Ok, I'm GMing a 4th level ranger with +7 Survival tracking a guy moving at full speed on a horse through the wilderness. The runner's destination is days away, but he only departed about 15 minutes prior, and with a tracker moving at half speed (the ranger's half speed or the ranger's horse's half speed?), this "chase" could potentially last many days.
So, assuming I'm reading the rules right, I'm making a skill check for every mile, factoring in terrain, visibility conditions, and the length of time that has passed since the tracks being followed were made. The length of time is subject to change throughout the chase because the tracker is not moving as fast as the trackee. I make this check every mile, more if the tracker loses the trail, and then tries again an hour later.
Am I over-thinking this? Is there a mechanic that I'm overlooking that simplifies this? Do most other GMs in similar situations make all of these calculations/rolls? They're not hard, but it seems counterintuitive that a GM would devote time out of the game to make all of these rolls, so I wondering if there's not an alternate method.
Seriously, I just handwave rolls based on the length of the Chase.
One roll to get started and one roll every time the conditions change to the worse (transition from soft to rocky ground, rain, Nightfall, whatever). Conditions improving obviously doesn't force a roll, and one to get "back on track" after a nights rest or any kind of major distraction like an encounter. If you feel like this is to easy, maybe make it a basic 4 checks/day with additional ones for unfavourable conditions.
Everything else just drives the Players and the GM insane. You're supposed to have fun, not sit around the table as laves to the rules, being extremely annoyed.
Also, I would give the ranger a penalty if he wants to track from horseback, like maybe 2 or 3 but then would allow him to use the horses half speed. If he does not want that penalty, he'll have to get off and use his own half speed.
Skills based over long term with scaling DCs like that rarely work (and NEVER work out in the skill user's favor unless they can make the DC on a 1).
I think even most published adventures just gives a set DC with like a +5 increase to the base DC for long chases.
Well the tracker can take 10, so that means he can follow the trail up to dc 17 with "no checks" needing to be made. Then if they lose they can try rolling to re-find the trail.
Most GMs don't use tracking this way and make up their own rules, and thus the track ability is useless. If the GM wants you to track them then you will, if the GM doesn't want you to track them then you can't.
|
Yes, that's how the rules work. They're really not designed for extended tracking challenges, and probably should be.
I think a mounted rider uses half the mount's speed for tracking. Unless you're doing a forced march, that's 20 miles per day moving at half speed on a light horse. 20 Survival checks a day, yikes.
Taking 10 is a good idea if the ranger can make the check at that DC. Otherwise you need to roll. Adding +5 to the DC isn't a bad simplification, but it's probably oversimplified and doesn't represent well the increasing chance that the tracker will lose the trail the longer the chase goes on.
If you want something slightly more nuanced but without making 20 rolls per day, homebrew/house rules ahoy:
Figure out how many miles the tracker could potentially cover. Divide by 2. Roll once per day. Subtract and add this number to the tracker's roll (before adding the skill bonus) to create a "range" of die results (min 1, max 20). If the miles covered per day is even, ignore the actual roll. You now have a number of "roll results" equal to the number of miles traveled = the number of rolls you're supposed to make. Now, adding the skill bonus, check how many of these rolls results in a success. Say that the tracker makes that many miles of progress.
So for example on the first day, the DC may be 15 (firm ground, one medium creature, no other adverse conditions). The tracker rolls a 12. For 20 miles per day, we get a "roll range" of 2-11 and 13-22 (treat last 3 rolls as 20). Since he succeeds on a roll of 8, we have 6 failures and 14 successes, and the tracker makes 14 miles of progress. The quarry makes 24 miles progress at full speed on foot. On day 2, it's foggy, but the quarry is still less than a day ahead, so the DC is 18. The tracker rolls a 7, for a "roll range" of -3 to 6 and 8 to 17. He needs an 11 to succeed, so this time he has only 7 successes and makes 7 miles of progress, for a total of 21 miles. The quarry has now travelled 48 miles and is more than a day (24 miles) ahead, so the next day the DC increases by 1 for a cold trail.
This isn't perfect since a failed check costs you an hour, not a mile of progress, and you're probably moving at 1.5-2.5 miles/hour, so if you actually rolled it out you'd make less progress than expected. But it's probably a decent simplification that still includes some randomness.
I don't think the Track skill specifies any penalties for tracking from horseback, so that shouldn't matter; the ranger should be able to remain on his horse.
