| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems fine to me:
Ravingdork says they constantly walk into traps and the monk never does anything sneaky, so I disagree that it's working fine.
More generally I think as Ravingdork describes it they're just playing too rigidly. They're doing this one specific set of things even when the circumstances make it a poor choice of activity or even when they're not leveraging it at all. Which strikes me as weird.
That being said, I agree with Ascalaphus on Investigate. That tactic probably shouldn't have been printed. I could see the concept working in a social setting, putting your focus on studying the people around you, but I don't understand it while traveling anywhere.
It definitely shouldn't be your default traveling option, but I can see, say, entering some old ruins and deciding to switch to Investigate for a little bit to study them while you're moving through them.
Really what stands out to me as Investigate's biggest problem is that it's distinct from Search, which is kind of weird since they're both about looking around for clues in your environment. You can notice arcane writing on a wall or look for a hidden door but doing both at once is two separate activities.
It's also a bit problematic because it's a little hard to have just one character who does the investigating for the party because knowing about cultures and arcane secrets are intellectual pursuits but for whatever reason learning about religious organizations and anatomy are more about intuition I guess.
Thank you for yet another valuable contribution to the conversation, Zapp. We all surely can learn much from your wisdom.It's a pretty succinct way of saying what needs to be said.
The game intentionally makes it hard for characters to solo mission. Anything that allows a character to do everything gets nerfed.
Is it real life realistic that a street urchin and a noble start with the same gold? No. Is it game realistic? Yes.
Is it real life realistic that it takes two seconds to remember a monster you've seen before? No. Is it game realistic? yes.
If you want to walk down the corridor while holding up a shield, casting detect magic, sneaking, searching for traps, while looking around thoroughly, slowing down to 1/8 speed seems reasonable. But the reason that you're not allowed to do it at full speed by default is that it is a game.
But it is not an issue of being a solo character, it is an issue of not being able to perform at least as well as a normal person in the real world as well as nerfing an iconic role. If you cannot sneak and watch out for enemies at the same time something is wrong with the system.
Beowulf: if I'm falsely discrediting your point, then I'm failing to understand it. Can you explain it again? Because I cannot understand why you are treating the "Scout" activity as anything similar to the classic idea of scouting ahead beyond the name being the same. Mechanically they are worlds apart.
You scout ahead and behind the group to watch danger, moving
at half speed. At the start of the next encounter, every creature in
your party gains a +1 circumstance bonus to their initiative rolls.
Simple. To me this sounds like exactly what your average party in PF1 or virtually any other TTRPG would have the "stealthy rogue" character do, not the Cleric. And in other systems this would typically end up with you directly gaining an initiative benefit: A Surprise Round.
The Scout activity does nothing to prevent an ambush. It just gives the party a circumstance bonus on initiative. That's all. They probably should have called it look out duty of something, because it has nothing to do with what we traditionally think of as scouting.
Perhaps the name of the activity bugs me the most. Scouting is, to me anyway, a stealthy endeavor. Scout in PF2 should probably be renamed "Keep Watch" or "Lookout Duty" like you proposed as it really does a bad job of sounding like you are "Scouting". Especially when you compare it to literary examples.
If you actually want to be able to get the drop on someone properly, you should not be traveling as a group. You should be having your sneaky character(s) travel ahead of the group Avoiding Notice, stopping when they find someone, and then doubling back to report to the group.
That last bit doesn't sound like Scouting to you as presented in the activity though? Moving ahead of the party to watch for danger and letting your allies know that something is up?
This brings us back to the core question of the thread: I see no reason why you wouldn't be able to Avoid Notice while Scouting. Part of Avoiding Notice is noticing when other people are there to avoid after all. What logical reason is there to deny a character from doing both?
In exploration mode, each player who wants to do
something beyond just traveling chooses an exploration
activity for their character. The most common activities
are Avoid Notice, Detect Magic, Hustle, and Search,
though there are many options available. While players
usually hew close to these default activities, there’s no
need for them to memorize the exploration activities and
use them exactly. Instead, allow each player to describe
what their character is doing. Then, as the GM, you can
determine which activity applies. This also means you
determine how an activity works if the character’s actions
differ from those on the list.
Emphasis mine. Even the rules leave open the possibility that a character could be using an activity not outlined in the book. Stealth Scouting could simply be what they are doing. If a player were to tell me that their Rogue is, "sneaking ahead to find any threats," I would absolutely allow them to do both activities at the same time. If they flub a sneak, then they get caught out and tip the enemy off giving them an initiative bonus. If they succeed, the party now has more information to work from and reap the reward, an initiative bonus.
I agree that many of these exploration activities could do with a name/description change or even be rolled into each other.
We are playing Age of Ashes. My group is a little rigid, stubborn even. They don't typically want to slow the game down by looking up and discussing all the exploration options they've yet to familiarize themselves with yet. I've even been snapped once or twice for talking too much and slowing the game when I was asking questions about the situation or offering alternative suggestions.
When the ranger takes Quiet Allies next level I imagine my monk is going to have a difficult time convincing everyone to take advantage. (I know what he'll take because we level up in advance so that we dont have to pause the game to level up in mid-adventure; again, to save time and keep things moving.)
