The players are entering a massive mining complex on a mission to find something. There are hazards, hostile wild life and other hostile competing groups they have to worry about, not to mention a double crossing bad guy on their tail.

Typically I would prepare a detailed map of the place, something akin to an old Dungeon Map from 'you name it' fantasy system, with encounters and interesting finds, hazards and 'treasure' spread throughout... and then have the mission objective tucked away for them to find.

But what about a more narrative approach. No map, just a series of descriptions regarding the areas they visit. The encounters come when it feels about right to present them and they find their goal when Im ready for them to. This would allow a keener sense of timing where encounters are concerned and let me rush the thing along or slow it down as needed to keep the drama up. Their choices as to which direction to take, which tunnel to follow and so on really don't have any bearing directly but can be made to appear that way through description and perhaps allowing them to pencil an adhoc map as they go.

Anybody else run a typical "crawl" this way?

If you hop over to the Age of rebellion Forum, Kyla has posted the conversion to an old weg adventure set inside a mine, Rebel breakout. you can look at it tog et inspired, or use their maps.

It varies from table to table. The game mechanics are written such that you don't need to count off grid squares or anything. You just give a rough ballpark of Short or Medium range and the game goes on. But I find it helpful to have a map just so everybody is on the same page. I've played games where the whole scene was narrated, and eventually a very complicated action required knowing just where everyone was to avoid friendly casualties. Each player doodled up what they thought the scene looked like, and none of them matched, nor did any match the GM's doodle of what they meant the scene to look like. So even if you don't use miniatures or anything, just having that map handy for reference does sometimes prove beneficial. Just don't let your players get so fixated on the map, that they can't imagine anything else. "Is there a restroom I can hide in? I don't see one on the map..." There's always a restroom somewhere. =)

Im not talking about a map for tactical purposes. This complex runs for several kilometers in all directions. A map here provides a sense of location in a general sense but Im thinking it might be better to just wing a map as we go along, that way they absolutely encounter the things I want them to and don't find their objective until I feel they are ready for it. Otherwise, with a map, its a bit random...heck they might go straight to it and ruin the whole thing.

I only provide a map when I know ahead of time where the players will be, and when it's tactically or aesthetically relevant. More often I will simply show some art to help with the narrative...a picture is worth a lot more than 1000 words when time is precious. Google images of sci fi mines and you'll find a boatload.

But I certainly wouldn't an entire complex of the kind you're describing. If I don't know where the players will be ahead of time then a quick sketch on graph paper for the relevant location when necessary is all I will do.

...that way they absolutely encounter the things I want them to and don't find their objective until I feel they are ready for it. Otherwise, with a map, its a bit random...heck they might go straight to it and ruin the whole thing.

I'd be careful about that. Giving the players the feeling of finding their way irrespective of your plans is one of the great pleasures, illusory though it may be, of roleplaying. Having at least 3 ways--and being open to more--with respective challenges, to get where you want them to be, gives them a sense of free will. The danger is they can lose interest if they feel their choices don't matter.

I kind of had this as a player in our last fantasy game...the GM had spent a lot of time with the art (his own) for the first half of the session that it was practically a travel guide/slide show...interesting and nice to look at, but quite boring for too long as we had nothing to do...I mean we fought stuff and picked locks, etc, but made no choices. It got to the point one of the players decided to just make his own detour (too complicated to explain how) which left the GM scrambling anyway and at a loss for a bit.

So just MHO, but when you provide more than one way to achieve the goal, not only do the players enjoy it more, but you'll be better prepared for off-rails events (partly because they're more likely to pick one of the routes you've established).

For very large facilities or ships, I've used a general schematic to show general areas since a full map would be way too large. That way you can point out to players what part of the ship or facility they are in or need to travel to.

Then, if I had time and forethought of specific areas where action might take place, I would have smaller scale maps. Or, I would just quickly wing it with a crude map when a fight broke out in a hallway.

X happens in an intersection, Y happens in a long corridor, Z happens near a shaft/lift. This is kind of how I run things. I use maps from old AD&D 1st modules and stuff I print off the internet. I also buy used sci-fi RPG publications like Alternity...some really detailed deck plans for ships there. I keep the maps in front of me, but I don't use a screen so the players know I'm not winging a map, but they don't know I'm pacing encounters. The illusion is real.

Edit: Autocorrect changed Alternity to Paternity. Now that would be a weird sci-fi game.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/203263-deck-plans-and-maps/?hl=narrative

This can work really well. You just have to make sure you are giving them some kind of meaningful choices and giving them a sense of progress.

