D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[Reynard]

This is exploration:

DM say: You walked into a triangular room with a wooden door on each side. The floor is made of sandstone, stained like a bag of Skittles - all the colors of the rainbow. Spread throughout room are six steel domes, each with a steel handle.

DM's notes: Beneath each dome is a vat of liquid.

Dome A: Purple, bubbling goo. Dries after 1 minute. Acts like a mixture between glue and concrete. DO NOT DRINK.

Dome B: Silver. Smells like lavender. Anything placed inside the vat or in contact with the liquid. shrinks to 1 tenth its size after 1 minute. This is not a curse or magical enchantment. It is a physical transformation.

Dome C: Shamrock green. Smells like springtime. Any creature placed in this vat or who imbues its liquid is reincarnated, as per the spell. Even if it is still alive.

Dome D: Black as black can be. Because it's a terrifying black ooze monster. And it's hungry.

Dome E: Orange. Smells like ogre. If imbued, causes the character to sprout a second head. The head has the opposite alignment as the original character. This is not a curse or magical enchantment. It is a physical transformation. (Imagine spiking someone's wine with this).

Dome F: Yellow, fizzing. This is a very strong acid. Shatters glass. Eats away organic material. Will eventually destroy metal.

Chaos ensures as characters try to discover the secrets of the vats and decide how to best use that knowledge.

I would argue that's a setup for exploration. The exploration part includes discovering that place and may or may not include futzing with it. The PCs might just Nope right out of there.

 

[Umbran]

wandering monsters

So, wandering monsters shift the issue of exploration into one of managing combat, another pillar. Perhaps that isn't a prime way to make exploration itself more engaging.

The basic idea of the Skill Challenge, on the other hand, is a fine element to include for exploration (actually, it can work in the Role Play pillar as well, and combat is already effectively a skill challenge).

 

[robus]

While it's certainly an example of exploration, I don't really consider it to be a great case of exploration. IMO, it's something you don't want to overuse.

Agreed, puzzles are certainly an aspect of exploration, but they can quickly frustrate the players. The maze puzzle around Xonthal’s tower in ToD did not facilitate fun for my players (despite one being an avid puzzler) I think there’s a feeling of “if I don’t solve this quickly everyone will be bored” so it takes the fun out of it. I think mysteries are a lot more fun as puzzles because there’s not the pressure of an immediate solution.

The exploration pillar. IMHO, is about getting the players immersed in the world and providing feelings of awe and wonder. I want my players to think “wow” and “what the heck is this place?!”

 

[Orcslayer78]

I totally disagree. Exploration is a massive and fun part of the game. People think D&D is a combat game because most of the rules are dedicated to combat. That's just not true. Social interaction and exploration are definitely at least equal to combat in importance and dedicated game time (at least in my games). You just don't need rules for those parts.

Forgotten Realms, however, is a terrible setting. Mostly because there's nothing left to explore there.

1) You never heard of the Border Kingdom I suppose

2) The DM is in control of the setting, one can just make new lands to explore, or new details inside the known lands, or go to Maztica, or teleport the adventurers in a remote part of the Realms giving them no clue about where they are and force them to explore the surrounding to understand where they are.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

That's what I consider wildcard exploration, and I don't actually consider it to be a great example of how to make exploration interesting.

What do you mean by "wildcard"?

It only has variety if the players can actually figure out what it does. If they try a few things and nothing works, they may just decide it's a red herring or not worth their time.

Which is also perfectly fine and interesting. It also means the vats can be used against the PCs at their own peril. Also fine.

Contrast that with a tree made of pure crystal that the PCs come across it their wanderings. They may or may not successfully deduce anything about it, but are nonetheless left with a bit of wonder about it. What is it? How did it get there? It's inherently more distinctive than a vat of liquid.

OK. But that tree doesn't really lead to decision making, which is the primary activity the players do.

It again only has purpose if the players can and do figure out what the liquids do. Even then, it's more likely that it's a purpose that the players need to devise on their own (if any).

Sure. They make their own choices. That's part of the game.

Compare that with coming across a forgotten back door to the dungeon you were trekking to. This has an obvious purpose. It's possible that the players may not make the connection, and might assume it is a different dungeon, but they certainly have the capacity to at least make an educated guess as to its purpose.

Much better than the tree.

Lastly, the challenge of the vats is in experimenting to figure out what the liquids do (without doing permanently harm to your character). If the players decide that it isn't worth their time, there is no challenge. All they've given up is finding out what the liquids do (which for all they know could be water with food coloring).

I wouldn't call the vats a challenge. They aren't something to overcome. They, like everything else, simply exist in the game world. It's up to the players whether to interpret them as a challenge or not. Just like it's up to the players to decide whether to engage with them.

By comparison, a river that needs to be crossed in order to reach the dungeon is a real challenge with plenty of options. They could try to swim across, look for a shallow ford, or even lash together a makeshift raft. While they could certainly turn around and go home, that isn't very likely.

Sure. OK. It's something I would narrate over. But whatever floats your boat.

I'm not suggesting that wildcard exploration is bad. I've played plenty of adventures which featured that sort of thing and it can lead to great fun and surprising hijinks. However, it can also end in the PCs walking away in frustration, with the players wondering why you wasted everyone's time.

While it's certainly an example of exploration, I don't really consider it to be a great case of exploration. IMO, it's something you don't want to overuse.

Walking away is fine. It's an interesting choice.

I don't get what you mean by a waste of time, though. Maybe you can explain.