The OP said "wilderness" and didn't mention a road, so since most trackless wilderness areas are 1/2 speed, let's assume that both horses can move 2.5 mph, but the tracking ranger is moving at half speed, 1.25 mph.
Assuming "firm ground" since that's the default and we have no reason to assume something else gives us a DC of 14 (the horse is a large creature).
The ranger can follow this automatically by taking-10 every hour and never lose the trail, unless it starts to rain or he can't see well enough after dark (and has no torches). Even if the bad guy gets a full 3 days ahead, the ranger can still Take-10 and follow him.
All that changes if penalties are applied for poor conditions. If it suddenly starts raining, we may assume that the ranger is falling afoul of the weather, or perhaps of the villain's plot armor.
Given the speeds involved and assuming no poor conditions arise, the villain will need to travel for 8 days before he is four full days ahead of the ranger moving half his speed. At that point, the ranger can no longer Take-10.
Unfortunately, that last bit means this ranger cannot take-10 to follow the villain at full speed because that raises the DC to 19 and he'll need to roll a 12 or higher. Trying at full speed means the ranger has over a 90% chance to lose the trail after just three hours, a pretty safe bet he loses it, then keeps losing it. Mathematically, traveling at half-speed with Take-10 is faster than losing the trail so frequently.
Now, if I'm GMing and want the PC ranger to succeed, I'll just have him track the guy for less than 8 days without any appreciable change in the weather. If I want it to fail, I'll add another day or two, or some bad weather, or a dark cloudy night, or a few miles of hard ground, or have the bad guy spend half a day in a river bed (hiding his trail).
Really, once the ranger cannot Take-10, even if he just needs to roll an 11, he now fails 50% in one hour, 75% in two, 87.5% in three, and over 90% failure in four hours. Reacquiring the trail means he begins failing all over again. The villain will be getting really far away every time the ranger blows it, so it really does become impossible without Take-10.
|
|
While the OP was a little garbled, I believe in the example only the tracker was mounted, since it refers to "the runner's destination." This means that while the initial DC is one higher for tracking a medium creature, the quarry has a harder time outpacing the tracker.
Really, once the ranger cannot Take-10, even if he just needs to roll an 11, he now fails 50% in one hour, 75% in two, 87.5% in three, and over 90% failure in four hours. Reacquiring the trail means he begins failing all over again. The villain will be getting really far away every time the ranger blows it, so it really does become impossible without Take-10.
Depends on whether the goal is catching the villain or just following them home. Even if you fail to make progress half the time once you stop being able to take 10, you can still make progress. At 1/4 the speed of the quarry it's another 4 days before they get a fifth day ahead of you, increasing the DC again. Eventually the trail gets cold enough that you just can't follow it, but it's not time to give up as soon as you start losing the trail.
So let's assume (for now) the Ranger's moves at the Ranger's full speed, not the mounted Ranger's full speed. A human Ranger moves 24 miles a day. So after three days, even tracking at full speed, the Ranger is 48 miles (another two days travel) behind and losing ground...and that's assuming the Ranger never has to roll.
So how far can a Ranger realistically move in a day if they roll better than a 10 every mile? It's looking like about 4 hours per 3 miles. Which means in a 24 hour period, the Ranger would only get 12 miles with no sleep.
The 24 mile number for a day of overland travel (12 miles/day at half speed) assumes 8 hours of travel with time for rest and sleep, not a forced march.
NN, it's worse than you say.
You have your example of the ranger losing 105 hours in 3 days. But 105 hours is actually 4 days and 9 hours. PLUS the 3 days he wanted to be actually following the tracks. So it takes him 7 days and 9 hours to cover the three-day journey. It's really several more hours since we need a couple more recursions on the remaining failed checks, so I'll round up 13 more hours and call it an even 8 days.
8 days to cover the ground the quarry covered in 3, so the ranger is 5 days behind.
But wait, there's more!
Every time the ranger loses ONE full day, the DC gets harder which increases his fail rate and adds more hours to the trip. This math is getting irritating now. I think I need excel or something to figure it out. By the time we get to the last few checks when the ranger is certainly 5 (probably more) days behind, his check is so hard he's only making it 1/4 of the time, meaning three lost hours for every one he makes, losing even more time, making the check even harder, and falling further behind.
