TLDR: Should I use more linear dungeon/encounter design to make sure that players have the opportunity to find treasure and loot? I try to give players the freedom to do things their way but it seems like they will always take the path of least resistance and leave most of the loot behind.
Hey all, I'm currently running an urban campaign set in Waterdeep that uses some aspects of Dragon Heist (initial quest, characters, etc.). The players are currently involved in infiltrating a thieves' guild, doing some initial tasks for their recruiter before being admitted.
The first task the recruiter gave them was to steal an urn from a wealthy banker's home. The recruiter told the players they could take whatever else they found in the home for themselves but he wanted the urn. The urn was visible through a barred window from the street on the 2nd floor of the home and I gave the players time in the game and out to come up with a plan to steal it. I designed the home with multiple ways in and out, set up guards, as well as an interesting encounter with the banker's young daughter who swore there was a ghost in the home (it was a group of boggles). I also revealed during their initial reconnaissance that they saw the banker put something into a vault in his office (in a separate room from the urn they were to steal). I placed gold and some other treasure in the vault (a magic ring, the illgotten deed to the Trollskull Manor, and some other incriminating documents that would help them in their campaign), as well as treasure and items of value around the rest of the house, in case they got handsy. If they helped the daughter she would help them get access to the vault which was trapped.
Feeling satisfied, I ran what I thought would be an interesting and rewarding session. What resulted was a very abrupt and very loud snatch-and-grab that resulted in the players making off with just the urn. There were a lot of reasons why it went that way, among them being some bad decisions on the players' behalf (including splitting the party), some bad rolls, and my foolish insistence that a level 1 sleep spell would not put a CR 3 guard to sleep. All around, it didn't go well and despite making their escape quite tense I was left pretty unsatisfied that both my preparation and the rewards I had sprinkled around went unused and undiscovered.
The next task the recruiter gave them was to raid a rival gang's hideout and frame the Xanathar Guild on the attack. They were also to recover any information they could find on the gang's connection to the Zhentarim. Again, I gave a bit of room for the players to surveil or infiltrate the hideout if they wanted, and to plan their attack. Again, they ended up sending only one person inside, who gathered evidence and a bit of loot (I made sure not to directly tie loot to specific rooms/areas) and then snuck out, while they others drew attention away. Because of the risk of only having one person inside, I think the player decided not to explore any further as soon as he found something that would satisfy the quest giver. Unfortunately, they left behind quite a bit of treasure.
Overall, I hope that my players are satisfied with the encounters, even if I am not. But in the future I would like to be able to award players with gold/treasure/magic items in a more consistent manner. After the first venture went so poorly, I decided to try coming up with loot that could be in several places rather than having every piece of loot tied to a specific location. I think this worked pretty well, but the issue (as I see it) remains that my players seem to be very timid and don't seem to want to explore the rest of the dungeon/encounter.
Should I try using a more linear approach in the future? Are there things I can do to better incentivize or alert the players that they are missing out on treasure by taking the path of least resistance? Or am I spinning my wheels over nothing?
Look, if they ignore treasure, that's their own fault. If they complain about not having more loot, just tell them to look for it. You shouldn't just put it at their feet if they decide to not look for loot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ignorance is bliss, and you look absolutely miserable."
Just curious - but do these characters actually want to be thieves?
Both the scenarios you set up were for folks who WANT to go in, sneak around, and take stuff that isn't theirs. On the other hand, these characters are infiltrating a thieves guild and may not think of themselves as nasty, evil, bad guys who sneak into people's houses (even bad people or organizations) and take their stuff. They are doing missions for the thieves guild so that they can infiltrate it ... not actually become members. If that is the case, the players/characters may not have much interest in actually running around their targets and stealing stuff.
Maybe something to consider. Might depend on the characters involved.
Just curious - but do these characters actually want to be thieves?
That's certainly a good point regarding the first mission they went on. They have not been afraid to go afoul of the law and I tried to give plenty of hints that the person they were stealing from isn't innocent either. I think they are primarily focused on completing whatever mission they're on and not getting sidetracked (for example, during a session that went to an underground fighting pit two of the players said it was a waste of time to bet/participate in the fights, even though they would be getting gold by doing so).
They won't be doing much more sneaking/stealing, but the same issue applies to other kinds of dungeons. I'm concerned that in more typical dungeons, unless I make them linear the players are going to end up skipping a good portion.
