I'm excited to see what is done with Exploration Mode. This is a much-neglected design space that is actually a very important part of the game. It will be nice to see it codified and made into an aspect of the game that is more playable.
For instance, searching a room. This comes up a lot. How long does this activity take? What can you find? What are you looking for? It is awkward and boring to search every 10 ft. section of a wall, or to stand at the threshold for 60 seconds while taking-20 (as the Dungeon Master tries to estimate the distance to each hidden thing in the room).
How about marching order? Is everybody always adjacent to each other at all times? If so do they all fall into the trap together? What about scouting ahead?
Perhaps with marching order there could be several choices, like the “Scooby-Doo”, where everybody crouches behind each other in adjacent formation as they creep down the hallway. Of course, if a trap is sprung everybody takes a hit. Or the more “natural” formation with 5-10 ft. between each person, but now your rear person can be attacked before the rest of the party can react. Or the “spread-out” formation with 20-30 ft. between each person--now party members can be abducted without others knowing (perfect for a doppelganger encounter).
There could also be the “two-abreast” formation, or the “sweep” formation with everyone lined perpendicular to the direction of travel. It makes things more complicated, but I think it could be fun.
I’m glad Pathfinder identified Exploration Mode, the ideas generated are bound to make the entire hobby better. What other things do you think can be explored with Exploration Mode?
Have you ever seen the 13 part series of posts on Hexcrawls over at the Alexandrian blog?
Something like that to really help GMs shape and narrate wilderness adventures would be so very welcome.
I'm also excited to see more about Exploration Mode.
That's very interesting. I'll give it a read tonight. Thanks for sharing.
I think Explortation Mode has the potential to be as big a part of the game as combat encounters--which I would welcome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a little mixed on this.
Questions:
1. Are you locked into a singlular action type during Exploration Mode?
2. Is it something the GM announces? This feels MMOish. >.<
This is one aspect that I would really like to see during play.
I too share your anxiety, but I've chosen to ignore it in the hope that something fun can come out of it. Typically, exploration has been handled in a very open way with very few rules, but it also often leads to confusion at the table.
I really not looking forward to this. Other attempts have been really hamfisted and ultimately, rather terrible and useless.
The questions in the OP already have answers. Marching order already includes distance apart, searching takes a defined amount of time. Most interactions already do in the relevant skills and things. I'm completely unclear on what a 'Mode' would add.
Time searching doesn't need to be played out as awkward and boring- it's nicely summed up with the phrase "searching the room takes you about X minutes and you find..." Which takes a trivial amount of table time.
Exploration is one of one things that varies by location, classes, and group. Free form is a necessity, or it becomes a video game check.
I agree. It is best to do this in a free form way. For instance, if you want to search a room the Dungeon Master just needs to tell you how long it takes. However, often there is confusion at the table when the Dungeon Master tells you to subtract 10 minutes off the remaining duration of your protective spells because you searched the room. See what I mean? How much time does it take to search a room?
Perhaps a "casual" search of the room takes 1 minute and doesn't require you to touch anything. While a "thorough" search takes 30 minutes and you could set off traps and alarms because you have to touch things. There could also be a "ransack" option, which takes 10 minutes and automatically sets off alarms and traps.
Usually while one person is searching the room the rest of the party are doing nothing. But if a search takes several minutes, are the other members of the party really just standing around doing nothing?
As it is, searching rooms is a bit undefined, and could benefit from some codification. I think Exploration Mode is the best place to start making the stuff that happens in between combat encounters more fun and less confusing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interestingly, exploration mode is going to be the primary mode of at-table gameplay. It is going to be the default mode, distinct from encounter mode (measured in rounds) or downtime (measured in days, and as often as not off-table). It is the design space where rituals, social combat, and skill challenges will exist. So count me as also excited to see what they've come up with. Edit: Actually, I suppose social combat might be an application of encounter mode. We'll need to see the full text to be sure I suppose.
