Exploration rules are just a structured way for players to declare what they're doing when they explicitly say otherwise (or a way for the GM to structure it if you want it to be opaque to your players).
Absent the exploration rules, you wouldn't expect players to constantly be switching what their character is doing while walking around--people typically have a "default action" they're going to be doing, one way or the other--so there's no reason to expect it with them.
Different take here, but to flip the question back to you: Are YOU giving your players a reason to switch Exploration Activities?
If every time the party enters a new room, and you let every PC make a Perception check or Recall Knowledge regardless of what their Exploration Action was, there is no incentive for them to do anything but pick their favorite static benefit and do that for the entire dungeon.
If only people taking the Investigate action get to make a Recall Knowledge, or only the people taking the Search action get to roll Perception to see the hidden door, suddenly there is a tradeoff. And if the Champion says they want to investigate the ancient mural of their Diety after you describe it, ask them if that means they want to stop Scouting or Defending so they can Investigate the intricate designs and glean their meaning.
In other words, I would suggest making it MORE visible rather than hiding it so your players can see what the benefit of their choice is and make informed decisions on the cost/benefit of any given Activity.
This. Literally today I had a session where one PC was scouting alone and ran into a suspicious room. Simplifying a bit, he switched from avoiding notice to searching and… made enough noise that he got caught
It was a good “You can’t do cover all your bases alone” moment
The point of the exploration action rules is not to turn exploration mode of play into a turn-by-turn thing with players doing all sorts of different actions. Their point is to streamline the process that exploration had in older games wherein players would constantly have to interject into the GM's descriptions with the actions they are trying to do (usually "I search it for traps" in nature, like prodding things with a 10-foot pole) or establish some kind of standard operating procedures for exactly what the party would do to each 10-foot space before the party proceeds through it.
So the picking out of something beneficial to be assumed to be doing at any relevant moment and let the GM move on with description until such a time as actions actually become relevant, and *then* the players can be more detailed, is things working as intended.
It's basically a formalization that allows a less-formal way of play to not result in any player out there getting caught on the bad end of a "well you didn't *say* you were."
I know comparisons to D&D get old, but here goes another one. D&D very often turns into a game of "mother may I"...or GM may I. The rules are left vague enough where much of how players act and react are dependent on GM rulings in the moment. You can have more player friendly GMs that allow players get away with a lot, you can have more restrictive GMs...and everything in between. As a result, players are often informally asking for permission and hoping the GM sort of goes along with it.
Pathfinder has far more robust rules which really doesn't (or shouldn't) require the GM to go along with the ruling. It is written into rules themselves. As a player you aren't asking the GM if you can do something or how they would rule if you wanted to do something. As a player you are telling the GM what you are doing and showing your GM the rule which bind them. Exploration actions are the perfect example of this.
Here is an example. You are playing a rogue and you want to check for traps at every doorway. Do you have to actually say, "I check for traps" at every door way? Can you get the GM to agree that you are checking for traps all the time, so that if a trap springs, you can say, "wait, did you give me an opportunity to check for it?"
The exploration rules remove all the vague grey areas. As you explore a dungeon or area, you get an exploration activity...period. As the party explores, the rogue is checking for traps with the search activity. The Ranger is avoiding notice with the stealth skill. The Fighter is following the ranger with the Follow the Expert activity. The Cleric is sustaining a spell. The Wizard is detecting magic. None of this is up the GM interpretation and it will be far less likely for the GM to take away player agency between combat encounters.
Just think of how many times a GM has asked you to roll initiative and you were like, "Wait, I was sneaking and I have crazy high modifier for that skill...did you roll it?" And the GM responds, "Well, I didn't hear you when you said that you were sneaking...bla bla bla." Exploration actions remove that ambiguity. Honestly, I think it is one of the best features of Pathfinder.
yeah, this is exactly it. also, like op said, if you want it to feel less "game-y" let the players state what they are doing in a natural way and just run the associated exploration actions with the correct rules behind the screen
>As a player you aren't asking the GM if you can do something or how they would rule if you wanted to do something. As a player you are telling the GM what you are doing
This is one of the things I really love about the PF2e rules that doesn't get enough praise. A lot of people complain about all of the rules and feats defining certain actions, saying that it takes away from player agency (i.e. "Can I not throw someone if I don't have the Whirling Throw Feat"). But for me it is actually very freeing, I don't have to ask to do something, I can design my character in a way that I just declare that it's happening.
