ZZarchov (with humble apologies for not giving you full credit), Anthony, Alexis and now Richard are all I have to thank for my enthusiasm.
Richard proposes a risk roll based on terrain, which I like but had already half prepared the below.
Well here goes - hold on blogger, there is a lot of work below.
Spawn and Carter - are your horse rules coming back soon or are they eaten by blogger for good?
The Jovial Priest's two option Overland Travel System
I want to go back to basics here.
Wilderness travel causes hit point loss?
Suggested by Zzarchov in a post by Alexis, picked up by Alexis and Anthony.
I think this is a good thing.
Hit points are abstract for stamina, fate, survivability, exhaustion and skill in combat. They are not just damage. An exhausted fighter may have suffered no damage but their ability to fight is greatly reduced, reflected by lower hit points.
If the environment leads to hit point loss than the environment has consequences apart from determining the risk and type of wandering monsters encountered as well time spent travelling.
If the environment has consequences than this encourages player choice.
What is the best granularity to allow player choice?
Ideally the knowledge of hit point loss can be predicted, even if not exactly by the player, so risk can be weighed.
The best moment for player choice occurs, when setting off for the day’s travel and deciding direction of travel.
A one hex granularity is probably acceptable, assuming the Expert rules that suggest standard walking movement is 24 miles/day or one hex. As in, do we want players discovering that the left upper area of the hex is easier travel than the middle section and thence keeping to the upper left? Or is it enough the player climbs a tree, the hex north looks bad, the hex west looks better, they head west. I think I can settle on the latter, even if that means two days of travel in the same hex. The decision had to be committed to two days ago.
How do we best stop normal men dying on simple journeys?
One option is the Alexis and new Anthony model, of time based accumulated loss, base 0.1 hit points per day + modifier. Such that it is very unlikely a normal man will die on a 3 day journey.
Makes sense but leads to a complex system requiring a calculator.
Alternatively we could have modifiers that reduce hit point loss to something, which allows the normal man to survive familiar journeys. Such a system might result in characters seldom losing hit points, making the whole system defunct. One could add saving throws into the system to prevent damage as I first proposed.
The problem with either system I am discovering is I am deprotagonising my players.
DM: “You lost two hit points today travelling through the forest.”
Player: “But I was down to two hit points since I fought that Ogre and since I’ve been travelling, and our cleric died, I haven’t regained any.”
DM: “Ah, sorry. He died.”
Player: “What, how?”
DM: “Well you know, he fell over and then got bitten by a snake…”
Player: “I want a saving throw”
DM: “.. and fell down a cliff into rapids and drowned.”
Player: “You suck.”
I don’t think players can die without an event, that they can interact in and hopefully change the outcome. Dying off screen or without adequate reason…sucks.
One option would be to say that wilderness travel hit point attrition can not reduce a character below 1 hit point.
(I would probably relax this if I was modeling an army, every hit point less than zero on an army scale = 1 HD loss from the army.)
But what stops the 1 HP character dancing butt naked in a blizzard and laughing at the DM. “Ha ha, you can’t hurt me.”
Yes I can, it’s called wandering monsters, or Zeus’s lightning bolt, and here was my potential eureka moment, what if I didn’t just roll for wandering monsters every day of travel (and every night), what if I rolled for random events as well eg horse slips, quicksand, blizzard etc.
Two game design options came to mind:
1. Hit point loss, but when the character would have been reduced below one hit point, increase the chances of random events (that might still yet kill the character but this time they would die on screen). It’s what happens in real life, Farmer Giles encounters a wandering monster, gets caught in a blizzard, slips and falls… and all the more likely if he is exhauster after many days of travel (1HP)
2. Drop the hit point attrition loss and work on random events tables to complement wandering monster tables.
So here goes:
Okay I want a simple solution that encourages real player choice in keeping with heroic fantasy.
Option 1: Travel leads to hit point loss
What factors might lead to hit point loss?
1. Topography – but it already has travel distance effects shouldn’t that be the difference, and no two forests are the same, should there be a way of accounting for this? Not necessarily, it has risks as well as simple slowing capacity.
2. Climate and season = weather.
I imagine a world where summers are pleasant and winters are snowy and cold.
How often do you want blizzards = simulation (seldom) or heroic fantasy (frequently).
3. Other (see below)
Topography effects both time to traverse and damage (simple predictable). I will be inspired by Cook Expert set for types of topography.
Weather has a random element and is in keeping with heroic fantasy rather than simulation. Weather can make topography more challenging both in time to traverse and damage.
