Travel Dilemmas
Travel-rooms have problems1. So back to thinking.
0.
What do I want from an approach to travel? Too many things, and they contradict each other.
The system should be scalable...: it should support a few hours' journey as well as multiple weeks of travelling — ideally in a similar number of arbitrary turns.
... but consistent: rolling one random encounter regardless of journey length is scalable, but it makes no sense in the fiction.
The system should be quick...: especially in the context of one-shots, I need the "getting there" part of the session to be no more than 10–15% of the total.
... but immersive: the system should feel like travelling, and evoke the setting.
The system should offer navigational choices...: it should accommodate different playstyles.
... but be direct: when travelling, we're going somewhere. There's limited session time, and in one-shots we must get to the dungeon.
Not to mention it should be challenging, but also fun to play — not tedious.
1.
What if we boil the whole journey down to its main dilemma?
Here's the basic architecture:
The journey is {tag}.
Thus, players can A or B.
2.
An archetype:
The journey is dangerous. Thus, players can face danger head-on or sneak to go unnoticed.
- Dangerous: the area is well-known for the creatures that live here. Players should be told some of the enemies they might encounter. The party has a higher-than-usual chance of encountering hostiles (3-in-6).
- Face danger: players will not be surprised, and have a chance of surprising the enemy. (Cost: safety)
- Sneak: players can add 1–3 days2 to their journey to lower the risk of encounters by one step per day. (Cost: time/rations)
We can apply the archetype to a region:
You will journey through the perilous jungles of Tau-Ria, where the Two-Faced Panther hunts Dire-Apes and carnivorous ants devour those who sleep in the open. Will you fight whatever jumps at you, or try to creep through the jungle unnoticed? The slower your pace, the safer the journey — but the more rations you'll need.
3.
Here are some other archetypes I came up with. I've worked out the tags and A/Bs for each, but I won't bother you with the mechanics yet.
- The journey is safe. Thus, players can take it easy or force the march.
- The journey is hazardous. Thus, players can deal with the hazard or go around.
- The journey is circuitous. Thus, players can look for a shortcut or take the long route.
- The journey is full of opportunity. Thus, players can keep the pace or make a short delve.
- The journey is contested. Thus, players can pay the toll or challenge the authority.
4.
Some assumptions in my game:
- Parties travel with a wagon carrying bulk provisions. What's actually tracked is each character's personal rations — the ones meant for the dungeon delve at journey's end.
- Dilemmas are presented as binary choices, but players are welcome to propose a different course of action.
5.
Should every journey be a dilemma? Maybe not!
Should every journey be only one dilemma? Maybe not! You could, in theory, chain a couple of these region-dilemmas into a multi-part journey. But this idea is untested, and I have no idea about its replayability.