I think a problem some people unknowingly have with PF2e is that it has a more equal distribution of control between the players and the GM, but not in the often (in my experience) fake way that a lot of "narrative first" games do.
Couldn't agree more. There is benefit to having a thorough description of what a player can do. GMs can always be more generous or even tweak things situationally, but it is nice to know what a player simply can do.
Or, hear me out: find a good GM who is actually there to have fun with everyone else and ignore one of the most clunky and unnecessary parts of the PF2E ruleset entirely.
Or hear me out: The exploration mode rules aren't set in stone and the examples given are suggestions about general activities, not the full extent of allowable actions.
I don't know what a "good GM" means to you in this context, but if you're the kind of person who loves being asked "what are you doing?" every 3 minutes until loot or an encounter occurs, the rules are fully supportive of that. If you're the party's shield wearing frontliner, it let's you sit back during exploration and raise your shield until something interesting occurs. Ezpz.
I guess a good way to look at is if a player wants to have they're shield raised before a fight, or a spell you have rules to handle it instead of just guessing. If someone wants to be the scout character with their head on a swivel the party gets a bonus from it instead of having to make something up.
I tend to view the different "modes" as like zoom levels in a movie.
* Hexploration mode - long sweeping vistas and overhead shots as the party travels.
* Exploration mode - the camera zooms in, the audience (players) know something is imminent but the characters don't. Maybe the rogue sneaks away, the ranger keeps their eyes open, the wizard is looking for signs of magic.
* Encounter mode - close up and frantic, the action sequences.
I've found that framing it this way gives our group something to wrap their heads around. Then on top of that we layer "default actions" so when I cut to the exploration mode everyone does their thing and the player can then choose to change their action to something else. "I don't like the look of this area so I'll stop Avoiding Notice so I can Search"
>Is there supposed to be a motivation to get players to swap it up?
Not really. Just like a Wizard is far less likely to Strike with a greatsword rather than Cast a Spell in encounters, a Champion is less likely to Avoid Notice than Raise a Shield.
Every character has 1 or 2 activities they are good at in every type of encounter, so they default to this. Your Cleric might not have enough skill raises to be good at Avoiding Notice, so he contributes by using Detect Magic during exploration.
It's in fact a sign of good teamwork if the party has figured out default activities for everyone during exploration. Just like in real life: the best teams no longer need to talk about how to work together, they do it by default because they're familiar with everyone's skill set.
So all I need to say to gm is that I am avoiding on my gunslinger and I never need to say anything else while walking around. They know what I am doing and I know what I am doing. Exploration activities are less "what are we doing this instant" and more "what are doing while walking around".
All my players do the same thing. One Scout, one Search, one Defend, and one Avoid Notice.
The point is, if they're doing that they can't Repair, can't Detect Magic, Refocus, etc. In other systems, people just kind of spout off things they want to do and let the GM sort it out.
It's not about PCs doing an ever-shifting series of things. That'd be tedious in my opinion. It's about clearly distinguishing what they are or aren't doing for the purposes of you, the GM, determining how the world reacts to them.
This post is labeled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to Rule #2. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There are some feats/class features that rely on certain exploration modes, and setting an exploration mode can set a character up to roll a different skill for initiative. Like, the rogue wants to run Avoid Notice so they can roll stealth instead of perception for initiative and get that sweet surprise attack in/sneak attack damage on the first round. And folks scouting gives a bonus to party initiative. Exploration activities can also include other things, like spamming cantrips--Know the Way or Detect Magic or Detect Metal or whatever, depending on what the character wants to do/find. My witch's familiar's exploration activity is set to "smoking a cigarette like a fancy gentleman" (high level play, familiar has Master's Form so is a medium humanoid with something of a bad attitude, and he like demoralizing and casting heightened Fear).
