PDA

View Full Version : DM Help Using rations and water in an actual game



Yora
2016-05-03, 03:55 PM
I really like the idea of players having to plan ahead for how much food and water they bring along and having to decide how much they can afford to be slowed down and how much they are willing to risk running out.

The problem with this is that most RPGs are very unclear on what would happen if they do run out. Coming up with some penalties for not having something to eat and drink isn't that hard, and even getting something that roughly resembles the actual effects on the human body can also be done with some research.

But even then you're still left with the question how it's going to be actually coming up in the game and how it will be making the game more fun.
Assuming everything goes allright and the players manage to always keep adequate supplies with them, you are doing a nontrivial amount of bookkeeping for the whole campaign without anything actually happening. That's probably the main reason why this is something that is usually ignored.

In a desert setting I can see some potential things that could be done if the party runs out of water. If they run into someone who has water, there are many different ways in which they could attempt to get the water, potentially while being in a very bad shape due to dehydration. Barter for it, try to steal it, letting themselves taken prisoner by enemies rather than dying, going into very dangerous looking caves that might have water. Lots of options.
But outside of deserts I don't really see how professional cross-country wanderers would be unable to find any water for three days.

Food is even more of a problem. While hunger will get really terrible after a week, dying from starvation can take months. I don't think there will be many situations where players in a game will think that they absolutely have to get food right now instead of keeping looking for a few more days.
One situation where I could see food becoming a problem is when the players want to travel light and fast and might get into the situation that they will have to decide between continuing their pursuit or taking a break to get new food supplies for the rest of the trip. But since the time to starve is so long, I don't really see that becoming an actual factor. If your chase goes on for two or three weeks, it's not going to be so urgent that you absolutely can't afford a stop to resupply.

So, while I really like the idea of characters having to plan ahead with their supplies, is there really any point to it outside from games set in environments where people can go for days without finding a source of water or for weeks without finding any food?

Honest Tiefling
2016-05-03, 04:05 PM
Yes! Contaminated water or food. In settings with magical taint, snacking on any old beastie or drinking any bit of water you come across can have hilarious effects. I guess if one is doing a more pulpy sci-fi setting, that can also apply to radiation. Our good pals, plague and disease come back and will probably impose enough of a problem that the characters will want to get rid of them pronto, but can be made minor enough that the character can still function.

Slipperychicken
2016-05-03, 04:34 PM
That's probably the main reason why this is something that is usually ignored.

I think it's also because it's an enormous downer when it actually comes up. If you're playing a game about fantasy violence, you usually aren't in it to roleplay your character dehydrating to death over the course of a week. Drowning or exposure at least are relatively common and over with quickly, but starvation is just depressing because it's such a drawn-out and unfitting end to a hero. I cannot even imagine my DM allowing the players to die of starvation, because of how unexciting that would be.

Nutriment supplies do become relevant when one is managing encumbrance. If you need two pounds of food a day plus water, that competes for space in your wagon or backpack, and the amount of food one has available can impact the urgency of an adventure. You might not want to spend extra days in a dungeon when you barely have enough food to make it back to town.



The problem with this is that most RPGs are very unclear on what would happen if they do run out. Coming up with some penalties for not having something to eat and drink isn't that hard, and even getting something that roughly resembles the actual effects on the human body can also be done with some research.

For what it's worth, 5th edition D&D is pretty clear on what happens when the PCs run out of food.

Necroticplague
2016-05-03, 04:54 PM
Not really. You've pretty much hit the reasons spot-on. If you want to have plans about nutrition being relevant, typical tabletop RPGs, which are usually based around more 'heroic' genres than the kind where such is relevant, aren't the space for them. Maybe in systems that are closer to simulation-types (i.e, 'you're the leaders of some kind of tribe trying to acheive some goal. You need to balance making sure everyone doesn't starve with progressing your goals') it can work.

To elaborate on one of my above points: in most comic books, you don't see a whole lot about logistics going on. And outside of a couple one, most manga don't either (and for the 3 exceptions I know, the focus on the logistics is the entire point). Because such stuff is ultimately besides the point. They're plot-irrelevant roadblocks that just kill pacing. So for TTRPGs, like any other media, I recommend either ignoring logistics entirely or making them the central focus of the campaign. What works for other media works (to a degree) in tabletop, because it's ultimately all just different ways to tell a story.

Lycanthrope13
2016-05-03, 06:47 PM
Remember the Rule of 3s for survival.
In extreme conditions, you can die of exposure in 3 hours, of dehydration in 3 days, and of starvation in 3 weeks.

Not sure how to implement that mechanically, but as someone who has experienced real dehydration firsthand, I would say that first would come a penalty to wisdom, as you have trouble concentrating. Next would be a dexterity penalty as you lose coordination. Then a strength penalty, and finally death. And the onset of symptoms comes much sooner than most people would imagine. If you're exerting yourself heavily, you can start spacing out and losing focus in under 12 hours.

Rysto
2016-05-03, 07:14 PM
I'm all for marathon gaming sessions, but a session so long that your players need to work out how much rations to bring strikes me as a bit extreme.


What?

Thrudd
2016-05-03, 07:56 PM
Not really. You've pretty much hit the reasons spot-on. If you want to have plans about nutrition being relevant, typical tabletop RPGs, which are usually based around more 'heroic' genres than the kind where such is relevant, aren't the space for them. Maybe in systems that are closer to simulation-types (i.e, 'you're the leaders of some kind of tribe trying to acheive some goal. You need to balance making sure everyone doesn't starve with progressing your goals') it can work.

To elaborate on one of my above points: in most comic books, you don't see a whole lot about logistics going on. And outside of a couple one, most manga don't either (and for the 3 exceptions I know, the focus on the logistics is the entire point). Because such stuff is ultimately besides the point. They're plot-irrelevant roadblocks that just kill pacing. So for TTRPGs, like any other media, I recommend either ignoring logistics entirely or making them the central focus of the campaign. What works for other media works (to a degree) in tabletop, because it's ultimately all just different ways to tell a story.

Not that I disagree with the problems that arise from trying to be too realistic in starvation rules, but what is in comic books is irrelevant to TTRPGs in general. The pacing of comics, movies, novels, or TV shows are irrelevant to an RPG, unless the game is specifically designed to simulate one of those things (like Feng Shui does with action movies, or a super hero game that is meant to be simulating comic stories).

