D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[Swarmkeeper]

Sure, that sounds like a lot of fun.

But I'm curious why I'm the one being called out as having a "limited view"? I'm just responding to what people have been saying. Any times we point out that they could bypass a trap or deal with an issue by just taking more time and using basic resources, we get told there are wandering monsters, or a time limit. You are actually one of the first people to present an exploration challenge that didn't involve a trap, monsters, or a time limit, and we are 36 pages into this thread.

Why is exploration such a difficult pillar to do right? Well, because it seems like people only throw basic challenges like traps or resources, or make it into the combat pillar. But, that isn't really leaning into the idea of exploration.

What, in your opinion, would really make exploration shine?

(apologies if I missed your specific ideas somewhere in the 36 pages here)

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'll still respond for now since we at least have it on the record that unseen servant can't overcome all exploration challenges.

I never said it did. I said it dealt with traps. And it seems like it does deal with the vast majority of them.

Whether it's a victory depends on how the dramatic question is framed and with consideration of the total context of the situation. I went into this already. You seem to suggest that the trap going off is victory when that's far from always the case. It really just leads to other things - the next step in the exploration challenge maybe or to combat or social interaction.

A small victory then, but let me rephrase.

You gave me no context other than the unseen servant dropped a passive stone block that cut off the passageway. Depending on the context... we might just shrug and walk away from that pillar, because if there is no indication of anything being worth our while past there, then why bother with it?

And your entire "counterexample" ignores a very important point... Rogues can fail checks. Any trap that the Unseen Servant trips is a trap that the rest of the party might have tripped if they weren't using it. Meaning that every trap is something that the DM had to consider would be tripped.

And if I could trigger it by accident, triggering it on purpose with no loss to the party is a victory. A positive. A boon , if you need me to use different words. And if a monster shows up... then we aren't doing exploration any more, and nothing that follows is a testament to exploration. It is combat.

I get the impression that time is not really a factor in the games you play or rarely is.

I still don't understand why you're trying to draw some sort of distinction between the pillars here as it pertains to exploration challenges. There's exploration (as defined in the rules) and there's exploration challenges. Either one can lead to other pillars or indeed involve more than one at a time.

It is not usually a concern, no. It happens, but certainly not every dungeon.

But, here is why I'm drawing the distinction. If we take the use of ritual magic to bypass exploration challenges as an exploration problem... isn't it weird to offer combat with a monster as the primary solution? If someone came to you and said they were having issues with a combat encounter being too easy because of the use of fireball... does it make sense to advocate that they put a secret bottom in the treasure chest so they get less gold? That doesn't solve the issue, it just makes a secondary challenge for the players that has nothing to do with the combat portion of the game.

This is why I'm drawing the distinction, because if you are tackling exploration being solved by ritual magic by punishing the players with more combat, it is the same sort of issue as having them get fewer rewards in every fight they use fireball. You aren't addressing the concern, you are just punishing them until they stop using the tool that is solving their problems.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

There's also this from the PHB which I don't think has been posted here yet... interesting that the descriptions of social interaction and combat both use examples that point back to the exploration pillar. One interpretation is that the whole game is exploration while combat and social interaction are specific, developed tools that can be utilized to help overcome (or further complicate) exploration challenges:


The Three Pillars of Adventure (PHB p8)
Adventurers can try to do anything their players can imagine, but it can be helpful to talk about their activities in three broad categories: exploration, social interaction, and combat.

Exploration includes both the adventurers' movement through the world and their interaction with objects and situations that require their attention. Exploration is the give-and-take of the players describing what they want their characters to do, and the Dungeon Master telling the players what happens as a result.

On a large scale, that might involve the characters spending a day crossing a rolling plain or an hour making their way through caverns underground. On the smallest scale, it could mean one character pulling a lever in a dungeon room to see what happens.

Social-interaction features the adventurers talking to someone (or something) else. It might mean demanding that a captured scout reveal the secret entrance to the goblin lair, getting information from a rescued prisoner, pleading for mercy from an orc chieftain, or persuading a talkative magic mirror to show a distant location to the adventurers.

The rules in chapters 7 and 8 support exploration and social interaction, as do many class features in chapter 3 and personality traits in chapter 4.

Combat, the focus of chapter 9, involves characters and other creatures swinging weapons, casting spells, maneuvering for position, and so on-all in an effort to defeat their opponents, whether that means killing every enemy, taking captives, or forcing a rout. Combat is the most structured element of a D&D session, with creatures taking turns to make sure that everyone gets a chance to act. Even in the context of a pitched battle, there's still plenty of opportunity for adventurers to attempt wacky stunts like surfing down a flight of stairs on a shield, to examine the environment (perhaps by pulling a mysterious lever), and to interact with other creatures, including allies, enemies, and neutral parties.

 

[TheSword]

Sure, that sounds like a lot of fun.

But I'm curious why I'm the one being called out as having a "limited view"? I'm just responding to what people have been saying. Any times we point out that they could bypass a trap or deal with an issue by just taking more time and using basic resources, we get told there are wandering monsters, or a time limit. You are actually one of the first people to present an exploration challenge that didn't involve a trap, monsters, or a time limit, and we are 36 pages into this thread.

