D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[Chaosmancer]

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

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

Honestly? I don't know. With the way the game is written and the "expected challenges" of traps I can't really think of any way to do it without completely rewriting the game.

The best version of traps I have found is the "click" method, I think from Dungeon Dudes, which basically allows the players to react to a trap being triggered to try and avoid it by declaring an action. It still doesn't really solve a lot of the bigger problems with traps.

Puzzles and Riddles are a constant headache, and I've tried to figure out a way to utilize them that isn't just challenging the players while they take a break from DnD.

Resource management is fairly boring, but mostly it is a solved problem. Barring needing a wagon to carry water (and then hiring a small army to care for the wagon and the mules) it isn't something that is a challenge I've found.

But, perhaps the biggest, the game just doesn't make the world fantastical enough. Most exploration problems are things handled the same way at level 2 as they are at level 5 as they are at level 17. The numbers get bigger, but the actual mechanisms rarely change. And there is no "dangerous wilderness" past around level 5, it simply doesn't exist.

The closest to something really good I've found in 5e so far is the Tasha's environments, those are a really cool idea, but a lot of it is still wandering monsters to fight and traps that hit your hp. It doesn't offer a lot of options, not in the way I was hoping.

As was said, the best parts of exploration are when you are discovering the context of the adventure, finding the clues, but you can't make mechanics for that. You can't make mechanics for descriptions.

so, I'm really not sure. There are a lot of different problems, and I'm not sure there is one solution.

 

[Lanefan]

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

At which point I might put up an argument, were I in that game; or not, depending on mood.

Honestly? It has been a long time since I've had that conversation.

You'd be having it with me, were I a player and you-as-DM did this to me.

It's only fair to show the same courtesy to the players, and let them state their own actions, when I'm the DM.

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.

Slow down and smell the roses!

I sometimes think the greatest enemy of good gaming is the constant attempts to speed things up.

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.

Maybe I do. But I'm still not going to blow you up until-unless you specify you're doing whatever's required to set the bomb off.

If it is going to be just taking damage for not being "careful enough" then just get it over with.

That sounds like a challenge: how many times do I have to blow your characters up before they start being more careful.

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.

Fortunately, I run a system where spells of any kind are a very finite resource; so constantly using a spell to bypass these things would become problematic before long.

 

[Lanefan]

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?

You're not.

However, quoting a clearly bad (as in, truly awful!) rule doesn't make the rule any better; and a Strength-2 thing shouldn't be able to generate anywhere near that much push force.

Remember, a Strength-2 Human isn't strong enough to even stand up on its own. It ain't going to be pushing 60-lb. bales of hay around any time soon.

 

[Asisreo]

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.

The point is the "obstacle" or "challenge" doesn't have to be an obstacle or challenge. They don't "lose" the chasm either. They just miss the treasure. No evil cackling about how they miss out. If anything, I'd be a bit disappointed that I wrote cool treasure but they just missed out on it. I can't predict the players' decisions which is the crutch of this whole conversation.

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.

You're trying to outsmart the traps. That's what you do as adventurers. Its true the DM makes the traps but its to add tension and conflict, not to make the players feel bad.

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.

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.

Its completely up to context. There might be time pressures or the trap blocks off access to a helpful but optional portion of the dungeon.

Why its there is completely up to the DM, but so long as the DM actually puts in work for the game, the trap activating might be bad.

A rogue with Perception and Investigation expertise might be able to bypass this trap just as easily if not moreso.

 

[iserith]

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

I would say it helps with some. I'm not sure a claim of "vast majority" really holds up in any objective sense. Maybe that's true with the sort of traps you're used to in your games, but that's not every game. As I said upthread, when someone has an assertion, complaint, or objection, we have to imagine what must be true in that person's game for the assertion, complaint, or objection to make sense. A claim of "vast majority" tells me that the variation in traps presented is likely to be very small, probably a lot of one-and-done traps, and that the DM's interpretation of what the unseen servant can do is overly broad. In those conditions, you have a point. But that's only true of some games.

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.

Again, setting off a trap isn't always good or wise and may ultimately be a failure - unseen servant or no - depending on what is at stake. If it's a complex trap that resets, for example, it only reveals the trap is there and perhaps what it's capable of doing. It does not answer any other questions about what to do next.

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.

For one, the use of rituals to overcome exploration challenges isn't a problem in my view. But it also isn't as "free" as some would have us believe - at least not in all games. It's a problem in some games that are run in particular ways, perhaps. So the question is, as I see it, "What is it about how I'm prepping and running my game that creates these conditions?" not "What the heck is wrong with these rules?"

Further, time pressure by way of wandering monsters or countdowns is simply a way to increase the difficulty of an exploration challenge. It isn't a punishment. It makes the decisions the players need to make harder. Without it, you're decreasing difficulty and it's no wonder your unseen servant is an unstoppable trap destroying machine. So, again, it's worth considering how you're designing and presenting your challenges first.

 

[Faolyn]

You're not.

However, quoting a clearly bad (as in, truly awful!) rule doesn't make the rule any better; and a Strength-2 thing shouldn't be able to generate anywhere near that much push force.

Remember, a Strength-2 Human isn't strong enough to even stand up on its own. It ain't going to be pushing 60-lb. bales of hay around any time soon.