RPG's are games, first and foremost. They vary widely in their objectives and methods, they aren't just about story-telling. You speak of simulation as though it is a fringe case, but it is a component of the earliest games. In a game that has exploring the wilderness as a major component, simulating the activity of a group of adventurers that must plan and execute expeditions, logistics are something that should be considered. The fun comes from having to weigh risk vs reward, making strategic decisions regarding the composition of the party and how many hirelings can be managed, deciding if a fight is worth the risk in expended resources, and deciding how much treasure you can carry.

I would definitely say you need rules for running out of food and water, because carrying capacity is one of the important considerations when making a journey. It may not come up often if the players plan appropriately, but that doesn't mean there should be no way to represent it. 5e actually doesn't do a bad job of this. It specifies an amount of food and water a person needs each day to stay healthy, as well as rules for players finding food and water in the wild.
I say keep it abstract. You want rules for finding food and water with different probabilities based on terrain and climate. There is room for an outdoorsman/hunter/ranger class to be a useful member of the party with skills that make getting lost less likely and finding resources easier.
The main question, to me, is whether 5e's separate exhaustion track is the best solution, or if a unified abstract health points could be used, basically HP is everything - hunger, thirst, exhaustion from going without sleep, battle fatigue, suffering non-lethal wounds. I'm up in the air. Doing that may actually work better with a mechanic that lets HP be recovered a little faster, like 5e's spending hit dice during a rest. It needs to be limited and controlled better than 5e does, but it does make sense with HP being an abstract measure of fatigue and combat-readiness in general.

Âmesang
2016-05-03, 09:04 PM
…so I just noticed that my Pathfinder ranger has no rations, just a waterskin and a bottle of wine. :smalltongue: I think I justified it because her Survival skill is high enough that, given a reasonable environment and even a low roll, she's able to sustain herself off of nature's bounty.

Of course that just made me remember Beavis and Butt-head's trek through the desert in their movie. Still, the thought of such beforehand preparation is why the character also carries a whetsone, flint-and-steel, winter blanket, cold weather outfit, felling axe, etc., etc.

lacco36
2016-05-04, 02:39 AM
I'll offer my few cents:

I won't discuss whether it's appropriate for any genre. I think it's up to each group of players to select their fun. And also - it doesn't really work for the power-fantasy type of games. But if you are playing a bunch of normal people who just happen to be cream-of-the-adventuring-crop, it's very interesting to see how the dungeon delving looks like :smallbiggrin:

While time to starve is quite long, the fatigue and discomfort from not having enough food sets up quite fast. Your stomach will growl, and while it's completely possible to march while hungry, it's not a pleasant or easy thing to do.

So if your system models well fatigue rules, the hunger/thirst ones should speed it up.

I usually don't care about water if they are in standard temperate climate & terrain - I assume that if they have a ranger, he's able to find some water sources, and if they cross a river/stream, they fill up on water. On the other hand, if they enter wastelands...

I prefer tracking via "smarties". A portion of food is represented by a piece of candy - whenever the party stops to eat, you also take one (it can be replaced by other stuff, but candy works well). I tried the same with water, but it wasn't so successful. However, it tracks food quite well - and one candy represents only "basic" portion, which means that they can eat two or three to before their characters get completely full... You would be surprised how soon the players run out of rations then (even if there is a bowl of candy in the middle of the table).

Yora
2016-05-04, 04:05 AM
One way to simplify the bookkeeping that just came to my mind is to have each character have food and water for 3 days when traveling, but not actually do any substracting each day and resupplying until the party reaches a situation where it might become important.
If something unexpected happens that has the party straded in a desolate area, the stuff in their packs will last for three days. If their packs are lost, they have to deal with the consequences immediately. If the players go on a journey where they expect supplies to be important, they can pack more. In that case, supplies are tracked every day until they are back down to supplies for 3 days, after which tracking stops (again assuming that they collect new stuff regularly). Unless by that point they actually are in a situation where they can't resupply and continue to track until they run out.

Maybe make the standard travel distance per day based on assuming they are doing some foraging. If they have packed additional supplies they get a speed bonus until the supplies run down to 3 days. If the players want to, they can also burn through their last 3 days of supplies to keep the speed bonus, but then they might run out unless they find a settlement soon.

I actually really like that. Rations as an emergeny survival kit or a speed bonus fuel seems very unintuitive at first, but I think in practice it might be very... ...practical.

Storm_Of_Snow
2016-05-04, 05:04 AM
Last game I ran I kind of used supplies to set a time limit - the players were given about 4 weeks of rations, plus whatever they'd already bought, it took a week to get to and from the area, and there was enough food they could scavenge during the adventure to add a week or so.

I guess another way to use them would be the players getting paid to set up supply camp sites in an inhospitable region, such as a desert, so that, for instance, trade caravans can cross it and cut time on the trading route, evade a trade blockade from another country or whatever other reason. Then their supplies limit how far they can roam from each camp to find the next site (especially if they're on foot and don't have pack animals or bulk transport options available), and how long each camp can survive until the next set of supplies arrive, and if they wind up getting delayed or lost (maybe their navigation equipment is damaged, or they bought cheap stuff and the margin of error means their destination was over the horizon when they went past it), their supplies suddenly become a massive issue.

Zombimode
2016-05-04, 06:09 AM
My usual way approaching this is a bit "game-y".
Instead of modeling starvation, I focus on the immediate downsides of missing meals.
Having nothing to eat will not kill you right away, but it will leave you in a somewhat weakened state.

Depending in the system and setting I have tried out the following:
- Limiting the benefits of a rest
- missing a meals will get you fatigue (system dependent)

Ie. in GURPS you could say: miss a meal will lower your FP score by one (in essence you lose 1 FP that can't be regenerated until you get something to eat)

Kami2awa
2016-05-04, 03:42 PM
Thinking about this, food in-game (where it comes up at all) is often glossed over as "rations" of indeterminate nature, which feed a character (regardless of age, species, build, or level of activity) for a fixed period of time.

I'd find it more interesting from a role-playing point of view to know *what* the character is eating. A barbarian might (barely) cook meat and rip it straight from the bone. A character accustomed travel might be happy with hastily-eaten dried foods and hard tack. Other characters might spend a lot of effort on cooking whatever is available, and carry herbs and spices from home to improve it, or go gathering things like wild garlic when available. A wizard might insist on altering food with Prestidigitation - another character might balk at such "unnatural" food. Characters might have dietary rules like vegetarianism - clerics and other devout worshipers of the gods might have particular dietary rules built into their faith.