Look, if they ignore treasure, that's their own fault. If they complain about not having more loot, just tell them to look for it. You shouldn't just put it at their feet if they decide to not look for loot.
I think I'll hold telling them to look for loot as a last resort. I'd prefer not to tell them how I want them to play, and focus on what I can do to help nudge them in the direction I want. At the same time, there is definitely some loot that I fully intend to put at their feet.
Just wondering if there's anything I can do to improve my dungeon/encounter design to encourage exploration.
It sounds like you gave the players the opportunity to make a decision, and all the information needed to choose the decision most to their liking, and they made it. You did your job. And I know it's frustrating to spend a lot of time crafting interesting encounters just to have your players pass them up or bypass them with an unexpected solution, but that's the game. It sounds to me like they had fun playing in your world.
The first task the recruiter gave them was to steal an urn from a wealthy banker's home.
...
What resulted was a very abrupt and very loud snatch-and-grab that resulted in the players making off with just the urn.
So, to me, this seems pretty normal. In most of the campaigns I've run and been in, players are pretty goal-oriented - they figure out their goal, figure out the best way to achieve it, and go for it.
The next task the recruiter gave them was to raid a rival gang's hideout and frame the Xanathar Guild on the attack. They were also to recover any information they could find on the gang's connection to the Zhentarim. Again, I gave a bit of room for the players to surveil or infiltrate the hideout if they wanted, and to plan their attack. Again, they ended up sending only one person inside, who gathered evidence and a bit of loot (I made sure not to directly tie loot to specific rooms/areas) and then snuck out, while they others drew attention away. Because of the risk of only having one person inside, I think the player decided not to explore any further as soon as he found something that would satisfy the quest giver. Unfortunately, they left behind quite a bit of treasure.
Yep, same deal. They came up with a plan to do the job - send one person inside, while the other draw attention. The executed the plan, and achieved the goal. Probably what I would have done too, and same with many other groups I'm in. Get the job done, complete the quest, get out.
Overall, I hope that my players are satisfied with the encounters, even if I am not. But in the future I would like to be able to award players with gold/treasure/magic items in a more consistent manner. After the first venture went so poorly, I decided to try coming up with loot that could be in several places rather than having every piece of loot tied to a specific location. I think this worked pretty well, but the issue (as I see it) remains that my players seem to be very timid and don't seem to want to explore the rest of the dungeon/encounter.
Yeah, this matches groups I've been in/DMed for too.
In my opinion, "Exploring the dungeon fully" is much more commonly done in video games - when you know there's a limited amount of dungeon that the game designers made, you want to get your money's worth and find *all* the things and all the secrets. So in a video game, you explore every room.
Whereas in D&D, where there's always more "world" around the corner, there's no push to "explore something fully" - because no matter what, there's always more to explore, because the DM is gonna keep inventing more. On the other hand, there IS a potential penalty for exploring too much - failure of the actual mission. Opening random doors that don't help the PCs accomplish their mission feels like getting distracted, rather than keeping your eye on the goal.
So I generally expect this to be the case. Players go for the goal, sometimes with, like, *one* detour if it's a really obvious one and they see a reason to.
Should I try using a more linear approach in the future? Are there things I can do to better incentivize or alert the players that they are missing out on treasure by taking the path of least resistance? Or am I spinning my wheels over nothing?
So you need to answer the question - what's the in-character reason that these characters would explore more? Are they looking for something in particular that they haven't found, are they trying to find something in those other rooms? What do they expect to see if they explore, and why would their characters decide it's worth the risk?
Just the generic motivation of "well, there might be treasure there" isn't effective enough. There might be treasure there, or they might be treasure if they return to the questgiver and go on the next quest.
I'd say the way to get them to explore fully is to give them a reason to. They've, so far, had very goal-oriented quests - go in, do X, get out. So that's what they've done. You can formulate the quest in a more open-ended fashion. Here's some examples that I came up with:
"NPC X is hiding a powerful artifact somewhere in their home. You're to retrieve it. The catch - I can't tell you the form of this powerful artifact, it's disguised as a more mundane magic item. Here's a wand of detect magic to help you, but identifying the artifact for sure will require bringing it back here and testing it." So then the players are gonna find a way to ransack this home, detect-magic-ing everything. Maybe the artifact is in the vault, maybe it's hidden in the master bedroom under the bed, maybe it's disguised as a lawn ornament, who knows. They gotta poke everything and see what they find.