In our AoA party we usually run the following setup.
1) Dwarf fighter scouts. While we are not especially keen on the initiative bonus we ruled that due to the ability description the "scout" will be the one who can "react" to danger first, which means that when we transition to encounter mode the fighter (sword & board tank) gets placed in a favorable position, no matter if the hazard/enemy is approaching from front, side or back.
2) My human cleric usually uses detec magic or searches if we think we need the additional eyes.
3) The curious gnome wizard usually uses investigate to look for clues or uses detec magic when my cleric isn't doing so.
4) Human ranger who doubles as the party thief (we have a on/off goblin rogue 5th player) uses search unless we all are using avoid notice (follow the expert).
Also I do agree that the exploration activities are badly named for what they do.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I said before though, Scout's Warning specifies that you use a Perception or Survival check for Initiative, not Stealth. So you couldn't use Avoid Notice and benefit from Scout's Warning.Ranger and Rogue can Scout as a free action.
...
To be fair though, I agree the batter could have used more time in the oven:
If number of tactics employed and proficiency rank were inputs to a system where outputs were distributed as reduction to speed, accuracy, and/or stamina - with the character selecting which penalty they were willing to take - that would be definitely more fiddly, but perhaps more "realistic" and more connected to character choice.
Hmm...
Avoid Notice doesn't say you HAVE to use Stealth for Initiative, just that you normally do. There's nothing that says you can't use Avoid Notice to be Hidden at the start of the battle, but still use Perception for Initiative.
But it is not an issue of being a solo character, it is an issue of not being able to perform at least as well as a normal person in the real world
What is an example of something that you think a normal person in the real world can do, that you can't do in encounter mode?
Ravingdork says they constantly walk into traps and the monk never does anything sneaky, so I disagree that it's working fine.
Oh, they can do it better, as I pointed out, but it's not the worst either: I can see why they didn't pick better options as the titles are confusing with what they actually do. The ranger would be much better at search then scout for instance. As for the monk, that's a matter of perception [of the characters/players]. Some people don't go out of their way to describe being stealthy when they already told you they are being stealthy: as such 'never does anything sneaky' is very subjective. With exploration being an abstraction of per round actions it's very hard to say someone is or isn't being stealthy without dice rolls.
But it is not an issue of being a solo character, it is an issue of not being able to perform at least as well as a normal person in the real worldWhat is an example of something that you think a normal person in the real world can do, that you can't do in encounter mode?
Sneak and keep watch for enemies. Encounter mode lets you do one or the other.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can see enemies while Avoiding Notice, so if you're looking to range far enough ahead of the party that you could come back and stop them, before they advance close enough to be detected, that is an option.
And if you're sneaking, and enemies are sneaking, there is a chance you'll notice them.
So the concept of "sneak and watch for enemies" is something you can do tight now, even if the specific mechanical pairing of " be hidden and grant the Scouting initiative bonus" is not.
Sneak and keep watch for enemies. Encounter mode lets you do one or the other.But it is not an issue of being a solo character, it is an issue of not being able to perform at least as well as a normal person in the real worldWhat is an example of something that you think a normal person in the real world can do, that you can't do in encounter mode?
First, obviously, I misstated the question out of force of habit by using the word encounter when I meant exploration. In encounter mode we're in rounds and you can do as many things as the action tags allow you to do within your turn.
When discussing the limitations of exploration mode - could you point me to the exact place in the text where it defines that you can rigidly only perform one exploration activity based on only one action at a time?
I don't get the sense that Exploration Mode is as rigid as you're making it out to be.
The Gamemastering chapters write up on running Exploration begins with this:
Exploration mode is intentionally less regimented than encounters. As a result, during exploration you’ll be making judgment calls on just about everything that happens.
From the outset it's telling the GM that they're in a less restrictive mode of player where they'll have to go off book a bit. The chapter then goes on to describe the latitude afforded both player and GM in using the Exploration activities that are presented:
While players usually hew close to these default activities, there’s no need for them to memorize the exploration activities and use them exactly. Instead, allow each player to describe what their character is doing. Then, as the GM, you can determine which activity applies. This also means you determine how an activity works if the character’s actions differ from those on the list.
There is then a section on improvising new actions:
If a player wants to do something not covered by other rules, here are some guidelines. If the activity is similar to an action someone could use in an encounter, such as Avoid Notice, it usually consists of a single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute ... or an alternation of actions that works out similarly... An activity using a quicker pace, corresponding to roughly 20 actions per minute, might have limited use or cause fatigue, as would one requiring intense concentration.
An exploration activity where you sneak forward and then perform a search for enemies should well be allowable by those rules as presented.
|
When discussing the limitations of exploration mode - could you point me to the exact place in the text where it defines that you can rigidly only perform one exploration activity based on only one action at a time?
On page 479:
"Rather than deciding on each action every turn, you’ll engage in an exploration activity"
or
"The GM finds the best exploration activity to match your description and describes the effects of that activity."
