Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="M_Natas" data-source="post: 8931038" data-attributes="member: 7025918">Getting lost/being lost does two things:It takes up resources (food, water, time ...) and it can get you to an unexpected/unplanned place.If you don't track resources, because your group decided to not use encumbrance and doesn't track food and water, in the Ressource department, getting lost starts to get pointless. There is only time left. And that only matters if there is a time constraint.Like, I wrote an adventure where the party tracks some bandits. If they have a bad check, they need more time to find the bandit camp, which changes what they will encounter there (the stolen goods were already sold to another trader, for example). So getting lost needs some kind of consequences. for that, we need context. That is a big problem in most D&D rules discussions. They happen out of context. Out of context getting lost is as pointless and boring as a DC 10 Pittrap.So in the context of a game, where the characters have no time constraints and don't do resources management outside of HP, Spellslots and other Character abilities, getting lost is mostly pointless, because it doesn't matter If you take one or two days to get to the location.But if you want to reach the city before the other adventure group gets there because they want to steal your client, then getting lost in the swamps of Misdirection has a point.If you do resource management by RAW, you have to plan the expedition to the ruins of interesting things, which is roughly 6 days of travel from the city of heroes, you need to get enough food and water with you to get there, explore the ruins, get the McGuffin of interest and get back. And if you get lost, suddenly, maybe your resources are not enough anymore. The characters now need to make decisions like do they press on and risk running out of food? Do they forage? Do they go back to town and prepare better, but risk that their nemesis group will get the McGuffin first? Now we have interesting choices for the party.Getting lost needs game context. If the party just wants to go to the next city, they Don't have a quest and all the time in the world, getting lost is pointless.Unless for the second reason: finding unexpected Locations/Things. Is it just another random encounter? Yes. But that is the second reason for getting lost: it is another random encounter/location trigger. It also makes the world more real.Oh, we got lost,  utterly now we found this little Shrine in the mountains, that is nice. People must worship some mountain spirits here. Could you just put that on the road without getting lost? Of course, you can do that. But finding stuff by getting lost has a greater feeling of verisimilitude. Getting lost is accidental exploration.If they encounter interesting locations on the road, without getting lost, it is just something the DM planned for the characters to find. If the group gets lost, it is something unexpected, it is something real in the world when they find the Shrine. Something g that feels like it would be there, even if the characters would never have stumbled upon it.So: In 5e, to have an interesting gameplay experience while getting lost, you need  1. to do Ressource management and you need 2. interesting things to discover. And 3. you need Ingame context that makes getting lost matter. You need some urgency.If you have these three things, getting lost can be something fun.</blockquote>

Verification