"Oh no! the Macguffin Mine has been invaded by cranium rats! You are hired to get rid of the infestation. That means finding where they're coming from, getting rid of the source, and then getting every last rat out of that dungeon." So then the players have to at least *look* in every corner to see whether they've missed any rats or any more ways in.
"The thieves guild has found the location of the Lost Dungeon Z! It's bound to be filled with untold treasures. Unfortunately, the Zhentarim are going to find it soon too. They're outfitting a massive expedition, so we're going to send a smaller, faster force - you! Your job is to get in there, grab everything the Zhents might want, and make sure they don't get it. Then get out before their main force arrives - you'll probably have just one day." So then the players explicitly have a task to explore as much as possible and grab as much as they can.
NPC X is hiding a powerful artifact somewhere in their home. You're to retrieve it... They gotta poke everything and see what they find.
Yeah, if you want a set of goal-oriented players to search, you need to make it necessary to search to achieve the goal, at least at first. If they see, after a couple of times, that searching = goodies, they may start doing it on their own.
Otherwise, back to the title: "How to Introduce Treasure when Players Don't Explore?"
An NPC could give them items as rewards, they could stumble across them, find them in shops, defeat an enemy who is carrying one. There are many ways to introduce them without having the characters search for them.
My players just completed a quest to stop a young girl, manifesting sorcerous powers for the first time, who had caused freak arctic conditions (no inspiration from any Disney stories... honest guv). At the end, a Sorceror met them and took the young girl to train her. In gratitude (he had been wanting to rescue and train the girl for a long time) he gave out some items (including one which will be important to the story later).
So, the players do not need to search for magic items in order for you to introduce them. However, if you want them to search, you'll have to give them a stronger nudge.
I do not believe there is any need to re-arrange the loot so that they find more of what is there. Your job as DM is to 'dress the dungeon' - that is, to put items into the areas that are what should be there, including treasure, and to spec the place out so that wherever the players decide to have their characters go, you know what's in there, and why, and what will happen if they go in. Is there a trap? A monster to fight? Some guards? A riddle or puzzle? Nothing special? Where is the treasure? Is it locked? What happens if they take it -- will someone notice it's gone and pursue?
Your job is to figure that stuff out. THEIR job is to play the game. If they skip half the content you made up, and in so doing miss all the treasure, that's on them, not on you.
I do agree that you need to think about, what would the reason be for them to explore a place given their mission and probable goals. But at some point the players have to decide what their characters are doing. Are they desirous of treasure and magic items? If so, then they need to go about looking for them, not expect them to fall into their laps. If not, then it should be no big deal if they don't find any (which, by not looking, they almost certainly won't -- and shouldn't).
My players have skipped some pretty nice treasures in a couple of places they've been, because their goal was something other than finding treasure. That's perfectly fine, IMO. They don't have to find everything.
But if they don't go looking for it and consequently don't find it, they don't have a leg to stand on, IMO, if they say later, "You're not giving us enough cool magic items." Magic items are not, as a rule, just sitting there for the taking in D&D. They are hidden, under guard, and you need to look for 'em.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
If you aren't satisfied as DM: its normal If your players aren't satisfied: you messed up How can you tell what the players think? Ask them. Sounds silly, but after every session I have I ask my players, "Did you enjoy the session? Anything you felt was unfair or handled poorly?" I improved VERY fast after getting that kind of feedback.
It sounds to me like you are doing a great job, and running the game exactly as I like it to be run. There are locations, plot hooks, NPCs, missions, danger and potential loot.
Players only get loot when they find it, take it, or earn it.
If you want them to have loot for some reason, then offer it as a reward for doing the missions. That's the only way you can make it really likely that they'll take it, and even then they might decline. I have planned out a large city for my players to explore with plenty of sub missions, a dungeon in the library and so on - but they may choose never to use the library. If they don't, they'll miss out on the loot there, and the chance for cool encounters. It can be dispiriting when players don't explore your designs, but remember that you can always run the campaign for another group in the future, or even send them back to the same location for another reason. You could shake it up and have the banker, getting desperate, kidnap a friendly NPC and heavily fortify his home. Returning to locations can feel really rewarding, especially if the circumstances there have changed.