The whole chapter is written in the singular: you engage in an exploration activity.
Also in the GM chapter:
p. 498: "In exploration mode, each player who wants to do something beyond just traveling chooses an exploration activity for their character."
---
The playtest had rules for doing more than one exploration activity at a time, and those were cut.
Improvising a new exploration activity seems intended for when a player is trying to do something not already covered by the existing rules. So a "sneak AND seek" activity would be unsuitable.
An exploration activity where you sneak forward and then perform a search for enemies should well be allowable by those rules as presented.
They covered this: "An activity using a quicker pace, corresponding to roughly 20 actions per minute, might have limited use or cause fatigue, as would one requiring intense concentration." So either you do a bad job at both Seek and Sneak [limited use] or you fatigue yourself... Neither sounds very good.
When discussing the limitations of exploration mode - could you point me to the exact place in the text where it defines that you can rigidly only perform one exploration activity based on only one action at a time?On page 479:
"Rather than deciding on each action every turn, you’ll engage in an exploration activity"
or
"The GM finds the best exploration activity to match your description and describes the effects of that activity."
The whole chapter is written in the singular: you engage in an exploration activity.
---
The playtest had rules for doing more than one exploration activity at a time, and those were cut.
Also on page 479:
"This also means you determine how an activity works if the character’s actions differ from those on the list.The door is still open to using multiple activities, just reclassified as a single activity. But that is at the discretion of the GM. I personally would allow it. I can also understand not allowing it for the sake of simplicity if nothing else.
There are plenty of corner case situations where a character could or would logically be performing multiple exploration activities at once. Detecting Magic and Avoiding Notice for example.
This gets more interesting when you add skill specific exploration activities to the mix. Avoiding Notice and Covering your Tracks for instance. Those two seem to go hand in hand if you are trying to escape an opponent.
From the other angle though, I don't really think that the rules are intended to be run this way. As evidence you only really have to look at Avoid Notice.
If you have the Swift Sneak feat, you can move
at full Speed rather than half, but you still can’t use another
exploration activity while you do so.
So yeah, the rules are definitely written from the perspective of One activity per character per Exploration "Round".
I rectify this by making a combination of activities into a new activity instead in my games. But that is a home brew solution.
The whole chapter is written in the singular: you engage in an exploration activity.
That's an interpretation, not a rule that is explicitly defined. The fact that they go out of their way to say that your players aren't locked into the examples given, that there are many others, that new ones can be improvised, that the player is supposed to give you a general idea of what they want to do you and you as the GM select the appropriate activity for their description all paint a far less rigid picture than you're ascribing to this.
Yes it's written in the singular - but Exploration is meant to be something that happens over a longer period of time. Your exploration activity in this five minute chunk of time can be one thing and the next five minutes another. You're not locked into one and only one activity and there is nothing in the text that says you are.
Improvising a new exploration activity seems intended for when a player is trying to do something not already covered by the existing rules. So a "sneak AND seek" activity would be unsuitable.
Defining your Exploration as sneaking forward into the overgrown forest and then seeking to determine if there are enemies there is perfectly suitable.
So yeah, the rules are definitely written from the perspective of One activity per character per Exploration "Round".If you have the Swift Sneak feat, you can move
at full Speed rather than half, but you still can’t use another
exploration activity while you do so.
Avoid Notice is written from that perspective. It then goes on to say:
If you have the Legendary Sneak feat, you can move at full Speed and use a second exploration activity.
None of the activities presented make reference to whether or not you can perform additional exploration activities while performing that one. It's only Avoid Notice that goes into that detail.
One thing that TTRPGs do an awful job of conveying is the sensation of time passing for your characters when you are playing them. Saying you spend 8 times as long to go down a hallway is easy because you're not actually experiencing it as a player. As a character, it is actually pretty plausible that you're gonna get bored and your attention will wander. Which means it is actually pretty hard to pull all of these things off at once for an extended period.
I agree that many of these exploration activities could do with a name/description change or even be rolled into each other.
We are playing Age of Ashes. My group is a little rigid, stubborn even. They don't typically want to slow the game down by looking up and discussing all the exploration options they've yet to familiarize themselves with yet. I've even been snapped once or twice for talking too much and slowing the game when I was asking questions about the situation or offering alternative suggestions.
When the ranger takes Quiet Allies next level I imagine my monk is going to have a difficult time convincing everyone to take advantage. (I know what he'll take because we level up in advance so that we dont have to pause the game to level up in mid-adventure; again, to save time and keep things moving.)
They sound... Kind of awful, and you have my sympathies. I think the group might be your real problem here. The group makes a much bigger impact in your enjoyment than the system you play, in my experience. That's why I don't do PFS.
You might consider doing what I did: go to PFS or Meetup.com games until you find people you like, then poach them for your own campaigns. GMing is a great to get to use all the crazy character builds.
From the outset it's telling the GM that they're in a less restrictive mode of player where they'll have to go off book a bit. The chapter then goes on to describe the latitude afforded both player and GM in using the Exploration activities that are presented:
While players usually hew close to these default activities, there’s no need for them to memorize the exploration activities and use them exactly. Instead, allow each player to describe what their character is doing. Then, as the GM, you can determine which activity applies. This also means you determine how an activity works if the character’s actions differ from those on the list.There is then a section on improvising new actions:...