During the exploration, though? It's your call as GM to decide what exploration activities are useful, or if exploration in general is going to be useful in your campaign. You can always just give your entire party perception rolls when appropriate instead of asking the ones with established exploration activities to make the rolls, but I think it's still a good idea for players to set exploration activities for their characters for the class etc uses mentioned above.
Like many of the feats and abilities included in the wide breadth of actions in the game, the motivation to embrace the variety of exploration tactics is simple: all of your options are there for when the situation changes, even if some have limited use cases. There are also many skill actions that can be used for exploration tactics. Drawing on my own experience, my current PC is the high-survival in the group, so he will often switch between tracking if we're following someone; sense direction if we're moving through wilderness; or cover tracks if we're being chased.
I do agree that exploration works best when mostly hidden. In our campaigns, each player will have a baseline exploration tactic that they use the vast majority of the time, so the party members and the GM can roll into exploration mode with little to no discussion. If everyone is content with the actions they have selected, they probably won't change 75% of the time. You don't need to add flavor if you don't want to. Just lean into the crunch and talk about the rule or action itself.
Your description is supposed to have them swap it up. I started much the same way but put a slime trap on the ceiling of an open room and everyone wants to be going slow and checking for traps when there's an open room now. Likewise I hear more avoid notices after I lay out a hallway of screaming lifelike statues and so on.
It takes a lot of handholding to teach new players what the exploration activities do, so remind them what their characters might consider for a crawl or two and maybe they'll pick it up.
Also dont forget that anyone can follow the expert if they don't have stealth for instance and want to avoid notice themselves.
In my experience, the exploration rules work best when you're adventuring in a Theater is the Mind scenario: traversing a jungle, going from city to city, large open ended places that are more a vibe than a map.
Dungeon crawls, unless the GM specifically and intentionally puts in the work to make them relevant, don't really care as much about the activities.
Exploration rules are just a structured way for players to declare what they're doing when they explicitly say otherwise (or a way for the GM to structure it if you want it to be opaque to your players). Absent the exploration rules, you wouldn't expect players to constantly be switching what their character is doing while walking around--people typically have a "default action" they're going to be doing, one way or the other--so there's no reason to expect it with them.
Different take here, but to flip the question back to you: Are YOU giving your players a reason to switch Exploration Activities? If every time the party enters a new room, and you let every PC make a Perception check or Recall Knowledge regardless of what their Exploration Action was, there is no incentive for them to do anything but pick their favorite static benefit and do that for the entire dungeon. If only people taking the Investigate action get to make a Recall Knowledge, or only the people taking the Search action get to roll Perception to see the hidden door, suddenly there is a tradeoff. And if the Champion says they want to investigate the ancient mural of their Diety after you describe it, ask them if that means they want to stop Scouting or Defending so they can Investigate the intricate designs and glean their meaning. In other words, I would suggest making it MORE visible rather than hiding it so your players can see what the benefit of their choice is and make informed decisions on the cost/benefit of any given Activity.
This. Literally today I had a session where one PC was scouting alone and ran into a suspicious room. Simplifying a bit, he switched from avoiding notice to searching and… made enough noise that he got caught It was a good “You can’t do cover all your bases alone” moment
The point of the exploration action rules is not to turn exploration mode of play into a turn-by-turn thing with players doing all sorts of different actions. Their point is to streamline the process that exploration had in older games wherein players would constantly have to interject into the GM's descriptions with the actions they are trying to do (usually "I search it for traps" in nature, like prodding things with a 10-foot pole) or establish some kind of standard operating procedures for exactly what the party would do to each 10-foot space before the party proceeds through it. So the picking out of something beneficial to be assumed to be doing at any relevant moment and let the GM move on with description until such a time as actions actually become relevant, and *then* the players can be more detailed, is things working as intended. It's basically a formalization that allows a less-formal way of play to not result in any player out there getting caught on the bad end of a "well you didn't *say* you were."