Especially skill challenges. They've been toying with various skill subsystems over the years; I want to see if they managed to combine the format into a single system like we see in the Skill Challenge book a TPP came out with a few years ago.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm completely unclear on what a 'Mode' would add.
Exploration is one of one things that varies by location, classes, and group. Free form is a necessity, or it becomes a video game check.
That's actually what a mode adds, oddly enough. If you have a mode, you can define it to be a certain amount freeform. If you don't, some groups will try to claim that it's not freeform and make it run step by step, "round" by "round." If you don't believe that this is a prevalent viewpoint, look for the fairly common strawman that claims that exploring while generally searching for something means you have to roll d20s for every 5 foot square in the building, rather than just rolling and using it when it matters or the like. That one in particular is all over the boards and you should get dozens of hits with a well-worded search for it. I think I just saw it recently.
That's not a "strawman". That's a valid criticism of how d20 and Pathfinder define exploration. There aren't any rules covering "just rolling and using it when it matters or the like", especially since you're required to spend actions intentionally making checks to even be allowed to find things like traps. It describes a flaw with the game that people almost always pave over (for example, by "just rolling and using it when it matters or the like"), because it's unplayable (and wouldn't be much fun even if it were). It's disingenuous to dismiss that kind of criticism because you've consciously or unconsciously solved that problem for your personal games.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's not a "strawman". That's a valid criticism of how d20 and Pathfinder define exploration. There aren't any rules covering "just rolling and using it when it matters or the like", especially since you're required to spend actions intentionally making checks to even be allowed to find things like traps. It describes a flaw with the game that people almost always pave over (for example, by "just rolling and using it when it matters or the like"), because it's unplayable (and wouldn't be much fun even if it were). It's disingenuous to dismiss that kind of criticism because you've consciously or unconsciously solved that problem for your personal games.
It's a strawman because it is an argument very commonly put in the mouth of others who are not saying that and then equated with their position, not because you can't find textual basis for it in the CRB. If anything, it wouldn't be an effective or pervasive strawman in the way it is if there was no way to support it in the rules. I fully agree with you that the PF1 CRB did not publish any rules that directly dispel that take (honestly it's pretty vague on a lot of the skills). Some people might just say that it's "obvious" and then not worry about it, but the very fact that there are so many discussions here where reasonable experienced roleplayers disagree is strong evidence of why exploration mode has serious value as a way to set expectations, so you and Voss don't play together and find a major clash in what you think is going to happen outside combat.
Thanks, Mark, for the flashbacks to the rules forum and responses to the FAQ.
*shudder*
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mazes.
I was just reading about hexcrawls over at the Alexandrian blog, as suggested by Yolande, and I was reminded about getting lost in the wilderness. Wilderness travel is pretty much the ultimate Exploration Mode activity, but I think some of the same concepts could be applied to the dungeon environment. For example: getting lost in the dungeon.
One classic trope that seems like it would fun, but rarely, if ever, works out at the table is--the maze. I've seen mazes handled in different ways. Sometimes you have small portions of the maze printed out and you only let the players see one section at a time. This is time consuming and potentially boring. Sometimes the Dungeon Master simply describes the convoluted passages, which is almost impossible for players to envision and leads to frustration and boredom. (I often laugh when I see a map, however painstakingly drawn, that has a maze or maze-like tunnels and corridors.)
I think this could be handled in Exploration Mode, with tension filled dice rolls to navigate the confusing passages.
I also think wandering monsters belong in Exploration Mode--leading to Encounter Mode of course.
I don't expect Exploration Mode in Pathfinder 2 to be a huge part of the game; but, like archetypes did, I see a potentially huge impact on the hobby as a whole.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, a thing I really liked about the Alexandrian posts was his care to specify sighting distances into adjacent hexes--answers to questions like, How close do I have to be to see that there are mountains there?
3.0 had a separate system for spot checks to determine if you actually notice a random encounter in the wilderness; so, for instance, one party might see the other and hide to let them pass or try to ambush them.