Our GM is no more familiar with the exploration rules than the players, and its usually the players declaring their exploration activities. If I told the GM he had to pick our activities, he'd probably scoff at the extra work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Our GM is no more familiar with the exploration rules than the players, and its usually the players declaring their exploration activities. If I told the GM he had to pick our activities, he'd probably scoff at the extra work.
So you’re telling me this ongoing thread rolls forward from the premise that neither you, nor your GM have familiarized yourself with the two page description of the Exploration Mode in play or the three page GM’s instructions on how to run Exploration mode and therefore you decided that clearly there was something wrong with the rules.
If I told the GM he had to pick our activities, he'd probably scoff at the extra work.
It’s written in the book so that you don’t have to tell the GM to do it, he can read that rule all on his own when he’s learning how to run the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well I also think this has to be seen in conjunction with the design decision that "everyone needs something to do, and at the same time" in contrast to PF1 where a rogue, ranger or monk could easily have a solo adventure 3 rooms ahead of the main party. And though I am basically in favour of such a concept, to me the actual implementation via the current exploration mode actions feels very artificial/superimposed/restrictive.
Typical discussion:
GM: Combat is over, what do you do?
Rogue: Well I scout ahead and check if somebody has noticed the fighting.
GM: So you choose the scout action and grant your group +1 to initiative in case somebody comes to investigate?
Rogue: No no no, I want to actively check for enemies!
GM: In that case you would be using search?
Rogue: Yes. And while being stealthy of course. I am a master rogue.
GM: So you want to use avoid notice instead of scout or search?
Rogue: Noooooooooooooooo........
(repeat ad infinitum)
GM: Combat is over, what do you do?
Rogue: Well I scout ahead and check if somebody has noticed the fighting.
GM: So you choose the scout action and grant your group +1 to initiative in case somebody comes to investigate?
Rogue: No no no, I want to actively check for enemies!
GM: In that case you would be using search?
Rogue: Yes. And while being stealthy of course. I am a master rogue.
GM: So you want to use avoid notice instead of scout or search?
Rogue: Noooooooooooooooo........(repeat ad infinitum)
Except that conversation, based on what is written in the Exploration section should be a lot different than what you’re presenting.
GM: The immediate threat in this dungeon seems to have been dealt with and you now have some time to explore your surroundings what would each of you like to do before leaving the dungeon and beginning the return journey home.
Wizard: I’d like to search the room for material components.
Rouge: I want to make sure there aren’t any remaining enemies lurking about.
Ranger: I want to get a better look at the creatures we encountered here.
GM: Alright, as they next hour passes here is how you do those things...
Exploration Mode isn’t the default mode of play that exists in between each and every encounter. So when you clear one room of a dungeon you don’t immediate drop back into Exploration Mode until you enter the next one. It’s the mode you enter when the stakes have lowered and you are able to spend time exploring without immediate threat. The book even defines the situations where it is likely to be used.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the actual implementation via the current exploration mode actions feels very artificial/superimposed/restrictive.What about it feels restrictive specifically?
For one the choose exactly one part that OP is complaining about and also because the individual pre-determined actions are (at least in my opinion) clearly not equal in strength.
When the GM explained encounter mode and the individual actions our group was like:
Avoid notice: Ok, our rogue or ranger eventually might give it a try. Eventually.
Defend: Well, sounds nice but also very situational.
Detect Magic: Hmm...we did not spam DM before, but apparently it is expected from us now. We better adopt.
Follow the expert: Remind us again when we are Experts and actually need to climb or hide.
Hustle: Noted.
Investigate: Ok, who has the most knowledge skills, apparently this is an expected activity too and we hate to miss clues.
Repeat a spell: Noted.
Scout: A full +1 on initiative? Mindblowing...
Search: Ahhhh, now we are talking!!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Exploration Mode isn’t the default mode of play that exists in between each and every encounter. So when you clear one room of a dungeon you don’t immediate drop back into Exploration Mode until you enter the next one. It’s the mode you enter when the stakes have lowered and you are able to spend time exploring without immediate threat. The book even defines the situations where it is likely to be used.
I understand where you are comming from, but we usually do not do a complete dungeon in (round based) encounter mode either. So what mode is in between encounter mode and exploration mode? At the moment we go to exploration mode when there is no immediate hazard or danger, so we can fast forward the next 10 "empty" rooms before things start to get interesting again.
the actual implementation via the current exploration mode actions feels very artificial/superimposed/restrictive.What about it feels restrictive specifically?For one the choose exactly one part that OP is complaining about and also because the individual pre-determined actions are (at least in my opinion) clearly not equal in strength.
When the GM explained encounter mode and the individual actions our group was like:
Avoid notice: Ok, our rogue or ranger eventually might give it a try. Eventually.
Defend: Well, sounds nice but also very situational.
Detect Magic: Hmm...we did not spam DM before, but apparently it is expected from us now. We better adopt.
