In my campaign the Underdark exists, but none of the surface races except Goblins know about it. As it works out, that includes the entire adventuring party. So instead of mapping out an Underdark for my custom continent I wrote this rule for when the surface-dwellers attempt short-range (up to a day or two) navigation underground. It replaces the Make A Perilous Journey roll.
When navigating the Underdark roll + WIS and lose 1 ration. On a 10+ take 3. On a 7-9 take 2. On 6 or less take one.
* You don’t become so lost you cannot return to where you started from
* You are not ambushed
* You find what you are looking for
* You don’t lose an extra ration and day finding your way
* You discover something unexpected
If the party didn’t have a swordmage who can make equipment lantern-bright AND blink over terrain obstacles I would add something like
* You don’t expend 2 Adventuring Gear per party member on torches, climbing gear, and miscellany spelunking expendables.
I like that move, but I’d reword it to this:
When navigating the Underdark, spend 1 ration per party member and roll + WIS. On a 10+, choose 3. On a 7-9, choose 2. On 6 or less, choose 1 in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You don’t become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You are not ambushed;
* You find what you are looking for;
* You don’t spend an extra day (and an extra ration per party member) finding your way;
* You discover something unexpected and useful.
That brings it more in line with the “official” moves.
Careful there Christopher. I’ll start running all my moves by you if you keep making them read that smoothly.
I wouldn’t mind that. 🙂
Maybe it’d be better to say “everyone marks off a ration” as part of the trigger.
Another possibility would be to have a list of options that modified the Trailblazer, Scout, and Quartermaster choices for the standard UaPJ move.
In a game where the Underdark features predominately that could be a good way of doing it. I don’t want the players to ever get the feeling they’re ‘at home’ down there. It’s often cramped for full-sized surface dwellers (why only one player, the point man, gets to roll) and without biological, magical or technological navigation aids they shouldn’t be able to reliably get what they want as they often do with the three player UaPJ move. (Especially with a Ranger who can automatically take two 10s)
When leading the party through the Underdark, spend 1 ration and 1 adventuring gear per party member and roll + WIS. On a 10+, choose 3. On a 7-9, choose 2. On 6 or less, choose 1 in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You don’t become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You are not ambushed;
* You find what you are looking for;
* You don’t spend an extra day (and an extra ration and adventuring gear per party member) finding your way;
* You discover something unexpected and potentially useful.
I like the rationale for having a separate move. It does say “this is not the same as finding your way above ground”, which is cool. The only problem I see (despite suggesting it), is the trigger. Unless the party has 1 ration and 1 adventuring gear use per party member, they can’t trigger the move. It makes sense that the characters would prepares themselves, but what happens when they don’t have enough rations/gear while still in the Underdark? They can’t trigger the move as they don’t meet the requirements.
Sure they can! They just suffer for it.
I see what you’re saying though. It needs a rephrasing mayhaps. Take… seven, I think.
When leading the party through the Underdark, roll + WIS. On a 10+, choose 3. On a 7-9, choose 2. On 6 or less, choose 1 in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You don’t become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You are not ambushed;
* You find what you are looking for;
* You find a path that does not require spending one adventuring gear per party member to advance;
* You are able to procure enough food from the environment to avoid spending rations;
* You discover something unexpected and potentially useful.
In this model a naked team could find their way… albeit not without consequence. At worst they are horribly lost, unable to find what they want or find a way back, blocked in at least one direction by impassible terrain, and in conflict with the Underdark’s denizens….but not dead from hunger.
I’m wondering if the option about finding what you’re looking for should automatically happen on a 7+ result (reducing the number of options chosen by 1). Usually it’s bad form to include an option that the player will practically always choose.
There’s other interesting things to pick from if they don’t choose to get where they were going, but if you’re “leading” a party through the Underdark, you have a goal in mind.
I agree with everything except the idea that they’ll always prefer finding what they’re looking for over being able to return to (the surface / the Dwarven kingdom / the Portal of Wizard X). I have a hard time seeing anyone not choosing either of those, but I don’t think it’ll always be one or the other.
I may be wrong! And that may only really be true for my campaign / players! Here’s another take that assumes ‘success’ means finding the goal.
