D&D General Why Exploration Is the Worst Pillar

[Hussar]

I don’t recall anyone saying “iron clad.” All I recall seeing are people saying there are rules that cover it. We both showed you rules.

ROTFLMAO

You both showed me CONFLICTING rules. IOW, you don't actually have an answer. You have two mutually exclusive, potential answers that are both supported by different readings of the books.

 

[Hussar]

/edit to add, as Iserith has seen fit to put me on ignore, I can't really continue this conversation.

 

[Faolyn]

ROTFLMAO

You both showed me CONFLICTING rules. IOW, you don't actually have an answer. You have two mutually exclusive, potential answers that are both supported by different readings of the books.

You asked for rules. You got rules. They conflict or are vague? Welcome to D&D.

I don't know what your ROTFLMOA is supposed to mean here. What does the lack of an "iron-clad rule" mean to you?

 

[Lanefan]

Don't your wizards get two free spells every level? By 5th level, I've got 16 spells in my spellbook even without finding any new spells. That's more than enough to cover most of this stuff.

If the wizard happened to get those useful spells. You shouldn't get to pick what free spells you get, and if the rules say you can I count that as a design flaw. They should be random, both to ensure a wider variety of spells get seen and to differentiate betwee casters.

Want a specific spell? Go out and find it, or spend the money and buy it.

Yeah, that got brought up before. It was a pointless thing then and it still is now. Good grief, no one carries a pot? If you're at the point where waterskins are the issue in exploration, I'm really not interested in playing in that campaign.

This comes across as self-contradictory. You're saying on the one hand that there's too many things that render the exploration pillar irrelevant yet on the other hand are saying you're not interested in a game where in order to make exploration challenging/relevant the requisite minutae are tracked. Make up yer mind.

 

[Hussar]

You asked for rules. You got rules. They conflict or are vague? Welcome to D&D.

I don't know what your ROTFLMOA is supposed to mean here. What does the lack of an "iron-clad rule" mean to you?

It means that I find it hillariously funny that the two advocates for the fact that there are "rules for exploration" in the game, cannot even agree on what those rules are, post conflicting rules and then pretend that everything is answered satisfactorily. "Welcome to D&D"? Seriously?

See, when you look at the other two pillars, what you see are rules for basic actions that aren't contradictory or conflicting. Want to hit something with a lumpy metal thing? Here's the rules. Here's some more rules. Here's a bunch of other rules that might come up. And, by and large, the rules don't conflict. Want to talk to someone and get them to help you? Are you telling the truth? Then it's Persuasion. Are you lying? Then it's Bluff. Are you threatening them with aforesaid lumpy metal thing? Then it's intimidate.

Want to find a secret door? Well, it might be perception. It might be passive perception. It might be investigate. Ask you DM.

And you seriously claim that these are the same thing?

 

[MichaelSomething]

Well I'm sure once Level Up comes out, that'll solve everyone's exploration issues!!

 

[Hussar]

If the wizard happened to get those useful spells. You shouldn't get to pick what free spells you get, and if the rules say you can I count that as a design flaw. They should be random, both to ensure a wider variety of spells get seen and to differentiate betwee casters.

Want a specific spell? Go out and find it, or spend the money and buy it.

Again, we're discussing what the rules ACTUALLY say, not what we wish they said. Since 3e, wizards have always gotten free spells in their spellbooks that they can choose. Since 2e, specialist wizards have gotten this too. So, the notion that spells should be random hasn't been true in D&D for a lot longer than it was.

This comes across as self-contradictory. You're saying on the one hand that there's too many things that render the exploration pillar irrelevant yet on the other hand are saying you're not interested in a game where in order to make exploration challenging/relevant the requisite minutae are tracked. Make up yer mind.

There is a pretty wide excluded middle here. I mean, people are expressing surprise that a player might spend that 3 sp and buy a second waterskin. Like I said, if your method of making exploration interesting and engaging is to start counting waterskins in a game where Create Water is a cantrip, then, maybe, just maybe that's not a good direction to go in?

 

[Faolyn]

See, when you look at the other two pillars, what you see are rules for basic actions that aren't contradictory or conflicting. Want to hit something with a lumpy metal thing? Here's the rules. Here's some more rules. Here's a bunch of other rules that might come up. And, by and large, the rules don't conflict. Want to talk to someone and get them to help you? Are you telling the truth? Then it's Persuasion. Are you lying? Then it's Bluff. Are you threatening them with aforesaid lumpy metal thing? Then it's intimidate.

And yet, at last Friday's game, the DM let me intimidate someone using my choice of Persuasion or Intimidation (social pillar stuff!), even though I literally had my sword at the person's throat; the choice was because of the way I addressed the person. It's almost like the rules are actually there to help the DM run their game and therefore there are sometimes multiple ways to achieve the same goal.

Want to find a secret door? Well, it might be perception. It might be passive perception. It might be investigate. Ask you DM.

Yep. Not only that, but it varies from trap to trap. For a trapped chest or doorway, roll Investigation. For a pit trap or a tripwire, your (passive) Perception is used, because these types of traps aren't hidden so much as just hard to spot. But to find out if a lock is trapped, I'd say it's perfectly legit to roll the better of your Investigation or your thieves' tools instead. And hey, the DM makes a secret door part of a painting? Maybe your artist's tools can be rolled to spot the door, because it's relying on your artistic knowledge to realize that line there isn't part of the painting but is actually a place where the painting can be opened to reveal the door.

And you seriously claim that these are the same thing?

They're different tools used for the same purpose. How is this a problem?

 

[Faolyn]

If the wizard happened to get those useful spells. You shouldn't get to pick what free spells you get, and if the rules say you can I count that as a design flaw. They should be random, both to ensure a wider variety of spells get seen and to differentiate betwee casters.

It's assumed you've been researching the spells between levels; the spells don't just magically (hah!) appear in your spellbook one day. Therefore, the spells shouldn't be random.

Instead, when you the DM place scrolls and other spellbooks, that's when you include "random" spells (either rolled or you pick them). That's what ensures a wider variety of spells.

 

[Asisreo]

Your players never talk to each other? Never plan anything or choose resources as a group?

That would explain a lot if they didn't.

They don't consult each other about every little thing. If they see anything out of the ordinary, they'll let you know. For now, though, they're in investigation mode and you can be sure they won't be expending resources unnecessarily.

If you want to ask them anything or relay information, you're free to do so. You know the rogue and the barbarian are more impulsive, though. Not disruptive, but they like making progress more than spending precious game time having too many meetings.