D&D 5E Exploration Rules You'd Like To See

[GnomeWorks]

To expand on that idea, Kamikaze...

What if, in addition to combat-centric defenses, characters also have environmental defenses. Moving through wilderness and such, the environment makes some kind of attack roll analogue against your defenses. Higher character defenses would represent wilderness know-how, seeing disasters coming, that sort of thing, while higher environment attack rolls would indicate, say, bigger storm systems that are harder to avoid, or sudden changes in environments (like landslides) that are harder to detect ahead of time.

You could also do wandering encounters like that, as well. Scouts would have higher defenses against wandering encounters, so they're less likely to be spotted, making scouting a useful thing to do.

If the environment "misses" the party, the exploration encounter doesn't occur - they see it coming and avoid it, bypass it, or otherwise manage to deal with it "off-screen." If it "hits" the party, then they have to deal with the encounter, potentially starting off in worse position in the encounter depending on how badly they failed.

For a wandering encounter, if it hits the party really hard, it becomes an ambush. If it hits the party rather well, the party is ill-prepared for it, but it's not an ambush type situation. If it hits the party on the nose, the wandering encounter and the party are both equally surprised at the event. That sort of thing.

You'd then play out the exploration encounter until everyone is in safety, using the sort of skill challenge-type thing you're talking about, or the combat is over, depending on the type of encounter it is.

 

[Quickleaf]

Just a wild idea...
how would a game look that was focused on exploration? Combat is resolved either automatically, or with one or two dice rolls, but exploration takes up significant chunks of time?
If we built a game that handled that, we could take the lessons learned and apply them to DnD...

It might look like BD&D?

Actually, the first thing that came to mind was a card game where you want to flip over cards laid out on the board in the hopes of getting treasure (or something else good). The same thing *could* be done with dice tables but I think cards would evoke more of the feeling of exploring a map. So, the focus of players is on the carrot, what cool benefits their characters can get from exploring. And that makes all the risk stuff we've been talking about it worth it... Maybe player could choose riskier wilderness / dungeon routes with the promise of even greater rewards?

A bit boardgame-y, but it's what sprang to mind.

 

[Zustiur]

Yes, that is a bit board-gamey, but as a starting point, I don't see that as a problem.
So, the nearest board-game equivalent that springs to mind is DND's own boardgame, where dungeon tiles are picked and laid out essentially at random, and then cards are drawn to determine what currently resides in those tiles.

Hmm, I'm going to back up a step before continuing.

I think we're looking at a very distinct play-style here. The following idea is not intended for everyone. Many, if not most, groups play with a 'pre-determined' story and map etc. They're welcome to continue doing so. What I'm currently thinking about is a minimum-prep survivalist style of DND, where the story comes from the characters and players, rather than being predestined by the DM.

The term Hex Crawl keeps popping up, so let's run with that for now.

• The party starts in the town hex. This is a frontier town, surrounded by wilderness on all directions (ala points of light, or the specific setting I happen to be working on right now...)
• They spend the first day, (having magically teleported to this town at the start of the game) exploring the town, meeting NPCs, getting to know where shops are, buying provisions, securing lodging etc
• The 2nd day they look outside. The standing army/militia/whatever has already subdued the surrounding hexes - they're not safe, but they're a lot safer than wandering further.
• DM puts down randomly selected hex 'cards' on each side of the town.
• Players ask NPC advice, and pick a likely looking hex to explore.
• DM rolls dice, draws cards whatever to get more detail about what is in the hex.
• The party is faced with a challenge of crossing a river with no bridge if they want to explore that hex. There may be some tantalizing hint of what is on the other side.
• Challenge happens
• The DM determines what's on the other side of the river that got the party's attention. It's a cave entrance
• Getting into the cave is difficult in some manner. Probably involves climbing down a steep slope or vertical hole. This is another challenge
• Once inside, the wilderness tiles are put aside and the cave system tiles are used instead. The first tile is the entrance tile which has several exits.
• ...
• By clearing the cave system, the party gathers some form of treasure, xp, and prestige for having helped the town
• They return to town and spend their new found wealth. Rest up etc. As money is a driving factor for adventuring, they quickly find themselves out of cash and in need of another adventure.
• They leave the town again, and select a hex to explore. This may be the same hex as previously; each hex has more than one feature

And so on...