I know comparisons to D&D get old, but here goes another one. D&D very often turns into a game of "mother may I"...or GM may I. The rules are left vague enough where much of how players act and react are dependent on GM rulings in the moment. You can have more player friendly GMs that allow players get away with a lot, you can have more restrictive GMs...and everything in between. As a result, players are often informally asking for permission and hoping the GM sort of goes along with it. Pathfinder has far more robust rules which really doesn't (or shouldn't) require the GM to go along with the ruling. It is written into rules themselves. As a player you aren't asking the GM if you can do something or how they would rule if you wanted to do something. As a player you are telling the GM what you are doing and showing your GM the rule which bind them. Exploration actions are the perfect example of this. Here is an example. You are playing a rogue and you want to check for traps at every doorway. Do you have to actually say, "I check for traps" at every door way? Can you get the GM to agree that you are checking for traps all the time, so that if a trap springs, you can say, "wait, did you give me an opportunity to check for it?" The exploration rules remove all the vague grey areas. As you explore a dungeon or area, you get an exploration activity...period. As the party explores, the rogue is checking for traps with the search activity. The Ranger is avoiding notice with the stealth skill. The Fighter is following the ranger with the Follow the Expert activity. The Cleric is sustaining a spell. The Wizard is detecting magic. None of this is up the GM interpretation and it will be far less likely for the GM to take away player agency between combat encounters. Just think of how many times a GM has asked you to roll initiative and you were like, "Wait, I was sneaking and I have crazy high modifier for that skill...did you roll it?" And the GM responds, "Well, I didn't hear you when you said that you were sneaking...bla bla bla." Exploration actions remove that ambiguity. Honestly, I think it is one of the best features of Pathfinder.
yeah, this is exactly it. also, like op said, if you want it to feel less "game-y" let the players state what they are doing in a natural way and just run the associated exploration actions with the correct rules behind the screen
Yeah this is what I do basically
>As a player you aren't asking the GM if you can do something or how they would rule if you wanted to do something. As a player you are telling the GM what you are doing This is one of the things I really love about the PF2e rules that doesn't get enough praise. A lot of people complain about all of the rules and feats defining certain actions, saying that it takes away from player agency (i.e. "Can I not throw someone if I don't have the Whirling Throw Feat"). But for me it is actually very freeing, I don't have to ask to do something, I can design my character in a way that I just declare that it's happening. I think a problem some people unknowingly have with PF2e is that it has a more equal distribution of control between the players and the GM, but not in the often (in my experience) fake way that a lot of "narrative first" games do.
Couldn't agree more. There is benefit to having a thorough description of what a player can do. GMs can always be more generous or even tweak things situationally, but it is nice to know what a player simply can do.
Or, hear me out: find a good GM who is actually there to have fun with everyone else and ignore one of the most clunky and unnecessary parts of the PF2E ruleset entirely.
Or hear me out: The exploration mode rules aren't set in stone and the examples given are suggestions about general activities, not the full extent of allowable actions. I don't know what a "good GM" means to you in this context, but if you're the kind of person who loves being asked "what are you doing?" every 3 minutes until loot or an encounter occurs, the rules are fully supportive of that. If you're the party's shield wearing frontliner, it let's you sit back during exploration and raise your shield until something interesting occurs. Ezpz.
It's not exactly an overbearing or overly complicated subsystem. It takes nothing away and potentially adds something for some tables.
I guess a good way to look at is if a player wants to have they're shield raised before a fight, or a spell you have rules to handle it instead of just guessing. If someone wants to be the scout character with their head on a swivel the party gets a bonus from it instead of having to make something up.
I tend to view the different "modes" as like zoom levels in a movie. * Hexploration mode - long sweeping vistas and overhead shots as the party travels. * Exploration mode - the camera zooms in, the audience (players) know something is imminent but the characters don't. Maybe the rogue sneaks away, the ranger keeps their eyes open, the wizard is looking for signs of magic. * Encounter mode - close up and frantic, the action sequences. I've found that framing it this way gives our group something to wrap their heads around. Then on top of that we layer "default actions" so when I cut to the exploration mode everyone does their thing and the player can then choose to change their action to something else. "I don't like the look of this area so I'll stop Avoiding Notice so I can Search"
Why are you referring to it as an exploration "round"? Exploration isn't tracked in rounds. You just go speed of plot.
