No, you just explore. If you want to get back to someplace you’ve been before without lots of hassle, map it with Cartographer!
What do you mean by “lots of hassle”? I’m not sure I understand the intended exploration procedure.
Like do I tell them there are such and such exits, then they pick one, repeat? Then when they tell me thy want to go back to a place, how do I determine when a check is called for? What is the “hassle”? My players tend to keep a very sketchy map of just boxes and lines keyed to a description. Are they not allowed to put lines between their descriptions?
Like I’m just not getting how this works out.
Should they only make a descriptive list with no spatial connectivity info? Then, when they want to get back to wherever and have no map, they have to make a test? Or do they only have to make a test of they can’t remember the order of procession they’ve taken?
For instance, what if the mapper says, “Let’s GTFO. Back through the lava room before this one, back through the primeval forest, back trough the terrarium, and we’re out.”
Presuming he lists a valid order, he just does it, right? But if the player is wrong or confused, there’s a Dungeoneering test?
Yeah, that’s something I’m not 100% on either. In my current game I haven’t bothered with maps or navigation much, but it’s also a one player campaign at this point, and she doesn’t have those skills, and the dungeons are relatively simple (The first one she only got through 3 rooms).
I get mapping in the over-world, because you need pathfinder if you aren’t following a map or a road. But with a dungeon it seems like it’s all pretty straightforward unless there’s a maze in there somewhere. Take the three squires adventure. There aren’t that many chambers, and I’d be fairly inclined to just play out the dungeon without using cartographer much.
That said, I think the notion in raw TB is that if you say “Let’s GTFO. Back through the lava room before this one, back through the primeval forest, back trough the terrarium, and we’re out.” There might be monsters in one of those places, or maybe someone reset a trap, etc. If you’ve used Cartographer then baring an obvious present threat (you are currently being chased or a tunnel collapsed that your map relies on), then you get there without being harassed by new obstacles in old rooms.
In Under the House of the Three Squires, traveling from the Lower Limestone Tunnel to the Upper Limestone Tunnel (or vice versa) requires avoiding the pit and climbing (or descending) the natural ladder. I make you test each time you go that way. If you’ve got it mapped, you can go from one to the other without dealing with it every time.
Ah, that’s a nice example.
I think (could be wrong) but if you have a map, you can even bypass the obvious threats (reset traps, cliffs) if you can move through the areas. Sorta like Let it Ride, maybe? A tunnel collapsing means you couldn’t draw a path to the exit, so you would go to there, clear the rubble, and then leave.
You make it over the cliff, you move past the trap, you sidle over the lava pit and drive off the goblins. Now you wanna get back out.
No Map: You have to test the move over the lava pit again, disarm the trap again if its reset and move down the cliff face. You might even need to fend off any returning goblins (if you move through where they were driven off to).
Map: You narratively make it through all of that and make it back outside. Whoosh!
I think…
Edit: Too slow.
While we’re on the subject of maps (maybe this should be a new thread), what are the criteria of a good map? What are the criteria of a bad map? Where do you say “No, it’s not good enough. You can’t roll.” ?
If they mapped everything in the dungeon except for the pit trap do you let them make the map with Cartography or do they “stumble upon” the trap when going back through (and have to test), even if they have their map?
So using a map effectively teleports you?
With regard to the original point, if the PCs search a wall for a secret door that isn’t there, then that’s a “good idea”, and they’ll successfully find a lack of secret doors.
Regarding a “good map”, I’m not quite sure what you mean. If they never encountered a pit trap, then it won’t be on their map, which means they won’t go that way if using a successful map. If the pit trap is in a specific area that they visited, like in some room, then they’ll avoid the pit using the map here as well, unless they intentionally stop in that room again.
That’s my understanding.
Basically. “Time” passes, for whatever that means in a system where time is abstracted, but narratively you essentially teleport.
Also, a good map is a map that lists locations and describes them briefly. A bad map is no map.
I mean if they encounter a pit trap (say in a earlier session, but it completely slipped the mapper’s mind to add it to the description of that particular room) and then try to make a map in a later session.
I think the idea is that a brief description is sufficient. The actual mapping isn’t supposed to be done by the players, it happens with the roll, as long as they roll is successful and they seem to have the gist of it, they can navigate without rehashing old obstacles.
If the cartographer roll is failed, the GM can add a location-based twist (like falling into an undiscovered trap). Otherwise, they would just bypass the area entirely.
Aiight. Just didn’t know how specific their descriptions needed to be.
Summarizing what I’m gathering:
MAP: teleport to mapped areas, no test.
NO MAP: navigate descriptively, in the traditional, analog way.
LOST: in a big place and can’t figure out where you are? Make Dungeoneering test to get back to somewhere familiar.
Legit?
The map is like Henry Jones’ notes in Last Crusade. It tells you what the dangers are, how to overcome them safely, what to look for etc. The map from the Hobbit is another example. “This is how you get in through the back door.” It’s not just about which direction to go to get from room to room so much as detailed instructions you use to minimize the risks of traversing a dangerous location. “What was in this room? Before we go in, we should check our map…”
Re: making a test to figure out where you are, I’d say no. Just describe the sitch, and have the players react. If THEY figure out where they are, then great. Hopefully though, you’ve put them someplace they haven’t been yet, and get them all kerfluffled.
Sounds about right to me.
I might still use Pathfinder if they’re lost, depending on where they are and how they go about finding their way back… but I’d have to take a look at the factors and what feels appropriate for the situation to make that decision.
Definitely not Dungeoneering. That’s for climbing, squeezing through crevices, cave diving, etc. I personally wouldn’t allow a Pathfinder test either. You wander until you can get to some place you have mapped.
Great. That makes me happy. Thanks, Thor.