Converting Travel Pace to Hexes

[Yora]

I am working on a complete system for wilderness travel that includes all the many aspects that are part of it, like movement speeds, supplies, encumbrance, getting lost, and random encounters, in a way that is both easy and fun to use and not like pulling teeth. The rules that are in the PHB and DMG are really not designed for campaigns in which the party spends a majority of play time moving through the wilderness.

I have long been quite opposed to using hex maps as a tool of dividing the wilderness into discrete areas. But looking for ways to handle the party loosiing their path, I've started to think that using hexes to measure distances is really the most practial way to do it.
Of course, you can still use hex maps, but for my ideas here it also works just as well if you have a hex grid overlayed on the GM version of a map that also shows the locations that are unknown to the players. In this system, hexes are not areas and have no content, they simply serve as a coordinate system for the GM to track where the players are when they have no clue where they are themselves.

When I tried translating movement rates to hexes or to road segments in the past, I constantly kept running into the issue of having to deal with parties moving 1/2 hexes, 3/4 hexes, or numerous other annoying fractions that take all the convenience out of counting distances in hexes. So this time, I decided to start not with the Travel Pace table, but instead put together a table of movement rates that only has full hexes on it.
There are two ways to do this.

Simple System


Speed
Easy Terrain
Difficult Terrain


Fast
6 hexes
3 hexes


Normal
4 hexes
2 hexes


Slow
2 hexes
1 hex



PHB System


Speed
Easy Terrain
Difficult Terrain


Fast
8 hexes
4 hexes


Normal
6 hexes
3 hexes


Slow
4 hexes
2 hex



The next question is now "how big is a hex?" I tried out different hex sizes, and again there are only two solutions that really make sense and get close to the distances in the Travel Pace table in the PHB.
Both happen to have 24 miles for normal pace in easy terrain, exactly the same number as in the Travel Pace table.

Simple System, 6-mile hexes


Speed
Easy Terrain
Difficult Terrain


Fast
36 miles (+20%)
18 miles (+20%)


Normal
24 miles
12 miles


Slow
12 miles (-33%)
6 miles (-33%)



PHB System, 4-mile hexes


Speed
Easy Terrain
Difficult Terrain


Fast
32 miles (+7%)
16 miles (+7%)


Normal
24 miles
12 miles


Slow
16 miles (-11%)
8 miles (-11%)



As you can see, when we are using 4-mile hexes, the deviations from the PHB are considerably smaller than when using 6-mile hexes.
However, in existing material, the 6-mile hex is probably the most common size of hex by far. In comparison, I don't think I've ever seen anyone use 4-mile hexes ever.

When you look at most closely replicating the numbers from the PHB, the 4-mile hex is the clear winner.
But I think for practical reasons and compatibility with a large number of existing hexmaps, I think 6-mile hexes are by far the better options.

What do you think about this?

[Man_Over_Game]

Well done on your project! It seems straightforward enough to use at my own tables.

But, just to summarize, it boils down to "If you can use a 4-mile map, use the PHB version. If you can't, use my 6-mile version"?

[some guy]

As you can see, when we are using 4-mile hexes, the deviations from the PHB are considerably smaller than when using 6-mile hexes.
However, in existing material, the 6-mile hex is probably the most common size of hex by far. In comparison, I don't think I've ever seen anyone use 4-mile hexes ever.

When you look at most closely replicating the numbers from the PHB, the 4-mile hex is the clear winner.
But I think for practical reasons and compatibility with a large number of existing hexmaps, I think 6-mile hexes are by far the better options.

What do you think about this?

What I think the most important thing about hex-distance is, is viewing distance. On a flat plane the horizon is about 3 miles away. Two different hex-sizes are nice to use when taking that fact in consideration:
1. hexes with a 3-mile diameter, for when you want players to know what the adjacent hexes generally hold (terrain, structures). In the middle of a 3 mile hex, pc's can look into the middle of neigbouring hexes.
2. hexes with a 6-mile diameter, for when you want players to survey the hex they are currently in. When in the middle of a hex, pc's can look at the borders of the hex.

