>>95992043
I really like them. Every time I've ever played a game with a DM who doesn't use a hex system to manage overland travel (I've played with probably 5+ DMs), overland travel looks like
>DM: "Alright, here's the map, you want to go here"
>PCs: "Alright, we go there"
>DM: "Okay, something does/doesn't happen, now you're there"
When I decided to DM myself, I tried hexcrawling with a small ~5/5 space. No exploration, just gave the players terrain and rough clues to where things were. It went fantastically.
For people who are anti hexcrawl, you should be pro hexcrawl. Or at least something that functions similar to hexcrawls. A short summary of my reasons why:
1. Converting to a hex-based terrain system establishes a fixed cadence for travel. Things happen at a specific pace that you can plan on. The party goes through X amount of terrain per day, at a fixed pace that can be measured in something that actually matters in the game. This structures the game in a way that takes effort off the DM _AND_ the players, and puts it on the system. Simply put, hexcrawling makes the entire game easier to manage. It also gives more opportunity to drive worldbuilding through hazards. The VALLEY OF ANCIENT DEATH region is not just spooky and has X number of planned encounters, it actually has an increased risk-per-movement of encountering enemies and a different random encounter table.
2. Hexcrawling, especially in combo with resource management and fixed inventory slot counts, gives more opportunity for players to leverage unique skills and invest in the actual world. When distance can be measured and matters, especially if you have fixed item slots, then players have to plan and leverage resources. They should be doing this using connections and the social aspects of the game, which creates emotional investment. If your players need Godrith the Caravan Master to coordinate wagons, then the BBEG kidnapping Godrith will actually upset them.