Tiktakkat
2016-05-04, 04:38 PM
*player rolls a Natural 1*

DM: You swing wildly and miss. The dragon goes. Striking faster than a viper, its head darts down and you are impaled on its fangs. Despite your heroic struggle, you have been defeated.

versus

*player rolls a Natural 1*

DM: You stagger over one last dune, but it must have been a mirage, and there is no water here. A few minutes later your desiccated corpse is baking in the sun.


What story would your players rather tell?


*player rolls a Natural 20*

DM: With a might swing, your blade cuts deep into the dragon's neck. It bellows in rage and agony for a moment before slowly toppling to the ground. You are victorious!

versus

*player rolls a Natural 20*

DM: After waiting patiently for hours, controlling the agonized pangs in your stomach, you finally see a squirrel approach your lure. Seconds tick by as it shyly moves into the snare. Suddenly it is snatched up! The dragon may slay you tomorrow, but you will not starve tonight!


What story would you rather tell?


That's why the rules for food in-game are often glossed over as "rations" of indeterminate nature, which feed a character for a fixed period of time.
And why there is another cheap magic to bypass them entirely provided a player decides not to be a cheapskate and risk dying of exposure in whatever extreme environment the adventure is set in.
A bit of flavor text here and there is all well and good, but as a critical campaign element it is almost always going to fall flat.

MintyNinja
2016-05-04, 04:52 PM
It also depends on the style of game you're running. A city based Adventure? Make sure your characters stop to eat once in a while and they're fine. A cross country epic adventure? Sure you can forage here and there but most of the gear you carry should be food. A harrowing tale of bare supplies and fleeing pursuers? Mark out what they have and how heavy it is because resource management can add another layer of desperation to this.

Taking two D&D 5e modules:
Princes of Apocalypse - You basically have what you need readily available. Go stop those cults.
Out of the Abyss - You hear the chittering of a giant spider approach and you smile as you know one way or another, you're not going to sleep hungry tonight.

Kami2awa
2016-05-05, 01:36 AM
I've found that tracking rations or similar turns the game into Oregon Trail, or an exercise in accountancy. Neither is particularly enjoyable for a lot of players. Many RPGs have enough resource management elements anyway - unless basic survival is the central focus of the adventure, I'd gloss over it entirely.

My point about food is that its a good route to characterisation, and also world-building. A world where you eat red meat off the bone and quaff mead is going to have a different atmosphere to one where you take government-issued protein pills. What people eat is a big part of their lives and cultural identities, so a bit of detail there fleshes out your character significantly. Tolkien's characters are rather obsessed with food (it's part of the character of the Hobbits) and so he describes it often and in detail.

Mutazoia
2016-05-05, 01:59 AM
Well....depending on the system....when the part cleric can cast "create food and water", the whole problem becomes moot.

Some systems, like Twilight 2000 have factored starvation and dehydration into account and have rules for it (along with a skill for foraging for food).

Comet
2016-05-05, 03:30 AM
*player rolls a Natural 1*

DM: You swing wildly and miss. The dragon goes. Striking faster than a viper, its head darts down and you are impaled on its fangs. Despite your heroic struggle, you have been defeated.

versus

*player rolls a Natural 1*

DM: You stagger over one last dune, but it must have been a mirage, and there is no water here. A few minutes later your desiccated corpse is baking in the sun.


What story would your players rather tell?


*player rolls a Natural 20*

DM: With a might swing, your blade cuts deep into the dragon's neck. It bellows in rage and agony for a moment before slowly toppling to the ground. You are victorious!

versus

*player rolls a Natural 20*

DM: After waiting patiently for hours, controlling the agonized pangs in your stomach, you finally see a squirrel approach your lure. Seconds tick by as it shyly moves into the snare. Suddenly it is snatched up! The dragon may slay you tomorrow, but you will not starve tonight!


What story would you rather tell?


Despite your infatuation with dragons, you still wrote those second instances in a relly exciting manner. I would totally want to survive out under the merciless sun of a scorching desert or stalk for small game at the limits of my endurance before going into battle!

Hunger and thirst have produced some of the best moments of our recent games. Encounters become opportunities, dungeons become potential storages and the adventuring party balloons out into a caravan of men and beasts hauling around weeks' worth of foodstuffs and waterskins. Not for everyone, I bet, but great fun for us!

Yora
2016-05-05, 03:34 AM
This is kind of the point of this threat. In most regular RPG rules food and water is pointless because there's nothing interesting to do with it. The topic here is how to make rules that do something interesting.

goto124
2016-05-05, 03:47 AM
This is kind of the point of this threat.

*cowers in fear*

Comet
2016-05-05, 03:49 AM
This is kind of the point of this threat. In most regular RPG rules food and water is pointless because there's nothing interesting to do with it. The topic here is how to make rules that do something interesting.

We had one campaign where entire sessions were spent out in the woods hunting. We first had to travel to a location where large game was known to be found, which usually took about two days of hiking and eating. Then we had to set up camp and build a fireplace and tanning station, because we would have to quickly and efficiently convert whatever we found into preservables to bring back to our villages. Then it was just a matter of venturing out into the dark woods, each day would reduce our existing supplies so we would have to bring in considerably more. A single wasted day was potentially catastrophic for us and folks back home.

This was done through simple navigation, crafting, sneaking and attack rolls. Some emergent properties became apparent as we played:

Finding some other village's hunting camp was a blessing. This meant no time had to be wasted setting up these relatively complicated operations. On the same note, protecting our own camps became a priority.

The best hunting was routinely located on some other village's borders. This makes the above that much more tense, as well as introducing a risk/reward for venturing deeper and deeper in search of game.

Big game became very tempting. A deer was a pretty big haul, a bear was like running into a dragon's hoard of gold. The bear was also about as dangerous as a dragon for us, but we still hunted it down because the temptation was too much.

Random encounters became a massive headache. Goddamnit, we don't have time to track down these wolf spirits, we need to build a boat to get back home before this meat goes bad!

Accounting can be fun on its own if the context is tense enough.

goto124
2016-05-05, 03:52 AM
Seems that when it comes to rationing, it's either "don't bother" or "the entire point of the game".

Comet
2016-05-05, 03:58 AM
Seems that when it comes to rationing, it's either "don't bother" or "the entire point of the game".

Eh, to be fair, there can be a happy medium. Rations in classic D&D just act as a timer for your exploration, which still works pretty well in my opinion. You stock up on as many rations as you can before heading out and then you tick them off every so often and stress out about how you don't have time to search for secret doors because you are running out snacks.

Yora
2016-05-05, 04:05 AM
Food and water are mostly a medium term problem. Going into a dungeon and back out usually is done quickly enough for it not to become an issue. You have to be isolated for at least a few days for it to become a priority.