Follow the expert: Remind us again when we are Experts and actually need to climb or hide.
Hustle: Noted.
Investigate: Ok, who has the most knowledge skills, apparently this is an expected activity too and we hate to miss clues.
Repeat a spell: Noted.
Scout: A full +1 on initiative? Mindblowing...
Search: Ahhhh, now we are talking!!!
Okay, so are you basing your opinion off of a brief description from your GM that only included the nine primary examples in the chapter, without including the other fifteen exploration actions presented?
You are not limited to only those 9 actions, nor just the 24 presented on pages 480-481.
If you’ve got ten empty rooms to explore, sure you’re in exploration mode at that point. But you have a significant number of activities to choose from and you can make your own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the actual implementation via the current exploration mode actions feels very artificial/superimposed/restrictive.What about it feels restrictive specifically?For one the choose exactly one part that OP is complaining about and also because the individual pre-determined actions are (at least in my opinion) clearly not equal in strength.
When the GM explained encounter mode and the individual actions our group was like:
Avoid notice: Ok, our rogue or ranger eventually might give it a try. Eventually.
Defend: Well, sounds nice but also very situational.
Detect Magic: Hmm...we did not spam DM before, but apparently it is expected from us now. We better adopt.
Follow the expert: Remind us again when we are Experts and actually need to climb or hide.
Hustle: Noted.
Investigate: Ok, who has the most knowledge skills, apparently this is an expected activity too and we hate to miss clues.
Repeat a spell: Noted.
Scout: A full +1 on initiative? Mindblowing...
Search: Ahhhh, now we are talking!!!Okay, so are you basing your opinion off of a brief description from your GM that only included the nine primary examples in the chapter, without including the other fifteen exploration actions presented?
You are not limited to only those 9 actions, nor just the 24 presented on pages 480-481.
If you’ve got ten empty rooms to explore, sure you’re in exploration mode at that point. But you have a significant number of activities to choose from and you can make your own.
I disagree. That's exactly what exploration mode is for.
Encounter Mode is for specific encounters, usually combat, but it could be social encounters, contests, etc...
Down Time is for weeks/months passing while you do stuff.
Exploration mode is for literally everything else. The very first page even says it's for dungeon delving.
Exploration Mode
While encounters use rounds for combat, exploration is more free form. The GM determines the flow of time, as you could be traveling by horseback across craggy highlands, negotiating with merchants, or delving in a dungeon in search of danger and treasure. Exploration lacks the immediate danger of encounter mode, but it offers its own challenges.
Edit: Damn forums have the reply buttons in the wrong spot. I quote the wrong post every time!
|
Well I also think this has to be seen in conjunction with the design decision that "everyone needs something to do, and at the same time" in contrast to PF1 where a rogue, ranger or monk could easily have a solo adventure 3 rooms ahead of the main party. And though I am basically in favour of such a concept, to me the actual implementation via the current exploration mode actions feels very artificial/superimposed/restrictive.
Typical discussion:
GM: Combat is over, what do you do?
Rogue: Well I scout ahead and check if somebody has noticed the fighting.
GM: So you choose the scout action and grant your group +1 to initiative in case somebody comes to investigate?
Rogue: No no no, I want to actively check for enemies!
GM: In that case you would be using search?
Rogue: Yes. And while being stealthy of course. I am a master rogue.
GM: So you want to use avoid notice instead of scout or search?
Rogue: Noooooooooooooooo........(repeat ad infinitum)
Well once the player made their intention clear a GM could run the game from there. You don't have to conform to a pre-described action.
Even if the GM doesn't feel inventive wouldn't most just treat it like Avoid Notice? And the player would still be able to use perception to check for guards since he isnt trying to check in depth for concealed traps (even those he could detect as long as they don't have an associated proficiency).
Also I know they are general exploration activities but the wording in some make it seem as if they were designed for use while traveling a long distance. I wouldn't always default to them in every exploration circumstance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so are you basing your opinion off of a brief description from your GM that only included the nine primary examples in the chapter, without including the other fifteen exploration actions presented?
Yes, because it is the 9 general ones that are somewhat bland/strange. All concrete skill activities make so much more sense, be it identify an item you found, repair your shield or treat the wounds of your group.
You are not limited to only those 9 actions, nor just the 24 presented on pages 480-481.
Fully correct, however if you do not have something concrete you might want to do (e.g. travel) you will often resort to those.
Also I know they are general exploration activities but the wording in some make it seem as if they were designed for use while traveling a long distance. I wouldn't always default to them in every exploration circumstance.
There was a HUGE discussion in our group before we actually started playing if exploration mode is for overland travel only (or large dungeons like a cavern system) or if it is also to be used for regular dungeons. In the end we decided to try to use it for dungeons also.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We use exploration mode whenever we're on the move in a potentially dangerous area.
In the dungeons we've faced lately, it's typically exploration mode from one room/encounter to the next, then after the encounter, we abandon the mode system entirely for a while, heal up, repair shields, search for loot, do other stuff, then re-enter exploration mode as we get moving again into a new area.