Normal men survive because they understand their local surroundings and know how to avoid damage.
Terrain | Movement | HP Loss / day | Weather Roll Modifier | Wilderness Encounter Roll 1d6 |
Clear | Normal | 0 | 0 | 6 |
Trail | Normal | 0 | 0 | as surrounding |
Grasslands | Normal | 0 | 0 | 6 |
Forest | 2/3 | 2 | 0 | 5-6 |
Hills | 2/3 | 2 | 0 | 5-6 |
Arctic | 2/3 | 2 | -1 (-2 if winter) | 5-6 |
Desert | 2/3 | 2 | -1 (-2 if summer) | 5-6 |
Broken | 2/3 | 2 | -1 | 5-6 |
Mountains | 1/2 | 4 | -1 (-3 if winter) | 4-6 |
Jungle | 1/2 | 4 | -1 (-2 if wet season) | 4-6 |
Swamp | 1/2 | 4 | -1 (-2 if winter) | 4-6 |
Road | 3/2 | -1 | 0 | as surrounding |
Could allow for option of light and dark forest (one step better and worse than forest, respectively)
Weather roll 2d6 | Extra Travel Risk | Effect | Example Descriptors |
2 | Lethal | Additional 1/2 normal movement, extra 3 hit point loss | Blizzard, sand storm, treacherous and wet footing |
3-4 | Dangerous | Additional 2/3 normal movement, extra 1 hit point loss | Freezing winds, scorching sun, slippery footing |
5-6 | Not a good day to travel | Additional 2/3 normal movement, no extra hit point loss | Heavy snow, thunderstorm, heavy rain |
7+ | None | None |
Daily Modifiers of Hit Point Loss (use all that apply) | ||||||||||
Knowledge | Sustenance | Clothing and Equipment | Effort | Night time shelter (apply the next morning) | ||||||
Familiar Route | -2 | No water (apply every day after 1st) | +3 | Excellent gear | -1 | Half Speed | -1 | Full exposure to the elements | Lethal Weather 3HP Dangerous 2HP Not good 1HP | |
Guide | -2 | No food (apply every day after 2nd) | +2 | Adequate gear | 0 | Forced March (3/2 movement must rest full day following) | +1 | Partial shelter | Lethal Weather 2HP Dangerous 1HP | |
Ranger/ Druid or a Barbarian in their own terrain, in the party | -1 | Half Rations (apply every day after 3rd) | +1 | Poor gear | +1 | Mounted | -1 | |||
The hit point loss is applied at the end of the day’s travelling with the exception that the Night Time Shelter potential hit point loss, which is applied at dawn.
It is possible to gain hit points while travelling, reflecting the potential uplifting and joyful freedom, the heightened survival instinct and the increased fitness, that can come with overland travel.
Hit points can not be reduced below one from attrition due to travel but if hit point would be reduced below zero for that day for any member of the party, roll a second wilderness encounter roll , for every member of the party who might have had their hitpoints reduced below zero.
Wilderness Encounter Table
I’ll just give one example table using Cook Expert (1-8) and modifying with my new non-creature encounters.
Mountains
Standard Daily Encounter Chance 4-6
1 Men
2 Flyer
3 Humanoid
4 Unusual
5 Animal
6 Humanoid
7 Dragon
8 Dragon
9 Non-creature
10 Non-creature
(As an aside Cook had the characters having in the mountains a whopping 1 in 8 chance (1/2*2/8) of encountering a dragon or their kin every day!)
Non-creature encounter table Mountains
(hit point losses on this table kill just like a wandering monster sword or claw would)
1 Rock slide (on a 1-2 for every character or mount: save vs paralysis or take 1d6 damage)
2 Major rock slide (on a 1-4 every character or mount: save vs paralysis or take 1d6 damage)
3. Weather deteriorates one step worse overnight and lasts all of the next day
4. Noisy and obvious progress, any wandering monster today will not be surprised and may have set up an ambush
5. Driving winds (or snow or sand) progress is slowed by a 1/3 and everyone must save vs death ray or suffer 1 hit point loss.
6. A pocket of bad air, save vs poison or lose 2 hit points
7. Haunted rocks: without a clerics blessing or exorcism the party is cursed (like the spell) for one whole day
8. Hidden runes in the rock: what do they say?
So that’s a taster of what could be created.
Option 2
Scrap the attrition element of travel and focus on the Wilderness Encounter Table element.