Comet
2016-05-05, 04:08 AM
Food and water are mostly a medium term problem. Going into a dungeon and back out usually is done quickly enough for it not to become an issue. You have to be isolated for at least a few days for it to become a priority.

True. When we play D&D we usually spend weeks in the wilderness to get into isolated dungeons that take at least two days to explore thoroughly. If your dungeons are a day's trek from a village and take three hours of fighting to exterminate whatever lurks within then you really don't need to track this food stuff at all. Which is what D&D is these days, I suppose.

hamlet
2016-05-05, 09:12 AM
The way I've always run it as a DM is always assuming that the PC's have 5 days worth of food and potable water with them provided they actually visit a town now and then. I don't even charge them for it.

If, however, they are a long way away from home in the deep wilderness or something, or trekking across a vast dessert, suddenly I remind them (before they set out) that their characters realize that they might want to stock up on food and water before they go. It's one reminder, and it's gentle, but if they ignore it, privation rules come into play.

Players learn fairly quickly to have somebody with the hunting/survival proficiencies on hand all the time and they always learn to budget enough to bring some fortified rations.

It's just a tiny bit of realism that eases the book keeping aspects, but keeps it in mind when it's appropriate.

Thrudd
2016-05-05, 11:59 AM
I wouldn't be trying to make food tracking interesting, in itself, necessarily. I'm trying to simulate a fantasy world where adventurers go on long expeditions into the wilderness. I want the players to feel like there is some reality to this world, rather than it being like a cartoon. So I want them to consider how much stuff they can carry, and decide who will be carrying it and how. There should be rules for foraging and hunting that let them stay in an area and get food after some time spent, and consequences for not eating or drinking. It is abstract, not meant to take up a lot of game time, it's just a thing they need to have in their packs. If the players plan and pack appropriately, food issues need never come up. I'd just want a way to address what happens if they do.

Airk
2016-05-05, 12:10 PM
Ryuutama, being a game mostly about journeys, has fairly elaborate rules for how much you can carry, a special food and water tracking sheet for the group, and clear consequences for what happens when going without.

The One Ring, which is also a game in which journeys figure prominently, abstracts all these things. Food and water isn't even figured into your carrying capacity, is not tracked, and the consequences for running out (which can happen, but only as the result of a poor dice roll) are abstracted into the general fatigue system.

Both of them work and are fun.

Lord Torath
2016-05-05, 01:36 PM
Dark Sun (2E AD&D) had dehydration rules that resulted in losing a variable amount of Constitution every day you didn't get enough water. Getting your full daily supply would restore a set amount of lost Constitution, while receiving almost enough water would prevent further Constitution loss, but not restore any.

I don't recall if they had rules for starvation, though.

hymer
2016-05-05, 01:42 PM
Dark Sun (2E AD&D) had dehydration rules that resulted in losing a variable amount of Constitution every day you didn't get enough water. Getting your full daily supply would restore a set amount of lost Constitution, while receiving almost enough water would prevent further Constitution loss, but not restore any.

I don't recall if they had rules for starvation, though.

Doesn't hunger and thirst also turn people temporarily CE in 2e Dark Sun?

hamlet
2016-05-05, 02:03 PM
Doesn't hunger and thirst also turn people temporarily CE in 2e Dark Sun?

No. There was a brief discussion as to what the various alignments would do if they were short on water and food. No rules.

AdmiralCheez
2016-05-05, 03:09 PM
My group has done food/water tracking a few times for long distance journeys. Apparently we really get into it because planning can frequently take an hour or more as we carefully figure out what supplies we need, what to take as a backup, how many pack animals we need, how much we can reasonably count on finding through foraging/hunting, etc. It got to the point where the DM (who suggested it might be fun to keep track of this stuff in the first place) wanted to just get on with the adventure.

Tiktakkat
2016-05-05, 03:18 PM
The topic here is how to make rules that do something interesting.

Yes, I got that.

And my advice is:
"Don't bother, it is not worth the effort."

Really, what sort of rules do you expect could make it more interesting?
Expanded rules on muscle loss due to starvation
Hallucination tables for lack of water
Saves for possession by cannibal spirits when going "too far" to survive
Modifiers for stomach growling affecting stealth checks while hunting
Detailed charts on storage time, weight, cost, aroma, dietary effect, flavor, and availability of different rations.
You could get a 20-30 page handbook out of that easily.
And . . .

Then the players find Shax's Indispensable Haversack ( http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?148101-3-x-Shax-s-Indispensible-Haversack-(Equipment-Handbook) ), and completely bypass your detailed rules until you decide to specifically target their magic items to force them to play your new sub-game whether they want to or not. (And if they made the effort to dig up Shax's, then it would seem they most likely don't want to.)

Tiktakkat
2016-05-05, 03:24 PM
Despite your infatuation with dragons,

Since the game being referenced is typically "Dungeons & Dragons", it doesn't require infatuation to pick them.


you still wrote those second instances in a relly exciting manner.

That's because I write really awesome flavor text, even for the most banal of situations.
Of course more critically, I know when those situations are less than relevant.


I would totally want to survive out under the merciless sun of a scorching desert or stalk for small game at the limits of my endurance before going into battle!

That makes . . . all one of the players I've run for.


Hunger and thirst have produced some of the best moments of our recent games. Encounters become opportunities, dungeons become potential storages and the adventuring party balloons out into a caravan of men and beasts hauling around weeks' worth of foodstuffs and waterskins. Not for everyone, I bet, but great fun for us!

For you.
For others . . .
You managed to clip my post before this:
"A bit of flavor text here and there is all well and good, but as a critical campaign element it is almost always going to fall flat."
Note the "almost always".
Being the exception doesn't change the rule.

Yora
2016-05-05, 04:23 PM
The way I've always run it as a DM is always assuming that the PC's have 5 days worth of food and potable water with them provided they actually visit a town now and then. I don't even charge them for it.

If, however, they are a long way away from home in the deep wilderness or something, or trekking across a vast dessert, suddenly I remind them (before they set out) that their characters realize that they might want to stock up on food and water before they go. It's one reminder, and it's gentle, but if they ignore it, privation rules come into play.

Players learn fairly quickly to have somebody with the hunting/survival proficiencies on hand all the time and they always learn to budget enough to bring some fortified rations.

It's just a tiny bit of realism that eases the book keeping aspects, but keeps it in mind when it's appropriate.

