Measuring time in Turns for explration

[Yora]

When it comes to the length of a round in D&D type games, I have a very clear oppinion that a 6 or 10-second-round is a much better choice than a 1-minute-round for various reasons related both to combat durations and movement speeds. But the older editions also have the turn as another unit to measure time outside of combat, which is meant to cover 10 minutes of exploration.

10-minute-turns seem like a good time scale for tracking the durations of torches and lamps and making wandering monster checks, and in B/X and BECMI all spells have their duration measured in turns as well. (Since a turn lasts 60 rounds and every encounter is assumed to last a full turn regardless of how many rounds have passed, this means you never have to bother with spells running out in the middle of a fight.) I would not make the time represented by a turn any longer or shorter.

But I've always found that turns are behaving somewhat weird when it comes to the speed at which parties are moving through dungeons while exploring. If you want to go straight back to the exit you can do that using encounter speed. But while moving at exploraton speed, a lightly armored character only makes 90 feet of progress. That's a measly 27 meters. Or 2.7 meters per minute. Or alternatively, you can search a 10x10 feet area in one turn. That's roughly 1 minute to search one square meter. That all seems way too low for me.

How do you need one minute to explore 3 meters of corridor? Are characters supposed to take out tape measures and record the exact dimensions of the environment? At such slow speeds I don't see what difference it would make to be wearing leather armor or plate armor. In plate armor with a full backpack your speed would even be down to just 90cm per minute. That's two steps. Two pretty short steps.

The only way I could imagine to take one minute to search one square minute would be if that square minute has a big chest or cupboard in it that I rummage through very carefully.

I see two solutions to that: Either to drastically increase the exploration and search speed during a turn, or to use a different idea of what exploration would look like (which is where you would come in.)

One thing I am already doing is to use a completely different encumbrance system that effectively uses item slots and different types of armor using up multiple slots. (Up to your STR in items = full speed; up to double STR in items = 3/4 speed, up to tripple STR in items = 1/2 speed.) This should make it easy for the party to share to load so they get a somewhat uniform speed. But how much unexplored cave or coridors should a group be able to move through in 10 minutes? I think it should be a lot more than 20 or 30 meters. What about searching?

[Lord Torath]

I would say that moving at "exploration speed" includes searching. You are carefully testing for traps, looking for secret doors, hidden compartments, listening for approaching monsters, etc.

[Thrudd]

I agree, it is an unrealistically slow rate of movement, even for extreme caution in dark places. If characters were really moving that slowly because they were searching everything carefully, they would never miss a secret door or be surprised by anything.
I think a more reasonably rate of cautious movement would be 1 ft/second, 60 ft/minute, which would be 600 ft in a 10 minute turn. I terms of time in the dungeon, that does seem way too fast. Exploration turns might be dropped to 1 minute instead of 10, and the movement rate wouldn't need to change - but you would need to increase the lifespan of torches and fuels and maybe spells by a large amount which may be annoying to keep track of - a torch now lasts 60 turns instead of 6 turns.

One thing you can do is to give the players a choice of movement rate during exploration, which will have an impact on things like finding hidden things and being surprised by monsters. 5e has a version of this idea. You can have thorough searching speed, which lets the party cover a 10x10 area in 1 minute, automatically finding any secrets that are there, if someone in the party is watching out instead of searching, there is no chance to be surprised (excepting magic like invisibility). Cautious speed moves 60 ft/minute, with normal chances to find secrets and be surprised by monsters. Slow speed moves 120 ft/minute and gives less chance to notice secrets and greater chance for surprise. Normal speed (for a dark dungeon) goes 180 ft/minute and no chance to see secrets and even greater chance of surprise. Fast speed is for retreating or moving through familiar areas, 240 ft/minute. In outdoor/open spaces, 240 ft/min is normal and a brisk pace might be 300 ft/minute.
You could reduce the lifespan of light sources a bit to make it easier to manage, or resolve to find an easy way to keep track, with a clicker or something.

[D+1]

But I've always found that turns are behaving somewhat weird when it comes to the speed at which parties are moving through dungeons while exploring.

The first job of the turn in older editions is to SET the speed at which the party can move through dungeons while exploring. The origins of D&D are really as a dungeon exploration game with the turn as the basic unit of time in which things were measured. Rounds were definitely a combat-only fraction of clock watching.

If you want to go straight back to the exit you can do that using encounter speed. But while moving at exploraton speed, a lightly armored character only makes 90 feet of progress. That's a measly 27 meters. Or 2.7 meters per minute. Or alternatively, you can search a 10x10 feet area in one turn. That's roughly 1 minute to search one square meter. That all seems way too low for me.