Our GM is no more familiar with the exploration rules than the players, and its usually the players declaring their exploration activities. If I told the GM he had to pick our activities, he'd probably scoff at the extra work.So you’re telling me this ongoing thread rolls forward from the premise that neither you, nor your GM have familiarized yourself with the two page description of the Exploration Mode in play or the three page GM’s instructions on how to run Exploration mode and therefore you decided that clearly there was something wrong with the rules.
I'm pretty familiar with the rules (from a "I've read everything" standpoint, not so much an "experienced numerous 2e games" standpoint). The others aren't. We're ~3 games in under this GM, and I hosted ~4 games for them before that (which didn't offer too many exploration opportunities). So yeah, we're still picking up a few things (and having a real hard time with preconceived notion baggage from 1e).
If I told the GM he had to pick our activities, he'd probably scoff at the extra work.It’s written in the book so that you don’t have to tell the GM to do it, he can read that rule all on his own when he’s learning how to run the game.
Sure, when and if he finds the time. We're talking about a guy who, when I avoided notice into a room with the party (who were not following suit), and we encountered a couple demihumans with their backs turned to us, he compared our Stealth DC to their Perception DC to see if they noticed us coming in.
By that point in the game, I didn't even bother pointing out the incongruity because I'd already been told to shut up by another player for asking too many questions and slowing down the game. I'm something of a rules lawyer, and had a bad habit of correcting people, even when it was detrimental to the party, so they implemented a "don't talk rules" rule "unless the GM specifically asks you," which he does, a lot.
We use exploration mode whenever we're on the move in a potentially dangerous area.
So you’re using it when you’re not supposed to, your DM hasn’t read it and won’t likely anytime soon. How is the problem with the rules as written then?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah bud, you are in the wrong group. This is a really bad fit for you. I had a similar experience with rules lawyering myself-- I'm used to my own group of players who appreciate me knowing the rules so well. When I went to PFS it was... not well recieved.
Also, I think I figured out where the problem with Investigate is. It is pitched as something you do while traveling at half speed. In playtest terms, it is a "tactic." It should not be. It should an exploration activity you use to Investigate particular scene. It isn't something you do while walking around. You do it when you walk into a room and stop to Investigate it, or after you fight whatever was in the room and are waiting for your medic to finish Treating Wounds. If it was going to be tied to time in anyway, it should probably be a 10 minute activity-- though the actual time it takes to Investigate will vary so much from scene to scene that it probably shouldn't be nailed down to anything.
I think if they hadn't included the bit about traveling at half speed, Investigate would have been easily understood by most people. Similarly, if they had scalling "Scout" something else it probably would have made more sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I allow players to change their tactics as they go on the fly and don't ask for prompters.
e.g. a rogue is scouting out a camp and expresses her interest to do so and how she does so. She avoids notice up to the treeline, stops avoiding notice while she is in the bushes and then seeks/searches before going back to avoiding notice while she moves again and then returns to the party.
Before people get grumpy at me and say "but that is more than one activity" I figure the player would have to take an action that would normally break them out of stealth or require a new roll for that to count.
Another way I could run it is having the rogue sneak up, search the surroundings, and prepare a discrete signal for attack from the rest of the party (which would give the scout benefit as the attack would be more synchronized).
I could be reading it wrong but exploration mode is everything outside of combat that isn't downtime and isn't meant to be a stiff set of round by round mechanics but rather just adding some limitations and codification to what people were already doing in D&D style RPGs for years.
As for the rogue who is on the lookout for foes and traps, they do that as written. Everyone is always on the lookout thanks to perception DCs.
So you’re using it when you’re not supposed to...
Huh? How so? We're in dungeons. The rules basically say to use it in dungeons and when traveling.
...your DM hasn’t read it and won’t likely anytime soon. How is the problem with the rules as written then?
None of these temporary issues have anything to do with my initial complaints/observations of Exploration Mode. Everything I've said is just as valid as when I first said them.
Yeah bud, you are in the wrong group. This is a really bad fit for you. I had a similar experience with rules lawyering myself-- I'm used to my own group of players who appreciate me knowing the rules so well. When I went to PFS it was... not well received.
Oh my group is fine. We've been playing together for nearly 20 years and are pretty aware of each others idiosyncrasies. It's really just one player who has a short temper and can't stand it when I talk over him. He's the one who imposed "the rule." I try not to talk over or interrupt people, but due to my hearing disability, I'm not always aware that I'm doing it.
Also, they're not learning the rules quickly because of laziness or disinterest, but because of priorities. They have families the need tending to (often right in the middle of those few games we can hastily schedule together). Several have two or more jobs. It's really only a matter of time before they catch up to me in rules knowledge. They've been doing it for years and have even corrected me on a few things before. Frankly, it amazes me they can find the time for the games themselves anymore, but it's kind of hard to do homework when you gotta' help the kids with theirs first.
I allow players to change their tactics as they go on the fly and don't ask for prompters.
e.g. a rogue is scouting out a camp and expresses her interest to do so and how she does so. She avoids notice up to the treeline, stops avoiding notice while she is in the bushes and then seeks/searches before going back to avoiding notice while she moves again and then returns to the party.