That's also the direction I am currently heading with my own rules for my game. I was reading Dark Sun again and it actually says to only bother with it in situations where access to water could be a major concern.

JoeJ
2016-05-05, 04:45 PM
Saves for possession by cannibal spirits when going "too far" to survive

That alone would make keeping track of food worth the effort. Every night, there's a chance that whomever is on watch will start to see through the "illusion" that makes all those fat, tasty deer look like their traveling companions. Then the voices start whispering that it's all been a trick. The character could have had food all along if only they'd been able to see the truth.

Deepbluediver
2016-05-05, 04:53 PM
So, while I really like the idea of characters having to plan ahead with their supplies, is there really any point to it outside from games set in environments where people can go for days without finding a source of water or for weeks without finding any food?
Well, yes it can take a person several weeks to starve to death, but they'll likely be near-incapacitated long before that. Any kind of prolonged activity (such as cross-country travel) is going to get FAR more difficult within just 24 hours of not-eating, which is one reason athletes pay such special attention to their diets. For a something fast-paced but short, like combat maybe, I'd say by the 3rd day you'd be within realism to start imposing stat penalties.

Unless it's a plot-point though, I wouldn't try to get into the minutia of it. Even without access to magical solutions, most mid-level players will have so much excess cash that food and drink become trivial expenses, and many groups could probably even hire a chef and several assistants to follow them around with a chuck-wagon. There may be other reasons to not do this of course, but so long as your players "restock" every so often I'm willing to just let them shell out a few coins for "travel rations" and not worry to much about it.

If its not food, what about other supplies? I've had at least one DM who insisted that we calculate how many candels, torches, and lamp-oil we needed to go spelunking in caves and ruins. Again, high-level magic can take of much of this, and how much effort you want to put into it depends on your group. If they are detailed-oriented and like the sense of imersion then fine. If they just want to kill dragons and get loot, then it's fine to just do that cartoon thing where all dark areas have a non-source-specific ambient light just bright enough to see by.

goto124
2016-05-06, 12:10 AM
Doesn't hunger and thirst also turn people temporarily CE in 2e Dark Sun?

To be honest, that sounds realistic :smalltongue:

Tiktakkat
2016-05-06, 12:02 PM
That alone would make keeping track of food worth the effort. Every night, there's a chance that whomever is on watch will start to see through the "illusion" that makes all those fat, tasty deer look like their traveling companions. Then the voices start whispering that it's all been a trick. The character could have had food all along if only they'd been able to see the truth.

While Ravenous is one of my favorite movies, and while I did actually sucker a party into a feast of "long pig" then have one of them go wendigo . . .
For a single adventure. Sure.
As a standard for every adventure? I'm really not seeing it.

hymer
2016-05-06, 12:41 PM
No. There was a brief discussion as to what the various alignments would do if they were short on water and food. No rules.

I can't seem to locate my old Athas stuff. I'll have to take your word for it.

JoeJ
2016-05-06, 02:17 PM
While Ravenous is one of my favorite movies, and while I did actually sucker a party into a feast of "long pig" then have one of them go wendigo . . .
For a single adventure. Sure.
As a standard for every adventure? I'm really not seeing it.

It could be part of the story arc for the campaign. Maybe some BBEG is creating a perpetual winter. Crops won't grow and civilization is starting to collapse. The PCs start off doing what they can to help the people in their village survive, knowing nothing about the BBEG or why spring hasn't come. Only gradually do they start to figure out what is really happening and how to put a stop to it.

hamlet
2016-05-09, 09:19 AM
That's also the direction I am currently heading with my own rules for my game. I was reading Dark Sun again and it actually says to only bother with it in situations where access to water could be a major concern.

That's always been my view of the rules as a whole. They are applied only in such cases when they enhance/facilitate the game. If they detract, then ditch them and just make it up.

That goes for ALL rules.

kyoryu
2016-05-09, 10:26 AM
What story would you rather tell?

I dunno, man, the survival one sounds pretty cool to me.

But regardless, it's important to make sure everyone is on the same page about *what* story you're telling.

Democratus
2016-05-09, 11:14 AM
I use rations and water in my current campaign. Here's the starting rule set I sent to my players for overland travel and food (5e D&D).

If they wish to live off the land, they must travel at a "Foraging" pace. When traveling like this they must make Survival checks and the result will determine how much food they find. For the most part this means that not the entire party can be fed by normal adventurers foraging (depending on the DC for the environment).

MODES OF TRAVEL

Normal: This is just hiking along, whistling a song, side by side (well, marching order). Normal chance for an encounter each watch. (1x speed)

Hustling: Characters are assumed to be moving quickly in any watch during which they hustle. Getting lost is more likely, location encounters are less likely. Each hour of hustling increases the risk of exhaustion. (2x speed during each hour of hustling)

Cautiously: While moving cautiously, characters are purposefully being careful. Movement is slower but the chance for a random encounter (non location-based) is reduced. It is also more difficult to get lost while moving cautiously. (3/4 speed)

Exploring: While exploring, characters are assumed to be trying out side trails, examining objects of interest, and so forth. The chance for encounters (including location-based) is greatly increased. Note: It is possible to move cautiously while exploring. All rules for both are applied. (1/2 speed)

Foraging: The party slows down to purposefully search for food and water along the way. Characters make Survival checks once per day as per the skill. Encounters might catch the characters scattered over a wide area when they start. Note: It is possible to move cautiously while foraging. (1/2 speed)


Combinations:
Cautiously + Exploring: (3/8 speed)
Foraging + Exploring: (1/4 speed)
Cautiously + Foraging: (3/8 speed)

*Special Note: Wanderer background feature
The Wanderer feature includes the ability to forage better than any normal person could. Here's how I'd like it to behave in this campaign.

Hustling: The character may find food/water for herself if it is available
Normal: The character may find food/water for herself and 1 additional person
Cautiously: The character may find food/water for herself and 3 additional people
Exploring/Foraging: The character may find food/water for herself and 5 additional people.
Stationary, doing nothing but foraging: The character may find food/water for herself and 7 additional people.

Asmodean_
2016-05-09, 12:23 PM
Answer: Goodberry. Amnestria is a druid so we don't really have to worry about food etc.

Democratus
2016-05-09, 12:55 PM
Answer: Goodberry. Amnestria is a druid so we don't really have to worry about food etc.

Goodberry is good for food but not water.

At 1st level having to sacrifice 1/3 of your spell slots to keep the party fed is fine. Same with create water for a water supply.