I would seriously love to have a system that did all of that. Whether its a book, cards, dice tables, computer generated random events (essentially dice tables), I don't care. I just want a way that I can sit down each game session and pick up where we left off, with no need to spend hours between sessions designing the next part of the story. I believe this works with a gritty 'death lurks around every corner' play-style, rather than a 'PCs are protagonists and must save the world' play-style.

I'm not the best DM in the world, there's no question of that. I can make up stories, but they usually fall flat in several key areas. All of these areas can be summed up as 'non combat challenges'. Give me a system for generating them for as long as it takes me to get a handle on doing that myself, and I'll be a very happy DM. I've suggested before that there should be a 'Tome of Traps' to go along-side the Monster Manual. Now I want a Challenge Compendium as well. Maybe an Exploration Encyclopedia, which contains both traps and challenges.

 

[Ultimatecalibur]

Just a wild idea...
how would a game look that was focused on exploration? Combat is resolved either automatically, or with one or two dice rolls, but exploration takes up significant chunks of time?
If we built a game that handled that, we could take the lessons learned and apply them to DnD...

Look up the PS2 game Unlimited Saga. While combat does take up time, exploring the maps, overcoming obstacles, avoiding/dodging traps, solving puzzles, opening treasures and making equipment tend to be where you spend more of your time.

The game is often jokingly called a table-top game in video game form.

That's a curious way to think of it, to get everyone involved.

So, like, in 4e, there's effectively one monster for each PC in a "balanced" encounter.

Maybe when confronting an exploration obstacle (such as a chasm or a raging river or something) there should be one "challenge" for each PC, too.

So a balanced raging river obstacle might require X successful skill checks per character rather than for the whole party. So in a simple 1 skill check-per-character raging river, with a 4-person party, you might have each character have to get across in their own way (rogue climbs a tree, wizard teleports, cleric grows angel wings, fighter swims through it like it's a gentle brook). Or maybe the wizard and the cleric don't have a way to get across, so the rogue and the fighter each make 2 checks (one for themselves, and one to help their friend) to get across...

And, of course, if they fail, they can roll on the Disaster Table to see if they sustain an injury, lose some supplies, enter a "save the failed guy" challenge, disturb a dire gar, whatever.

Yes, that is the idea I was trying to get across.

If we were to pace things similar to 4e combat, maybe say 4-8 successes per character yields success in the challenge...but that seems like a LOT (and 4e combat seems slow to me anyway ), so maybe we keep that number a little lower. Make it 2-4 checks per character, and you've got something similar to a 4e battle with 1/2 monster HP or x2 PC damage.

Hmm....

5 checks/rolls is what I feel is the sweet spot for single character task type skill challenges. 1 success : 5 failures, 2:4, 3:3, 4:2 and 5:1 all have different advantages and disadvantages and fit well within a 4/5 round combat (you can easily imagine a Rogue disarming a trap or opening a locked door or a Wizard casting an emergency teleportation ritual or Cleric performing an impromptu exorcism while the rest of the party fights off enemies in that time).

 

[steenan]

I don't have a clear idea of what exactly the exploration rules should be. I know quite what I want from them, just not how exactly to get there.

My goals and expectations are:

1. Rules that are strict, but tie closely with the fictional situation, not just with other mechanical constructs (see Dungeon World for how this is done, 4e for how this isn't).

2. Each roll changes situation in a significant way, for better or worse. There should be no "succeed to do something, failure and you're stuck" or "succeed to keep status quo, failure means problems" rolls. Both success and failure should be interesting.

3. The rules should give the DM freedom in defining the fictional situation and the level of challenge and give players space for creativity in deciding how they want to approach the situation. On the other hand, they should force the DM to keep the situation moving (instead of, for example, forcing players to guess the one correct solution, or allowing perception/knowledge checks but not giving useful information) and the players to use a wide and flexible array of actions (instead of repeatedly doing one or two things they are good at).

4. The rules should work well with both a situation-based style (where the DM has the situation already designed - just not what will happen when PCs interfere) and a "no myth" style (where the only fixed thing is what has already been done and observed in game - everything else is improvised on the fly, possibly with player input),

 

[Blackwarder]

That's a curious way to think of it, to get everyone involved.

So, like, in 4e, there's effectively one monster for each PC in a "balanced" encounter.

Maybe when confronting an exploration obstacle (such as a chasm or a raging river or something) there should be one "challenge" for each PC, too.