Personally I play a Chaotic PC who would not go around just looting a house purely because he was inside it, and it sounds like you're framing these missions as smash-and-grabs. The players have a task: get the item. It would seem odd to me if they then went around doing a whole lot of looting - that's not why they're there. Some parties are highly threat averse, and if they are, then you can consider that when planning missions for them.
Yes, this is fairly normal. It happens a lot. And it's part of the job.
If your players aren't satisfied: you messed up
Well... maybe. I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement that any time the players are unsatisfied it means the GM messed up. After all, we all know people in our lives who are never satisfied. You give the low level players a +1 sword, and they complain it's not +2. You give them a +2, and they whine about wanting a +3. People such as this, being unsatisfied, are not the DM's fault.
Furthermore, players may have unrealistic expectations, especially if new to the game. They might think, for example, that any magic item they want is available in magic shops like going down to the big box store in modern times. Maybe they saw something like this on their favorite D&D stream/podcast and think it's true in your world. Maybe they even think this after session 0 when you told them it wasn't. Now when they go to the shop area looking for a magic shop and don't find one, they are unsatisfied. This is not the DM's fault either.
A lot of factors can contribute to player dissatisfaction, and not all of it is the responsibility of the DM. Sometimes players want things that are unreasonable, and are unsatisfied when they don't get them. Some players are spotlight hogs, for example, and will be unhappy whenever the adventure is not about THEIR character. If the whole session was about Bob's character or Sarah's, John will be unsatisfied. That's on John, not Bob, Sarah, or the GM.
And plenty of times players do things of their own accord, making their own terrible, short-sighted decisions, and are unsatisfied with the result. That's how it should be as well. In character actions have in character consequences.
So... I think that "having a satisfying play session" is, yes, in general something a GM should try to provide the players, but I don't think that whenever players end up dissatisfied, it is always and entirely on the shoulders of the GM. Sometimes it's mostly the players' fault.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I'd say the way to get them to explore fully is to give them a reason to. They've, so far, had very goal-oriented quests - go in, do X, get out. So that's what they've done. You can formulate the quest in a more open-ended fashion. Here's some examples that I came up with:
These are great examples. I think you and many of the others are hitting on the same point. I shouldn't be surprised that the players are focusing on the goal rather than being "completionist" like you would in a video game. I'll try to tweak the way I design quests so that they are required to do more thorough exploration in the future.
But if they don't go looking for it and consequently don't find it, they don't have a leg to stand on, IMO, if they say later, "You're not giving us enough cool magic items."
Thankfully they haven't said so, but they are approaching level 7 so I want to make sure they start finding interesting and unique items. They already have a couple interesting items, and I've provided ways for them to get "cheap" magic items that have either limited use or some side-effect. I was looking at the table of how many magic items the party should have in XGtE and was getting worried that they are undersupplied.
How can you tell what the players think? Ask them. Sounds silly, but after every session I have I ask my players, "Did you enjoy the session? Anything you felt was unfair or handled poorly?" I improved VERY fast after getting that kind of feedback.
Makes sense. I will ask them how they feel about the distribution of magic items so far.
Some parties are highly threat averse, and if they are, then you can consider that when planning missions for them.
Have them encounter another pack of thieves, one who is proudly showing off some nice item. When asked where they got it, "Oh, yeah, we were robbing a house and Dobby here noticed a hidden door, we risked spending more time in the hour to investigate, and found this nice piece. Cool eh?"
One of the good things about this edition is the treasure doesn’t matter. In others, if they didn’t have the right gear, they’d not succeed. In this one, If they don’t find the +x sword by level y, they won’t be behind. Characters can play at level 20 with the same sword that had at level 1, and it will work just as well.
So if they don’t find it, no big deal. You can always put it in a future treasure pile if they really need it, or they can go without, but their character will still be effective.
Look, if they ignore treasure, that's their own fault. If they complain about not having more loot, just tell them to look for it. You shouldn't just put it at their feet if they decide to not look for loot.
I think I'll hold telling them to look for loot as a last resort. I'd prefer not to tell them how I want them to play, and focus on what I can do to help nudge them in the direction I want. At the same time, there is definitely some loot that I fully intend to put at their feet.