For reasons unknown to all, these rules got dropped from the game with the 3.5 revision, even though they were completely necessary to running meaningful wilderness encounters, and nothing ever really replaced them in Pathfinder either--though some of the stuff in Ultimate Wilderness helped.
There's a lot of danger and drama and decision-points in wilderness exploration that really has never been codified in the main rules. Good GMs have found a way to make it happen on their own, while bad or inexperienced GMs flounder and end up hand-waving overland travel because it seems impossible to make it fun.
This is one reason I'm really looking forward to exploration mode.
Another would be what Mark suggested, getting away from micro-level rules like Stealth checks are required for every move, which work great in a combat situation, but quickly become nightmares of dice-rolling for, say, a party trying to sneak past a guard. Just a rule to say, In Exploration Mode, Stealth checks must only be made once every minute, or every ten minutes, helps make Stealth a viable strategy and an interesting part of the game.
I'm really exited about the ties of exploration mode to initiative. As your exploration activity seems to have influence what you use for initiative and what happens for you when a combat starts.
From the blog posts I kinda read already that if the rogue's exploration mode is "Sneaking around", it uses Stealth for its initiative check and has options on high levels to become invisible and whatnot.
The different modes and their initiative effects can nicely standardize in the rules what may already be roleplayed now. And by that can use some special abilities that are provided by classes and feats.
Scouting ahead for traps? You probably start an ambush differently than the guy foraging for food in the bushes as your party marches along.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Funny enough, AD&D back in 1st edition had an "exploration mode," just not called as such. When not in combat, time was measured in 10-minute blocks, and it was assumed that everything from searching an entire room to binding wounds and using cure spells to mapping was done in that turn. Now, after two decades of, "we only need rounds or out-of-combat," we're sort of back to it.
I like the idea, myself; it also simplifies things like people wanting to constantly keep a readied action, to 'keep from being ambushed or unaware.' Despite it not being in the rules, people always want to do it, and it drove me nuts frequently reminding people that it doesn't work that way. Anyone who has ever been on guard duty for a whole shift understands how difficult it is that their concentration stays on "always alert" for hours at a time.
At least with "exploration mode," people can get a better sense that they are in a different frame of time, and "readying for an ambush" doesn't mean you'll never be surprised.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I loved the 10 minute blocks. It meant 1min/lvl spell durations basically lasted 1 battle which kept the party from trying to sprint the dungeon before bull’s strength wore off.
I agree. It is best to do this in a free form way. For instance, if you want to search a room the Dungeon Master just needs to tell you how long it takes. However, often there is confusion at the table when the Dungeon Master tells you to subtract 10 minutes off the remaining duration of your protective spells because you searched the room. See what I mean? How much time does it take to search a room?
I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to argue. If searching the room takes 10 minutes, obviously 10 minutes pass for the spells as well. I don't see any confusion. I don't even see the *potential* for confusion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to argue. If searching the room takes 10 minutes, obviously 10 minutes pass for the spells as well. I don't see any confusion. I don't even see the *potential* for confusion.
I see your point Voss. If the Dungeon Master says it takes 10 minutes then it takes 10 minutes, case closed. But often things go unspoken and assumptions are made.
I think it was a Green Ronin publication (the Advanced Dungeon Master's Guide?) in which they addressed the issue and put a name to it. They called it a "clash of assumptions". In this case the player assumes a requested activity takes a certain amount of time and the Dungeon Master assumes it takes a different amount of time. So, in this case, perhaps the Player assumes searching the room takes 1 minute but the Dungeon Master assumes it takes 10 minutes. That is a clashing of assumptions, it creates confusion, and typically the player then wants to retroactively change their action. This happens a lot.
But searching rooms is just one kind of activity that may be able to benefit from codification in Exploration Mode. There are other things.