So a balanced raging river obstacle might require X successful skill checks per character rather than for the whole party. So in a simple 1 skill check-per-character raging river, with a 4-person party, you might have each character have to get across in their own way (rogue climbs a tree, wizard teleports, cleric grows angel wings, fighter swims through it like it's a gentle brook). Or maybe the wizard and the cleric don't have a way to get across, so the rogue and the fighter each make 2 checks (one for themselves, and one to help their friend) to get across...

And, of course, if they fail, they can roll on the Disaster Table to see if they sustain an injury, lose some supplies, enter a "save the failed guy" challenge, disturb a dire gar, whatever.

If we were to pace things similar to 4e combat, maybe say 4-8 successes per character yields success in the challenge...but that seems like a LOT (and 4e combat seems slow to me anyway ), so maybe we keep that number a little lower. Make it 2-4 checks per character, and you've got something similar to a 4e battle with 1/2 monster HP or x2 PC damage.

Hmm....

No no no no no!

That sound just like SC... Blah.

Exploration is about the big picture, it's traversing the dungeon it's moving between two cities or trekking into the wilderness.

Your post mate, boil exploration into some kind of an encounter, now I'm all in favor of environmental encounters but these are not exploration.

While combat, social and environmental encounters are about the dice rolls (to varying extent) exploration is about the resource game, food, water, endurance, carrying capacity, light sources,movement rates etc.

It's a mode of play that should be as detailed as combat, it should get its own time keeping unit (why the hell did 3e gotten rid of turns??) it should have rules for spotting, entering or avoiding encounters, it should allow for resource attrition and some classes should be able to excell in it (I'm looking at you thieves and rangers).

And most important, players should be able to solve exploration encounters (meaning environmental encounters) by expanding resources rather than just rolling a d20.

So crossing a raging river might require one character to strip down to his lion cloth and swim to the other side with a rope (so he need to roll a swim check) tie the rope to a tree (maybe even tying several for added security) (a tie rope checks) and depends on the number of ropes or the tie rope checks resultes a balance check for each character trying to cross with penalties for encumbrance.

The players should (roughly) know in advance how many turns it would take them to cross, but other option would be trying to find a shallower place to cross (and how long that might take and would probably require some sort of a wilderness check) or maybe building a raft and using it to cross over (again using a bunch of rolls for building and stirring the raft safely to the other side without capsizing).

All of the above should cost resources; time, items, spells etc. and failure should have consequences from not being able to cross at all, losing a lot of time, being swept off by the river, losing equipment in the river, catching Hypothermia from falling into the river, to out right drowning.

I read a great article right here in ENworld about why we like rules in our RPGs, it's a great article you should read it but the same is true about exploration, just like in combat where we want clear rules and guidelines so we can know the consequences of our actions and how many decision points we got exploration (and diplomacy) deserve the same attention.

Warder

 

[Balesir]

While combat, social and environmental encounters are about the dice rolls (to varying extent) exploration is about the resource game, food, water, endurance, carrying capacity, light sources,movement rates etc.

Good ideas in this post which I'll try to summarise/build on.

What the system might look like, then, is a "time tick" like the old "turn" that meshes with the encounter times - ~10 minutes works well since an encounter plus a short rest could be "one turn". Specifying "10 minutes" too exactly would, I think, be problematic and too picky - maybe say it's 5-15 minutes (2d6+3, if you really need an exact measure), with a mean of 10. That way, the rules don't get tied too suffocatingly to the players' imagined models of the "real world" but, in the round, 12 turns is still likely to be as close to 2 hours as makes no difference.

Next, define what can be done in a "turn". An essential feature would be an extensive equipment list to give "resources" that could be expended to achieve tasks; "Craft(material)" skills could then be used (with appropriate "designs"/"recipies", analogous to Rituals?) to create resources in suitable locations (e.g. making wooden items in a forest location).

Movement rules of some sort would be important, and "maintenance" resources (food, drink, rest, shelter) would also be required - and could be generated via Rituals or Skill applications.

Sounds like a fine module outline.

 

[howandwhy99]

Exploration Rules for a puzzle game is basically saying "the rules" from my point of view. In an RPG, whether an online MMO, single player console game, or tabletop D&D is gong to having the majority of rules fall under its physics engine.

I think that's what needs to be provided, but also opened up for individual DMs to customize for their home games. Think of it like monsters or spells. Anyone should feel comfortable enough to design and implement their own monster or spell under the core game system. When it comes to what D&Dn means by exploration I think we're talking about all of the environmental factors that can challenge players in the game.

