Adventures that are NOT dungeon crawls.

[Aberzanzorax]

I've read three threads specifically asking for adventures from WotC (or really, from 4e in general) that are NOT dungeon crawls.

Here they are:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...-edition-adventures-arent-dungeon-crawls.html

Too many Dungeon adventures end up in a dungeon crawl - Wizards Community

Please help! 4e isn't all fighting and no roleplaying but the adventures are! - Wizards Community


What do people mean by NOT a dungeon crawl?
"spread encounters out a bit, mix in more investigation or puzzle elements and less combats strung back to back"

"a sandbox style adventure"

"a nice mix of action and intrigue. I would like to see different factions jumping into the adventure, and create interesting choices for the players."

"character choice driven modules where the plot informs the choices of the characters"

"more than a string of encounters"

"heavier role-playing, detective work, and intrigue"

"adventurers get to make meaningful choices and their relationships with people matter too"

I just want adventures that aren't "go here and kill stuff" and also have "make choices and it matters...not make choices and you still just go here and kill stuff."


Here are the suggestions from those threads of good non dungeon crawls:

Wizards of the Coast:
P2 Demon Queen's Enclave (this has been called a dungeon crawl, though)
Dungeon Magazine:
Last Breaths of Ashenport
Sea Reavers of the Shrouded Crags
The Temple Between (scales of war)
Haven of the Bitter Glass (scales of war)

Goodman Games:
Dragora's Dungeon
Curse of the Kingspire
Scions of Punjar
Thrones of Punjar
Isle of the Sea Drake

Open Design:
Wrath of the River King

I also have on VERY GOOD AUTHORITY that
ENworld Publishing:
War of the Burning Sky (CAMPAIGN!!)
is NOT an dungeon crawl.

Alea Publishing:
Three Days Until Dawn

This person's site:
4E Adventures


Thoughts? Any others? Disagree with any I've listed? Is this a false dichotomy (in that 3e really only had dungeon crawls as well)?

 

[JoeGKushner]

May sound strange but there are several parts of the keep on the shadowfell that are not dungeon crawls. the various encounters with the kobolds for example or the fight against the people excavating ye ole dragon bones.

 

[JeffB]

Sea Drake is probably my fave adventure published since 1982 or so - excellent wilderness scenario with lots of investigation and varied/interesting encounters. If you like X1, you'll love Sea Drake.

 

[Qualidar]

May sound strange but there are several parts of the keep on the shadowfell that are not dungeon crawls. the various encounters with the kobolds for example or the fight against the people excavating ye ole dragon bones.

I don't think that really eleviates the issue though: those are still just fights, there' just not indoors.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Yep, at least according to what I've been reading, that the people in these threads wanting not a "dungeon crawl" (including myself) would say that a "make your way through the swamp of terror, killing your way through 20 encounters of monsters and a few humans up to no good, to kill the big bad enemy at the other side of the swamp" is still a dungeon crawl, even if it is above ground.

That's why I included those quotes in my original post, as the other threads got into the semantics of "What is a dungeon crawl anyway"?

I'd have to say, having played KotS, that it absolutely qualifies as a dungeon crawl, in my opinion, including those parts you mention.



I don't, however, mean to shut down conversations as to what a dungeon crawl is in this thread, by the way, I'd say that's totally fair game. Maybe that is part of the problem when one asks why there are so few 4e adventures that are not dungeon crawls...an overly wide net for what IS a dungeon crawl?

In essence, I'm using "dungeon crawl" to mean "the players move from combat to combat with little or no chance to make any meaningful choices other than how they are going to kill the current and/or next group of baddies".

More plot, more out of combat roleplaying, more "influencing the world through decision making", etc is the sort of adventure that I believe people have been categorizing as "not dungeon crawls".

YMMV, and if it does, please say why.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I just wanted to create my own thread regarding a similar (or the same) topic.

I'd like to call it a kind of "signal to noise" ratio.