Just wondering if there's anything I can do to improve my dungeon/encounter design to encourage exploration.
Consider that D&D they may be nudging you in the direction they want. See it as an opportunity to push your boundaries and try new things.
There's a lot of "well if they don't find it that's their problem" here that heavily implies that "dressing the dungeon" is The Right Way to Play. But there are plenty of reasons the players might not be into that. As mentioned above, maybe they simply don't see themselves as thieves. Maybe they're too worried about dying, getting caught or ambushed to feel relaxed enough to look for loot. Maybe the characters just aren't the type to be focused on treasure. For many of the characters I've played, there are big differences between stealing treasure, finding treasure, and earning treasure. You may be playing to a whole pack of earners.
So try different methods of handing it out. Grant items as gifts when they complete a quest. Put an item conspicuously on the bad guy they need to defeat (bonus - you get to use it on them). Create puzzles or challenges that make treasure visible but not something they can just pick up (i.e. The Sword in the Stone). Drop a hint that the only weapon the BBEG truly fears - the Super Awesome Sword of Destruction - is rumored to be in Sidequest Cavern, awaiting those strong enough to retrieve it.
If the PCs don't run around looting everything, that's not really a problem.
If they accomplished their goal, pay them. They don't have to find it, just pay them for work.
It is totally ok for PCs to not chase gold. If they enjoy doing a good job, that's great! No campaign should be purely loot oriented. And if there is something you really want to give them, give it as payment for a job. Either as a reward up front or better yet, as the boss saying he doesn't have as much cash on hand, will the party take this XX thing instead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
You can also optionally make a certain magic item key to unlocking the next part of a dungeon, or make one item they need to get separated through many rooms and during looking through to find the item they find several other things as well.
TLDR: Should I use more linear dungeon/encounter design to make sure that players have the opportunity to find treasure and loot? I try to give players the freedom to do things their way but it seems like they will always take the path of least resistance and leave most of the loot behind.
Hey all,
I'm currently running an urban campaign set in Waterdeep that uses some aspects of Dragon Heist (initial quest, characters, etc.). The players are currently involved in infiltrating a thieves' guild, doing some initial tasks for their recruiter before being admitted.
The first task the recruiter gave them was to steal an urn from a wealthy banker's home. The recruiter told the players they could take whatever else they found in the home for themselves but he wanted the urn. The urn was visible through a barred window from the street on the 2nd floor of the home and I gave the players time in the game and out to come up with a plan to steal it. I designed the home with multiple ways in and out, set up guards, as well as an interesting encounter with the banker's young daughter who swore there was a ghost in the home (it was a group of boggles). I also revealed during their initial reconnaissance that they saw the banker put something into a vault in his office (in a separate room from the urn they were to steal). I placed gold and some other treasure in the vault (a magic ring, the illgotten deed to the Trollskull Manor, and some other incriminating documents that would help them in their campaign), as well as treasure and items of value around the rest of the house, in case they got handsy. If they helped the daughter she would help them get access to the vault which was trapped.
Feeling satisfied, I ran what I thought would be an interesting and rewarding session. What resulted was a very abrupt and very loud snatch-and-grab that resulted in the players making off with just the urn. There were a lot of reasons why it went that way, among them being some bad decisions on the players' behalf (including splitting the party), some bad rolls, and my foolish insistence that a level 1 sleep spell would not put a CR 3 guard to sleep. All around, it didn't go well and despite making their escape quite tense I was left pretty unsatisfied that both my preparation and the rewards I had sprinkled around went unused and undiscovered.
The next task the recruiter gave them was to raid a rival gang's hideout and frame the Xanathar Guild on the attack. They were also to recover any information they could find on the gang's connection to the Zhentarim. Again, I gave a bit of room for the players to surveil or infiltrate the hideout if they wanted, and to plan their attack. Again, they ended up sending only one person inside, who gathered evidence and a bit of loot (I made sure not to directly tie loot to specific rooms/areas) and then snuck out, while they others drew attention away. Because of the risk of only having one person inside, I think the player decided not to explore any further as soon as he found something that would satisfy the quest giver. Unfortunately, they left behind quite a bit of treasure.