Before people get grumpy at me and say "but that is more than one activity" I figure the player would have to take an action that would normally break them out of stealth or require a new roll for that to count.
I'm not aware of any rules that lock you into a particular activity. You just do it until you declare that you stop doing it and then do something else.
Huh? How so? We're in dungeons. The rules basically say to use it in dungeons and when traveling...
You said you’re using it when you’re “on the move” in dangerous situations.
The book says you should use it:
Stakes: Low to moderate. Exploration mode should be used when there’s some amount of risk, but no immediate danger. The PCs might be in an environment where they’re likely to face monsters or hazards, but they usually stay in exploration mode until they enter a fight or engage in some other direct interaction.
It’s built for exploring the dungeon you’ve cleared, not mapping out the dungeon you’re about to sack. The reason it keeps resulting in your springing traps and getting attacked is because you’re misapplying it, and no wonder - you freely admit your DM hasn’t read it.
The rules basically say to use it in dungeons...
The color text paragraph at the top of the player facing page about it sure does include the word dungeon. The rules however, don’t actually say that. But you’d know that, because you read it. Right?
Everything I've said is just as valid as when I first said them.
How so? Everything you’ve said has been experiential about how it played out at your table, only to later repeatedly admit that the table you’re talking about is DM’s by someone who doesn’t know the rule in the first place.
The book says you should use it:
Stakes: Low to moderate. Exploration mode should be used when there’s some amount of risk, but no immediate danger. The PCs might be in an environment where they’re likely to face monsters or hazards, but they usually stay in exploration mode until they enter a fight or engage in some other direct interaction.It’s built for exploring the dungeon you’ve cleared, not mapping out the dungeon you’re about to sack. The reason it keeps resulting in your springing traps and getting attacked is because you’re misapplying it...
I don't get that impression at all when reading those same rules. Your own quote basically describes every adventure dungeon ever. (I've marked the relevant bits in bold.) I don't see anything that indicayes it's just meant to be used in cleared areas.
Many activities, like Avoid Notice don't even make sense in cleared areas.
IYour own quote basically describes every adventure dungeon ever.
No it sure doesn’t. An eight room dungeon with multiple monsters in all eight rooms would represent a place of immediate danger and you would have to be in encounter mode the whole time.
My inclusion of the “cleared dungeon” is not me saying that it is definitively only designed for empty dungeons but an attempt at creating an analogy for you that you might be able to grasp since you’re clearly struggling with the five pages that are in the book.
Exploration Mode is designed to encourage your players to, get this, explore their surroundings and engage with their environments. If you’re using it to cover the dangerous sneaking from dungeon room to dungeon room as you have been indicating, you’re not using it correctly.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I have to agree that exploration in dungeons make sense. It's basically what the search/investigate/defend actions exist for. Exploration is basically good for whenever you're doing something that doesn't require you to track movement round by round but isn't slow enough to really qualify as downtime either.
Exploration and then flipping to encounter when you spring a trap or run into enemies makes sense. Running a whole dungeon in encounter mode even sounds kind of awkward, though I guess that could work if you're really into the tactical side of things, treating clearing a dungeon more like a SWAT team clearing a house...
Yeah I have to agree that exploration in dungeons make sense. It's basically what the search/investigate/defend actions exist for. Exploration is basically good for whenever you're doing something that doesn't require you to track movement round by round but isn't slow enough to really qualify as downtime either.
Exploration and then flipping to encounter when you spring a trap or run into enemies makes sense. Running a whole dungeon in encounter mode even sounds kind of awkward, though I guess that could work if you're really into the tactical side of things, treating clearing a dungeon more like a SWAT team clearing a house...
I’m not saying it shouldn’t be used in a dungeon. I’m saying that if you’re almost exclusively using it in between combat encounters in a dungeon, as Ravingdork has said through the course of this thread, then of course you’re going to find exploration mode lacking because you’re not interacting with it as intended.
It's not that we exclusively use it in dungeons, it's just that we've only really adventured in dungeons so far. A lot of Age of Ashes 1 takes place indoors or underground.
Im sorry but I don't see how using it in a dungeon and using it in the wilds is any different.
The issue is not the location. The issue is not the situation. The issue is the spirit of the mode and the time at which it is being applied. It isn’t the case that if you aren’t in Encounter Mode you must then be in Exploration. These are not the states of matter.
Exploration is meant to encourage... Exploration. It’s meant to be used in times when the stakes are lower and there is less chance of danger so that you can try to create a more fully engaging world.
They didn’t create an entire new mode of play purely to do the things that we’ve been doing in between encounters for the entire life of the hobby. It doesn’t have a lot to do in the hallway between dungeon rooms and it feels like it’s in the way there because you’re used to filling that time a certain way. This mode is for encouraging your players to engage at the time they normally didn’t before.
It can be used the way Ravingdork uses it. It can be used as a default mode, but it isn’t exclusively built to do just that. It’s designed to give you more play options not to handcuff you, if the way you’re using it is negatively impacting the way you would normally would have run your dungeon, then run your dungeon the way you did before.
