D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[Lanefan]

And when the next trap "just so happens" to be something not covered in the SOP, like Lanefan's example of the handle that blasts cold?

Sorry, but that one wasn't mine.

 

[Faolyn]

Note, there is absolutely nothing wrong with free form gaming. I've done it, it's fun. But, it does REALLY rely on the group, rather than the mechanics being any help. What I mean is, since there are no mechanics, the DM is pretty much 100% responsible for everything. I guess that's what's been commented on all the way along when people were talking about how it's very vague in so many areas. How do you find that secret door was the example before. We had two, contradictory answers, both claiming to be correct, and apparently, it's not a problem that the rules contradict each other.

They don't contradict each other. Neither of them says "this is the only way to search for secret doors." They both tell you ways to find things. Should the DMG have been clearer? Apparently so. Does it lack a rule though? No.

This isn't free form play, though. This is something that requires the DM to actually be familiar enough with the printed rules to be able to make the appropriate call. Which is why I'll state I was incorrect when I said it's Investigation to find secret doors: the DMG actually says what to do on page 103. It's actually both Perception (to find the door) and Investigation (to figure out how to open it). Although in my defense, I just looked up skills and not secret doors, and I almost never actually use them in my games.

Secret Door. A secret door is crafted to blend into the wall that surrounds it. Sometimes faint cracks in the wall or scuff marks on the floor betray the secret door's presence.

Detecting a Secret Door. Use the characters' passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to determine whether anyone in the party notices a secret door without actively searching for it. Characters can also find a secret door by actively searching the location where the door is hidden and succeeding on a Wisdom (Perception) check. To set an appropriate DC for the check, see chapter 8.

Opening a Secret Door. Once a secret door is detected, a successful Intelligence (Investigation) check might be required to determine how to open it if the opening mechanism isn't obvious. Set the DC according to the difficulty guidelines in chapter 8.

If adventurers can't determine how to open a secret door, breaking it down is always an option. Treat it as a locked door made of the same material as the surrounding wall, and use the guidelines in chapter 8 to determine appropriate DCs or statistics.

The DMG contains this sort of info. Chapter 5 is on adventure environments and has a whole section on wilderness survival and the weather, on foraging, on food and water needs, and even on becoming lost. Chapter 8 has a section on exploration. Sure, it could really benefit from a Wilderness Survival Guide and Dungeoneer's Survival Guide (a So-and-So's Guide to Exploration, most likely), but the rules do in fact exist. So basically, it's a case of RTFDMG. Don't just assume that because you don't know the rule of the top of your head that it doesn't exist.

Which, from the POV of the OP, is probably why it's problematic. The other two pillars are nowhere near as DM dependent.

And that is simply because the only class that has exploration built-in is Ranger, when all classes should have some exploration ability. Everyone has combat and social stuff written on their sheet, so everyone knows it.

 

[Azzy]

I played the module as written - the prisoner is bound and gagged. He can't make any noise. Additionally, in 5e, that yellow mold thing doesn't exist. Sorry, I should have specified I was running Ghosts of Saltmarsh.

Yes, there is. It's in room 11.

 

[Aldarc]

Honestly? I think this is the heart of the issue.

As you just described it, a lot of exploration is basically free form. There's no rules, there's no actual game there. It's just a series of free form Q&A statements that gets to a point where you begin engaging with the game again.

Note, there is absolutely nothing wrong with free form gaming. I've done it, it's fun. But, it does REALLY rely on the group, rather than the mechanics being any help. What I mean is, since there are no mechanics, the DM is pretty much 100% responsible for everything. I guess that's what's been commented on all the way along when people were talking about how it's very vague in so many areas. How do you find that secret door was the example before. We had two, contradictory answers, both claiming to be correct, and apparently, it's not a problem that the rules contradict each other.

So, yes, IF the DM is right in the groove to do this, AND the players are happy with free form play, AND the players are not going to leverage the mechanics that are present in the game that does go a long way towards skipping over exploration play, THEN exploration can be a ton of fun.

Which, from the POV of the OP, is probably why it's problematic. The other two pillars are nowhere near as DM dependent.

It's not that there are no rules (slim as they may be), but, rather, that the DM has a lot of leeway of what rules and rulings apply along with when and how. But even if there are rules on the DM side of things, this does IMHO make it a bit more nebulous on the player-side of things. Again, the DMG itself admits that the combat is more structured than other pillars.