We did a completely random dungeon in this game using cards I made that had skill groups and difficulties listed on them, using some narrative description to make it flow into a consistent dungeon.

It was a race against time, so they had to get a certain number of successes before time expired. When they hit that number of successes, they found their way to the end, which was a boss fight using standard combat rules and a tactical map.

I could post the rules we used if anyone is interested. It was a lot of fun.

yes Plarfem, that's exactly what Im talking about. In this case wandering around the mines tunnels is just a vehicle towards having certain encounters. They have oh, maybe 3 or 4 absolute encounters, a half dozen random ones and then a couple that lead them out and to the big finish at the exit. Where they go exactly is more of an illusion, the linked mixture of a bunch of environment descriptions Ive made up in advance. (ie. the co-gen reactor storage facility, the static infiltrator chamber, comms central, conveyor assembly unit, secondary maintenance shed. etc.) Some of them require negotiating hazardous conditions or hostile encounters with subterranean wildlife or potential run ins with a rival group of scavengers. Again, all pretty much independent of where the would be on any map.

Their choices as to which direction to take, which tunnel to follow and so on really don't have any bearing directly but can be made to appear that way through description and perhaps allowing them to pencil an adhoc map as they go.

You might as well just read them a story. RPGs are all about choices. I don't see why you'd bother running the party through a sci-fi dungeon if you obviously don't want to run them through a dungeon. There's a plenty of other adventure options out there.

To quote Han, "Players always find out."

I'd recommend using a node-dungeon. Just a simple flowchart that links the hazards together based on their directional relationship. No need for a real map but it also give the player's choices actual meaning.

Their choices as to which direction to take, which tunnel to follow and so on really don't have any bearing directly but can be made to appear that way through description and perhaps allowing them to pencil an adhoc map as they go.

You might as well just read them a story. RPGs are all about choices. I don't see why you'd bother running the party through a sci-fi dungeon if you obviously don't want to run them through a dungeon. There's a plenty of other adventure options out there.

To quote Han, "Players always find out."

I'd recommend using a node-dungeon. Just a simple flowchart that links the hazards together based on their directional relationship. No need for a real map but it also give the player's choices actual meaning.

Yes but even in the case of a flow chart there is the chance they will, by accident, bypass critical scenes and encounters and diminish the quality of the adventure. When their decisions on direction have no real upside other than perceived freedom of action and have every chance of ruining the session, I don't understand the risk.

I am reminded of an old D&D module I ran years ago. The party was trapped within a labyrinth and had to find their way out. It was a maze, pure and simple, with lots of bad guys and cool traps scattered throughout. Trouble was by chance (or at least I think it was by chance, I have always wondered if one of the players had a copy of the module) they missed nearly every major encounter, sneakily wandering right through the place in no time and escaping. One of the most boring sessions of the campaign.

Now if I had merely structured it as a series of encounters that had to be overcome in order to escape, that sort of thing could be avoided and the actual wandering could have been engineered randomly without undue affect.

I am remind3d

Diminish who's quality, yours or theirs?

If everything you write must absolutely be everything they experience it's not an adventure, it's exposition.

It is quite possible to give them meaningful choices that are different than where they go on a map.

How they overcome obstacles, and the effects of what they do are also meaningful. Build in some effects like that, where something they do in encounter X determines what happens in encounter Y.

You can also build in a couple points where they could bypass encounters through their choices, but limit that to only a couple of instances in your narrative. That way you don't have to worry about them bypassing everything.

That's exactly what I've done. Encounter based instead of map based. Is it such an odd concept?what if c3p0 were the character, should we let him wander around a map of Tatooine e with a chance he stumbles into the jaws or just program the encounter after some Tim passes? Geeze, you guys have all done it surely.

Yes, I'm sure most GMs have done encounter based games instead of location based ones. I think it could be just a hangup on the word dungeon, which almost exclusively refers to a location based adventure.

What you are really doing is an encounter based adventure in a setting that would be described as a dungeon. That doesn't mean it's a dungeon crawl, in the d&d sense, and I'm sure it will work out fine, as long as the players can affect the narrative, which is what you have said you will be doing. I'd love to hear how it goes.

Yes but even in the case of a flow chart there is the chance they will, by accident, bypass critical scenes and encounters and diminish the quality of the adventure. When their decisions on direction have no real upside other than perceived freedom of action and have every chance of ruining the session, I don't understand the risk.

