Playing "Adventurers" As Actual Adventurers

[Micah Sweet]

"Oregon Trail" definitely needs to be only part of the gameplay loop. Oregon trail makes things interesting by having river crossings, resupply opportunities, and other fixed events along the way. When doing long overland travel I like to break it up with fixed encounters ("lairs") as well as random encounters, weather, and mishaps. It's also important to give changing color to give a sense of space and motion and two or three sentences to give the players a sense of where they are. Terrain can be at least as fantastic as any real-world terrain. I try to imagine the players crossing the scenic equivalent multiple national parks, splitting up descriptions across multiple events - establishing shots, random encounters, lairs, etc. Each with two or three sentences and most with some encounter opportunity or signpost.

I still don't have exposure damage rules I'm fully satisfied with. Long term exposure to cold and heat should be draining or debilitating, but you both want to minimize rolls and also be able to deal with things like the difference between 4 hours of exposure and 12 hours of exposure and 24 hours of exposure (in arctic or volcanic caves, for example). Tables in my experience work best but its really hard to come up with something that scales damage to the level of the character without being unrealistically lethal to low level characters or a trivial time waster to high level characters. Realistically damage ought to scale per HD but then this gets to be extremely complex in a hurry. I used rules of a mid to high level party traversing a steaming jungle where PCs typically lost 10-20 hit points from heat exhaustion over the course of the day (but could recover them by taking a short rest out of the heat), but it always bothered me that the rules weren't truly applicable to 1st level characters or say a rodent.

The rules for journeys in several games (mentioned by me above) do a great job of handling stuff like that as exploration challenges.

 

[pemerton]

Sure, and planing is 90% of job. But it's rather boring as game play loop. Once you start your journey, you might as well play Oregon Trail. You make skill roll, dm makes roll on weather/mishap table. Time passes, you check supplies, rinse, repeat.

This is the whole point. Stories of survival against insurmountable odds are inherently dramatic. Except in TTRPGs, it seems.

It depends how the RPG structures play.

Rolling dice against a "random attrition table" is apt to be relatively uninteresting. But there are other ways to frame the declaration and resolution of actions in an exploration-oriented RPG.

 

[Reynard]

Rolling dice against a "random attrition table" is apt to be relatively uninteresting. But there are other ways to frame the declaration and resolution of actions in an exploration-oriented RPG.

Which is what I am hoping to hear about.

 

[GrimCo]

I'm thinking more what would play loop look like for long campaign (say 15-20 sessions, 3-4 hours each). Sure, planing is fun, preparations, info gathering, supplies, getting funding, whole shebang. But once expedition starts and you boldly go where no man has gone before. Most expeditions were uneventful, tedious and boring. Long stretches of walking or sailing, with nothing interesting or noteworthy happening, mixed with discomfort, occasional injury or disease that put you out of comission from few days to well, forever ( and playing out dysentery or scurvy isn't really fun), ocassional bad weather that forces you to stay put and just wait, while supplies you brought shrink. Long stretches of boredom, occasional bursts of crisis, and the constant fear that you’ll die from something stupid in horrible way like eating something spoiled or drinking contaminated water and shitting yourself to death (cholera, dysentery).

Now, if someone likes that, cool. But most people i know, want games to be fun, they want player agency, they want ability to influence outcomes, to be active participants, not just reactive to what world throws at them. It can work, when it's focused on the interpersonal drama, tension and conflicts.

 

[The Firebird]

Which is what I am hoping to hear about.

For a traditional dungeon crawling system, I feel like the format is basically 'solved' in that there are a set of rules that the majority of systems use with minor adaptation. I mean concepts like:

-Characters have classes and levels
-Characters have hit points and HD determined by their class.
-Random encounters are generated as a way to impose time pressure
-Attacks are made by rolling a d20 vs a target number.

I do not mean to say this is the only way to do these tasks. But the majority of systems that want to accomplish these tasks use a relatively similar variant and that works well for many players. (I hope that is enough caveats).

I think that for expedition play we've never arrived on a similar set of rules. For example, for tracking food and water:

-Do we track them explicitly by weight?
-Do we abstract somewhat to gear slots?
-Do we use a fully abstracted supply system, like supply as hp? (I haven't played Level Up. Does it land here?)

It feels to me that if I want to design a d&d variant, the dungeon crawling rules are really easy to make my own twist on. The expedition rules are much harder because I'm not sure where to begin.

Please object if you think this is wrong. I am just thinking out loud. There are probably errors.

Is there anything like a taxonomy of expedition rules?