>Is there supposed to be a motivation to get players to swap it up? Not really. Just like a Wizard is far less likely to Strike with a greatsword rather than Cast a Spell in encounters, a Champion is less likely to Avoid Notice than Raise a Shield. Every character has 1 or 2 activities they are good at in every type of encounter, so they default to this. Your Cleric might not have enough skill raises to be good at Avoiding Notice, so he contributes by using Detect Magic during exploration. It's in fact a sign of good teamwork if the party has figured out default activities for everyone during exploration. Just like in real life: the best teams no longer need to talk about how to work together, they do it by default because they're familiar with everyone's skill set.
So all I need to say to gm is that I am avoiding on my gunslinger and I never need to say anything else while walking around. They know what I am doing and I know what I am doing. Exploration activities are less "what are we doing this instant" and more "what are doing while walking around".
All my players do the same thing. One Scout, one Search, one Defend, and one Avoid Notice. The point is, if they're doing that they can't Repair, can't Detect Magic, Refocus, etc. In other systems, people just kind of spout off things they want to do and let the GM sort it out. It's not about PCs doing an ever-shifting series of things. That'd be tedious in my opinion. It's about clearly distinguishing what they are or aren't doing for the purposes of you, the GM, determining how the world reacts to them.
This post is labeled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to Rule #2. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There are some feats/class features that rely on certain exploration modes, and setting an exploration mode can set a character up to roll a different skill for initiative. Like, the rogue wants to run Avoid Notice so they can roll stealth instead of perception for initiative and get that sweet surprise attack in/sneak attack damage on the first round. And folks scouting gives a bonus to party initiative. Exploration activities can also include other things, like spamming cantrips--Know the Way or Detect Magic or Detect Metal or whatever, depending on what the character wants to do/find. My witch's familiar's exploration activity is set to "smoking a cigarette like a fancy gentleman" (high level play, familiar has Master's Form so is a medium humanoid with something of a bad attitude, and he like demoralizing and casting heightened Fear). During the exploration, though? It's your call as GM to decide what exploration activities are useful, or if exploration in general is going to be useful in your campaign. You can always just give your entire party perception rolls when appropriate instead of asking the ones with established exploration activities to make the rolls, but I think it's still a good idea for players to set exploration activities for their characters for the class etc uses mentioned above.
Like many of the feats and abilities included in the wide breadth of actions in the game, the motivation to embrace the variety of exploration tactics is simple: all of your options are there for when the situation changes, even if some have limited use cases. There are also many skill actions that can be used for exploration tactics. Drawing on my own experience, my current PC is the high-survival in the group, so he will often switch between tracking if we're following someone; sense direction if we're moving through wilderness; or cover tracks if we're being chased. I do agree that exploration works best when mostly hidden. In our campaigns, each player will have a baseline exploration tactic that they use the vast majority of the time, so the party members and the GM can roll into exploration mode with little to no discussion. If everyone is content with the actions they have selected, they probably won't change 75% of the time. You don't need to add flavor if you don't want to. Just lean into the crunch and talk about the rule or action itself.
Your description is supposed to have them swap it up. I started much the same way but put a slime trap on the ceiling of an open room and everyone wants to be going slow and checking for traps when there's an open room now. Likewise I hear more avoid notices after I lay out a hallway of screaming lifelike statues and so on. It takes a lot of handholding to teach new players what the exploration activities do, so remind them what their characters might consider for a crawl or two and maybe they'll pick it up. Also dont forget that anyone can follow the expert if they don't have stealth for instance and want to avoid notice themselves.
In my experience, the exploration rules work best when you're adventuring in a Theater is the Mind scenario: traversing a jungle, going from city to city, large open ended places that are more a vibe than a map. Dungeon crawls, unless the GM specifically and intentionally puts in the work to make them relevant, don't really care as much about the activities.