Take 1E as an example. Under the small section about movement and searching in the DMG (small, because it was sort of assumed most DM's were already freely making judgments in this area), it suggests 1 round to search a door for traps, 1 round to listen for noise, 1 turn to casually examine and map a 20x20' room, followed by another turn to thoroughly search it after initial examination, 1 round to check a 10x10 section of floor or wall for secret doors, and again another round to search for the means to OPEN one after it's been found. Then follows suggestions that if there's a lot in an area to search, such as a lot of furniture and containers, then the DM can easily double the time required. Really the DM can AND SHOULD set the time required to what the DM deems reasonable in order to find what the DM wants the PC's to find. And searching for secret doors is ADDED time.

For movement the standard rate when unencumbered by too much weight/gear is 12", which is a scale measurement that breaks down to 120' every turn (10 minutes) while exploring and mapping. Multiply that by 5 if following known routes or maps. If you're fleeing outright you could move 120' per minute/round - which is the amount you get to move during combat anyway.

"Exploring" a dungeon as you move through it is actually slow because you ARE making at least crude measurements, and speed of moving through it (in AD&D) is determined mostly by how much dead weight or bulk you're already schlepping around. That isn't SEARCHING, it's exploring. Pretty much means you can make a serviceable map to find your way around (and especially the way OUT), but is by no means a matter of tape-measure measurements. Exploring means you're mostly looking for the obvious things, watching out for all the possible things that can surprise and KILL you. You're moving slowly so as to not just BLUNDER into traps and ambushes, but you're not taking time to SEARCH - unless players actually feel that moving extremely slow and searching every freakin' square inch is something they want to do. But then the DM is also prompted to get characters moving by use of wandering monsters, tricks and traps to spring on the characters of those players who WASTE time with unnecessary and tedious searching, etc.

Of course, D&D was still being framed as something of a "Gotcha!" game between the DM and players at that time too, so players needed to find a BALANCE of activity for their characters as they explored dungeons - too much time wasted moving too slowly and the DM will start using tools to painfully teach the characters to move along... yet move along too quickly without notable levels of caution and the DM will again declare the PC's are surprised, miss important clues, don't hear noises, don't notice traps, etc.

It's not the turn itself that's an issue - it's how the DM has it apply to what the characters ACTUALLY do and how the players do or don't make best use of their characters time in the dungeon.

One thing I am already doing is to use a completely different encumbrance system

Really the only purpose of an encumbrance system is to firstly ensure that the characters are only carrying realistic amounts of crap on their persons, and secondly to apply reasonable penalties when they carry too much. Old School rules might have some specific numbers, but mostly it's a matter of the DM simply keeping an eye on it so that it doesn't get out of hand (or no more out of hand than the DM cares to allow).

Again, using 1E AD&D as an example:
12" = able to run quickly = normal gear of about 35# (adjusted for STR) and no great bulk
9" = able to make a lumbering run = heavy gear with armor and equipment of about 70# or fairly bulky.
6" = able to trot short distances = very heavy loads, armor/gear of 105# and bulky (like plate armor).
3" = slogging = weight over 105# or very bulky [like maybe carrying a 2'x3' chest full of gold strapped across your back?]

That's the general PH information. As DM you would be EXPECTED to add to that or modify it to meet YOUR expectations of what's reasonable for PC's to manage to do. For example, the different armors were assigned base movement rates based on "bulk" as opposed to weight, but if you wanted to make it a bit easier on the PC's (and frankly a bit more realistic) then you could, and should, ignore the idea that plate armor is going to slow you down to 6" simply due to being outrageously bulky and hard to move around in, and just use weight and strength adjustment to reduce movement speed.

The Old School way is NOT to treat the written rules as the authoritative word. What the _DM_ feels is appropriate is the final word (as long as the players agree with you enough to not mutiny).

But how much unexplored cave or coridors should a group be able to move through in 10 minutes? I think it should be a lot more than 20 or 30 meters. What about searching?

Never had much problem with the above described general information. When I wanted to ignore encumbrance as DM, I did. When I wanted it to matter, then it mattered. If players wanted the party to be able to explore faster then they stopped trying to treat the game like it was a MMORPG with friggin' bottomless backpacks full of a mobile armory of weapons, a spare diesel locomotive and a cubic meter of neutron star material. Simple ideas are to use hirelings or pack animals to tote some of the dead weight, leave less valuable loot behind instead of seizing every copper piece with a deathgrip, expend magic resources on spells or items that enable carrying more, sending a few PC's to scout ahead while others search rooms, or whatever.