These are a set of vats I used in a mega-dungeon I ran in 2010-12. The vats were encountered by 6 separate groups of players. A variety of comments emerged, but I don't remember "waste of time." Everyone seemed to find them fun.

I remember one group graffitied the room with the vats in order to get the other groups to drink their contents. ("This one tastes great!" "Don't stick your finger in here.") Another group, gathered samples to test on the villagers in a nearby town. A third enjoyed reincarnating themselves into different races. They all became trolls. They became known as the Trolls in Boots by the other groups. One group (I forget which) did some research and reversed a sample of the shrinking potion. Then they used the shrinking potion to make their treasure more portable.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I would argue that's a setup for exploration. The exploration part includes discovering that place and may or may not include futzing with it. The PCs might just Nope right out of there.

Well, of course. The PCs get to make their own decisions based on what they find interesting in the world. My point is, exploration isn't the same thing as travel; exploration requires an element of decision-making.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The One Ring rules which inspired them are better though.

Much better, and I'd go so far as to suggest replacing standard initiative rolls in combat with a Preparedness roll that establishes initiative but also gives benefits for rolling higher, perhaps simply in the form of inspiration if you exceed a certain threshold.

 

[Fanaelialae]

What do you mean by "wildcard"?

By wildcard, I mean that it's the type of exploration encounter that is extremely open ended. It could be central to the campaign (your Troll Boots) or completely insignificant (the characters ignore it or can't figure out what anything does). Not even the DM knows. The Deck of Many Things is a more straightforward example of what I consider a wildcard.

Which is also perfectly fine and interesting. It also means the vats can be used against the PCs at their own peril. Also fine.

You seem to have completely missed my point here. Vats containing liquid don't really stand out or inspire wonder. While the contents are indeed wonderous, the players will only ever be inspired by it if they experiment and figure out what they do.

OK. But that tree doesn't really lead to decision making, which is the primary activity the players do.

Of course it does. They can certainly investigate the tree in a similar manner to the vats.

To illustrate, imagine if they found a grove of crystal trees, the sap of which corresponds to each of your vats.

However, even if they don't investigate, they're still inspired with a sense of curiosity and wonder. The crystal tree is distinctive (assuming crystal trees aren't all over your world).

If the players assume that the vats are just water storage for the dungeon denizens, they may walk right by them and forget about them. They probably won't forget something as distinctive as a crystal tree, because no one's going to mistake that for a water tower.

I wouldn't call the vats a challenge. They aren't something to overcome. They, like everything else, simply exist in the game world. It's up to the players whether to interpret them as a challenge or not. Just like it's up to the players to decide whether to engage with them.

From the player's perspective, sure.

From a DMs perspective, some things are placed there to challenge the players. If you place a puzzle lock on the door, that's a challenge. The players are of course free to ignore the door or to find an alternate means past it (passwall) but it nonetheless exists as to challenge them. That it exists within the game world like everything else doesn't change that.

Walking away is fine. It's an interesting choice.

I don't get what you mean by a waste of time, though. Maybe you can explain.

I strongly disagree that walking away is an interesting choice. If you think the players ignoring the exploration encounter means you've created a successful encounter, I've got news for you.

If the players can't figure out the liquids and simply grow frustrated and leave, it's been a waste of time for them. It's like adding pointless filler content or worse.

Let's assume a fairly inexperienced group, just for sake of illustration. One reckless guy quaffs the concrete potion and dies a minute later. The fighter sticks his sword in the reincarnation potion and nothing happens. They unseal the black ooze and another party member dies in the ensuing combat. The players decide the DM placed these vats here just to mess with them and walk away.

Of course, that's not the only way this encounter might work out, as evidenced by how it played out in your own campaign. If at least some of your players were experienced with D&D, then it's likely that they were familiar with this trope and knew that if they were careful and stuck with it, it could pay off well.

Under different circumstances or with different players it may not have worked out as well. Sometimes the Deck of Many Things spices up a campaign and takes it in interesting new directions. Other times it wrecks it. I've seen both outcomes.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Under different circumstances or with different players it may not have worked out as well. Sometimes the Deck of Many Things spices up a campaign and takes it in interesting new directions. Other times it wrecks it. I've seen both outcomes.

I think this is the line that divides us. I see nothing with things being wrecked. Like walking away, it's an interesting outcome that opens up repercussions in the game world and consequences that other groups playing in the campaign can exploit.

Just as combat comes with deadly risk, so should exploration. The Deck of Many Things does just that. Adventure at one's own peril.

 

[Reynard]

I think this is the line that divides us. I see nothing with things being wrecked. Like walking away, it's an interesting outcome that opens up repercussions in the game world and consequences that other groups playing in the campaign can exploit.

Just as combat comes with deadly risk, so should exploration. The Deck of Many Things does just that. Adventure at one's own peril.

Like @Fanaelialae I have used the Deck of Many Things multiple times (almost once per D&D campaign, in one form or another) and it totally can destroy a campaign. If players pull too many cards, the outcomes -- good or bad -- create entirely different paradigms from before the draw. Depending on the nature of the campaign, it can completely ruin it. Some campaigns are so loose -- "These are the stories of whatever happens to these people" -- that it's fine. Other campaigns are about something specific that while resilient to the normal events of play can't quite adapt to the huge swings caused by something like the Deck. And there's also the issue of how massively the Deck can disrupt balance among the PCs. Some groups have a much harder time with that than others.

My general advice is: do not introduce the Deck of Many Things into a campaign that cannot handle either the best or worst outcomes from it.