Overall, I hope that my players are satisfied with the encounters, even if I am not. But in the future I would like to be able to award players with gold/treasure/magic items in a more consistent manner. After the first venture went so poorly, I decided to try coming up with loot that could be in several places rather than having every piece of loot tied to a specific location. I think this worked pretty well, but the issue (as I see it) remains that my players seem to be very timid and don't seem to want to explore the rest of the dungeon/encounter.
Should I try using a more linear approach in the future? Are there things I can do to better incentivize or alert the players that they are missing out on treasure by taking the path of least resistance? Or am I spinning my wheels over nothing?
Look, if they ignore treasure, that's their own fault. If they complain about not having more loot, just tell them to look for it. You shouldn't just put it at their feet if they decide to not look for loot.
"Ignorance is bliss, and you look absolutely miserable."
Just curious - but do these characters actually want to be thieves?
Both the scenarios you set up were for folks who WANT to go in, sneak around, and take stuff that isn't theirs. On the other hand, these characters are infiltrating a thieves guild and may not think of themselves as nasty, evil, bad guys who sneak into people's houses (even bad people or organizations) and take their stuff. They are doing missions for the thieves guild so that they can infiltrate it ... not actually become members. If that is the case, the players/characters may not have much interest in actually running around their targets and stealing stuff.
Maybe something to consider. Might depend on the characters involved.
That's certainly a good point regarding the first mission they went on. They have not been afraid to go afoul of the law and I tried to give plenty of hints that the person they were stealing from isn't innocent either. I think they are primarily focused on completing whatever mission they're on and not getting sidetracked (for example, during a session that went to an underground fighting pit two of the players said it was a waste of time to bet/participate in the fights, even though they would be getting gold by doing so).
They won't be doing much more sneaking/stealing, but the same issue applies to other kinds of dungeons. I'm concerned that in more typical dungeons, unless I make them linear the players are going to end up skipping a good portion.
I think I'll hold telling them to look for loot as a last resort. I'd prefer not to tell them how I want them to play, and focus on what I can do to help nudge them in the direction I want. At the same time, there is definitely some loot that I fully intend to put at their feet.
Just wondering if there's anything I can do to improve my dungeon/encounter design to encourage exploration.
It sounds like you gave the players the opportunity to make a decision, and all the information needed to choose the decision most to their liking, and they made it. You did your job. And I know it's frustrating to spend a lot of time crafting interesting encounters just to have your players pass them up or bypass them with an unexpected solution, but that's the game. It sounds to me like they had fun playing in your world.
Yep, same deal. They came up with a plan to do the job - send one person inside, while the other draw attention. The executed the plan, and achieved the goal. Probably what I would have done too, and same with many other groups I'm in. Get the job done, complete the quest, get out.
So you need to answer the question - what's the in-character reason that these characters would explore more? Are they looking for something in particular that they haven't found, are they trying to find something in those other rooms? What do they expect to see if they explore, and why would their characters decide it's worth the risk?
Just the generic motivation of "well, there might be treasure there" isn't effective enough. There might be treasure there, or they might be treasure if they return to the questgiver and go on the next quest.
I'd say the way to get them to explore fully is to give them a reason to. They've, so far, had very goal-oriented quests - go in, do X, get out. So that's what they've done. You can formulate the quest in a more open-ended fashion. Here's some examples that I came up with:
"NPC X is hiding a powerful artifact somewhere in their home. You're to retrieve it. The catch - I can't tell you the form of this powerful artifact, it's disguised as a more mundane magic item. Here's a wand of detect magic to help you, but identifying the artifact for sure will require bringing it back here and testing it." So then the players are gonna find a way to ransack this home, detect-magic-ing everything. Maybe the artifact is in the vault, maybe it's hidden in the master bedroom under the bed, maybe it's disguised as a lawn ornament, who knows. They gotta poke everything and see what they find.
"Oh no! the Macguffin Mine has been invaded by cranium rats! You are hired to get rid of the infestation. That means finding where they're coming from, getting rid of the source, and then getting every last rat out of that dungeon." So then the players have to at least *look* in every corner to see whether they've missed any rats or any more ways in.
"The thieves guild has found the location of the Lost Dungeon Z! It's bound to be filled with untold treasures. Unfortunately, the Zhentarim are going to find it soon too. They're outfitting a massive expedition, so we're going to send a smaller, faster force - you! Your job is to get in there, grab everything the Zhents might want, and make sure they don't get it. Then get out before their main force arrives - you'll probably have just one day." So then the players explicitly have a task to explore as much as possible and grab as much as they can.
