Overland Travel: a return to Hexploration?

[S'mon]

Basically, I like for overland travel to matter. I don't like skipping over a two-week journey. Skipping the journey makes the world seem less real, seem two-dimensional, only a painted backdrop.

I have to disagree that "You travel for two weeks, until..." makes the world seem less real than a two week journey involving a dozen or more random encounters, which would be the typical result of your 5 checks/day plus follow-up checks. I guess though it depends on what a 'random ecounter' is here - on one extreme it could be a dozen wandering monsters who all attack the PCs, on the other hand it could be mostly weather, terrain obstacles, exotic phenomena, friendly or neutral NPCs, game animals, and such, with very few monster attacks.

I definitely don't think that "You meet a Manticore, roll init" every day of a two-week journey adds to the versimilitude of a world, quite the reverse. For realism, the fewer random monster attacks the better. The kind of thing which does help a feeling of realism is exotic local colour - a sky island glimpsed at sunset; a migration of furred snakes across the PC's path. And a sense of place - describing the dark mountain range that looms to the north. The stillness of the pine forest. The sunlight glimmering on the lake. Just brief, hopefully evocative descriptions of the world around the PCs.

 

[Raven Crowking]

This is a time when I agree with Bullgrit.

That's one of the signs! So either the end of the world, or 5e, is coming!

RC

 

[Umbran]

In my opinion, a campaign that doesn't play through overland travel with overcoming outdoor obstacles and getting wilderness encounters, is only half a campaign. Just a two-dimensional campaign.

The thing is, one can have outdoor obstacles and wilderness encounters without regularly playing through overland travel. The GM can set some of the adventures outdoors, so that the wilderness is the destination, rather than just the space you move through.

And by the way, overland movement isn't what makes a game three-dimensional. Flight is what makes the game three-dimensional

 

[RedTonic]

I don't usually do much to simulate overland travel in my current playstyle. We may do a lot of narrative. However, I usually have encounter setpieces depending on which way the PCs go. They're following an imperial highway now, which means good headway. I like the notion of 'hexploration,' since I want to add more of a simulationist bent, and my players like to explore.

As to horses, nobody was thinking of them or pack animals until I asked why no one had a mount. I think part of the issue is that many players are either used to travel being totally handwaved--AND that many players are used to DMs stealing the horses. If you're going to lose an expensive investment like that at the whim of the DM, why bother? The latter reason is what I received when I asked them why they had no horses. (I haven't DMed a d20 system for this group til now, so no, I claim no responsibility for horsetheft.)

 

[S'mon]

I love it when PCs don't buy horses - means they're slower than the monsters >

 

[ThirdWizard]

As to horses, nobody was thinking of them or pack animals until I asked why no one had a mount. I think part of the issue is that many players are either used to travel being totally handwaved--AND that many players are used to DMs stealing the horses. If you're going to lose an expensive investment like that at the whim of the DM, why bother?

I remember I was playing in a game a while back and the DM wanted us to have horses. So, he set up an encounter where we'd fight some mounted soldiers and get some mounts. What he didn't see coming was that we decided the best course of action was to slaughter the horses before moving onto the soldiers. Kind of set the tone for the campaign, actually.


On the topic, though, I've never really done hexploration. This is almost certainly because I DMed almost nothing but Planescape for over ten years, and overland travel is quite a different matter entirely in that campaign setting. But, it seems like an interesting exercise for me to add it into the next game I run, which will hopefully be Dark Sun.

What I would want to do would be to use hexploration in such a way as to introduce the Players to the world, without making them read a bunch of handouts or what have you. A "show don't tell" kind of deal. For that it seems good.

However, how do you keep it from being like a minigame? What I envision is having a map hexed out in front of everybody with a marker indicating where they are, then they say "We'll go this way" and we zoom in on the area, have an encounter or whatever, then zoom out to the map view. That sounds awkward and unsatisfying to me. What are ways for this to occur in play that make it more natural? Or am I over worrying about this?

 

[Mark CMG]

Western-US climate is not Savanna climate, though.

This might prove useful -

Seasonal Distribution of African Savanna Fires


Mod edit: Sorry to crop this, but we'd prefer you not bring that up in public threads. Thanks. ~Umbran

 

[Wik]

I love this thread. I loved it way back when, and I still love it now.

Some more thoughts, picking up from where I left off:

1) Encounter Tables are your friend. Big ones. And not just tables of things to fight - they should include weather patterns, RP encounters, and encounters that could go in a zillion different directions depending on what the PCs do. Environmental hazards. All in the tables.

2) Don't forget environmental hazards. Horses are great and all... but I can tell you that they're useless in many environments. Trying to move horses in the Pacific Northwest, for example, is silly. Hell, WALKING in some parts of this forest is hard enough. There's a reason people sail everywhere...

3) I agree that a fight a day is overkill. You'd be better off having several days go by without nothing more than light rains, weather effects, and "local colour". But when fights happen, they should be BIG. Because PCs will go into it with all of their resources, most of the time.

4) Play around with stuff like food spoilage, infections, malaria, bad water, hypothermia, and everything else.

5) Also, if your players aren't really outdoorsy people, they're never really going to get the majesty of wilderness exploration. I can tell you this for a fact: a torch in the darkness just makes everything around you seem DARKER. It is damned cold in the morning, even in the summer. Drinking water fresh from a stream is heaven. And you will be scared out of your skull when it's dark and you hear something in the brush around you.

 

[Melba Toast]

I love this thread. I loved it way back when, and I still love it now.

Aw, thanks Wik.

I appreciate all the comments so far. Very interesting responses. Lets keep the thread alive!

Those of us with experience in hexploration always draw back to the example of 'The Isle of Dread'. This is partly due to the fact that it was included with the original D&D Expert Rules box, so most of us old folk had a copy of it on our bookshelf. But, I do think that IoD was unique among hexploration modules and that it did some things that made it more compelling.

Some factors that I think helped The Isle of Dread:
1) it took place on an island, so you had natural boundaries within which to explore. This gave players a sense of scale;
2) Players had a copy of the island map with all the coastal terrain pre-determined, the PCs just had to navigate through the interior of the island
3) the game was based around a treasure hunt for the black pearl and little clues were scattered around the island.
4) the game was non-linear, you weren't driving toward a climax

Its possible the hexploration system can only work effectively (and excitingly) if the PCs are searching for something: a lost ruin, a bandit fortress, a fabled monastary, etc.

Having boundaries clearly helps. A bandit fortress might be hidden in a dense primeval forest. So let the players reach the forest's edge, and then start the hexploration. You are searching the forest. Which way do you go? The path they tread through the forest could therefore lead them straight into the fortress, or they could be running around in circles for days. That's half the fun.

Perhaps its better if the DM tracks the PCs progress on his own private hex map, and just describes things as players tell him what direction they want to head ('We head southwest', 'We head north' etc). Then, if the players aren't doing a good job of tracking their own movements, they might end up doubling back on themselves, discover their own campsite, etc.

 

[S'mon]

This might prove useful -

Seasonal Distribution of African Savanna Fires


Mod edit: Sorry to crop this, but we'd prefer you not bring that up in public threads. Thanks. ~Umbran

My mind is boggling at what the mod edit might be for.

Thanks Mark - it says "almost all resulting from human activities", so just as I thought there's not much chance of a lightning storm initiated savanna fire. OTOH it has given me the idea of the PCs running into a deliberately started fire - maybe the Altanian barbarians are using fire for some natural or mystic purpose - so that's good.