Survival and Foraging for Others

[Diarmuid]

The SRD has this to say on using Survival for foraging:



Get along in the wild. Move up to one-half your overland speed while hunting and foraging (no food or water supplies needed). You can provide food and water for one other person for every 2 points by which your check result exceeds 10.


These rules dont make any distinction on if you're foraging for small/medium/large creatures. Nor does it seemingly allow for foraging for anything that isnt a "person". This is fairly silly, but I'm trying to determine how best to rule this for my current game that has a heavy focus on exploration.

I'm thinking the normal +2/person is easily translated to +2/medium creature. Where I'm stumbling is how to account for large creatures. I've already ruled that Large creatures require 4 times a much food/water based on the rules for rations/waterskins for small creatures being 1/4 the weight of medium versions.

Using that extrapolation leads me to requiring and additional 8 points above the DC 10 to forage for another large creature, but this just seems like a little too much IMO. I'm waffling between doubling it to +4 and meeting in the middle at +6. Anyone have any thoughts or any precedents they've found in official WotC material that might help here?

[Extra Anchovies]

Well, the normal foraging under the survival skill is for omnivores with human-like diets. Horses eat, well, grass. That's pretty easy to find; if you're in a grassy area, stopping for half and hour twice per day to let the horses graze should be enough, no check needed. Herbivores, especially those with strong digestive systems such as most livestock animals, are very easy to feed, which is part of why we use them for livestock.

[Zaq]

RAW, a Large creature making their own Survival check is also going to be able to get along with a result of 10. I understand that you're kind of objecting to that as conflicting with the "Large critters need more food/water" rule, but RAW, there's nothing saying that a Large creature requires a more difficult Survival check, at least on their own.

If you feel the need to penalize them when you're making checks for multiple creatures, I'd say doubling it would be enough (so you can help an extra Medium creature with each +2, and an extra Large creature with each +4). Of course, by the same logic, you'd also have to make Small creatures only take a +1, really (even though, much as is the case for a Large thing, they also require a 10 if they're making their own check).

Ask yourself, though: what is this actually adding to the game? How will this make the game better? Are you specifically trying to penalize Largeness? Will the PCs notice the difficulty jump if it takes a +8? Will they notice it if it takes a +4? Can they succeed on either when they take 10? Do remember that anything without a WIS penalty can take 10 on Survival checks and successfully fend for themselves under normal conditions, since it's only a DC 10 to take care of yourself. That means that it doesn't have to be a single Survival check for the whole party—everyone can make their own, and they'll normally succeed if they take 10. So really, how are you looking to affect gameplay at the table? That's what this really comes down to.

[Diarmuid]

The issue is currently with horses. Yes they can graze for food, but it's more the water intake that's the issue.

[Extra Anchovies]

The issue is currently with horses. Yes they can graze for food, but it's more the water intake that's the issue.

That's true. Bringing them to water isn't all that hard. Making them drink, on the other hand... :smalltongue:

On a more serious note, stay by a stream and you're good. In fact, horses get most of their water intake from the plants they consume.

[Curbstomp]

Also there is a feedbag-type item that will feed and water a horse virtually forever for under 1k gold. Magic Item Compendium, I can't recall the name of it at the moment.

[Diarmuid]

The group has a charter to explore a large expanse of land, so staying near a stream is not an option if they actually want to fulfill their obligations. They've also just hit level 2 and cant afford one of those items, let alone one for each person's horse.

In the absence of any suggestions or references to precedence, I think I'm going to simply put foraging for large creatures at +4 rather than the normal +2.

The more I think about it, the more it doesnt necessarily make sense to me though. A large creature, like a Giant could fend for itself with a simply DC 10 Survival check. Would it also be able to fend for it's family/group with +2 per other Giant it was foraging for? Am I unnecessarily making this harder than it has to be?

[Curbstomp]

Can't the party just bring a wagon packed with water barrels? They are pretty cheap in 3.5