Yeah, if you want a set of goal-oriented players to search, you need to make it necessary to search to achieve the goal, at least at first. If they see, after a couple of times, that searching = goodies, they may start doing it on their own.
Otherwise, back to the title: "How to Introduce Treasure when Players Don't Explore?"
An NPC could give them items as rewards, they could stumble across them, find them in shops, defeat an enemy who is carrying one. There are many ways to introduce them without having the characters search for them.
My players just completed a quest to stop a young girl, manifesting sorcerous powers for the first time, who had caused freak arctic conditions (no inspiration from any Disney stories... honest guv). At the end, a Sorceror met them and took the young girl to train her. In gratitude (he had been wanting to rescue and train the girl for a long time) he gave out some items (including one which will be important to the story later).
So, the players do not need to search for magic items in order for you to introduce them. However, if you want them to search, you'll have to give them a stronger nudge.
I do not believe there is any need to re-arrange the loot so that they find more of what is there. Your job as DM is to 'dress the dungeon' - that is, to put items into the areas that are what should be there, including treasure, and to spec the place out so that wherever the players decide to have their characters go, you know what's in there, and why, and what will happen if they go in. Is there a trap? A monster to fight? Some guards? A riddle or puzzle? Nothing special? Where is the treasure? Is it locked? What happens if they take it -- will someone notice it's gone and pursue?
Your job is to figure that stuff out. THEIR job is to play the game. If they skip half the content you made up, and in so doing miss all the treasure, that's on them, not on you.
I do agree that you need to think about, what would the reason be for them to explore a place given their mission and probable goals. But at some point the players have to decide what their characters are doing. Are they desirous of treasure and magic items? If so, then they need to go about looking for them, not expect them to fall into their laps. If not, then it should be no big deal if they don't find any (which, by not looking, they almost certainly won't -- and shouldn't).
My players have skipped some pretty nice treasures in a couple of places they've been, because their goal was something other than finding treasure. That's perfectly fine, IMO. They don't have to find everything.
But if they don't go looking for it and consequently don't find it, they don't have a leg to stand on, IMO, if they say later, "You're not giving us enough cool magic items." Magic items are not, as a rule, just sitting there for the taking in D&D. They are hidden, under guard, and you need to look for 'em.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
If you aren't satisfied as DM: its normal
If your players aren't satisfied: you messed up
How can you tell what the players think? Ask them. Sounds silly, but after every session I have I ask my players, "Did you enjoy the session? Anything you felt was unfair or handled poorly?" I improved VERY fast after getting that kind of feedback.
It sounds to me like you are doing a great job, and running the game exactly as I like it to be run. There are locations, plot hooks, NPCs, missions, danger and potential loot.
Players only get loot when they find it, take it, or earn it.
If you want them to have loot for some reason, then offer it as a reward for doing the missions. That's the only way you can make it really likely that they'll take it, and even then they might decline. I have planned out a large city for my players to explore with plenty of sub missions, a dungeon in the library and so on - but they may choose never to use the library. If they don't, they'll miss out on the loot there, and the chance for cool encounters. It can be dispiriting when players don't explore your designs, but remember that you can always run the campaign for another group in the future, or even send them back to the same location for another reason. You could shake it up and have the banker, getting desperate, kidnap a friendly NPC and heavily fortify his home. Returning to locations can feel really rewarding, especially if the circumstances there have changed.
Personally I play a Chaotic PC who would not go around just looting a house purely because he was inside it, and it sounds like you're framing these missions as smash-and-grabs. The players have a task: get the item. It would seem odd to me if they then went around doing a whole lot of looting - that's not why they're there. Some parties are highly threat averse, and if they are, then you can consider that when planning missions for them.
Yes, this is fairly normal. It happens a lot. And it's part of the job.
Well... maybe. I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement that any time the players are unsatisfied it means the GM messed up. After all, we all know people in our lives who are never satisfied. You give the low level players a +1 sword, and they complain it's not +2. You give them a +2, and they whine about wanting a +3. People such as this, being unsatisfied, are not the DM's fault.