If there are two paths from point A to point B, one of which is full of exciting adventure while the other is boring, then that's a bad dungeon design. Make both paths interesting in their own way.

Either that or just narrate over the character travels through the dungeon. So, after Encounter 1 describe how they are exploring a strange mine shaft and then go straight to Encounter 2.

Giving the players the false impression that they are actually exploring a mine/dungeon when they aren't is pointless. You're just wasting everyone's time. And, as I said, the players will figure it out.

Nothing to figure out. They wandered through a mine, did some stuff, eventually escaped. No conspiracy at all.

Oh and your comment about narrating between encounters is exactly my plan. How did that get lost in here somehow?

Sometimes I use a small dry erase board if needed; if the players want to plan their attack on a fortified position for example. So I would use my terrible drawing skills (not kidding) to draw the map continously inbetween encounters to make sure the players have a feel of the area or if I have the time and need a ighter atmosphere I'll use some onlinetools. (http://pyromancers.com/dungeon-painter-online/ or the likes)

I like a nice piece of art to evoke a feeling and give PCs an impression of a place. Miles and miles of black tunnels can just be called that with a nice piece of art to accompany it. A map maybe of a key location(s) is ok for setting things up tactically, but that would be more for me than them. I think a piece of art can suffice for that as well. Sometimes a map is a good idea also, as the specifics leads to tactics. Some of both I guess is my answer.

Sometimes I use a small dry erase board if needed; if the players want to plan their attack on a fortified position for example. So I would use my terrible drawing skills (not kidding) to draw the map continously inbetween encounters to make sure the players have a feel of the area or if I have the time and need a ighter atmosphere I'll use some onlinetools. (http://pyromancers.com/dungeon-painter-online/ or the likes)

Sorry derroehre, Im not talking about a tactical combat map, that's an entirely different matter. Im referring to a map of a large installation or complex or even a really large ship where it might be more appropriate to just narrate movement rather than reflect it on a even an abstract map.

"You run down several interconnected corridors, make a number of turns and then pass through what appears to be a monitoring station of some kind before arriving at a maintenance airlock."

I like a nice piece of art to evoke a feeling and give PCs an impression of a place. Miles and miles of black tunnels can just be called that with a nice piece of art to accompany it. A map maybe of a key location(s) is ok for setting things up tactically, but that would be more for me than them. I think a piece of art can suffice for that as well. Sometimes a map is a good idea also, as the specifics leads to tactics. Some of both I guess is my answer.

Yes in this case I think a few graphics are actually superior in relating the environment.

Sometimes I use a small dry erase board if needed; if the players want to plan their attack on a fortified position for example. So I would use my terrible drawing skills (not kidding) to draw the map continously inbetween encounters to make sure the players have a feel of the area or if I have the time and need a ighter atmosphere I'll use some onlinetools. (http://pyromancers.com/dungeon-painter-online/ or the likes)

Sorry derroehre, Im not talking about a tactical combat map, that's an entirely different matter. Im referring to a map of a large installation or complex or even a really large ship where it might be more appropriate to just narrate movement rather than reflect it on a even an abstract map.

"You run down several interconnected corridors, make a number of turns and then pass through what appears to be a monitoring station of some kind before arriving at a maintenance airlock."

As said, when needed, so sometimes.

If I decide against a map for the players I still have a sorta mindmap of the layout scibbled somewhere in view.

My players stormed an asteroid base with about 15-20 different areas/rooms (don't remember) and difficult intersections. I made a detailed map with the tool I linked and put post its over the areas they didn't see yet. Effektively turning it into a dungeon-situation, something I try not to do, but it worked out great. On that base they also found and "liberated" room by room a DP20 frigate, which imo also required a map so everyone can follow the way taken to the bridge or the detention area.

I like a nice piece of art to evoke a feeling and give PCs an impression of a place. Miles and miles of black tunnels can just be called that with a nice piece of art to accompany it. A map maybe of a key location(s) is ok for setting things up tactically, but that would be more for me than them. I think a piece of art can suffice for that as well. Sometimes a map is a good idea also, as the specifics leads to tactics. Some of both I guess is my answer.

Yes in this case I think a few graphics are actually superior in relating the environment.

Agreed.

In between sessions I like to look at artworks at deviant art or swagonline, as inspiration for me or for better immersion for the players. I still have several pictures saved in a folder where each symbolises a full campaign or at least an act of a campaign...If only the dreaded real life were more accommodating