It's all about interesting choices: spending limited magic resources or packing heavy supplies.

hifidelity2
2016-05-10, 06:51 AM
For the campaigns I play in / run we tend to assume people are carrying a few days supplies (7 normally - they might be iron / trail rations and a water skin). There are replaced automatically as they journey from place to place. The only time we track the items is if the party are unable to replenish them

An example was the part was being chased by the BBEG’s henchmen and more importantly they know the henchmen were more powerful than they were

They had to flee into the mountains on foot with only minimal supplies and no time to fully kit themselves out.

I then tracked food and water and if they stopped / slowed down to hunt etc then the henchmen got closer

Eventually the party were on short rations and started to suffer ST and FT penalties

Democratus
2016-05-10, 07:08 AM
For the campaigns I play in / run we tend to assume people are carrying a few days supplies (7 normally - they might be iron / trail rations and a water skin). There are replaced automatically as they journey from place to place. The only time we track the items is if the party are unable to replenish them

That's a lot of weight. In D&D 5e, 7 days rations is 14 pounds. One day's water supply is 5 pounds. So that's about 20 pounds food/water if you only carry 1 day's worth of water. This is half the total unencumbered weight that can be carried by a Str 8 character.

My usual solution is to hire porters or bring a couple of pack animals.

Yora
2016-05-10, 07:23 AM
In the end it's up to the players to decide how much of a stock they want to maintain and carry around. I would suggest three days' worth of supplies to my players.

If they go on an expedition and worry that supplies might become a problem, they can pack more. If they have to get rid of some weight and think they will be fine with a smaller emergency supply, they can ditch some of it.

Slipperychicken
2016-05-10, 09:40 AM
My usual solution is to hire porters or bring a couple of pack animals.

Just don't forget their food and water needs :smallbiggrin:

Democratus
2016-05-10, 09:45 AM
Just don't forget their food and water needs :smallbiggrin:

Indeed! In certain terrain types a mule can get most of its bulk food from grass. It can also drink from water sources that humanoids would not find safe.

A good trick to use when hex-crawling is to follow rivers as your "roads". And then deviate from the river when you are closest to your destination.

However, it is important to not have your animals or (gods forbid) your porters die of deprivation while carrying a pack full of food and water.

hamlet
2016-05-10, 10:00 AM
Yeah, part of what made Old School D&D fun was the planning of expeditions. Resource management was a real thing and if you were going to trek to the hind end of beyond and back, then you would probably do well investing in a mule or three and a couple carts and hope that your ranger or suitably woodsy characters could find ways around major natural obstacles.

Or, you had magical transport. Not often a given.

Deepbluediver
2016-05-10, 11:12 AM
Yeah, part of what made Old School D&D fun was the planning of expeditions. Resource management was a real thing and if you were going to trek to the hind end of beyond and back, then you would probably do well investing in a mule or three and a couple carts and hope that your ranger or suitably woodsy characters could find ways around major natural obstacles.

Or, you had magical transport. Not often a given.
Honestly I think in part it comes down to the group. If someone just wants to delve dungeons and fight monsters, they might not find it fun to get sidetracked into an episode of Accountants & Audits instead. I'm not saying that every group has to have easy access to magical solutions to this problem, just keep in mind what the group really wants to focus on.

hamlet
2016-05-10, 12:22 PM
Honestly I think in part it comes down to the group. If someone just wants to delve dungeons and fight monsters, they might not find it fun to get sidetracked into an episode of Accountants & Audits instead. I'm not saying that every group has to have easy access to magical solutions to this problem, just keep in mind what the group really wants to focus on.

Yeah, but that's the thing. In a good old fashioned mega-dungeon (i.e., the 13 or so levels of Castle Greyhawk) you could conceivably find yourself days away from resupply, so not tracking supplies is a huge breach of suspension of disbelief. In little dungeons and story games, it's a little different I suppose.

kyoryu
2016-05-10, 12:26 PM
Yeah, but that's the thing. In a good old fashioned mega-dungeon (i.e., the 13 or so levels of Castle Greyhawk) you could conceivably find yourself days away from resupply, so not tracking supplies is a huge breach of suspension of disbelief. In little dungeons and story games, it's a little different I suppose.

Exactly. How much you were carrying, and how many supplies you had were a part of old-school megadungeon play. They were survival horror, not action adventure.

hamlet
2016-05-10, 01:51 PM
Exactly. How much you were carrying, and how many supplies you had were a part of old-school megadungeon play. They were survival horror, not action adventure.

Disagree. I rarely play "survival horror" style, and we still find that tracking provisions adds to the game rather than detracts.

kyoryu
2016-05-10, 02:16 PM
Disagree. I rarely play "survival horror" style, and we still find that tracking provisions adds to the game rather than detracts.

Er, I'm not saying it's useless outside of that style. Just saying that it's useless *with* that style.

Yora
2016-05-10, 02:22 PM
With what style?

Rumpus
2016-05-10, 05:30 PM
I always just ignore food and water requirements unless they are a plot element. Unless you have several people who really enjoy playing clerk, it's usually not a net fun gain to include it.

kyoryu
2016-05-10, 06:28 PM
With what style?

Dungeon delve as survival horror.

hifidelity2
2016-05-11, 07:41 AM
That's a lot of weight. In D&D 5e, 7 days rations is 14 pounds. One day's water supply is 5 pounds. So that's about 20 pounds food/water if you only carry 1 day's worth of water. This is half the total unencumbered weight that can be carried by a Str 8 character.

My usual solution is to hire porters or bring a couple of pack animals.

They normally have at least 1 pack animal between them

Eisirt
2016-05-11, 11:52 AM
How many players equip their characters with an fresh set of clothes?

Or camping gear (most of the time they have a tent or a sleepingbag; but how many have eating utensils and cooking gear)... or grooming products...

I have the feeling this is the reason behind many of the camping friendly spells and magic items that have popped up in AD&D over the years.

Yora
2016-05-11, 12:12 PM
Got an idea for thirst and hunger from Other Dust:

Any time something bad happens to you, you get a condition. All conditions give you a -1 penalty to all your rolls.

One day without water makes you thirsty (one condition). Two days without water makes you perched (another condition). After three days without water you're dead.
One week without food makes you hungry (one condition). Two weeks without food makes you starving (another condition). After three weeks without food you're dead.

Not an accurate progression of starvation, but as a simple game rule it's good enough. (Maybe make it hungry after 3 days, starving after nine days, and dead after three weeks.)

This can also be used for being out in the cold. One hour makes you freezing (one condition), two hours makes you hypothermic (another condition), and three hours make you dead.
Be a little sick: One condition. Be very sick: Two conditions.
If you use negative hp, getting knocked unconscious could give you an injury, counting as another condition.

