Asking for Feedback on potential new City/Town Building Set

[UPDATE: April 13th - This set is now available on the marketplace here ] Allo everyone, To go along with my other inquiry on the forums at the moment about what tokens folks would like to see next, <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/1653010/what-tok" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/1653010/what-tok</a>... I have another inquiry regarding map related assets. I've done a couple of village/town sets previously which are strictly top down views of buildings which can be arranged however GMs wish to create their maps. Rustic Village - Mostly all rooftops of varying shapes and sizes that easily create the appearance of a fully built up village/town <a href="https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/set/100/rust" rel="nofollow">https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/set/100/rust</a>... Quaint Town - Which is mostly a large collection of top-down building interiors that can be used on their own or assembled together to create larger buildings (like taverns) with simple thatched roofs that can be used to cover the interiors whenever the PCs are in them. <a href="https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/set/180/quai" rel="nofollow">https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/set/180/quai</a>... For the next set that I'm contemplating, it would be a departure from the strictly top down format. Since it would be a collection of map related assets, it would still be using a mostly top-down angle for the building assets, but I'd be angling them similar to how I angle my token miniatures (just enough so that you can see the sides somewhat. I could do these as strictly top down views of just the roofs, but I'm wondering if GMs would prefer these as slightly angled to add more depth to their maps. The image below is an example of what I'm describing. The set would essentially be several dozen buildings of a similar appearance, which GMs could arrange however their wish to create their city. Does this look good, or would folks prefer it if I just focused on another set of strictly top-down rooftops similar to Rustic Village?

Personally, I think I like this look better than the straight-down, roof-only view. If you released a set of these, I'm pretty sure I'd purchase it.

I love the perspective...I think the only questions would be being able to see on the back side of buildings (partial transparencies on back walls?) and seeing inside. These are gorgeous. I would get a set as well!

Brett E. said: Personally, I think I like this look better than the straight-down, roof-only view. I agree. While I like the top-down look, you lose a LOT of the interesting detail. This sort of semi-isometric view retains the benefit of the birds-eye view feel, while adding the more complete image that gives the map a much more realistic and detailed feel. Your strictly top-down images are good, but better for a map that's strictly about location. These would be better for a map that feels 'alive', if that makes sense. I like it. -Phnord

Looks great. If you added some stone buildings, partial stone buildings, run-down buildings/houses, noble villas, temple with stained glass, bridges, city walls, towers, town square with market tents, cemetery, mill, river, windmill, inn, streets, fencing etc., I would most likely purchase a set.

Phnord Prephect Phnord, you beat my comment by 3 minutes...lol

John said: Phnord Prephect Phnord, you beat my comment by 3 minutes...lol Phnord Prephect said: I like it. -Phnord

I do really like it, but it is hard for me to envision how this would look and play in a battle map setting. While not specific to this topic, one thing that I have a very hard time with is the creation of battle maps that have a good representation of the town/village/city that the group is in. So something that would allow an easier time of that would be awesome.

Combine this with the token movement script and the sprite tokens to let you have your very final fantasy game. :)

Thanks for the feedback so far folks! As a followup question: How do folks feel about different lighting? Would having separate day/night versions be important to GMs, or do folks feel it would be an unnecessary addition? Here are a few examples of what the buildings would look like with different lighting: 1.) No special lighting, 2.) Day Time, 3.) Night Time

I personally would not make use of different lighting versions, one set would be enough for me.

I agree with Brett, one set. If you wanted to suggest variable times, you could offer a semi-transparent overlay 40% black/dk blue tile, and mini-light tokens that could be placed about the map to suggest night-time. That might solve some issues with time of day. (Psst...I like the middle one) - Again, beautiful work!

In addition to the above posts, the ability to tint a token eliminates the need for differently-shaded images: I still like it. -Phnord

I also like to use a token with a colored radius that covers the entire map. Maybe blue and black at 500' to set the "mood".

I hate top down, so I say do it!

Just one last update to this thread. Based on feedback, I've released the set with both the isometric/angle and the strict top-down view. Folks really seemed to love the angle view, but there was some valid concern over whether GMs could create precise battle maps where being able to tell the exact placing of walls (behind the buildings) were. So the set includes a collection of builds from different sides, along with their top down counterparts. I've also included a few sample townspeople to help GMs get a start on populating the maps, as well as a few premade maps that show off potential ways of arranging streets.

Excellent! I will be purchasing this weekend when I log in to work on my campaign, I will soon be needing some urban setting scenes.