Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 9516320" data-attributes="member: 63508">Not a ton. Not compared to combat.But wilderness exploration without magic has fewer core rules in 5e.Without magic. It's very &quot;Mother May I?&quot; where viability of actions varies heavily from DM to DM.Then those types of classes work better.Without those subsystems, those homebrew non-spellcasting Rangers stink at ranging And the other side. If you don't run any real exploration game, the 5e Ranger becomes lackluster because 25-35% of it is tied to being good at exploration.Obstacles and Challenges with well designed rules to overcome them without magic at challenge levels the DM can understand.Base D&amp;D has practically no exploration rules outside of Tier 1 exceptPoisonsTrapsI mean the designers hinted at ways to deal with higher level exploration challenges like planar travel or hazardous environments without casting spells or finding magic items, then they went back on it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Minigiant, post: 9516320, member: 63508"] Not a ton. Not compared to combat. But wilderness exploration without magic has fewer core rules in 5e. Without magic. It's very "Mother May I?" where viability of actions varies [I]heavily[/I] from DM to DM. Then those types of classes work better. Without those subsystems, those homebrew non-spellcasting Rangers stink at ranging And the other side. If you don't run any real exploration game, the 5e Ranger becomes lackluster because 25-35% of it is tied to being good at exploration. Obstacles and Challenges with well designed rules to overcome them without magic at challenge levels the DM can understand. Base D&D has practically no exploration rules outside of Tier 1 except Poisons Traps I mean the designers hinted at ways to deal with higher level exploration challenges like planar travel or hazardous environments without casting spells or finding magic items, then they went back on it. [/QUOTE]

Verification