D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[Plaguescarred]

Usually when you're not talking or fighting, you are exploring.

Exploration to me is an important often undervalued pillar. Combat is pretty straightforward, so is Social interaction but Exploration is more complex. It can range from searching, trekking to looking for clues, puzzle-making, looking for secret passage, identifying magic items and so many others things. One of the best thing i love to do in D&D is mystery solving, which is the epitome of exploration.

The heart of most adventure or mission is exploration, to uncover what is going on and go to the depth of it, whatever that is. We D&D to explore things more than anything!

 

[Yora]

No. Monsters have abilities. In 5th edition, very few can only make a standard attack on every turn. Almost every creature comes with some abilities to make fighting them different.

And then there's of course the entire system of hit points, rounds, saving throws, conditions, ...

 

[Fanaelialae]

No. Monsters have abilities. In 5th edition, very few can only make a standard attack on every turn. Almost every creature comes with some abilities to make fighting them different.

Okay? Good monster design is not equivalent to good encounter design. The DM still has to take what's in the MM and turn it into an interesting encounter. An encounter with 4 goblins in an open field is by definition going to be less interesting than an encounter with some goblins and some other creatures/terrain that have synergy with the goblins' shifty feature.

 

[Aldarc]

The only new game I've seen in ages that really seems to be designed as an exploration game was Forbidden Lands. And that still feels like a remake of what D&D used to be 40 years earlier.

Numenera was supposed to be about exploration, but at least from reading it, there just doesn't seem to be anything mechanically in the game that deals with it. Not hugely surprising, given that it's from one of the main designers of D&D 3rd edition.

For games that also have a strong exploration and journey focus, there is also The One Ring RPG and Ryuutama (often described as Oregon Trail + Hayao Miyazaki).

 

[iserith]

Problem is that the 5e DMG is crap.

Not that it doesn't have some good content, but it's structured and organised so badly that it's easy to forget most of what is in there by the time you need it in your game design.

I've found myself inventing rules for things more than once before remembering that 5e already has rules for them, buried somewhere in that unintuitive mess of a book.

It's badly organized, yes. It's still really no excuse for not reading it in my view.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

I've always found Exploration difficult to pull off. It feels a lot like scene-setting and, because of the way 5e deals with healing, it's difficult to make 'obstacles' meaningful. (you fall off a cliff, take damage. Long rest, you're cured).

But, recently, I've been playing Descent into Averness and the DM is doing a superb job of making exploration intense and meaningful. Apparently, he's using the 5e One Ring rules?

Our exploration into the fallen city of Elturel goes something like this:

DM: So, you have a mission at the graveyard and must descend from the escarpment fortress into the city. What route are you taking? How are you proceeding (directly, stealthily, main thoroughfares? etc..)

We describe our goals and our route. Based on that, we make rolls. Example: Perception for the Lookout, Stealth for the Scout(if we're trying to be inconspicuous) and some kind of skill check to Navigate (especially if we are trying to take back alleyways and circuitous routes.) This could be a History check ("I used to live here") or a Survival Check (Looking for safe ways and keeping to a consistent direction)

Depending on how we do, we can have partial or full success or complete failure. Failed stealth check means we spotted the horde of zombies blocking our way, but sadly, they've seen us. A failed navigation check could be we get turned around and take longer and darkness falls, or the people we're running from catch up. Etc..

Spells and resources make checks easier or auto-succeed. (featherfalling down the cliff allows us to bypass a blockade along the road so no need for a stealth check)

Encounters from checks (failed or successful) add interesting story bits, failures create tension and force the group to push quicker than we are comfortable or, sometimes, lead to combat and drain precious resources.

He's made it so that every foray into the more dangerous parts of the city is harrowing.

 

[iserith]

I've always found Exploration difficult to pull off. It feels a lot like scene-setting and, because of the way 5e deals with healing, it's difficult to make 'obstacles' meaningful. (you fall off a cliff, take damage. Long rest, you're cured).

But, recently, I've been playing Descent into Averness and the DM is doing a superb job of making exploration intense and meaningful. Apparently, he's using the 5e One Ring rules?

Our exploration into the fallen city of Elturel goes something like this:

DM: So, you have a mission at the graveyard and must descend from the escarpment fortress into the city. What route are you taking? How are you proceeding (directly, stealthily, main thoroughfares? etc..)

We describe our goals and our route. Based on that, we make rolls. Example: Perception for the Lookout, Stealth for the Scout(if we're trying to be inconspicuous) and some kind of skill check to Navigate (especially if we are trying to take back alleyways and circuitous routes.) This could be a History check ("I used to live here") or a Survival Check (Looking for safe ways and keeping to a consistent direction)

Depending on how we do, we can have partial or full success or complete failure. Failed stealth check means we spotted the horde of zombies blocking our way, but sadly, they've seen us. A failed navigation check could be we get turned around and take longer and darkness falls, or the people we're running from catch up. Etc..

Spells and resources make checks easier or auto-succeed. (featherfalling down the cliff allows us to bypass a blockade along the road so no need for a stealth check)

Encounters from checks (failed or successful) add interesting story bits, failures create tension and force the group to push quicker than we are comfortable or, sometimes, lead to combat and drain precious resources.

He's made it so that every foray into the more dangerous parts of the city is harrowing.

That pretty much sounds like the Activities While Traveling rules from the D&D 5e PHB and DMG with progress combined with a setback from the Ability Check rules or possibly other flourishes from DMG 242. Plus the rules for triggering random encounters from DMG 85. The single Stealth check for the scout looks like an outlier in terms of 5e rules in my view. I think in 5e that's probably a group Stealth check if trying to determine something other than surprise (and individual Stealth checks if determining surprise). The lookout's Perception check is also replaced by passive Perception for anyone not navigating, tracking, foraging, mapping, or doing anything equally as distracting (per the DM).

 

[Tonybro001]

A year or so ago I played the 5e version of Tomb of Annihilation and hex crawling through the jungles of Chult doing side treks was honestly one of the most enjoyable aspects of the game.

Our DM painted the map in scratch off paint so every time we moved we had a bit of fun, it was like having the worlds biggest scratch card in front of you. The prize? Staying alive.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

That pretty much sounds like the Activities While Traveling rules from the D&D 5e PHB and DMG with progress combined with a setback from the Ability Check rules or possibly other flourishes from DMG 242. Plus the rules for triggering random encounters from DMG 85. The single Stealth check for the scout looks like an outlier in terms of 5e rules in my view. I think in 5e that's probably a group Stealth check if trying to determine something other than surprise (and individual Stealth checks if determining surprise). The lookout's Perception check is also replaced by passive Perception for anyone not navigating, tracking, foraging, mapping, or doing anything equally as distracting (per the DM).

The skills are just an example. It could be any skill check - it just depends on the activity and how the players decide to go about. It could be Insight, History and Athletics. It's an extended test.

Edit: In one example, I used Carpentry skill to evaluate the structural integrity of the rooftops as we used the rooftops to stay off the streets.

Edit: I guess what makes it interesting is how he comes up with things in every event (success or failure)

 

[iserith]

The skills are just an example. It could be any skill check - it just depends on the activity and how the players decide to go about. It could be Insight, History and Athletics. It's an extended test.

Sure, my point is mostly that we don't actually need to look outside the D&D 5e rules to build the framework for exploration we want in our games. Not that there's anything wrong with doing so - it's just not necessary. From your description, the characters look to be taking on specific roles while traveling and resolving any uncertainty via ability checks the result of which the DM narrates. D&D 5e's got that.