In fact, if the original DC was too high to Take-10 but the ranger needed only an 11, all the above math applies and it will take over 10 days to track the enemy. But if the ranger really needed, say, a 13 instead of just an 11, it's just about guaranteed he'll be over a week behind and the DC will now be so high he cannot do it on a natural 20.
(The OP's ranger can Take-10 if the ground is firm and there are no poor conditions to make it harder, but only for the first few days, after which the DC gets high enough that he needs to start rolling)
There is a reason this. this, and this is on the Ranger list. =)
Now depending on his Wis he probably only gets one of those per day, but Nature's Paths especially would put time very much on his side.
It evens the pursuit rate at a base level, and if the party Wizard were kind enough to lend him a Pearl of Power or something, Deadeye's Lore would make this a short chase.
The problem with the spells available is that they only last 1 hour/level. At 4th level, that's not much help of one has to track for days. Nature's Path should not be helpful. It gives you the shortest route through the wilderness. That is not going to be the path you need to follow unless you know where your quarry is headed.There is a reason this. this, and this is on the Ranger list. =)
Now depending on his Wis he probably only gets one of those per day, but Nature's Paths especially would put time very much on his side.
It evens the pursuit rate at a base level, and if the party Wizard were kind enough to lend him a Pearl of Power or something, Deadeye's Lore would make this a short chase.
Nature's Path just makes whatever path you happen to be walking as easy as a highway.
The guy only has a 15 minute head start on him.
Through the forest, the quarry is moving at half speed, while he will be moving at full (half speed by tracking). Worst case, the man retains a 15 minute lead into the night.
Or they catch him in like a half hour if they can use two of the spells above.
Some good points have already been made. Some things are little vague in the OPs post, so I'm assuming that
- both the ranger and the runner are on light horses and so have the same movement rate
- the ground is firm and so the DC to track a Horse (Large creature) is 14.
With a 15 minute head start, even if the chase is across trackless plains (the terrain where the spotting distance is best) then the runner is 4950 feet (0.93 miles) away assuming the horse is walking. Further if the rider started running or hustling. The furthest something can be spotted according to the environment rules is 1440 feet. So the chase is an out-of-sight chase from the beginning unless the GM decides otherwise.
The chaser cannot track if hustling as the -20 penalty is too high, so the runner cannot easily be caught by moving faster.
The chaser cannot catch the runner if moving at half speed. Taking half speed movement through wilderness terrain the runner will travel 160 miles in 8 days. After 17 days the chaser will have travelled an average of 97 miles and the trail will have gone cold (rolling a 20 is not good enough). This whole chase can be narrated instead of doing a single roll.
If the chaser is moving at full speed, then there is the chance of a standard chase. Taking the same assumptions as above, there is a 60% chance that the Ranger can follow the trail for the next mile. As long as the survival check is made a variant of the evasion and pursuit rules might be used, substituting Ride skill checks for Dex checks. Each +1 over the other equating to a minute gained or lost in the pursuit. The pursuit is over when the chaser loses the trail or decides to drop to half speed.
Alternatively, you could prepare a grand overland chase as the runner may slow down, take breaks etc if they think they are in the clear.
|
|
While the OP was a little garbled, I believe in the example only the tracker was mounted, since it refers to "the runner's destination." This means that while the initial DC is one higher for tracking a medium creature, the quarry has a harder time outpacing the tracker.Let's look at the OP again:
Ok, I'm GMing a 4th level ranger with +7 Survival tracking a guy moving at full speed on a horse through the wilderness. The runner's destination is days away, but he only departed about 15 minutes prior, and with a tracker moving at half speed (the ranger's half speed or the ranger's horse's half speed?), this "chase" could potentially last many days.Seems pretty clear the runner is moving at "full speed" on a horse and the ranger is moving at "half speed" on a horse.
If the person being chased is on a horse, they're a rider, not a runner.
I think it's meant to be parsed like: "Ok, I'm GMing a 4th level ranger with +7 Survival (tracking a guy moving at full speed) on a horse through the wilderness."
As opposed to: "Ok, I'm GMing a 4th level ranger with +7 Survival (tracking a guy moving at full speed on a horse) through the wilderness."
If both tracker and quarry were mounted, I'd expect to see the first sentence refer in some way to plural horses as opposed to just "a horse."
Could be wrong, but I definitely think it's not clear that there's two horses involved.
