Journeys as Dungeons

[HidesHisEyes]

I've struggled with the question of how to make overland travel in D&D a meaningful part of the game since I first started to DM, and reading this article (http://theangrygm.com/getting-there-is-half-the-fun/) on Angry GM's site has just got me thinking about it again.

Angry's article is full of good ideas, but what really interested me was Intermedial's comment towards the end of the comments section. This person suggests a houserule by which “A long rest takes 24 hours anytime you spend a day or more travelling overland" so that in effect "any bout of travel becomes a single “adventuring day”, cutting off the typical problem where the party can nova on random encounters."

I find this idea extremely enticing because, where Angry's suggestions - like every other "overland travel system" I've seen - amount to a whole new game structure that would sit side-by-side with the game's built-in tried-and-tested "adventuring day" structure, but would be essentially different from it. Intermedial's idea allows you to simply use the adventuring day structure during long journeys as well as dungeon crawls.

I might amend the house rule to "when travelling, a long rest only has the benefits of a short rest", as it seems a bit clearer in my mind. So on a seven-day journey it would be assumed that the PCs would make camp and rest for eight hours each night, but each time would only allow them the usual benefits of a short rest. You can then scatter encounters of various kinds throughout the journey - not necessarily all combat encounters but all using the game's highly developed and "gamey" resources system of hit points, spells and abilities. For longer journeys you could place "way stations" along the route - inns and villages where the PCs could get a real long rest, dividing the journey into multiple adventuring days.

Now I can see one or two problems with this straight away. One is that players might find it odd that a long rest means different things at different times, but for me at least a justification of "it's hard to get a proper night's sleep on the road" would be enough. A bigger problem is that, any time the PCs have to go on a journey to get to a location to complete their mission (i.e. the majority of site-based adventures), there needs to be some way for them to have a long rest once they get there but before they start. Given the justification I just mentioned it's hard to think of a solution to this, short of handy inns just outside every dungeon. Finally, I suppose what many are looking for when they complain of overland travel being boring in D&D is not an extension of the dungeon crawl gameplay to encompass travel, but a system in and of itself that is still gamey but in different ways (in which case I'd recommend you read the article I linked to at the start if you haven't). But there are certainly ways that the two approaches could be combined.

Anyone have any views on this?

[Rhynear]

A bigger problem is that, any time the PCs have to go on a journey to get to a location to complete their mission (i.e. the majority of site-based adventures), there needs to be some way for them to have a long rest once they get there but before they start. Given the justification I just mentioned it's hard to think of a solution to this, short of handy inns just outside every dungeon.

This part could be solved by getting the PC's to have to pay for retainers or similar to set up a 'bare camp outside of the dungeon which wood take too long for them to set up on the road so that they could get long rests.

[HidesHisEyes]

This part could be solved by getting the PC's to have to pay for retainers or similar to set up a 'bare camp outside of the dungeon which wood take too long for them to set up on the road so that they could get long rests.

I like it, except to say it relies on PCs having the opportunity to hire retainers, which the state of the narrative might not always allow for.

I'm now leaning towards simply requiring "rations" or "provisions" as a cost for resting. A short rest would cost one, a long rest perhaps three. Then there's no need to distinguish between being "on the road" or not, it's just a small but significant adjustment to the resting rules as written. Unfortunately there would have to be an arbitrary limit on how many rations you could carry, otherwise players could just spend a ton of money front-loading before every journey, but that's not such a high price to pay. Foraging would mean, with a successful survival check, you get one unit of provisions that has to be used up the same day.

[pwykersotz]

I like your first idea a lot better than the rations. There's another thread about rests being dependent on expendable items, but it doesn't sit well with me for some reason.

As you said, I think the justification of the stress and danger of travel is enough to justify it. To your second point though, I'm not certain it's as big of a problem as you might think. As I see it, there's two major ways that this will shake down. Either the overland travel dangers are incidental and are just like adding another couple rooms in that destination dungeon, or the travel dangers are severe and warrant their own special consideration.

If the dangers are so severe as to not be a separate dungeon room, I think it is a pretty normal step to give the party some time to recover. It's almost exactly like stringing two dungeons together, one with the key to the other, and the other with the real goal. Part of the design of such an encounter is figuring out what options the party has for resource management.

[HidesHisEyes]

I like your first idea a lot better than the rations. There's another thread about rests being dependent on expendable items, but it doesn't sit well with me for some reason.

As you said, I think the justification of the stress and danger of travel is enough to justify it. To your second point though, I'm not certain it's as big of a problem as you might think. As I see it, there's two major ways that this will shake down. Either the overland travel dangers are incidental and are just like adding another couple rooms in that destination dungeon, or the travel dangers are severe and warrant their own special consideration.

If the dangers are so severe as to not be a separate dungeon room, I think it is a pretty normal step to give the party some time to recover. It's almost exactly like stringing two dungeons together, one with the key to the other, and the other with the real goal. Part of the design of such an encounter is figuring out what options the party has for resource management.

I see what you mean. You could just assume there's a sort of buffer zone of fairly relaxed travel between the last encounter on the road and the arrival at the dungeon, during which the party gain the benefits of a long rest. I guess that could work, yeah, once the players get used to it anyway.

One thing I like about the idea of using rations/supplies though, is that it makes the management of these resources important. It's an attempt to combine the resource-management game of the kind Angry outlines with the standard "adventuring day" structure. Used alongside a system for measuring distance travelled each day and how long it takes (also covered by Angry's article) it could make life on the road really quite thrilling. I can see it being difficult to balance the "supplies economy" to fit the adventuring day though.

[Slipperychicken]

When they're on roads, you could have in-universe inns for players to take pit stops when you need them to. Probably one per day of travel for civilized roads, and a little less often for wilderness.

[Finieous]

Now I can see one or two problems with this straight away. One is that players might find it odd that a long rest means different things at different times, but for me at least a justification of "it's hard to get a proper night's sleep on the road" would be enough.

What about when they cast leomund's tiny hut as a ritual, providing them an extremely secure campsite that is always lighted to their specifications, comfortable and dry? That seems at least as low stress as an unfamiliar inn, and certainly more secure. Actually, being in a natural environment with this kind of comfort and security seems about the most peaceful conditions I can imagine.

In any case, I've found that this is a non-issue as long as I throw some multi-encounter travel days into the mix. As long as the players know this is a real possibility on any given day, they'll prepare for it by conserving their daily resources. If you do use a different rest mechanic for travel and non-travel, you're better off just being straight about its actual game justification. For me, the fictive justification wouldn't be persuasive. Obviously, if it would be persuasive for your group, this shouldn't be a concern.

[Temperjoke]

It could also be that just spending more time camping on the road as opposed to an overnight rest is enough for the full benefit of a long rest. I mean, if you're putting the effort in to stay a night, a day, another night, then leaving that day in one location, you're going to be more comfortable than just tossing bedrolls near a fire. Of course, staying on the road in a more formal camp like that adds to the danger as well, increasing the odds of being attacked soon after. It also doesn't have to be an actual inn or tavern along the road (although, an inn in the middle of nowhere that is suspiciously comfortable could be the start to a neat little side quest mini-dungeon to break up the monotony of regular travel); it could also be a rest stop area near a natural spring or oasis, with fire-pits and cleared areas for camping out, maybe courtesy medical supplies that are a sort of "take a penny, leave a penny" sort of thing.