When leading the party through the Underdark, roll + WIS. On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1. On 6 or less, choose 1 and you don’t find what you are looking for, in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You don’t become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You are not ambushed;
* You find a path that does not require spending one adventuring gear per party member to advance;
* You are able to procure enough food from the environment to avoid spending rations;
* You discover something unexpected and potentially useful.
I’m not sure about finding what you’re looking for… if the party is seeking the Great Dingus of Power I don’t really want them to find it in one roll and then split for home. I think I’d change it to reach your destination. It’s more about navigating than resolving the quest. Naturally upon reaching your destination you’ll encounter some final barrier, like a yawning chasm or dark elf city. And a clever GM can string it out into a scavenger hunt, with several intermediate stops.
Failing to find your destination simply means you ended up someplace else, also undoubtedly cool and full of adventure.
When most of the options in a move are negatives, I find it hard to read and think through. Whatever you choose doesn’t happen, and what you don’t choose does happen. It’s backwards and I always have to think twice about what is actually happening. In these cases I prefer to invert the logic to turn the negatives into positives. Then I can focus on what the players choose, and ignore what they don’t choose. So…
When leading the party through the Underdark, roll +WIS. On a 10+, choose 1 and then you reach your destination. On a 7-9, choose 2 and then you end up someplace unexpected. On 6 or less, choose 3 in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You are ambushed;
* You take a difficult path that requires spending one adventuring gear per party member to advance;
* You consume one ration per party member, not having found any food along the way;
* You don’t find anything unexpected or useful along the way.
I suppose that last one, about finding something useful, could be food… if you choose it, either you found food, or you found a cool treasure but had to eat your rations. It gets kind of long if you write it that way though:
* You don’t find anything unexpected or useful along the way. If you what you didn’t find was food, consume one ration per party member.
Awkward.
I like the inversion! It does read more intuitively. Good call.
I’m also compensating when I write a new move for the GM’s Basic Move, “BS-Flag throw.” “You can’t find the Amulet of Teluma which grants every class power and ahem friggin-lazer-beams to the wearer, Bob, just because that’s what you are looking for. How about the ancient earth-elemental burial grounds you were talking about three sessions ago?” But a good move shouldn’t have to have the GM ready to intercede. So, you’re right – find the place you’re heading for, not the thing you seek.
My only immediate gripe would be that 7-9 is generally a success with cost, but in your write-up the party ends up somewhere besides their destination. A low-WIS character could bumble for weeks down there if they need a 10+ to get to their destination.
I moved the ration / gear into one option as well – I can’t imagine anyone choosing anything but ‘rations, gear, nothing cool, can I roll again?’ on a 6-. Needs more teeth for my ‘this place does not want you alive’ Underdark. It would be good for a ‘this place is slightly more dangerous that the surface world’ one thought, depending on the campaign setting!
I suspect this one’ll work for me and my campaign world (and hopefully my players) a bit better:
When leading the party through the Underdark, roll +WIS. On a 10+, choose 1 and then you reach your destination. On a 7-9, choose 2 and then you reach your destination. On 6 or less, choose 3 in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You are ambushed;
* You consume one spare ration and one adventuring gear per party member, having to cross extremely tiring and dangerous terrain;
* You don’t find anything unexpected and useful along the way.
Or maybe
When leading the party through the Underdark, roll +WIS. On a 10+, choose 1. On a 7-9, choose 2. On 6 or less, choose 3 in addition to whatever else the GM says.
* You become so lost you cannot return to where you started from;
* You do not end up where you were hoping to.
* You are ambushed;
* You consume one spare ration and one adventuring gear per party member, having to cross extremely tiring and dangerous terrain;
* You don’t find anything unexpected and useful along the way.
(“We found it guys. We’re out of supplies, Jim’s still got Drow daggers sticking out of him, and I have no friggin idea how to get back home, but we’re here.”)
I’m a fan of the “choose options that don’t happen” moves, but that’s just personal taste. Use whichever way works best for you. 🙂
I’m a little curious about the “You don’t find anything unexpected and useful along the way.” choice. So… if they don’t pick it, they stumble across something useful, but if they do pick it, they don’t? That seems kind of backwards to me.
Yup! But everything they pick (in this write up) makes things worse for them. So picking it means ‘something good doesn’t happen along the way’.
Maybe that just needs to go – choosing it supports the status quo and is a way to burn off negative repercussions, which probably oughtn’t be within the player’s power to do.
Yeah its kind of the odd one and I think end up being a “dump choice.”