My example is assuming the Ranger cannot Take 10 and has to roll. So if we assume the Ranger will fail on 10 or lower, then on average, they are spending an hour every after every successful mile. To put it another ways, the Ranger rolls and succeeds and then travels a mile (20 minutes)> He then rolls and fails spending an hour and rolls again and succeeds and travels another mile (1:40 minutes elapsed). He then fails his roll, spends an hour and then succeeds and travels another mile, failing his roll and loses another hour.. So that's 4 hours passed and three miles traveled. It would thus take 15 hours to travel 12 miles, only 4 of which would be spent actually traveling. So it looks like the Ranger would get sleep.
This is a simplification and is based on expected outcome.
You said "So how far can a Ranger realistically move in a day if they roll better than a 10 every mile?" so I thought you were talking about successes (at half speed for tracking).
The target instinctively knows the shortest, easiest, and fastest way through the wilderness. For the purpose of determining overland speed, the target treats any trackless terrain as though there were a trail or road, and any terrain with a road or trail as though there were a highway.Because you are taking the shortest route through the forest, you get to treat it as being tracked. In other words, the game is simulating the effect of a shortcut by simply changing the movement modifier. That does not mean anywhere you go is tracked. Only if you are moving through the forest. When you are tracking someone, you don't take the shortest path through the forest.
I disagree. It says the shortest, easiest, and fastest way through the wilderness, not just the shortest route. That could refer to knowing where the easiest place to cross a stream is instead of spending time searching for a spot to ford, or knowing how to avoid roots and rocks and minor hazards that would trip you up, not just to having magic mapquest giving you a route plan. And it says that you apply the benefits when determining overland speed - which is exactly what we're all doing with the "you can move 12 miles in a day" thing.
I meant "runner" as in the guy running away, not necessarily referring to the physical act of running. Sorry for the confusion.
The guy fleeing is on a horse moving at full speed, and the ranger, well, he could ride his horse if he wanted, but when I posted the OP, I wasn't sure if a tracker could follow tracks from horseback, although this was mostly due to my pre-conceived notions of tracking (from encountering trackers on foot in various media). I accept that you can track while mounted as per the rules.
And, yes, both parties' horses have the same speed.
Thanks to all for confirming that I wasn't over-thinking the rules, in this case. I probably will handwave the rolls based on the near-inevitable outcome (not from what I prefer, but the obvious outcome that the quarry will make it to his destination before the ranger catches up to him).
I also enjoyed reading the discussion that resulted from my question. I agree with the statement that implied that using the Survival skill to follow tracks wasn't designed to handle longer distances such as this scenario. I also think it's interesting that most APs/modules seem to resolve the tracking in a single skill roll.
I posted the OP, I wasn't sure if a tracker could follow tracks from horseback, although this was mostly due to my pre-conceived notions of tracking (from encountering trackers on foot in various media). I accept that you can track while mounted as per the rules.
The Ranger can be on horseback, but the rules clearly state it is the ranger's speed that matters for the penalties.
You move at half your normal speed while following tracks (or at your normal speed with a –5 penalty on the check, or at up to twice your normal speed with a –20 penalty on the check)."You" is the tracker and "your normal speed" is not your speed while mounted. I posted a bunch of rhetorical questions for discussion, but the way to explain the rule is probably done best by example:
There's a maximum rate you can walk and read a book at the same time. That rate is a result of your body mechanics. If you walk too fast you can't hold the book steady. However, in RL, that rate is different for everyone. A person with long legs will naturally walk faster than a person with short legs given the same requirement to hold the book steady.
So for tracking if your base speed is increased, then you follow the tracks at a faster clip than someone with a lower base speed.
Your inclinations about following tracks are spot on. A tracker would do his/her best tracking on foot unless the tracks were so obvious anyone could follow them...like footprints in the snow.
But that argument arbitrarily ties a PC's movement speed to the rate at which they read tracks. In your argument, humans, elves, and dwarves tracking from the back of a horse move at 15 feet per round while tracking versus gnomes and halflings on horseback move at 10 feet per round.
I realize that their are problems with both sides of the interpretation; I'm just saying that it's not as "clear" as you say. I'm going with the mount's speed, justifying it by saying that if a tracker is mounted, they are relying on their mount to navigate forward, allowing them to focus on interpreting the tracks. (Even that justification still has problems, but it's just not worth it to me to delve too deep into rules that aren't up to the level of realism needed to fully resolve the issue.)
