continental drift. Or there's lore... I don't know.
Map 5: strange arrangement on SE archipelago. Those are hard. I have tried it.
Map 6: the borders seem unnaturally free of border gore. Don't get me wrong: I dislike border gore, but if borders fall along natural features, they will be a lot less clean than that...
Map 7: the entire continent is shaped like a flattened circle. Reshape it! Have some fun! Also: a critique of many maps is the location of smooth edges. Where the land drops quickly to the sea (like near a mountain range) you see smooth edges. The opposite is true in shallow water. This map looks like every edge is steeply sloping.
Holy moly, it's here! Nice! :D
Where could we find jpgs of all these? I wanna find good examples for my own work
Love the door! That is committed cartography!
Sad i can t use the interactive map creator in worldanvil
I think some of them should darken their coastlines, like for me I have kinda bad eyesight (not enough for glasses apparently) so from afar it’s hard to tell what land and what’s sea at first, I dunno maybe I’m being picky, but there’ll all pretty great regardless
Amateur geologist/cartographer here, rivers don't really flow or move like the ones in the first map. As for composition it is a bit messy and generally cluttered. But all these issues could easily be fixed.
The last map is the actual door to another world ;)
You have no standards ... one map you say has not enough point areas on the coast, and the very next map you love when it has NONE.
You missed an opportunity with Grootland...... I am Groot!
Is no one going to talk about how Mavis Flemming just stole names from Matthew Mercer?
I must finish my map! I mean start on it, and get it done FAST
Today i designed my first map not something that impressive but im still proud of her
My name is Nate and your watching Disney channel XD Nice video man!
I have to say, these are really well made good talent from all of these people, and also do you accept dungeon maps?
Where can i contact you in private to discuss the geography in my map?
Hi Nate! Will you make a second part of this? I want to send my map to you as well as others.
I hope to do a few of these per year. Many will be submitted, few will be chosen.
@@WASD20 I see. Thanks for response!
these gaps in mountains ar ein germany and austria pretty ofte... its from the sea that went b ythe rock and carved holes an dcliff sinto the mountain
Good work. Cool maps!
A lot of these maps look nice and hearing the criticism will help me with my own. :3
When I make maps I make to much detail for me to even understand what's happening in my own map
Do you plan to make another video like this?
I do!
Gotta acknowledge that subtle compass swastika in the first one though.
about the craggy mountains, what if it's part of the style
Well it clearly is! :)
Great video. I like the respekt you have still for the maps but good advices. Like it :-)
I'm still working on mine but when I'm done can I send it to you? My phone won't allow me to get into your invite; can I send it to you through this chat or email?
my comments on the map of 7:25 lettering here is not the best, it is not nice to have it go right through all the artwork. and also it not being close to where it should be, it seems all in long lines.
All of those look soooo much better than mine....
Awesome vid!
Just saying this is really kind of him, this is something that people pay for so consider yourself lucky to have our man here going over your map. He also has a Patron, just sayin.... www.patreon.com/wasd20
How can I send maps to you, to be critiziced?
Cool Intro!
I just joined your discord and posted one of my maps.
I many, the placement of the elements like trees or grass are too regular. A few open spots and clusters would make it look more natural.
Map of the hand is interesting cause it is a hand
#1 looks too much like a modern interstate map to me
I just recently finished a map, ill drop it in the discord
Grootland map was🔥✨✨✨
sweet.
apart 2
-If You Want Your Maps Critiqued Better, Post Them In The Maps Channel To Be Critiqued By Me!-
Erate?
@@vytizen Indeed, 'Tis Me! And You Are, Vytiz?
Yes
Do a part two
The second map archipelago seems a bit spastic and not really well organized for an island chain
I read this as "Nato Critiques YOUR Maps!"
Me: :/
Oh this is great. I've been wanting to remake my setting map(s) and if I've got the chance to get your feedback I'm gonna have to make some time and do it because I'd really love to see what a pro thinks.
Actually actual.
For the second map there is something weird going on where the mountains meet the sea at the bottom. The shoreline seems to eat into the height of the mountain, there should be a cliff here. Also a mountain range would extend into the sea whereas here we have a bay. Super shading.