After all, TRPGs have been going for 20+ years without an explicit "Exploration" mechanic
20+ is an odd way to say almost 50.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It sure feels very handcuff. Should have been presented better, with more pages for starters.
It sure feels very handcuff. Should have been presented better, with more pages for starters.
What part of it feels like you're shackled? It can't be where the book defines the mode as more freeform:
Exploration mode is intentionally less regimented than encounters.
It isn't the section where it advises the GM to consider switching to encounter mode if actions there might be more applicable:
they have specific actions they want to use, they should ask; you can decide whether the actions apply and whether to switch to encounter mode for greater detail.
It can't be the idea that you're free to make up your own activities that feels like you've been placed in handcuffs.
players usually hew close to these default activities, there’s no need for them to memorize the exploration activities and use them exactly. Instead, allow each player to describe what their character is doing. Then, as the GM, you can determine which activity applies. This also means you determine how an activity works if the character’s actions differ from those on the list.
I can't imagine it's the guidance for allowing the use of fast paced actions that's so limiting.
activity using a quicker pace, corresponding to roughly 20 actions per minute, might have limited use or cause fatigue, as would one requiring intense concentration.
Nor even the guidance on how to handle even more robust activities:
might find that a player wants to do something equivalent to spending 3 actions every 6 seconds, just like they would in combat. Characters can exert themselves to this extent in combat only because combat lasts such a short time—such exertion isn’t sustainable over the longer time frame of exploration.
In just three pages of text that is a lot of latitude given to both player and DM. so what exactly is so restrictive about it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ultimately everyone is just taking this way too literally instead of just doing it logically. You finish a fight. During that time, in the same room, you treat wounds, search, etc...
You check the door going into the next room for traps.
Before opening the door, everyone declares that they are either Scouting or Avoiding notice, as those are the only two modes that matter at all for entering into a potential encounter.
Once you open the door, and see that there is no immediate threat, you start searching for traps and hidden foes. Once the room is clear, you start over.
If there are enemies in the room, you roll Initiative, run the encounter, and start over.
If the Rogue wants to "Scout ahead" and Avoid Notice, those aren't two activities. That's literally Avoiding Notice and then opening the door to see what's behind it, moving into the room, and opening the next door. The DM still makes Perception rolls to see if you notice traps and stuff. You only have to actively search for advanced traps that have a minimum proficiency rank.
Detecting a Hazard
Every hazard has a trigger of some kind that sets its
dangers in motion. For traps, this could be a mechanism
like a trip wire or a pressure plate, while for an
environmental hazard or haunt, the trigger may simply be
proximity. When characters approach a hazard, they have
a chance of finding the trigger area or mechanism before
triggering the hazard. They automatically receive a check
to detect hazards unless the hazards require a minimum
proficiency rank to do so.
During exploration, determine whether the party
detects a hazard when the PCs first enter the general area
in which it appears. If the hazard doesn’t list a minimum
proficiency rank, roll a secret Perception check against
the hazard’s Stealth DC for each PC. For hazards with a
minimum proficiency rank, roll only if someone is actively
searching (using the Search activity while exploring or
the Seek action in an encounter), and only if they have the
listed proficiency rank or higher. Anyone who succeeds
becomes aware of the hazard, and you can describe what
they notice.
All of the "travel speed" stuff is for over world travel between locations. In a dungeon, you aren't in exploration mode long enough for that to matter.
I'll grant you, dirtypool, that the handcuffed feeling probably has more to do with how we're managing Exploration Mode than the explicit rules.
I like your approach, Aratorin. It isn't too far off from how we do it now.
Also, I don't think we knew that PCs got auto-checks to spot traps in this edition. Like in 1e, if we didn't have a special ability like trap finding, or didn't declare we were looking for traps, we never found them until it was too late.
That makes sense though. Our GM got a defective Core Rulebook that was missing some 20-odd consecutive pages that covered part of the magical item and hazards/traps sections.
I'm not sure if Customer Support has sent him the replacement book yet.
I'll grant you, dirtypool, that the handcuffed feeling probably has more to do with how we're managing Exploration Mode than the explicit rules.
I like your approach, Aratorin. It isn't too far off from how we do it now.
Also, I don't think we knew that PCs got auto-checks to spot traps in this edition. Like in 1e, if we didn't have a special ability like trap finding, or didn't declare we were looking for traps, we never found them until it was too late.
That makes sense though. Our GM got a defective Core Rulebook that was missing some 20-odd consecutive pages that covered part of the magical item and hazards/traps sections.
I'm not sure if Customer Support has sent him the replacement book yet.
Traps that require a proficiency aren't auto discovered, but there is no reason not to swap between exploration modes on thr fly. Not "avoiding notice" doesn't mean you are shouting at the top of your lungs.
That is to say, if you come into a corridor nothing stops the rogue for checking the hallway for traps before continuing to avoid notice afterwards.
But moving stealthily and looking for hidden traps is a pretty specific skillset and would take a lot of someone's attention. I would have liked to see a paired down trapfinder feat appear as an expert or master skill feat though.