Of course, terrain such as forests can diminish and block view and hills and mountains can increase viewing distance.

Edit: the above system, does not solve your initial problem, but I do believe viewing distance is important for a party to avoid getting lost.

The setting The Dark of Hot Springs Isle also has some useful ways of using hexes (2-mile hexes, days are separated in 4-hour blocks; going from one hex to another takes 4 hrs, discorvering 1 point of interest takes 4 hour (every hex holds 3 points of interests)).

[Tanarii]

What I think the most important thing about hex-distance is, is viewing distance. On a flat plane the horizon is about 3 miles away.
DMg page 242 says to use 2 miles. Which would mean a 4 mile hex, you can see to the edge from the center, or to the center of the next hex from the edge of your current one.

More generally when you get near the edge, you should probably be able to see the terrain of the adjacent two or three hexes, assuming there isn't limited visibility.

[Yora]

But, just to summarize, it boils down to "If you can use a 4-mile map, use the PHB version. If you can't, use my 6-mile version"?

I still want to expand on this with a random encounter and resource managment system. Switching from 6-mile hexes to 4-mile hexes would mean a 50% increase in encounters and resource consumption. That seems too big for me to handwave away, so I think any expanded system would need to use a single fixed scale.

For GMs who want to simply use hexes for measuring distance and not changing a anything else about 5th edition wilderness travel, I fully recommend using 4-mile hexes. If nothing else, this is one useful discovery to share with the world.

I specifically want to avoid creating a hexcrawl system that treats hexes as areas with imagined borders and specific content. Purely a system to track time, progress, and resource consumption.
Anyone looking to create a hexcrawl system might find these tables useful. But since that won't be part of my expanded system, I don't want such considerations to be part of the decision for a hex size.

I am creating this system for a campaign that does not feature any plains and where vision is almost always very restricted. However, the setting will also feature good amounts of sea travel, and I now realize that vision distance at sea is a critical component. I think sea travel will require a completely different system. It should be as similar to the wilderness travel system, as possible, but the hex size clearly should be much larger. And for picking that size, vision distance probably is the most deciding factor.

[Imbalance]

Good insight.

Having some Heroscape terrain on hand, I had been giving some thought to building a sort of 3d "known world" map using the hexes. For no good reason, I was considering a distance of 5 miles corner to corner, representing a flat region of about 10,000 square miles of land and sea. I don't have enough tiles to go crazy, but if I assume a tile height of 500' I can stack up some mountains or plateaus. Roads, rivers, boundaries, etc. can be done with thread; sticker dots for cities and towns; various markers for peaks, caves, ruins, and so on.

A DM would be able to point to an area encompassed by 4-5 green tiles and tell the party they are lost somewhere within this forest. If they climb a tree, they'll see the mountain to the north and know that they must head west toward a city. The DM would know exactly which tile they are in, whether the forest road is ahead or behind them, and how many more days of travel to reach civilization, as well as what is likely to cross their path on the way.

[Tanarii]

Check out the Alexandrian on Hexcrawls, if you haven't already:
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/17308/roleplaying-games/hexcrawl

[Armok]

I like this stuff a lot! I'd definitely be interested in how you'd approach random encounters with this system. My current method rolls once at daybreak, once at midday, and again at dusk. (That last roll could then end up happening during watch while the party rests, if it's suitable.)

I do my encounter rolls on a D20, and have tried different numbers for the encounter. Most adventure modules seem to use 18 for civilized or peaceful times and 15 for more dangerous lands or times, but I'm just not sure that generates encounters as often as I'd like. I'm definitely open to fine-tuning how that works...

[Yora]

Roll once per hex. A random encounter happens on a 1.

Roll a d10 when moving fast, a d8 when moving normal, and a d6 when moving slow.

You can go up a die size when the area is particularly safe, and down a die size when it's particularly dangerous.

Since you spend less time in the wilderness when moving faster, the total number of encounters during the journey is likely to be lower. Since the number of rolls is fixed by the distance, using a larger die compensates for that.

I'd also make a check per night, and it would make more sense to always make that roll for normal speed, since speed isn't actually a factor. But it's easier to not constantly have to remember to change the die.