And that is simply because the only class that has exploration built-in is Ranger, when all classes should have some exploration ability. Everyone has combat and social stuff written on their sheet, so everyone knows it.

(1) I'm not sure that it matters that all classes should have some exploration ability, because what matters is that they don't (at least according to your estimation), and (2) the Ranger's exploration abilities are mostly about skipping the exploration content, which is IMO questionable design that doesn't necessarily make the Ranger feel cool at what it should be good at.

 

[TheSword]

If you look at the module and what @the Sword posted, you'll note that everything in there points downwards. Nothing suggests there is anything interesting on the second floor.

The stairs point up… that would be enough for a lot of people.

Maybe our group are grognards but it is alien to me to explore a possibly endless unknown underground area first when there is a finite first floor to check instead. Particularly when leaving potential enemies or hazards above could leave you trapped between two parties if you head downstairs.

Honestly? I think this is the heart of the issue.

As you just described it, a lot of exploration is basically free form. There's no rules, there's no actual game there. It's just a series of free form Q&A statements that gets to a point where you begin engaging with the game again.

There are tons of rules. Literally hundreds. How many hp and what’s the AC of a stone wall vs a wooden wall. Climbing rules to ascend the inner wall of a moat, jumping rules to get across that chasm I mentioned, saving throws against a huge range of hazards, the skill check system. Vision and light rules to see how far you can detect and how this affects skill checks to spot things, not to mention a huge range of spells that affect exploration and can be used as examples of non-magical effects… on and on. Exploration is choc full of crunch.

Note, there is absolutely nothing wrong with free form gaming. I've done it, it's fun. But, it does REALLY rely on the group, rather than the mechanics being any help. What I mean is, since there are no mechanics, the DM is pretty much 100% responsible for everything. I guess that's what's been commented on all the way along when people were talking about how it's very vague in so many areas. How do you find that secret door was the example before. We had two, contradictory answers, both claiming to be correct, and apparently, it's not a problem that the rules contradict each other.

I do think this has been answered. It’s perception to detect a door. Though if you have good reason, of course you can use another skill or method… survival to spot tracks leading up to the wall, or proficiency Alchemy to notice the smell of hydraulic fluid etc. Nature to see that the moss on that area of wall is newer. Etc.

So, yes, IF the DM is right in the groove to do this, AND the players are happy with free form play, AND the players are not going to leverage the mechanics that are present in the game that does go a long way towards skipping over exploration play, THEN exploration can be a ton of fun.

If the DM isn’t in the right groove, then of course it isn’t going to work. But I would say the same thing about combat, and definitely about roleplay. These things can also be leveraged and skipped. How many players have you seen that shoot first and ask questions later?

Which, from the POV of the OP, is probably why it's problematic. The other two pillars are nowhere near as DM dependent.

I really struggle to see how roleplay isn’t entirely DM dependent. To be honest I think it requires far more improvisations and work to roleplay NPCs well than it does to go through exploration.

Combat should be just as DM dependent if the DM is creating interesting combat environments, using good monster tactics, adjusting base monsters to make them more interesting, and adjudicating dynamic combat actions. Rather than just the orc swings his sword at you. It misses.

 

[TheSword]

(1) I'm not sure that it matters that all classes should have some exploration ability, because what matters is that they don't (at least according to your estimation), and (2) the Ranger's exploration abilities are mostly about skipping the exploration content, which is IMO questionable design that doesn't necessarily make the Ranger feel cool at what it should be good at.

Spell casting classes: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer’s, Warlocks, rangers, spell thieves, elderitch knights etc have a plethora of exploration abilities that they can select. A massive amount of choice.

Paladins have divine sense - that an exploration ability.

Rogues have expertise - that allows them to be experts in a wide range of exploration abilities

Rangers have lots of abilities linked to their terrain and favored enemies. I don't think that they skip exploration, for the most part. Being better able to track your foe doesn’t skip content, being able to move better in favored terrain or have enhanced skills doesn’t skip content it just frees you up in comparison to the rest of the party. Sure they can ignore getting lost and rations but if that’s only a tiny sliver of one tiny slice of exploration.

Fighters and Monks are about the only classes that don’t have some form of class granted exploration benefit. Though if we start judging the game based on what monks do or don’t get then we’re on a highway to nowhere. Despite that several of the subclasses for monks and fighters have exploration abilities.

Tool proficiencies allow for further exploration abilities in their fields and Languages are a form of exploration ability. They just aren’t bound to a particular class.