[Telok]

When moving through blank corridors and not bothering to try to reliably map things the stated time and movement is rather slow. If you need to know whether or not the corridor is 110' or 130' feet because there might be a room full of hidden treasure nearby then it's better. You can bypass the trap searches by throwing a ball and having a dog fetch it, but that tells anyone near the other end of the hall that someone's coming and gives them time to set up an ambush.

For rooms, it depends on the room. A dungeon cell with a few chains and bars? Quick to search, five minutes at maximum. My living room with five sets of shelves, pictures, rugs, furniture, and the computer desk? If a gremlin hid my keys in here it would take me 30+ minutes to search the place, and I'm familiar with it and I know there aren't any secret compartments.

[Yora]

One interpretation I've found today, which apparently is based on a slight elaboration of Mentzer Basic over Moldvay Basic, is that searching a 10x10 feet area over one turn is for searching for hidden doors and traps. Which you can then in turn think further to mean that the common searching through the rubble is part of the exploration turn and alreaft factored into the exploration speed. And that would make such a slow pace much more plausible.

A turn is only an abstration, not exactly 600 seconds. It's purpose is to track how long torches and spells last and when a wandering monster check should be made. It's only roughly 10 minutes on average thrughout the whole adventure. Combat is assumed to last a full turn even though almost no fight last anywhere near to 60 rounds. (I've once seen a story of a dozen high level PCs fighting a lich in the Underdark for over 60 rounds.) And torches don't work on an exact timer either.
Saying that a turn has passed for every 120 or 90 feet the party has explored seems a good abstraction, regardless of how much rummaging and pulling on levers they did.

And one person mentioned the idea that a turn also include taking short breaks. Which I think would well justify the different exploration speeds for encumbered characters. Climbing on rubble with a big pack gets exhausting and you probably take it off more frequently when interacting with stuff found in the dungeon.

With this interpretation I think I'll actually use turns by the book. The only change I want to make is to drop the one turn of rest after every five turns of exploration. It's another thing to keep track of that I don't see adding anything to the resource management that I would probably forgett all the time. And that small -1 penalty for not resting is pretty insignificant and I always keep forgetting such situational modifiers in a fight.

[FreddyNoNose]

When it comes to the length of a round in D&D type games, I have a very clear oppinion that a 6 or 10-second-round is a much better choice than a 1-minute-round

different choice not better. Better is subjective and not absolute.

[Lord Torath]

different choice not better. Better is subjective and not absolute.

Yora was explicitly stating his opinion, not declaring the universal superiority of 6-10 second rounds over 60 second rounds ("I have a very clear opinion...").

[FreddyNoNose]

One interpretation I've found today, which apparently is based on a slight elaboration of Mentzer Basic over Moldvay Basic, is that searching a 10x10 feet area over one turn is for searching for hidden doors and traps. Which you can then in turn think further to mean that the common searching through the rubble is part of the exploration turn and alreaft factored into the exploration speed. And that would make such a slow pace much more plausible.

A turn is only an abstration, not exactly 600 seconds. It's purpose is to track how long torches and spells last and when a wandering monster check should be made. It's only roughly 10 minutes on average thrughout the whole adventure. Combat is assumed to last a full turn even though almost no fight last anywhere near to 60 rounds. (I've once seen a story of a dozen high level PCs fighting a lich in the Underdark for over 60 rounds.) And torches don't work on an exact timer either.
Saying that a turn has passed for every 120 or 90 feet the party has explored seems a good abstraction, regardless of how much rummaging and pulling on levers they did.

And one person mentioned the idea that a turn also include taking short breaks. Which I think would well justify the different exploration speeds for encumbered characters. Climbing on rubble with a big pack gets exhausting and you probably take it off more frequently when interacting with stuff found in the dungeon.

With this interpretation I think I'll actually use turns by the book. The only change I want to make is to drop the one turn of rest after every five turns of exploration. It's another thing to keep track of that I don't see adding anything to the resource management that I would probably forgett all the time. And that small -1 penalty for not resting is pretty insignificant and I always keep forgetting such situational modifiers in a fight.

Hey, you are the only person who knows what will work for the game you are running. Most games have house rules. I certainly do. :D

Adding house rules can add new things to games. For example, back in the 70s when critical hits became a thing, so many DMs adopted/created a critical hit system for their games. DMs picked up house rules from other DMs and so on and so forth.

FYI, I used encumbrance and material components and such. It adds an important aspect to the game. Many DMs didn't use those.