D&D 5E [+]Exploration Falls Short For Many Groups, Let’s Talk About It

[overgeeked]

I don't think this is necessarily true. The resources you manage in a dungeon crawl in 5e are just hit points. Everyone manages HP. Because of how long rests work, I'd imagine exploration to challenge HP and HD, but this isn't substantially more than they're already managing.

I haven't met many players in the last 30-some years who're interested in old-school resource management or bookkeeping. Some yes, but not many. In the last 10 years I've almost exclusively met players who prefer 5E's version of "resource management" over anything even approaching old-school resource management. So I'd say it's absolutely true. I think you're maybe missing some of the context of the comment you're disagreeing with.

Every system works perfectly with a perfect DM, yeah. But even with florid descriptions and engaged players, rolling a bunch of skill checks can feel pretty lackluster. It's like reducing a combat to a bunch of attack rolls and expecting the DM to provide the details. It'll work just fine, in a pinch (shout out if you were a Fighter in 2e, because this was basically your playstyle), but things like saving throws and area effects and movement and terrain and resource management all add to the complexity in a good way. They're desired, because combat should be interesting and more than just d20 rolls!

If you hate an activity or a mechanic, it doesn't matter how enthusiastic or descriptive the referee is. But don't pretend like marking a torch off on your character sheet is somehow inherently more engaging than a skill check. Either you decide the activity has value or you decide the activity does not. Arguing about it won't change anyone's mind. They're personal preferences, not capital "T" Truths.

If you instead design your exploration like you're designing a dungeon, you are going to add nuance and variety. Traps and encounters and big reveals and impactful decisions. That's appealing complexity. If exploration is important, it should have that kind of appealing complexity.

And how is it resolved? According to you, none of the above matters if any of it is resolved with a skill check. The details are engaging or they're not. The resolution mechanic is engaging or it's not. Some people simply have different preferences. Arguing that their preferences are wrong is a waste of time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think you get it.

They don't want anyone to have them officially.
They don't want players to expect to use the official options.

There is a contingent who have years of experience on running exploration and don't want WOTC, Paizo, Kobold Press, ENPublishing or anyone else interfering with that.


It's not about being rules light.

It's about having holes they believe only the DM should fill.
There are people who don't want players to ask them to use the optional ABC rules on page XYZ in the DMG.
And these fans are vocal and have influence in the community. That's why the exploration rules in the multiple games are detailed in some parts and bare in others. And why its always the same parts.

I know. I still don't think those who hold that opinion should be catered to, because they explicitly want other gamers to have less. They should be ignored.

 

[Hussar]

I am very much in favor of bringing magic down a notch or two, can only do the game good

I have to admit, I'm very much in that camp as well. I've mentioned in another thread that I've been playing fairly high level D&D for about 3 or so years now with groups that are almost entirely casters. The whole "Well, they just won't have the right spell" argument kinda goes out the window when you have three or four full casters and a half caster as well. There are just so many spell slots and options. If one character doesn't have something, you can pretty much gurantee that someone else will.

 

[Hussar]

I know. I still don't think those who hold that opinion should be catered to, because they explicitly want other gamers to have less. They should be ignored.

Where have you been for the past ten years? 5e is completely designed based on this. That's explicitly the design of 5e - rulings not rules.

-------------

See, @I'm A Banana - I'm going to disagree with you on the expenditures thing. Because, yes, a 7th level spell is a pretty major expenditure. Except that you're trading your 7th level spell for 3 more 7th level spells. Because in a group with 4 full casters, you have 4 7th level spells. Suddenly that expenditure is pretty minor. It's only 1/4 of the most powerful effects the group can use.

That's what the whole "resource management" argument misses. It's not about resource management of a specific character. That's not the issue. It's resources for the group. It doesn't matter how many HP a character has, so long as the group has enough healing to bring it back. And, when you start dealing with high level parties that aren't the stereotypical 2 fighter types, a rogue, a cleric and a wizard, suddenly, the whole thing gets knocked out of whack.