While having a limited number of energy types (like there used to be a limited number of saving throw types) is useful to simplify play, we should also have the option to add in greater diversity. That's just one area, but if I want sleep deprivation, dehydration tracks, loss of ability scores from extensive lack of exercise, aging penalties and even aging damage, hard core level loss attacks, food born disease vectors, navigation the players are asked to do by either the sun, stars, sighted points of reference, or even dead reckoning ... well, I want to be able to include those. I don't want to think I can't mold the game into what we'd like it to be, but I'd like a solid, well grounded, and efficient enough game to be happy to build off of.

Coming up with more interesting exploration scenarios is kind of easy and practically endless. What I believe DMs could use are some basic building blocks for the broad spectrum of these designs to initially learn, then add on to, and perhaps at last to set aside as we make the game our own.

 

[Blackwarder]

Accidently posted before I mean to... Mods please delete

 

[Blackwarder]

We can start talking about encumbrance, I really like ACKS way of calculating it:

Encumbrance measures how much equipment and treasure characters are carrying. Encumbrance is important because characters can only carry so much, and if they are heavily weighed down with equipment they cannot carry as much treasure, nor move as fast. Encumbrance is measured in stone.

A stone is a historical unit of measure that varied from 8 to 14lb depending on what was being measured. ACKS assumes a stone weighs around 10lb, but it is left purposefully abstract to represent an amalgam of weight, bulk, and generally portability. After characters purchase their equipment, they should calculate their encumbrance. To determine the number of stone encumbering a character, simply consult the table below.

Item Encumbrance in Stone
Worn clothing 0 stone
Armor & Shield 1 stone per point of Armor Class*
Items 1 stone per 6 items
Heavy Item 1 stone per heavy item (8–14lb)
Treasure 1 stone per 1,000 coins or gems
*Magical armor and shields are lighter than mundane items. They reduce their encumbrance by 1 stone per point of magical bonus.

When counting items, each weapon, scroll, potion, vial, wand, magic item, or other object counts as an item. Multiple small items sold as a bundle (such as 12 spikes, 6 torches, 20 arrows, etc.) count as one item for this purpose. Very small single items (such as 1 silver arrow) can be ignored for encumbrance purposes. Heavy items include two-handed weapons (including bows, crossbows, and various large melee weapons); any item that is as tall as the carrying character (including spears, staffs, and 10' poles); any item that weighs around 8-14lb; and any item that requires two hands to carry (such as chairs or chests). Items weighing more than 14lb will weigh more than 1 stone. For purposes of encumbrance, 1,000 coins are considered 1 stone. When a carrying device, such as a backpack, lists the weight it can carry in stone, this weight can be converted at 1:1000 from stone to coins to determine how many coins it can carry. A character's speed will be affected based on his encumbrance, as shown on the Character Movement and Encumbrance table, below. For additional information on movement, see the Time and Movement section in the Adventures chapter. The maximum any character can carry is 20 stone, plus his Strength adjustment.

EXAMPLE: Marcus is carrying a two-handed sword (1 heavy item), a crossbow (1 heavy item), a mace (1 item), 2 daggers (1 item each), 1 week's iron rations (1 item), a tinderbox (1 item), 2 flasks of oil (1 item each), 3 stakes and mallet (1 item), a small mirror (1 item), a pound of wolfsbane (1 item), a pound of garlic (1 item), and a case with 20 bolts (1 item). He is carrying 12 items, which counts as 2 stone. His two-handed sword and crossbow count as 2 stones. Finally, he is wearing plate armor (AC6), which counts as 6 stone. His total encumbrance is 10 stone, so his exploration movement is 60' per turn. Later, he picks up 8,000 silver pieces. This increases his encumbrance to 18 stone, and reduces his exploration movement to 30' per turn.

Character Movement and Encumbrance
Encumbrance Exploration Movement Combat Movement Running
Up to 5 stone 120' per turn 40' per round 120' per round
Up to 7 stone 90' per turn 30' per round 90' per round
Up to 10 stone 60' per turn 20' per round 60' per round
Up to max capacity(20) 30' per turn 10' per round 30' per round

It's simple, elegant and seems easy enough to use, it got a distinct impact on the character (which directly translate to player strategic choices) and it isn't a yes/no situation.

If I were to use it for DnDNext I would change it a bit by saying that the different encumbrance rate include you Str modifier so a 16 Str character can carry up to 8 stones without losing movment rate.

Warder