Furthermore, players may have unrealistic expectations, especially if new to the game. They might think, for example, that any magic item they want is available in magic shops like going down to the big box store in modern times. Maybe they saw something like this on their favorite D&D stream/podcast and think it's true in your world. Maybe they even think this after session 0 when you told them it wasn't. Now when they go to the shop area looking for a magic shop and don't find one, they are unsatisfied. This is not the DM's fault either.
A lot of factors can contribute to player dissatisfaction, and not all of it is the responsibility of the DM. Sometimes players want things that are unreasonable, and are unsatisfied when they don't get them. Some players are spotlight hogs, for example, and will be unhappy whenever the adventure is not about THEIR character. If the whole session was about Bob's character or Sarah's, John will be unsatisfied. That's on John, not Bob, Sarah, or the GM.
And plenty of times players do things of their own accord, making their own terrible, short-sighted decisions, and are unsatisfied with the result. That's how it should be as well. In character actions have in character consequences.
So... I think that "having a satisfying play session" is, yes, in general something a GM should try to provide the players, but I don't think that whenever players end up dissatisfied, it is always and entirely on the shoulders of the GM. Sometimes it's mostly the players' fault.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
These are great examples. I think you and many of the others are hitting on the same point. I shouldn't be surprised that the players are focusing on the goal rather than being "completionist" like you would in a video game. I'll try to tweak the way I design quests so that they are required to do more thorough exploration in the future.
Thankfully they haven't said so, but they are approaching level 7 so I want to make sure they start finding interesting and unique items. They already have a couple interesting items, and I've provided ways for them to get "cheap" magic items that have either limited use or some side-effect. I was looking at the table of how many magic items the party should have in XGtE and was getting worried that they are undersupplied.
Makes sense. I will ask them how they feel about the distribution of magic items so far.
Yes, it seems that way.
Show, don't tell.
Have them encounter another pack of thieves, one who is proudly showing off some nice item. When asked where they got it, "Oh, yeah, we were robbing a house and Dobby here noticed a hidden door, we risked spending more time in the hour to investigate, and found this nice piece. Cool eh?"
One of the good things about this edition is the treasure doesn’t matter. In others, if they didn’t have the right gear, they’d not succeed. In this one, If they don’t find the +x sword by level y, they won’t be behind. Characters can play at level 20 with the same sword that had at level 1, and it will work just as well.
So if they don’t find it, no big deal. You can always put it in a future treasure pile if they really need it, or they can go without, but their character will still be effective.
Consider that D&D they may be nudging you in the direction they want. See it as an opportunity to push your boundaries and try new things.
There's a lot of "well if they don't find it that's their problem" here that heavily implies that "dressing the dungeon" is The Right Way to Play. But there are plenty of reasons the players might not be into that. As mentioned above, maybe they simply don't see themselves as thieves. Maybe they're too worried about dying, getting caught or ambushed to feel relaxed enough to look for loot. Maybe the characters just aren't the type to be focused on treasure. For many of the characters I've played, there are big differences between stealing treasure, finding treasure, and earning treasure. You may be playing to a whole pack of earners.
So try different methods of handing it out. Grant items as gifts when they complete a quest. Put an item conspicuously on the bad guy they need to defeat (bonus - you get to use it on them). Create puzzles or challenges that make treasure visible but not something they can just pick up (i.e. The Sword in the Stone). Drop a hint that the only weapon the BBEG truly fears - the Super Awesome Sword of Destruction - is rumored to be in Sidequest Cavern, awaiting those strong enough to retrieve it.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
If the PCs don't run around looting everything, that's not really a problem.
If they accomplished their goal, pay them. They don't have to find it, just pay them for work.
It is totally ok for PCs to not chase gold. If they enjoy doing a good job, that's great! No campaign should be purely loot oriented. And if there is something you really want to give them, give it as payment for a job. Either as a reward up front or better yet, as the boss saying he doesn't have as much cash on hand, will the party take this XX thing instead.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
You can also optionally make a certain magic item key to unlocking the next part of a dungeon, or make one item they need to get separated through many rooms and during looking through to find the item they find several other things as well.
As Xalthu said, money isn't particularly useful in D&D 5E.
However, if you want to reward your PCs then perhaps their recruiter can provide items as appropriate rewards for their successful mission(s).
So why do my players want it so much?