But this is a game so realism is kicked in the crotch repeatedly.
True dat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have always assumed that half speed for tracking basically meant half the time you are more or less stopped looking for tracks, and the other half the time you are moving (at full speed, but only half the time, so net half speed.) Given this assumption, mounted or Barbarian fast speed would apply and it makes sense.
Generally speaking, without a higher skill, even a small lead is insurmountable if the quarry is going to be fleeing for a long distance, as others have pointed out, you will eventually lose them.
It is possible though to cheat sometimes. He has been heading west for the last hour, and I know that a day to the west, the only way across the river Plot Device is the bridge of Adventure Hook, so I'll hustle there, either to beat him or if not, at least pick up his trail without losing so much ground. Obviously tons of other possibilities apply, depending on what you know about the region and the likelihood of various destinations for what you are pursuing.
Of course, this sort of has risks. If you guess wrong you have probably completely lost the trail.
Would you argue that a halfling on the back of a horse gets to move faster without penalty than a hafling on foot?
I would argue that the horse is moving and thus it is the one that needs to make a stealth roll.
Although I could perhaps see the halfing hiding behind saddle bags on the horse or something, it wouldn't be moving at all in that case. Theoretically one could hide on a galloping horse. I'll admit though that the rules for stealth (such as they are) are somewhat beyond my comprehension and I usually just fudge a lot of it when I'm gming.
|
|
The word "through" tells us that this occurs when you're moving from Point A to Point B. When you're tracking, you don't know where you are going. It is nonsensical to say you are taking the shortest route through the forest while tracking someone who did not take the shortest route.
"Through" does not necessarily require a known destination. I can say "I walked through the gardens for hours" when referring to a casual, exploratory ramble with no particular destination.
Look, if the spell simply said you get to treat trackless forest as tracked, or if it says the ground is magically made to be tract, I'd agree with you, but it specifically says you are taking the "shortest route" which implies your ability to travel faster is a result of magically knowing the actual shortest path from A to B.
No, it doesn't say "shortest route," it says "shortest, easiest, fastest way." "Way" is broader than "route." Eg, "the easiest way to travel downriver is on a raft" or "the fastest way to cycle up a hill is by changing into a lower gear."
I realize that people in the rules forum like to ignore any part of a rule or spell that isn't strictly mechanical, but nothing in the books says we are allowed to do that. The point of the rules is to tell us how to play the game. ALL text that gives us guidance on how to play the game is thus part of the rules.
I'm not ignoring the entry text, I'm just not reading extra restrictions into it. The first sentence of the spell is really quite general in a way that allows the mechanics text to apply to all situations involving overland travel.
Nature's path doesn't have any requirement that a particular destination be set when cast. You could cast it and travel to one place and then another if you had time in the day, for example.
There isn't a minimum distance on this either. So it certainly can be used to increase speed in the wilderness following tracks even with the most restrictive definition of way or route since you can choose the route to be from one footprint to the next.
At this point, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.
You are probably correct.
I think you are vastly over-reading the importance of 'shortest' in a line that is essentially fluff text about the spell, and also ignoring the easiest, and fastest.
For the most part, not having a road doesn't necessarily mean you are going the long way around, it means that you are tripping on roots, ducking branches etc. Nature's path lets ignore all of that. It isn't just a compass, it is an instinctual understanding of the natural things that would slow down your movement letting you move as though they weren't there.
If you are familiar with the Dresden Files, there is a great example of this in Skin Game (I think) where Harry is able to move really fast on his Island because of his connection with Demonreach. He knew where to step so he would get the best footing and not trip, when to duck around branches all of that. Yes, he also knew where his destination was, but that wasn't the primary thing that made him go faster. Someone trying to follow right behind him would make substantially less progress.
Mechanically, the spell simply lets you treat trackless terrain as a road for determining overland speed as long as you are in the correct setting.
Note that it also lets you treat a road or trail as though it was a highway, which is pretty much exactly what your string analogy is. Even though you are following the trail's path, not 'nature's path' the spell improves your overland travel speed.
I think you are vastly over-reading the importance of 'shortest' in a line that is essentially fluff text about the spell, and also ignoring the easiest, and fastest.And I would submit you're completely ignoring it as it appears to have no effect how you adjudicate the spell.