Terrain | Movement | Wilderness Encounter Roll 1d6 |
Clear | Normal | 6 |
Trail | Normal | as surrounding |
Grasslands | Normal | 6 |
Forest | 2/3 | 5-6 |
Hills | 2/3 | 5-6 |
Arctic | 2/3 | 5-6 |
Desert | 2/3 | 5-6 |
Broken | 2/3 | 5-6 |
Mountains | 1/2 | 4-6 |
Jungle | 1/2 | 4-6 |
Swamp | 1/2 | 4-6 |
Road | 3/2 | as surrounding |
Wilderness Encounter Table
eg Mountains
Standard Daily Encounter Chance 4-6
1 Men
2 Flyer
3 Humanoid
4 Unusual
5 Animal
6 Humanoid
7 Dragon
8 Dragon
9 Non-creature
10 Non-creature
Expanded Non-creature encounter table Mountains
(hit point losses on this table kill just like a wandering monster sword or claw would)
1 Rock slide (on a 1-2 for every character or mount: save vs paralysis or take 1d6 damage)
2 Major rock slide (on a 1-4 every character or mount: save vs paralysis or take 1d6 damage)
3. Weather deteriorates overnight and lasts all of the next day, progress slowed by 1/3 (roll again for a wilderness encounter 4-6)
4. Noisy and obvious progress, any wandering monster today will not be surprised and may have set up an ambush
5. Driving winds (or snow or sand) progress is slowed by a 1/3 and everyone must save vs death ray or suffer 1 hit point loss.
6. A pocket of bad air, save vs poison or lose 2 hit points
7. Haunted rocks: without a clerics blessing or exorcism the party is cursed (like the spell) for one whole day
8. Hidden runes in the rock: what do they say?
9 Weather lethal, shelter or suffer 1d6 exposure damage, no progress
10 Dark and foreboding area roll twice today for a wilderness encounter.
11 Easy days travel, path more open and weather calm, extra 1/3 distance covered
12 Glorious weather and vistas, all party members gain 1 hit point but can not exceed their maximum.
So that’s another taster (longer table) of what could be created.
Thoughts anyone….
the deprotagonizing issue strikes me as a simple matter of judging when to abstract the action and when to disengage autopilot and drop back into play: encounters do this, I'd say taking damage should too, except by mutual agreement around the table.
ReplyDeleteI like what you're doing with the encounters, but I think I'd reverse the probability of creature vs non-creature and/or add a whole category of minor, mundane mishaps. Down to 1 HP? The next thing will be a sprain/break/whatever, so now you're trying to make camp while injured and any ensuing encounter will have a nice load of added tension (yeah, I know you can't be incapacitated except by unconsciousness at other times, that's another problem for another post). I'd also involve the players before 1HP is reached, so it's their own conscious decision to press on foolishly. Individuals might inadvertently collapse from heatstroke in the desert but groups should notice it happening, at least when their weaker members drop. I'd tell them how much water is left, get them to estimate how far they'll get on that, encourage them to plan and only bite them if they refuse. Horses/animals might be a big exception to this rule: unless you have someone trained to deal with them, their sudden laming/death really might come as a surprise.
The tables themselves have really interesting options. How about tainted well (save v poison or variety of effects); native warnings/wards (like haunted rocks or some other active push-back); treacherous footing, man traps, caltrops, wire, whatever; clinging crud (pollen that makes you sneeze, smelly swamp mold, biting bugs - anything that makes you easier to detect on a lasting basis); distracting vistas/trail detail (easier to surprise); squeezes (remove armor/packs/animals to continue; need new gear (stuff breaks, or minor sprain means you need 2 alpenstocks to continue, or bridge out/make raft - means delays, find materials to make repairs, test wilderness skills, encumbered when action happens); slides and falls (this hex is blocked, go around. Or for full chutes and ladders action, you're precipitated unwillingly into an adjacent hex).
Your pockets of bad air intrigue me. Is this a feature of your campaign world? Are you working with 16th century theories about contagion spreading through "foul airs"?
BTW, I think it was Zzarchov who started the whole travel damage thing, not Zak (for a change).
ReplyDeleteInteresting. Blogger seems to have eaten my previous comment. Sorry if this comes through twice. And in case of total meltdown I'll repeat here that I think it was Zzarchov who started the whole travel damage thing, not Zak (for a change).
ReplyDeletethe deprotagonizing issue strikes me as a simple matter of judging when to abstract the action and when to disengage autopilot and drop back into play: encounters do this, I'd say taking damage should too, except by mutual agreement around the table.
