D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[thirdkingdom]

I'll be using 12 mile hexes.

Then that 12 mile hex contains 125 square miles.

 

[Zardnaar]

Then that 12 mile hex contains 125 square miles.

Yeah it's gonna be abstracted. Basically you walk through map the major geographic features move on.

Anything interesting the PCs conveniently discover it.

Stand on hill draw map move.

 

[Yora]

Then that 12 mile hex contains 125 square miles.

Which is slightly larger than Malta, or twice as large as Lichtenstein.

(Malta, not Lichtenstein)

 

[Zardnaar]

How fast did Lewis and Clark cover the dirt?

 

[Nefermandias]

Role-playing is theatric, and we have seen it done with character arcs, accents, and know how it has been long elevated as the height of good Game-Mastering ("Role-play" NOT "ROLL-play.")

This definition of roleplay rubs me really wrong. In fact, I think it's so annoying that I strongly encourage my players to steer the hell away from this mind set if they want to play at my games.

 

[Fanaelialae]

That's an excellent point, @Yora . If the only way to get XP and gold is Combat, then Combat will become the only thing that matters, the only thing that will ever really motivate the players.

A solution to this problem would be to change the distribution of gold, XP, and magic items across all tiers, instead of just lumping them all under Combat. Redistribute 1/3 of the expected XP and gold for the Combat tier, 1/3 for the Social tier, and the remaining 1/3 for Exploration tier.

Take the classic "kill all the trolls in yonder cave" adventure plot. The characters are expected to earn a certain amount of XP and gold for each troll they kill, according to the rules. But maybe the characters only get 1/3 of that gold and XP for killing all of the trolls in that lair. They get another 1/3 of it only if they manage to uncover the clues that link the trolls to a rival merchant with powerful connections in town. And they get the last 1/3 of the money and XP if they deliver enough evidence to the Captain of the Guard, and manage to convince him to arrest the man responsible.

Yeah, I've done something like this for my last few campaigns, and it's worked out well.

Although I do think it depends on the players. My main group doesn't really need an incentive to engage in exploration. They enjoy it. I simply wanted them to be rewarded for doing so (and also encourage my newbie group to explore more).

At the end of the day, I think it comes down to giving them interesting content to explore. If there's rarely anything of interest to find (interesting to the players, rather than merely interesting to the DM), then of course the players aren't going to engage in exploration. On the other hand, if exploration is found to be a rewarding experience, then I think players are likely to engage with it even without an XP incentive (though XP certainly won't hurt).

 

[iserith]

This definition of roleplay rubs me really wrong. In fact, I think it's so annoying that I strongly encourage my players to steer the hell away from this mind set if they want to play at my games.

I agree. There's roleplaying - making decisions for your character - and there's acting which is a way to communicate those decisions. Everyone's roleplaying just by playing, since a player has to make decisions to move through the fictional world and achieve goals. Some players are also acting when they do that. And that's fine, but I don't think it's a reasonable expectation that every player should be acting unless that's the table rule everyone agreed to.

 

[Nefermandias]

I agree. There's roleplaying - making decisions for your character - and there's acting which is a way to communicate those decisions. Everyone's roleplaying just by playing, since a player has to make decisions to move through the fictional world and achieve goals. Some players are also acting when they do that. And that's fine, but I don't think it's a reasonable expectation that every player should be acting unless that's the table rule everyone agreed to.

Yes, I would go even further to say that since the vast majority of players aren't Oscar material, their "acting" ends up just being disruptive, distracting or straight up cringe. Just don't.

 

[iserith]

Yes, I would go even further to say that since the vast majority of players aren't Oscar material, their "acting" ends up just being disruptive, distracting or straight up cringe. Just don't.

As long as they aren't taking up more spotlight time than anyone else, I'm good with it. My regular players are very entertaining in this regard, but they know to keep things moving forward and how to share the spotlight. Every now and again I'll encounter a player in a pickup group who must have learned how to play from watching certain actual play streams and I'm like, c'mon dude, hurry it along and make a decision.

 

[Nefermandias]

As long as they aren't taking up more spotlight time than anyone else, I'm good with it. My regular players are very entertaining in this regard, but they know to keep things moving forward and how to share the spotlight. Every now and again I'll encounter a player in a pickup group who must have learned how to play from watching certain actual play streams and I'm like, c'mon dude, hurry it along and make a decision.

The funny thing, is that people keep talking about how those streamers are awesome "role players" but I'm always under the impression that there's very little actual role playing going on in those shows. It just feels like scripted bs.