All totally not realistic, but it's simple to remember and apply on the fly.

hamlet
2016-05-11, 01:05 PM
Got an idea for thirst and hunger from Other Dust:

Any time something bad happens to you, you get a condition. All conditions give you a -1 penalty to all your rolls.

One day without water makes you thirsty (one condition). Two days without water makes you perched (another condition). After three days without water you're dead.
One week without food makes you hungry (one condition). Two weeks without food makes you starving (another condition). After three weeks without food you're dead.

Not an accurate progression of starvation, but as a simple game rule it's good enough. (Maybe make it hungry after 3 days, starving after nine days, and dead after three weeks.)

This can also be used for being out in the cold. One hour makes you freezing (one condition), two hours makes you hypothermic (another condition), and three hours make you dead.
Be a little sick: One condition. Be very sick: Two conditions.
If you use negative hp, getting knocked unconscious could give you an injury, counting as another condition.

All totally not realistic, but it's simple to remember and apply on the fly.

Reduce the time units for starvation a bit. A week without food and you'd be more than "hungry." You'd be well on your way to starvation. And maybe figure in CON if you want to add just a bit of complication. You can last your CON in hours without a drink of water before the first penalty hits. Your CONx2 or x3 in hours without food. That way, less sturdy folks are going to suffer more quicker while tougher folks might be able to hold out longer.

[quote="Eisirt"]How many players equip their characters with an fresh set of clothes?

Or camping gear (most of the time they have a tent or a sleepingbag; but how many have eating utensils and cooking gear)... or grooming products... [/I]

I do. Even in 5th edition and 3.x. I can't imagine making a character without it, unless there's a very specific reason not to (like you're a vagabond or something).

lacco36
2016-05-11, 03:28 PM
My players often go shopping for clean clothes once they reach a city. No idea why - I never enforced that. But I embraced it :smallsmile:. They also can't stand to feed their characters hardtack and iron rations if there are other choices. Our resident barbarian once blew all his money on a feast, just to "finally have some good food".



Back on topic:

I agree with hamlet - the times you used are fine if you take into account a well-fed person that has little to no tiring activity.

And while the starvation in sense "dying from hunger" would kick in later, the first "I feel weak", "I can't concentrate if I don't eat" will come sooner.

I have few times had the pleasure of needing to spend a day or two without food. While I drank ridiculous amounts of water, in the evening I felt as if I could eat anything. Even my flip-flops looked rather tasty.
And that was just one day.
Yes, I have rather poor willpower when it comes to eating. However, while I had all the possible entertainment to keep me busy (movies, books, games), I couldn't concentrate well.
So after a week without food? I assume I'd be crawling on ground, trying to find some bugs to eat - and moving rather slowly.

How to model this? Usually I'd say through fatigue. I'd check how Twilight series (the post-apocalyptic warfare, not the twinkly-vampire novels) handle this - I have only the T2013, which handles fatigue through 4 states and has fixed rates how long you can function without lack of food increases your fatigue - at least that's what I remember. I'll try to find the book if you want some more info.

And last half of the third week without food would be - I think - spent lying on ground, fantasizing about eating.

Beneath
2016-05-11, 10:50 PM
I haven't had a chance to play it yet, but it sounds like the game Torchbearer (https://www.torchbearerrpg.com/) might be of interest to you. The reviews of it that I've read that have me wanting to play it say that it covers this (and also encumbrance, which is related) very well.

Apologies if it's been mentioned; I control+F'd through the thread and didn't see it.

goto124
2016-05-12, 02:07 AM
The quality of the PCs' food should affect the quality of the players' snacks too.

That'll give them an incentive to spend more on food :smalltongue:

Deepbluediver
2016-05-12, 10:35 AM
The quality of the PCs' food should affect the quality of the players' snacks too.

That'll give them an incentive to spend more on food :smalltongue:
An interesting idea, but I don't want to be on the hook for lobster-thermidor if one of the PCs gets silly and drops 10k gold on professional chef and custom-built kitchen-wagon to follow them around.

Yora
2016-05-15, 03:37 PM
Okay, this is not exactly about rations, but I've come up with an idea for the greater topic of Encumbrance, supplies, and overland travel.

In Chris Kutalik's Pointcrawl system (http://hillcantons.blogspot.de/2012/01/crawling-without-hexes-pointcrawl.html), dots marked on the paths between locations are used to help with measuring travel time. Which then looks like this.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xFuBPa9r100/TwxRdcgc5oI/AAAAAAAAD6g/X8cdD6Z39V0/s320/scan0001.jpg

In his system, a dot represents the distance of six hours unencumbred walking or three hours unencumbred riding (for a human character).

But what if the character are encumbred or have a slower moving speed to begin with? This is the same problem you get when using 6-mile-hexes on a hexmap. Movement speed is often variable and how far a group travels in a day depends on the movement rate and the terrain. So at the end of the day you might quite well ending up with a distance of three and a half dots or four and a third hexes. Then you have to remember the remainders and add them up over several days for an extra dot or hex, or you discard them at the end of each day. Either way, it's not very neat.
And I am pedantic. :smallbiggrin:

So I thought if there's something about the dotted lines between locations that could be improved. And looking at the overland speeds in most D&D editions, the amount of distance you cover in a day on plains tends to be either 6 miles, 12 miles, 18 miles, 24 miles, and so on. Or in other words, you end up with a number of 6-mile-segments. The party might either move 3 segments in a day or 4, and in some circumstances perhaps 5 or only 2.
But then terrain also enters the equation and movement speed can be reduced to 2/3 or 1/2, or it might increase to 3/2, which can make everything a lot messier and complicated. My solution for that is this:


http://spriggans-den.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/pointcrawl-overland.jpg

Depending on your movement speed, you get a number of segments you can cover in a day.
The terrain you're moving on determines how long each segment is.

When you prepare the map for the adventure or campaign, you just have to remember that a plains segment is 6 miles, a forest segment 4 miles, a mountain segment 3 miles, and a road segment 9 miles. That's really easy. Just make your map, draw lines between the locations and estimate the distances, and then put the dots on the line based on the terrain the line is crossing through.
When you then play the game you won't have to do any messy calculations based on how much the terrain slows you down. All you have to know is that the slowest party member has a number of dots per day and then the whole party moves that number of dots.

