Hexploration, horses, and rivers

[spqr202]

I have a question about whether GMs typically have rivers impede the progress of horses when doing hexploration.

For example, on page 14 of Stolen Lands, if the party is on horses and starts out in the hex with L. Goldmine, and proceeds through the hex Q. Rickety Bridge, to the hex with W. Fangberry Thicket, Do you let horses cross the hex with Q. Rickety Bridge? I know that at the actual Landmark of the Rickety Bridge horses cannot cross (page 24) but if the PCs are not exploring the hex but just passing through do you let horses pass? One could theoretically say that the bridge itself is not passable by horses but further up the river in the same hex is a section of the river shallow enough that horses can ford. This would make travel a bit more challenging for the PCs, but might add more hassle than fun.

What have GMs who have run Stolen Lands done?

[spqr202]

Oh and a second question, if you don't let horses pass through hex Q, do you let PCs explore the hex with horses, since theoretically they cannot get to half of the hex with their horses?

[redcelt32]

If the PCs cannot explore ALL of the hex, it does not count as explored (at least IMC). If the hex is split by a river, that means they have to explore both sides of the river.

I was a total pain in the butt to my players about crossing the rivers, only allowing them to cross at the haunted bridge, the natural ford of the Shrike down near where the rivers meet, and at the Thorn River Camp. Once my players got horses, they never bothered with the Rickety Bridge. They do still have to go way out of their way due to the river, mostly because they never seem to get around to building bridges across the river (I ruled they could build a bridge in a hex even if they didnt claim it). Making them respect the rivers helps them appreciate later on when they get roads and bridges, and emphasizes the river as a significant part of the landscape.

[Waiwode]

Like Redcelt, I'm a pain about rivers.

In the Narlmarches, though, I state that the rivers are narrower, and numerous fords exist. A forest/river hex takes an extra day to explore.

[PJ]

Waiwode wrote:

Like Redcelt, I'm a pain about rivers.

In the Narlmarches, though, I state that the rivers are narrower, and numerous fords exist. A forest/river hex takes an extra day to explore.

I too made hexes with rivers harder to explore as they have to do one side at a time.

[Duskrunner1]

Same here. I remember reading that the rivers are deep and wide in the majority of places. As such the party has to find various locals in order to cross and finish the job.

[DM_aka_Dudemeister]

Same here, it makes for interesting gameplay as the players follow the river seeking for a place to cross. :)

[Lex Starwalker]

Also, if the PCs have horses, the horses have to make swim checks to cross rivers as well as the PCs.

[PJ]

Lex Starwalker wrote:

Also, if the PCs have horses, the horses have to make swim checks to cross rivers as well as the PCs.

As long as they weren't arguing with me on how long it was going to take I didn't really make them roll excessively. A couple of the hexes took them quite a few days to explore fully though with finding and getting said horses across those rivers.

[wanderer82]

One of my PCs, a gnome gunslinger with a background in engineering, took the time to examine the old bridge, then promptly rolled a nat 20 on his knowledge (engineering) check to determine its faults and how to repair it. So, the party took the time to make it stable, with plans for a future full rebuild, and continued on with their exploration.

I love PCs who have noncombat skills, makes for some entertaining stories!

[PJ]

wanderer82 wrote:

One of my PCs, a gnome gunslinger with a background in engineering, took the time to examine the old bridge, then promptly rolled a nat 20 on his knowledge (engineering) check to determine its faults and how to repair it. So, the party took the time to make it stable, with plans for a future full rebuild, and continued on with their exploration.

I love PCs who have noncombat skills, makes for some entertaining stories!

I love said skills and always try to make them relevant in all my games.

[Waiwode]

wanderer82 wrote:

One of my PCs, a gnome gunslinger with a background in engineering, took the time to examine the old bridge, then promptly rolled a nat 20 on his knowledge (engineering) check to determine its faults and how to repair it. So, the party took the time to make it stable, with plans for a future full rebuild, and continued on with their exploration.

I love PCs who have noncombat skills, makes for some entertaining stories!

Although suiting the purposes for our risk-loving Adventureres, I probably still would have made it cost between 1000 - 2000gp in parts and labour to make it fully functional -- and about 1/4 to 1/2 the BP cost of a Bridge normally, iirc. It still allows the Player to win a victory, but doesn't end up in re-working all the bridge rules.

[CalebTGordan]

My players have one Gypsy wagon, one cart, one ox, and about 12 horses of various types. I am an absolute pain when it comes to river crossings and I remind people of Oregon Trail where wagons sink almost every time.

The river hexes in the forest have been different, and easier to cross, but the party still is cautious when they come across a river.

The only river they could cross in the hills is the natural ford where the rivers meet.