Like investigations and gathering information. Both sound like something that could be an Exploration Mode activity. What others can we think of?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My issues with the idea of "Exploration Mode" is this:
In my experience with d20-based systems, any attempt to write rules for non-combat situations (outside of "this is how skills work"), has been lacklustre at best, and outright ridiculous at worst.We've seen "Skill Challenges", "Chase Scenes", "Social Combat", "Modified Chase Scenes", and many others.
None of them have been better than the GM 'winging it'.
Personally, I think reading about all of these different attempts and thinking about what they are trying to do is part of why "winging it," as a GM, has been possible for me. I don't know if they will get everything exactly right in the playtest (probably not, it is a playtest), but I strongly value the attempts, and seeing the design process.
For example, skill challenges really opened my mind to the idea of including the whole party in social encounters and thinking about how absurd it was for an NPC to stand still and talk only to one party member without looking over everyone and asking questions to get a sense of the group dynamic. Even though I never ran a 4e skill challenge, just reading about how it was proposed encouraged me to rethink my own short comings in GMing fun skill based encounters. There is a lot of proposed ideas in the exploration mode that I think will be worth reading about and thinking about, even if I don't end up adopting them.
Think it's a weird thing that we seem to need codified. A lot of PF2 seems to be just 'foolproofing' things we just winged it to better or less degrees of success. Though I'll say I have yet to see a group that takes it to the insane degree of take 20 on every 5 foot step.
It's another tool in the kit. Some will use it, some won't, some will complain, others will praise.
Me? I don't see it being used at my table. Don't have a need. Though if a GM actually takes out a stop watch or timer for these modes, thats a cue to leave the table.
I think Exploration Mode will help simplify dungeon-crawling in my campaigns. One of the reasons I run Pathfinder is for all the built-in gming-tools, and this is a good one for content writers.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it is a good addition for design space reasons, but we already do it without naming it exploration mode. Fights go by rounds, after the fight is measured in blocks of several minutes to cover searching or recovering or social interactions. Downtime is measured in hours or days of activity. Also probably going to be easy to remove or ignore if somehow the implementation is botched, I'll just go back to the version I use in PF1. Any exploration-exlusive abilities I'll just attach a time to perform (like how diplomacy takes a minute) if the abilities need to be usable in combat mode as well.
That said, it would be exceedingly difficult for paizo to unintentionally botch encounter mode. Like, short of intentionally requiring stopwatches or including abilities that can be spammed when it would otherwise make no sense because a limit on use is explicitly absent, I can't see this not being an upgrade.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is up with stopwatches all of a sudden?
I think very common things like general group movements and searching will be Exploration Mode activities in the core rules. However, other Exploration Mode systems should be published in later supplements.
My well is beginning to run dry but I'll throw this one out there: I think recovering from a fight could be an Exploration Mode activity.
Oh, and camping! I think camping would benefit a great deal from codification as an Exploration Mode activity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Think it's a weird thing that we seem to need codified. A lot of PF2 seems to be just 'foolproofing' things we just winged it to better or less degrees of success.
WHile this is true, much of PF1 can also be described as codifying things GMs previously just winged. Look at Ultimate Intrigue and Wilderness Adventures. Sometimes we'd get supplements like Occult Adventures that opened up new directions, more often it we got things like the Villan Codex. A great supplement! One of my favorites! But...mostly it was a bunch of set stat blocks to ease on-the-fly NPC encounters.
My point is, Pathfinder's target market seems to be people that want stuff they wing a little bit more foolproofed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point is, Pathfinder's target market seems to be people that want stuff they wing a little bit more foolproofed.
One of Pathfinder's big draws for me is how little prep-work it allows me to get away with compared to my next most favored system.
Having NPCs I can drop, with little to no modification, into any of hundreds of prewritten adventures is super helpful. Even more so if I can quickly generate enough content to keep them busy for 6 more hours whenvthey walk right past my plot hook into the narrative void. I love things like random encounter tables, and structural feature generation charts. My favorite was the chart to randomly determine the menu at a tavern (with included prices)