I like what you're doing with the encounters, but I think I'd reverse the probability of creature vs non-creature and/or add a whole category of minor, mundane mishaps. Down to 1 HP? The next thing will be a sprain/break/whatever, so now you're trying to make camp while injured and any ensuing encounter will have a nice load of added tension (yeah, I know you can't be incapacitated except by unconsciousness at other times, that's another problem for another post). I'd also involve the players before 1HP is reached, so it's their own conscious decision to press on foolishly. Individuals might inadvertently collapse from heatstroke in the desert but groups should notice it happening, at least when their weaker members drop. I'd tell them how much water is left, get them to estimate how far they'll get on that, encourage them to plan and only bite them if they refuse. Horses/animals might be a big exception to this rule: unless you have someone trained to deal with them, their sudden laming/death really might come as a surprise.
The tables themselves have really interesting options. How about tainted well (save v poison or variety of effects); native warnings/wards (like haunted rocks or some other active push-back); treacherous footing, man traps, caltrops, wire, whatever; clinging crud (pollen that makes you sneeze, smelly swamp mold, biting bugs - anything that makes you easier to detect on a lasting basis); distracting vistas/trail detail (easier to surprise); squeezes (remove armor/packs/animals to continue; need new gear (stuff breaks, or minor sprain means you need 2 alpenstocks to continue, or bridge out/make raft - means delays, find materials to make repairs, test wilderness skills, encumbered when action happens); slides and falls (this hex is blocked, go around. Or for full chutes and ladders action, you're precipitated unwillingly into an adjacent hex).
Your pockets of bad air intrigue me. Is this a feature of your campaign world? Are you working with 16th century theories about contagion spreading through "foul airs"?
Yes, I would like to emphasize that it was Zzarchov. Let's have respect due to its source. Please, Jovial, if you would, edit the post to give Zzarchov his credit.
ReplyDeleteNot disrespect, just stupidity. Disrespect would be claiming the idea as my own, stupidity is thinking Zak is short for Zzarchov.
ReplyDeleteRectified above, with pleasure.
Alexis, if you are subscribing to this post, which system as outlined above would you choose if you had to choose one?
Some good stuff here
ReplyDeletehttp://aeonsnaugauries.blogspot.com/2011/05/race-version-1.html
They're both crap. If the players aren't comfortable dying in the wilderness without DM creations for wandering monsters that are more 'tangible,' boo hoo. As a DM, you might point out that disease, starvation and clumsiness are causes of death too, and if they can't cope with a little bloody nose, they ought to stay at home in bed.
ReplyDeleteI've been trying to figure out how to say this politely, Jovial. Your tables for both options smack of the problems I pointed out with my As Usual post last month. It's a lot of pretty repetitive random results that don't contribute to the adventure.
What you don't understand is that the actual damage caused by travelling through the wilderness IS NOT THE POINT. The point is the manner in which it drives players OUT of the wilderness, thus playing on their fear and causing them to be legitimately terrified of having to go off road. i.e,, so they get that feeling that exists in every story known to man of staring into the trees and thinking, "I don't want to go there, it will KILL me."
If you soften that feeling up, you might as well just build carnival lights over the forest, hire a barker and sell freaking popcorn. Your result is no emotional impact, and therefore, no drama.
You're trying to create a funhouse, and I'm trying to create a horror tale. Do you understand the difference?
@ Alexis - they may well both be crap, that's why I'm glad you have given feedback.
ReplyDeleteI want three things: 1) what I want is the players to feel they are masters of their own destiny, in the sense they can make legitimate choices after weighing risks; 2) I don't want them dying off screen, though it would be reasonable to tell them if you push on today you are very likely to die; and I want the system to not require a calculator.
Happy to take on board any system that can do this, and very happy to see you take yours and Anthony's system a step further into something ready for play testing.
Wanting the players to feel like masters of their own destiny is so American. Canadians, who must deal with a much harsher climate every day, know much better. This is wisdom from great Northrop Frye ... but I digress.
ReplyDeleteYour players, in my opinion, should get over themselves. Your world will be much more impressive when they stop feeling they are in control of their destiny, and start feeling that the world is a big dangerous place out of their control.
I don't mean to imply that YOU are in control either, Jovial. The whole point to a table like this is to remove your responsibility. "Sorry fellas, you got the short end of the stick. It's a tough world all over."
I don't know what this "dying off screen" thing means.
And this anti-calculator, anti 70's technology stance ... baffling.