This can also be very neat for random encounters. If you do one possible encounter per day, just make one roll as usual. But instead you can also make one random encounter per dot. This has the nice side effect that you immediately know in what kind of environment the encounter happens and around what kind of day. Let's say the party is moving along the path at the bottom of my example image covering 4 segments per day. There is no encounter during the first and second segment, but an encounter happend during the third. I instantly know: The encounter takes place in the forest during the early afternoon.
The only possible flaw in that system is that a slower moving group has fewer chances to have an encounter than a fast moving group and the total number of encounters for the whole journey will be the same regardless of the speed at which you travel. If that bothers you, you could change the dice you roll to check if a random encounter happens. You could use a d10 when the group travels 5 segments per day, a d8 for four segments, and a d6 for three segments (with an encounter happening on a roll of 1) While the slower group has fewer chances for an encounter in a day, the odds that the encounter actually happens becomes higher, which should somewhat cancel out.

What are you thinking about it? Anything I could still improve?

lacco36
2016-05-16, 02:11 AM
This can also be very neat for random encounters. If you do one possible encounter per day, just make one roll as usual. But instead you can also make one random encounter per dot. This has the nice side effect that you immediately know in what kind of environment the encounter happens and around what kind of day. Let's say the party is moving along the path at the bottom of my example image covering 4 segments per day. There is no encounter during the first and second segment, but an encounter happend during the third. I instantly know: The encounter takes place in the forest during the early afternoon.
The only possible flaw in that system is that a slower moving group has fewer chances to have an encounter than a fast moving group and the total number of encounters for the whole journey will be the same regardless of the speed at which you travel. If that bothers you, you could change the dice you roll to check if a random encounter happens. You could use a d10 when the group travels 5 segments per day, a d8 for four segments, and a d6 for three segments (with an encounter happening on a roll of 1) While the slower group has fewer chances for an encounter in a day, the odds that the encounter actually happens becomes higher, which should somewhat cancel out.

What are you thinking about it? Anything I could still improve?

I really like that idea. Have been doing something similar for some time, but will switch to this.

First thing to clarify - will players know the structure behind crawling or not?

In my case - not. The framework is there just for me, to be able to handle the exploration without being overloaded/having to do rulings all the time. They provide structure, but the players have only to decide their way.

They also won't know what are the rules for "random encounters".

As for the slow-moving party having less encounters... in my crawl game I have two categories - encounter and landmarks. Encounters are "dynamic" - these are the bandits, gnolls, traders, caravans, etc. Landmarks are static. For your issue, I'd just give higher chances to find landmarks to the slow-moving party (as they pay more attention to the area) and lower for encounters. The opposite with faster-moving party - they make more noise, attract more attention and - cover more ground, giving them more possibilities to meet people as they go through the area.

In the other thread you asked about finding hidden places... would combining this make sense?

Yora
2016-05-16, 05:26 AM
First thing to clarify - will players know the structure behind crawling or not?

Depends. In my perception, the idea of "crawling" means trying to find all the content in the dungeon/sandbox you can, by carefully checking off each square or hex on the player map. In such a case, the players would have to know the structure and use it to complete their own maps.
But of course that's not the only thing you can do with such system, which is why I usually talk about hex maps and point maps. You can crawl them, but you don't have to. (But while the term pointcrawl should give many people a rough idea what it's about, I don't think anyone would know what I am talking about when I post something about point maps.)

In practice, I would have my players describe what place they want to go to or pointing on the unstructured player map on a general area where they want to look for something they expect to be somewhere around there. The point map would merely be my GM tool to quickly figure out travel time and random encounters. You can even use the system for a regular scripted adventure and just have a single path without forks.
I wouldn't put the paths and points on the player map.

However, I think the players should have some understanding of the random encounter mechanics. They should know that traveling slow means more encounters along the way (because they spend more time on the road), and I also think it's quite important that they know that the specific encounter they get is randomized and not selected by the GM. What they encounter is good or bad luck, and not the GM going easy or hard on them. But that's really a whole nother topic.

But what do you mean by static landmarks? If they are fixed, they aren't random encounters, aren't they?

lacco36
2016-05-16, 05:58 AM
But what do you mean by static landmarks? If they are fixed, they aren't random encounters, aren't they?

This is also a different topic - one for the Finding hidden places in an outdoor Pointcrawl (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?488128-Finding-hidden-places-in-an-outdoor-Pointcrawl) thread.

I'll most probably go there to post full reply, but just a short one here: assumption is, that the players diverge from "path" or "trail" - or if there is no "trail". If they follow a trail/road/path, they encounter only landmarks that are on/near the path.

The landmarks may be dungeons, buildings, a charred tree, standing stones or even a particularly lovely, peaceful meadow with a (healing) spring.

Once they walk through e.g. a forest, I don't follow their specific path - for me it's important to see if they got lost or if they continue in their original direction (= go the shortest possible route). And I roll for landmarks if they are able to spot them.

Landmarks "stay" on the map = they can find them again if they take the time/spare the effort. They can navigate based on them and they usually don't move. That's why I roll these separately from the encounters.

Yora
2016-05-16, 06:09 AM
Ah, okay. So basically randomly generated new "points" that are permanently added to the map. I also have those in my notes.

And now I just realized I completely forgot to integrate my ideas for forraging and rations into this whole system. But I think it's easy. If you are using your rations instead of forraging for food, you get to move one more segment per day.

Since the whole point of my ration system is to leave the rations untouched unless the players specifically mention them (effectively making them a speed-boost item), the default distance travelled in a day would be one segment less. If your daily travel speed is 24 miles, then you move three segments in foraging mode, and four segments when using rations. If the group is encumbred or has slower party members, foraging speed is two segments and ration speed three segments.

Another thing I had not considered yet is travelling on rivers and ocean voyages. But here's a simple system.



Vehicle
Movement


Boat (downriver)
6 segments


Boat (upriver)
3 segments


Ship (favorable wind)
12 segments


Ship (unfavorable wind)
6 segments



This is also using six mile segments. It's not exactly to the movement speeds in D&D, but having unfavorable conditions cut the number of segments in half makes it easy to remember without requiring any fancy calculations on the spot.
On the point map, I would draw lines between the primary ports or ferry stations and then put dots on them as usual. If the players want to charter a ship for an unusual journey, add a new line to the map or make a guess.

Rivers are one of these situations where the dotted lines have a nice advantage over hexes. If you have a winding river that is much longer than the direct distance between its start and end point, just put the dots on the map closer together to represent the meandering path. You can have two lines connecting two points on the map that run next to each other (one black for road, one blue for river for example), but one line has more dots on it than the other.