Fair enough. Just explain to me how you square your view with the stated fact in the spell that it improves travel down to trail to be like travel down a highway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I 'terrian' isn't defined as a region of some set size. I'm not in a 'hill terrian' next to a 'jungle terrain' i'm in trackless jungle or on a jungle trail. It seems bizarre to me that you think travel is faster if a trail exists somewhere nearby, but if we actually follow the trail we slow down again.
In event we clearly see this very differently.
Irrespective of the relative speed of the quarry and tracker, there are several far more important factors to take into account when trying to determine the success or failure of a pursuit situation.
1) The tracker is a ranger, a skilled outdoorsman familiar with the type of terrain, if not the actual particulars of this area of terrain. But is the quarry similarly skilled(and familiar with the terrain), less skilled or more skilled than the tracker? This will impact not only the quarry's speed, but his chance of getting lost or of finding hidden features (refuge, hiding spot, paths, etc).
2) What condition is the quarry in? Wounded? Fatigued? Disoriented? Frightened? In despair of escaping certain death? Some of those conditions will directly impact the quarry's ability to keep going at full speed, hour after hour.
3) How certain is the quarry that pursuit will continue? He might just feel safe enough to stop at some point, either just to catch his breath, bed down for the night or go back to whatever he was doing beforehand.
4) Does the quarry have a safe place, lair or allies nearby? The tracker might even wind up in an ambush, if he's too focused on the tracks themselves to watch out for other dangers.
5) Does the quarry blunder into some hazard - quicksand, a cliff face, a sinkhole, a beartrap, some wandering monsters, etc?
If I were preparing this situation as a DM, I would make up a random events table with various modifiers to (attempt to) take into account at least some of the relevant circumstances.
So any "terrain" that applies to your travel must cover at least the majority of your travel or that terrain modifier wold not apply
I agree. So if you are going to use the base rate of 'trail' for Nature's Path, at least the majority of your travel actually has to be on the trail. In other words, you are following the trail. Nature's Path makes that faster because magic. Even if your trail is a perfect straight line to your destination, the spell makes it faster. I'll certainly accept that in some cases natures path could theoretically take you off a trail for a short time, but it certainly is not a requirement of the spell, and in the vast majority of cases roads and trails exist because they are the best way to get between two places. If there was a better one, then that is where the trail would be.
From your previous post:
So a spell that only works on "overland speed" and overland speed only does not have any effect if you are not moving on that time/distance scale.
That doesn't follow at all. You can travel at 60 miles per hour for less than an hour, I actually do it every day.
In addition, if you dogmatically insist that overland travel can only apply if you travel for at least an hour, then it would seem in many terrains tracking is impossible for a human ranger. Since you move at your overland travel rate, but you have to make a check every mile, it becomes impossible to get to the next place you have to make a tracking roll if you adjusted speed is greater than one mile an hour.
It also seems odd to me that based on your interpretation, if I was an hour away from my destination and cast the spell it would fail, since making me get there sooner would mean that overland travel couldn't apply.
This is all of course absurd, but no more absurd (and it logically follows from) your assertion that unless you move for at least an hour you can never use overland travel rate.
I do want to say that although we are disagreeing I am enjoying the discussion. You are presenting your points in a straight forward manner and keeping a pleasant demeanor. I certainly appreciate that.
Back to the OP's post. Given the assumptions I had made earlier in this thread, had the Ranger had another 2 ranks in survival then he would have been able to track at full speed by Taking 10 and thereby turn it into a chase.
Aid another would grant that +2. With an assumed three other party members the chance of at least one of them making A DC10 survival roll would be fairly high (87.5% assuming no modifiers). A group roll every mile may be an option and even if the trail is lost it the chances are can be found again with an hour's lost time. So even though the chance of catching the runner is minimal, the chance of following is much higher. On average the trail would be lost 3 times a day, but if a couple of group members have wisdom bonuses then this could easily drop to twice a day. With an hour of forced march every day (the horse automatically fails its check) to catch up one hour is lost every day. With 8 days travel they should be able to stay close enough to follow the runner to his destination.
The two options then appear to be to narrate the tracking or to design a chase so there is a chance of catching up en route. As someone has pointed out above, the tracking party must follow the same route so there are no chase options, but you could include a lack of options for places to camp as an example to vary things up. Also bear in mind a camp fire is quite easy to spot from a long distance at night if not hidden. Is the runner taking precautions or do they believe they have escaped? An easily imaginable scenario could be, the party has found the runner but they can only engage whilst fatigued or even exhausted.