Why is exploration such a difficult pillar to do right? Well, because it seems like people only throw basic challenges like traps or resources, or make it into the combat pillar. But, that isn't really leaning into the idea of exploration.

Only because of your suggestion that an exploration adventure was exploring a ruin for treasure. When exploration can be so much more.

Essentially I see the exploration pillar as something that can easily fill a session but works best in a balance of combat and roleplay. For me exploration is the gaining of knowledge related to game world and the adventure through the characters actions. (Pretty much chiming with the DMG quote above. There is definitely an overlap with combat and roleplay and where possible this overlap should be seamless. It’s about working out what has happen in the past, what might happen in the future and what’s on the other side of that door right now. It can be uncovered through handouts? Or interrogations, or walking and looking for yourself. I really do think the most of the material of my style of adventures is exploration and i definitely prefer it that way.

For instance I just ran a session where the party scouted out a mine they know to contain a hidden cult. They travelled to the area (exploration). They surveyed the area (exploration) then followed one of the mine workers after the shift to a festhall (some more exploration of that location) then bribed the worker with drink and gold to gain info about the inner mine (roleplay). They then infiltrated the mine (exploration) discovering an elevator down in abandoned room that they were able to get working (exploration) and found a hidden temple with a strange black pool, several magical braziers and relics of holy rituals (exploration). They defeated a couple of low level guards (combat) placed to keep an eye on the place. Finally they found a secret passage in one of the walls exploration).

I’d say this session was 70% exploration, 20% roleplay, 10% combat. I’m ok with that. There was the risk of discovery by the mine guards and workers which they overcame with stealth and a little magic. Crossed a broken bridge across a chasm to the disused part of the mine and elevator and interacted with the dangerous pool of black ooze. There was plenty of hazard and challenge that wasn’t combat.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes, and if you clarify that every time you open the door, you'll go along with those procedures, then that's fine.

But I have a hard time believing any player would be okay with this set of events:

DM: You see a door. You check for the traps on the door by first checking the handle but turning it releases a blast of cold air!

Player: Hey, we didn't say that we did that!

DM: you always do that, though

Player: Yeah, but you obviously railroaded us into that trap.

And the DM did. The DM gave them no chance to re-evaluate their SOP and they got hurt because of the assumption. At that point, it really doesn't matter what you were about to say, the DM already violated your agency.

If you're a fighter in melee against a single enemy, the DM has no right to make your attacks for you.

But there has to be a middle ground between me reading off a checklist at every door, and being asked if I'm sure I want to do it in that order, and the DM railroading me into a trap that automatically goes off.

Especially since there is always something that could be done hurt a character who said the wrong thing. It's just tedium of trying to outsmart the DM, while the DM is actively working to make it as painful as possible.

I don't get what you mean. The point isn't that you purposefully put something in there, the point is that the player was curious and decided to check it out. Whether you put something in there is the icing on the cake but even an empty chasm says that nothing has fallen into it since it was created, which could be useful information. It might even alleviate any fears of an ambush coming from within the chasm.

Maybe you don't remember your own example?

"Here's a point of interest: place those famous 30' chasms in your game and, at the very bottom, put some cool magic items from lost adventurers. Make sure the bottom is out of view from the edge. Watch as the wizards "win" this challenge by shooting their own foot and missing out on something that could have helped the group."

Your entire point was to punish the players for bypassing the chasm. Shown by the quotes are "win" because ha ha, they didn't think to climb into a chasm they couldn't see the bottom of to get treasure they couldn't see. Man, look how they shot themselves in the foot.

What's the point of specifically setting them up to fail if they don't decide to look in random crevices? Sure, if they decide to I might put something in there, because they went and climbed inside the chasm, but I'm not going to set them up so I can chuckle at them thinking they are succeeding by successfully bypassing the challenges, when the reality is they should have been more clever.

You're assuming the trap has a reasonable time limit. Sure, you could wait for the gas to dissipate but it might either be magical gas that doesn't dissipate or it may take days for it to clear.

The flames could also be magical and continuous. The scythe traps don't need to stop.

Now its a dangerous corridor with plenty of saving throws against damage and debuffs but you don't know how long it will take to bypass it.

Taking things as a general procedure for checklists can easily work at your own disadvantage.

Okay, so first this is exactly the same situation if the party failed to detect the trap, except no one is injured, so we're still good.

So we can wait a few days, that's an option. Maybe we send the Unseen servant up to tie a rope to the swinging blades, the hemp rope is pretty strong, and if we can create a rope path to climb up and over the blades and flames then that would work. Have to worry about the poison gas, but maybe it is thinner at the top. Maybe it can plug the vents the gas is coming out of with wax.


I still don't understand how putting party members in harm's way is somehow superior to the Unseen Servant revealing the danger ahead of time. Also, most traps don't keep going for days, and if they are endless and continuous... then why were they not active when we got to the hallway? Is this a trap that has never once ever been set off? I'm just not understanding how we are in a worse situation than we would have been walking down this hallway of obvious and continuous death.