To be fair, an unseen servant isn't a human, or even humanoid. It's more like telekinesis you don't need to concentrate on.

 

[Chaosmancer]

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

Dude... that was an example, not a comprehensive list of everything Exploration can be. That's like saying someones view of combat is limited because they talk about fighting an orc. It doesn't mean they are unaware that other monsters exist.

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.

Sure, everything is best in moderation, but again, a lot of the responses I've seen to solving Exploration challenges (whether traps, ravines, food and water, transport, ect) via magic and rituals have been wandering monsters. It really made me wonder, how often have people run a game session with no combat at all, no social rolls at all, purely exploration.

For instance I just ran a session where the party scouted out a mine they know to contain a hidden cult. They traveled to the area (exploration). They surveyed the area (exploration) then followed one of the mine workers after the shift to a feast hall (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.

I'm sure it was fun, but here is a quick thought. From the way you described it, there were few actual challenges. Some stealth, you mentioned a chasm, and then whatever that ooze was. For the vast majority of this, it sounds like they declared an action, and succeeded. I could honestly see 80% of your session not involving a single die roll.

And I'm not saying that's bad, but it is notable. It makes me wonder, if people are struggling with exploration, maybe it is because the best parts of exploration are the parts that are the reveals. Traveling through a location isn't exciting, it is when you take information you have and start applying it, that is when it gets exciting.

 

[Chaosmancer]

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

I was more hoping you would elaborate, but we can just uselessly snipe at each other too.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You'd be having it with me, were I a player and you-as-DM did this to me.

It's only fair to show the same courtesy to the players, and let them state their own actions, when I'm the DM.

You want to complain about me speeding things along when there are no traps or other gotcha's feel free. I haven't had a non-obviously telegraphed trap in years.

Slow down and smell the roses!

I sometimes think the greatest enemy of good gaming is the constant attempts to speed things up.

There is smelling the roses, and then there is six athletics rolls to break down a door that we all know we are going to get through.

I'm not trying to rush through everything, but I'd much rather say "I search the room" instead of "I search the drawers. I search the wardrobe. I search the pockets of the clothes in the wardrobe. I check for a false back. I search the bed. I search under the bed. I lift the mattress and search under there. I search the foot locker. I check the foot locker for a false bottom. I check the book shelf. I check the red book. I check the green book. I check the blue book. I check the brown book. I check the purple book." ect ect ect.

Maybe I do. But I'm still not going to blow you up until-unless you specify you're doing whatever's required to set the bomb off.

Look man, I get player agency. But sometimes I don't feel like playing 20 questions.

That sounds like a challenge: how many times do I have to blow your characters up before they start being more careful.

Fortunately, I run a system where spells of any kind are a very finite resource; so constantly using a spell to bypass these things would become problematic before long.

Then I'll get a 15 ft pole. Or I'll just stand around and do nothing until the other people get blown up enough.

Look, I can play the way where I describe every single thing I do to prevent any sort of risk to my character. And you can probably find something I missed and I get hurt by a trap I didn't see coming. But all of that is a lot of effort for a whole lot of boring tedium. I just don't see the point.

You're not.

However, quoting a clearly bad (as in, truly awful!) rule doesn't make the rule any better; and a Strength-2 thing shouldn't be able to generate anywhere near that much push force.

Remember, a Strength-2 Human isn't strong enough to even stand up on its own. It ain't going to be pushing 60-lb. bales of hay around any time soon.

I don't see any point in discussing what it should be, I'm simply talking about what it is.

 

[TheSword]

Dude... that was an example, not a comprehensive list of everything Exploration can be. That's like saying someones view of combat is limited because they talk about fighting an orc. It doesn't mean they are unaware that other monsters exist.



Sure, everything is best in moderation, but again, a lot of the responses I've seen to solving Exploration challenges (whether traps, ravines, food and water, transport, ect) via magic and rituals have been wandering monsters. It really made me wonder, how often have people run a game session with no combat at all, no social rolls at all, purely exploration.



I'm sure it was fun, but here is a quick thought. From the way you described it, there were few actual challenges. Some stealth, you mentioned a chasm, and then whatever that ooze was. For the vast majority of this, it sounds like they declared an action, and succeeded. I could honestly see 80% of your session not involving a single die roll.

And I'm not saying that's bad, but it is notable. It makes me wonder, if people are struggling with exploration, maybe it is because the best parts of exploration are the parts that are the reveals. Traveling through a location isn't exciting, it is when you take information you have and start applying it, that is when it gets exciting.

I don’t think you’re wrong there. A lot of exploration doesn’t require a roll, it requires a decision to take a course of action.

And that’s just fine. Not everything has to come down to a dice roll to be a challenge. Sometimes a mystery is a challenge or decision making. These things can be just as important as dice rolling. Decision making can be extremely difficult… agonizing even.

As an example, the players had to decide whether or not to wear armour as they snuck into the mine. Armour would make them far more conspicuous and stand out amid the regular miners, but it would protect them if they did get caught. That was a challenging decision. It required thought. They ended up breaking into one of the mine workshops, loading their armour into an empty crate and carried that into the mine as if it was full of tools.