 

[Aldarc]

Spell casting classes: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer’s, Warlocks, rangers, spell thieves, elderitch knights etc have a plethora of exploration abilities that they can select. A massive amount of choice.

Let me stop you right there. You're barking up the wrong tree. The person I am quoting is the one who said that the Ranger is the only class with built-in exploration. So please address your rebuke to the correct person.

 

[Hussar]

Not to get too nitpicky here but... he can absolutely make noise to get the attention of the PCs. Read the Adventure summary and the sidebar in Ghosts of Saltmarsh.

Spoiler

His whole thing is a ruse to gain the characters' trust.

Spoiler: A Man on the Inside (part of the Adventure Summary)

A merchant in Saltmarsh who profits from the illegal activities of Sanbalet has taken desperate action to ensure that the smuggling operation continues. The merchant sent a local thug, Ned Shakeshaft, to the house to await the characters in a remote bedroom on the second floor.

Ned pretends to have been knocked out, gagged, bound, and left to die by unseen attackers. After being "rescued" by the characters, he aims to sow dissent, cause accidents, and otherwise make trouble as they explore the house.

More information on Ned and how to incorporate him into the adventure can be found in area 15.

Spoiler: Snake in the Grass (sidebar)

Ned tells the characters he is a traveler from Seaton who entered the house the previous night to find a place to sleep during his journey to Saltmarsh where he hoped to find work as an adventurer. He entered through the back door and had only reached the kitchen when he was attacked from behind and knocked unconscious. He awoke some hours ago—bound, gagged, and stripped of his possessions—in this room. He did not see his attackers nor has he heard any sounds in the house. Now he would like to be released and to join the characters in their mission.

Neither Ned nor his merchant mentor are fools, and they have given some thought to preparing this story—it is not possible for the characters to discern Ned's true motives. Indeed, to add verisimilitude to the story, Ned has a lump on the back of his head (inflicted, with sadistic delight, by the merchant before Ned left his company).

What Ned Wants.
Ned wants to manipulate the characters into abandoning their mission. He tries to achieve this by playing up the dangers of the place and causing accidents as they explore. The closer the characters get to discovering the truth about the smugglers, the more desperate he becomes. When it became clear he can't warn the characters off, he'll try to ambush them with a poisoned weapon during a fight against other creatures.

I will freely admit it's been a long time. My group saw the stairs down, saw the magic mouth and immediately went downstairs. I don't think they investigated more than two or three rooms on the first or second floors.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

I do think this has been answered. It’s perception to detect a door. Though if you have good reason, of course you can use another skill or method… survival to spot tracks leading up to the wall, or proficiency Alchemy to notice the smell of hydraulic fluid etc. Nature to see that the moss on that area of wall is newer. Etc.
/snip

No, it wasn't answered. It was given two conflicting answers.

 

[Hussar]

Spell casting classes: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer’s, Warlocks, rangers, spell thieves, elderitch knights etc have a plethora of exploration abilities that they can select. A massive amount of choice.

Paladins have divine sense - that an exploration ability.

Rogues have expertise - that allows them to be experts in a wide range of exploration abilities

Rangers have lots of abilities linked to their terrain and favored enemies. I doubt but that they skip exploration. Being better able to track your foe doesn’t skip content, being able to move better in favored terrain or have enhanced skills doesn’t skip content it just frees you up in comparison to the rest of the party. Sure they can ignore getting lost and rations but if that’s only a tiny sliver of one tiny slice of exploration.

Fighters and Monks are about the only classes that don’t have some form of class granted exploration benefit. Though if we start judging the game based on what monks do or don’t get then we’re on a highway to nowhere. Despite that several of the subclasses for monks and fighters have exploration abilities.

Tool proficiencies allow for further exploration abilities in their fields and Languages are a form of exploration ability. They just aren’t bound to a particular class.

Whoa, whoa, whoa - we just spent the past twenty pages being told that casters absolutely DON'T have any exploration abilities. That choosing these abilities are huge investments and no characters would EVER use them. I mean, didn't you argue against using unseen servant just a page or so back.

And, I really didn't understand it then. Unseen servant pushes down with 30 pounds of force every round, every 5 feet. This catches most traps in a corridor. That means I'm moving 5 feet every round, or 50 feet per minute. That's 500 feet per AD&D turn, or just a bit faster than FOUR TIMES the expected indoor travel speed in AD&D. And you're complaining that this is too slow? How fast do you think the party moves in a dungeon?