map

[mdhprime]

Crazy question here. Does anyone know of a more detailed galactic map other than the rather general map on page 210 of the Player's Guide?

[RealPity]

The book STAR CHARTS has good detailed ones, if you do a google image search most of the maps are on there.

I have the book and it is well done, planets detail and such.

[mdhprime]

The book STAR CHARTS has good detailed ones, if you do a google image search most of the maps are on there.

I have the book and it is well done, planets detail and such.

Great! Thanks for the info. I will check it out.

[Solstice]

I agree. I use Star Charts as well. It is a well laid out book that I got online and I ended up buying the physical copy of the book (Geoffrey Mandel is the author), because I liked the look and it even tracks the activities of the shows, planet info, planet classes, how the quadrant/sector systems work, etc.

I love to be able to visually see where in the glaxaxy/quadrant each of the systems are for visualizing it to my players. It is not a decipher/coda system resource, but the info that it gives is great additional information to enhance a series.

Anyway, I had this same question when I got started. I thought I would pass this on. Have a great time.

[The Tatterdemalion King]

A lot of Star Chart's assumptions bug me...

[RealPity]

Well, like pretty much everything related to Trek, there's lots of contradictions depending on where you go to look. Or even amongst "canon" within series

[The Tatterdemalion King]

Well, like pretty much everything related to Trek, there's lots of contradictions depending on where you go to look. Or even amongst "canon" within series

Nah, it was mostly their approach to blocking out space, relative size of interstellar polities, and things like that–and that it wasn't printed on layered transparencies : ). It's just that space is, well, mostly space, not contiguous terrain, and all the important bits are individual points in a three-dimensional medium. Aside from the RNZ, I can't think of a region that would be defined as a line or a discrete bloc, and even that was probably defined by 2150s reach of sensor or communication technologies, a midway point between effective staging areas of both coalition and Romulan planets.

[mechascorpio]

This is a great site, Star Trek Cartography , and this page has a number of maps: http://www.stdimension.org/int/Cartography/Maps.htm

Scroll halfway down this page, and the user has posted high-res maps from Mandel's Star Trek Maps book from 1980, which are obviously out of date and probably up for debate in terms of canonicity, but I do love the TOS-iness of them.

[Solstice]

Nah, it was mostly their approach to blocking out space, relative size of interstellar polities, and things like that–and that it wasn't printed on layered transparencies : ). It's just that space is, well, mostly space, not contiguous terrain, and all the important bits are individual points in a three-dimensional medium.

I do agree with you in regards to the three-dimensionality of space. Yes, the book is not perfect, but until perfection comes along, I do like what it is...a good visual aid to use to supplement the few books Decipher published for official material. My pdf version that I got from somewhere even puts some of the quadrant maps together into one large map with enough res to zoom in.

I will have to check out the sites that Mechascorpio posted and see if I can incorporate it as well.

In all, though, I can totally overlook what it lacks for the fact that it at least attempts to do what no other book has. And that is to put into one book as much of the canon material as possible and to try and make sense of what numerous individual writers of television shows and movies have dreamt up, especially when it was thrown out bit-by-bit over almost 40 years. Oh, and the full color pages are nice too.

But, if there are better resources out there, definitely let me know. I am always looking to better my series.