Because, in one way, you're right. In a typical party, one of the two full casters using their highest level slot to gain a long rest is probably not the most effective use of that slot. It's a choice. But, in a party with 4 casters, suddenly that's a minor expense. Oh noes, the group is down 1 of its 4 7th level spells. They only have 3 more to use.

I really think that because the game is so based around low level play and around the notion of a very specific group load out, once you deviate from that, the magic system fights you tooth and nail.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Where have you been for the past ten years? 5e is completely designed based on this. That's explicitly the design of 5e - rulings not rules.

This can be fought against whilst still adhering to the basic framework of the 5e rules (if not necessarily their aesthetics). Level Up, for example, does this.

 

[Hussar]

This can be fought against whilst still adhering to the basic framework of the 5e rules (if not necessarily their aesthetics). Level Up, for example, does this.

And if this was a thread about Level Up or on the Level Up forum, that would be an excellent point. But, since this is a thread specifically about 5e D&D, as in WotC 5e D&D, and it's a + thread to boot, all you're doing is thread crapping.

So, what's your point?

 

[M_Natas]

But that would be a huge change for the game- making magic unreliable. Mord's Mansion is 100% effective for what it does. There are no "random encounters" when you use it. Same as most of the magic in 5e D&D. Yes, we can keep trying to add "challenges" when the party uses Leomund's Hut or Goodberries or this or that or whatever. There are two problems with that though.

1. The casters are now driving the challenges of the game. We're not adding in random encounters that make sense for the adventure, we're adding in random encounters or events to counter using these spells. The only reason that these events are occuring is in response to the players using these spells. Which, at the end of the day, runs counter to why we use these spells in the first place. The whole point of using these spells was to avoid encounters and make resting safe.

2. And, I'm not sure getting into some sorts of magical arms race with the players is healthy. Well, the players now have resource X, Y and Z, so, we must up the challenges for exploration to match. It's essentially just a treadmill. Get stronger, face stronger opposition, get stronger... Again, the reason we're doing this is in response to the casters.

It's an arms race that I'm not interested in because it also has the knock on effect of making players realize that if they want to engage in the game, they have to play casters. Your fighter isn't going to be of much use traversing the Elemental Plane of Water, where you need things like Water Breathing, some sort of magic that gives you a swim speed and so on. All of that comes from the casters.

The tension between the magic system and exploration is very difficult to resolve.

The problem is, Tiny Hut, Goodberry and Co. wouldn't be a problem, if the Rest System wouldn't be so bad.
Most problems with Tiny Hut and Co. would be solved, if players wouldn't get just 100% of their spells back after sleeping/resting 8 hours no matter where they do it.

If you are on a 10-day Wilderness Expedition and wouldn't get spell slots back, because long rests only can happen in town, for example, Tiny Hut and Goodberry are suddenly very expensive, because Spell Slots become scarce.

But right now, except for maybe the first 3 or 4 levels, a caster barley ever runs out of spellslots, so utility spells don't really have an opportunity cost, because you always have spell slots left and because you always reset to 100% spell slots after a long rest, not using leftover spell slots before a long rest is stupid, especially of they can make the long rest safe.
And without a real opportunity cost, using such utility spells is always the best way.

But now imagine a rest system, that only gives a fraction of spell slots back. Suddenly, using Tiny Hut means, that maybe the next day you can't fight efficiently or help the group pass the chasm.

That is the big problems with 5Es exploration - that PCs are always just one good nap away from being at 100% of their capabilities.

The removal of any long term impact of battles, of traps, trivialises most challenges that exploration otherwise would pose.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Does everyone in your group, yourself included, want to get to the action? If so, perhaps you should just narrate time passing with the occasional description of spectacle and dispense with exploration altogether. I don't believe, however, that we should assume everyone feels that way and so validate WotC's choice not to put serious effort into one of the parts of the game they themselves say is just as important as combat.

There is a difference between travel and exploration. Travel is getting from one known adventure location to another, and an Indiana Jones style red line on the map often does fine. But exploration is a different thing all together, and explorers typically don't know where they will end up.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

One idea that did occur to me that we could do to help each other is create an "encounter bank" on there forums. Anyone interested?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Interesting enough this article appeared on D&DBeyond and echoes come suggestions that have come up.