D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[iserith]

The irony here of one post RIGHT ABOVE THE OTHER:




Which is it? I was told that there were IRON CLAD mechanics for determining this. That it was not up for debate in any way. You you two give me conflicting answers right after each other.

Hell, you don't even quote the same rules. Different books to resolve a bog standard, common action.

There are a couple of ways you can look at what you call irony here. One, you could look at my response and see that it applies to secret doors specifically and (because specific beats general, another rule) is therefore the correct response to your question about where the rules are that govern the discovery of secret doors. Or, two, you can double down on what you think is evidence of there being no concrete rules for the exploration pillar, despite that obviously not being the case.

Given that I showed you, by way of the magic power of the DMG's index, that there are in fact concrete rules for secret doors, don't you think it's time to acknowledge that there are concrete rules for the exploration pillar?

 

[cmad1977]

Light or lack thereof isn’t exploration.

 

[iserith]

You're ignoring the basic point. There IS NO TRADE OFF. The characters are giving up incredibly minor resources to be able to completely bypass challenges. Again, remember, I hadn't actually listed anything that actually cost any resources. I also hadn't listed the shopping list of class abilities either. Nothing I listed was a cost in any real sense.

There are most certainly trade-offs in context and in time spent as I have shown. Those are meaningful in any game with a strong exploration element and a sense of urgency. It just might not be evident to you perhaps because you don't play in these kinds of games or run them. You post like someone who doesn't even like exploration challenges. And that's just fine, but don't sit there and tell us something doesn't exist or matter when it clear can and does in games that employ the rules we're given.

Really? So, if the monster has a 15 AC and my character scores a 15 on his attack, it's the DM's decision as to whether I hit or not? If the monster has 4 HP and I deal 5 damage, the DM decides if that monster is incapacitated or not? If I roll a 16 for my initiative, and the monster gets a 12, does the DM decide that the monster attacks first? Maybe the DM gets to declare that the monster is 6 feet away, not five, and thus not in your reach.

Well, that's certainly one way to play. I'm not terribly interested in Calvinball and I'm pretty sure that any DM who insisted that his rulings overruled these kinds of mechanics would be looking for new players PDQ.

So, no, the DM does not "always decide". D&D is not a rules light game or a rules absent game. It is a very rules heavy game and those rules are pretty iron clad. DM's who ignore those rules are generally considered bad DM's.

The DM decides all of this, including whether and when you even make an attack roll or damage roll. The DM decides what's in the environment and the result of every single action the characters undertake. That you can safely bet an attack roll follows your declaration of an attack at your table is just because your DM is being consistent with adjudication - which is good. But in D&D 5e, make no mistake, the DM is empowered to decide all of these things. The rules serve the DM, not the other way around and the play loop gives the players only the power to say what they want to do and nothing else.

 

[cmad1977]

Just to reel the conversation back in, the Player's Handbook describes the exploration pillar...

"Exploration includes both the adventurers’ movement through the world and their interaction with objects and situations that require their attention. Exploration is the give-and-take of the players describing what they want their characters to do, and the Dungeon Master telling the players what happens as a result. On a large scale, that might involve the characters spending a day crossing a rolling plain or an hour making their way through caverns underground. On the smallest scale, it could mean one character pulling a lever in a dungeon room to see what happens."

Funny how there is no description of tracking food or light sources…. It’s almost as if Exploration isn’t about resources at all!

 

[iserith]

Funny how there is no description of tracking food or light sources…. It’s almost as if Exploration isn’t about resources at all!

It is part of exploration though, just not the whole thing. Tracking food and light sources fall under both interaction with objects and situations that require their attention i.e. dwindling resources and the need to see in the dark and avoid starvation. Are those things important in every game? Nah. But they are part of the exploration pillar.

 

[Faolyn]

And your entire challenge could have been solved with a single Speak with Plants spell. Or Commune. Or a host of other things.

What makes you think a 0-Int plant will have all the answers you need to overcome the challenge?

You keep saying that your spellcaster character will have all the resources. But what if the challenge comes when you’ve already used many of your slots and resources and there’s tough monsters searching for you and you’re low on hit points? Do you spend a spell slot on speak with plants or do you save that slot for combat? Do you risk waiting 10+ minutes for a ritual when any second now a threat will emerge?

 

[mrpopstar]

Funny how there is no description of tracking food or light sources…. It’s almost as if Exploration isn’t about resources at all!

Snark aside, exploration includes both the adventurers’ movement through the world and their interaction with objects and situations that require their attention. Resources include objects that require attention, and situations where you have no resources require attention.

 

[mrpopstar]

It is part of exploration though, just not the whole thing. Tracking food and light sources fall under both interaction with objects and situations that require their attention i.e. dwindling resources and the need to see in the dark and avoid starvation. Are those things important in every game? Nah. But they are part of the exploration pillar.

This! -- Responded before I caught your response.

 

[turnip_farmer]

What's a time pool? Can't find this term appearing before in this thread.

It was an idea from the Angry GM. The idea is that, as time passes in the game world, the GM adds dice into a bowl. If I remember the idea right, when there a six dice, the GM rolls them, and any show up a 1, you get a complication, like a wandering monster.

Basically, if players are more likely to run into monsters or whatever the more time they spend mucking about, you want a visceral way for them to understand how much time they're spending on different tasks. It's a tool to create tension and drive them to action when there is a time pressure.

I'm not sure it's the right tool for encouraging exploration, since it's whole purpose is to get the players moving, and spend less time poking at things.

 

[mrpopstar]

Sure, I get that this is what you do, but the conversation isn't "Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar except at MrPopStar's Table," but more generally in the wider play culture of the game. And I do think that part of that involves how there is less incorprated structure in the exploration and social pillar in comparison to the combat one (as per even the DMG!), which means that (1) player experiences between DMs will vary more considerably for these pillars than combat (e.g., rulings not rules, GM decides, etc.), and (2) as per @robus's observation: the exploration pillar requires extra work adjusting the dials and knobs from the DM.

My contributions here have taken the form of, "hm, actually there's guidance for that," to which the response is, "no, that's up to the Dungeon Master!" And if I say, "as the DM, this is what I do," the response is, "well there is no guidance!"



There's a great deal of dissonance between "rulings not rules" and "exploration is the worst because rulings."