Basically, the "signal" of an adventure is what it is about and its plot elements, stuff like:
- What is the conflict?
- What are the major players?
- What kind of twists and turns does the plot offer. (Maybe some NPC turns against his party, another major player arrives, a false leads the party astray, whatever).

The "noise" are the individual encounters (more specifically probably: combat encounters). I say noise, without meaning to say they are useless or not fun.

I think a dungeon crawl is such an example - there is a simple "signal" - there is some guy in the dungeon that does evil. The "noise" is all the fights against his guards and other monsters in his dungeon until you get to the final encounter.

Generally, "filtering the noise" means combat, getting the "signal" is getting a new plot element that advances the story.

Even here, it's not all that simple. For example, in Thunderspire Labyrinth, the party needs to find some items - each item is guarded by some monsters. These are "signal", but they are still weak compared to, say, figuring out that the prisoner you freed from the Drow is actually a werewolf and you just set him lose in a small village, or that Darth Vader is your father.

I am just in the process of creating a few new things to do for the party in my online campaign, and I find myself "troubled" with this, true.

One plot element is hunting down the kobolds in the area and figure out if they are still a thread. I decided to add a conflict within the Kobold tribe in the area to improve the "signal to noise" ratio - just clearing out the dungeon doesn't cut it.
Another element is a Fell Taint incursion in a small mixed Halfling/Human community. I notice that just having one or two encounter seems too make it forgettable, but I need some twists to improve the "signal".

 

[Ariosto]

What's odd to me is that the characterization is at odds with the principles of the traditional D&D dungeon. Is every dungeon expedition a "crawl", or is that term being used to distinguish poorly designed dungeons from well designed ones?

"The players move from combat to combat with little or no chance to make any meaningful choices other than how they are going to kill the current and/or next group of baddies." Assaulting a well defended fortress can be an interesting scenario, but it's not really a proper "dungeon" in the original D&D sense. Avoiding needless combats is a key strategy in the traditional dungeon. You've got (or ought to have!) a goal, and you've got limited resources.

The map for such a scenario is very important. It needs plenty of branching decision points, with interconnections providing a large number of possible paths through it -- and at the same time, "choke points" and separate branches that make the choices significant. Most of the time, there should be at least two immediate options besides retracing one's steps (and obviously a growing number as one considers further branchings).

A compact "module" may be more "packed" with encounters than a full-scale campaign dungeon, but monsters should still occupy only a minority of the locations. In the original scheme, they were to be found in only a third of the rooms. About half the areas would be "empty" in the sense of offering neither great peril nor great treasure -- but they could still have interesting features to explore. Their main purpose was to facilitate players' maneuvering to scout, bypass traps or gain advantage for an attack, or escape pursuers. The remaining areas would include puzzles, traps and tricks.

Besides the "ordinary" regions described above, there would be areas with great treasures -- the strategic objectives of players. Those should be challenging to find and reach, and present the really tough fights. Those fights are likely to be hard to avoid, if one wants the treasure -- but not impossible for cunning players to bypass.

Secret ways are an important feature of the traditional dungeon. Clues or items found in one place (or several) might open opportunities elsewhere for those who acquire and understand them.

It should be possible to parley with at least some dungeon inhabitants. Par for the course, there are factions of whose rivalry players can take advantage. Things of appropriate value might be traded for information or even material assistance.

In short, a "dungeon" that amounts to little more than a gauntlet of combats is not truly worthy of the name in classic Dungeons & Dragons terms.

The 4E game provides for very engaging combats, and it is understandable that some people might wish largely to dispense with the other aspects of D&D play. I would hope that Wizards of the Coast would recognize, though, that such a narrow focus is not satisfying to many others -- perhaps to the majority of people attracted by the promise of "adventure".

 

[Morrus]

War of the Burning Sky
Totally not a dungeon crawl​

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

War of the Burning Sky
Totally not a dungeon crawl​

Needs more whitespace, I almost missed the plug!

 

[Agamon]

War of the Burning Sky
Totally not a dungeon crawl​

You really need to change your sig to this!