 

[Chaosmancer]

A game of pure combat sounds umnplayable to me. Combat in DnD is not that good - I'd play Mordheim or something if that's what I wanted to do. You need to context to make combat worthwhile. A session which was almost all combat would be okay.

I don't really care if you would find it unplayable, people play that way. Pretty consistently. The question is if people have done the opposite exploring with no combat whatsoever.

We did have a session recently in the game I play in with neither combat nor any NPCs to talk to. The entire thing was spent poking around a dungeon trying to find something. There was a puzzle we had to solve and some traps. Obviously, there was context to explain why we were in the tomb and what we were trying to accomplish. I enjoyed it.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. Might end up like what I was talking about, but a puzzle and some traps sounds pretty sparse.

 

[turnip_farmer]

I don't really care if you would find it unplayable, people play that way. Pretty consistently. The question is if people have done the opposite exploring with no combat whatsoever.



I'm glad you enjoyed it. Might end up like what I was talking about, but a puzzle and some traps sounds pretty sparse.

I don't really care if you would find it sparse. People play that way.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Where are you getting this number from?

Also, pull or drag (and shouldn't that be push or drag?) should be a bigger number than lift, right? I mean, I can drag a hell of a lot more weight than I can lift.

Page 176 of the 5e PHB

Carrying Capacity. Your carrying capacity is your Strength score multiplied by 15. This is the weight (in pounds) that you can carry, which is high enough that most characters don't usually have to worry about it.

Push, Drag, or Lift. You can push, drag, or lift a weight in pounds up to twice your carrying capacity (or 30 times your Strength score). While pushing or dragging weight in excess of your carrying capacity, your speed drops to 5 feet.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Exactly, which counters your point upthread re the Servant being able to protect the party. Here, the only difference is the Rogue gets fried alongside you rather than 30' up the hall (and for extra evil, the lightning bolt should start just behind whoever sets off the trap; meaning the person who triggers the trap is safe but all their friends get fried...)

So... one specific type of trap. Okay, let me give just a few it protects us from

Scything blade in the room with the lever
Explosion in the room with the lever
Spikes from the floor in the room with the lever
Poison all over the lever
Lever turns into a viper
Falling block in the room with the lever
Pit trap opening in the room with the lever

So, one that counters my point, seven that support it. Of course the DM could make a trap that specifically targets the people not pulling the lever and instead blows up the hallway behind them... but nothing the party does is going to stop that. So, it isn't really a counter of the servant being safer and protecting the party to show that a DM can hurt the party no matter what they do.

It's worth bringing this idea up for exactly as long as it takes to toss it to the curb; Unseen Servants are not creatures (it's not a summon spell, for one thing) and won't trigger anything requiring the presence of a creature. Nor are they alive; even if a Servant's within range, Detect Life won't pull it.

Until a DM says you are wrong and it is and it does.

Because if you don't specify it the DM is left wide open to "But I never said I was opening the book!"; and who here hasn't had this argument a hundred times or more. A DM can never just assume a PC is doing something, particularly when other options are available.

Instead of stopping and staring at you, though, the DM should have said "You find a closed book on the desk. Are you doing anything with it?" This question forces you to declare whether you're leaving it where it is, or stowing it in your pack for later, or opening it [kaboom!], or just reading the outside cover, or calling someone else over to check it out, or whatever.

Honestly? It has been a long time since I've had that conversation. Yeah, sometimes you need to specify, but I've been in plenty of situations where the DM had me pointlessly spell out everything, just to "increase the tension". And it didn't increase the tension, it just annoyed me.

If the book is going to blow up the moment I open it, then why not just have a drawer that blows up when I open it. Or have the chair blow up when I touch it. If it is going to be just taking damage for not being "careful enough" then just get it over with.

And then I'll go ahead and use Mage Hand an unseen servant and interact with everything from 30 ft or more away, so I don't get blown up the next time, because now I'm being "clever" and that means, according to @TheSword that I'm hogging the spotlight and my fellow players will just throw me into an explosion so they don't have to sit through me painstakingly avoiding every trap.

And how is any of this a challenge instead of just tedium?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Chaosmancer is incorrect here. Here's the rules from the PH:

Carrying Capacity. Your carrying capacity is your Strength score multiplied by 15. This is the weight (in pounds) that you can carry, which is high enough that most characters don't usually have to worry about it.

Push, Drag, or Lift. You can push, drag, or lift a weight in pounds up to twice your carrying capacity (or 30 times your Strength score). While pushing or dragging weight in excess of your carrying capacity, your speed drops to 5 feet.

Size and Strength. Larger creatures can bear more weight, whereas Tiny creatures can carry less. For each size category above Medium, double the creature's carrying capacity and the amount it can push, drag, or lift. For a Tiny creature, halve these weights.

I said push. Push is 30*strength score. Unseen servant is strength 2

2*30 = 60.

You literally quoted the rules, how can I possibly be wrong?