How important is it that a dungeon makes sense?

[delericho]

You're absolutely correct. Still "dungeon" for me means more than any underground location, it's the dungeon as adventuring environment. And while dungeons should be more believable, I don't know many that are.

Oh, on that we can certainly agree!

 

[fjw70]

The only thing that I really want from a "make sense" Dungeon, is that the theme of inhabitants is consistent (= it makes sense these creatures live together).
Like no Unicorn-eating Troll living one door away from a troll-slaying unicorn.

I miss those kinds of dungeons from when I was a kid. They didn't make any sense but they were a lot of fun.

 

[Celebrim]

How important is it that a dungeon "makes sense", and what does that mean to you?

Very important.

It means:

1) There is a logical reason that the dungeon was built in the first place. I hate dungeons that seem to have been built solely to be explored by future treasure seekers.
2) The designers of the original dungeon made it to suit reasonable purposes and the layout is reasonable and efficient and the cost of construction reasonable for the intended purpose.
3) There is a logical reason that the dungeon hasn't been looted of treasure. Nothing bothers me more in a dungeon than it being famous, rumored to contain fabulous treasure (which is often just lying around on the floor), has been around for centuries, and has encounters that could easily be handled by characters well below the level of those wandering around in the setting.
4) If the dungeon could be visited, it shows signs of having been visited.
5) Any present inhabitants either have no biological needs or have a meaningful place in the ecosystem and a good reason to consider the dungeon a good place to live. Bonus points if the inhabitants modify the original dungeon to suit their needs.

If it is important, would you still be able to enjoy a "nonsensical" dungeon if its nonsensical because it exists in a dream or in an afterlife limbo of some sort?

Yes, though I would still hold the dungeon to the terms of its setting. A dream dungeon would need to fit into the psychology of the dreamer in some fashion. A dungeon in a chaotic outer planar setting would need to uphold actual chaotic ideas and not merely be highly organized but zany traps.

 

[howandwhy99]

It depends on what type of game you are playing. If the dungeon is the game board, then how important do you believe it is for the game board to be comprehensible to the players?

 

[Lanefan]

"Making sense" is sometimes useful and other times highly overrated. As long as there's at least a vague rationale behind all of it (which the players/characters may or may not ever figure out) it's cool with me.

And in a dreamworld dungeon absolutely anything goes - the last one I ran the party suddenly found themselves on their homeworld's moon; after a couple of whacked-out encounters they made camp, then watched as a couple of gods fought it out in the night sky and (as a minor side effect) destroyed their home world. (all this as a lead-in to an adventure series dealing with said gods that is just now finishing)

Lan-"stop making sense"-efan

 

[jonesy]

It depends on what type of game you are playing. If the dungeon is the game board, then how important do you believe it is for the game board to be comprehensible to the players?

Hmm. Isn't that a question about the rules of the game and not whether the final board makes sense? Or are there any board games where one can't see the full board at the beginning and the board could be totally random at the end? Most random boards that I can think of still operate under strict rules that everyone knows when the game begins. There's a limit to how random it can get and the players know what that limit is.

Edit: or is this one of those instances where I again read a term you are using and confuse it to a different image in my head? I saw you say 'game board' and assumed you meant board games as opposed to pen and paper rpg's.

 

[billd91]

I prefer that the dungeons have a certain degree of coherency - they fit their own story, they fit the overall campaign, the creatures within have a reason to be there and behave in a believable manner (the troll-eating unicorn and unicorn-eating troll need to be either widely separated and in conflict over the no-man's land between them, well-fortified, or both there at the behest of some other actor capable of keeping them from behaving in their natural way). When I'm running, I also try to provide a certain degree of verisimilitude with my trappings and descriptions even if the width of the corridors is very generous to support game play.

It's possible to have fun with a dungeon that doesn't care about any sort of coherency, but I find it easier to have fun if I'm not running into too many things that provoke the "aw,c'mon" reaction.

 

[Celebrim]

The words "dungeon" and "make sense" in one sentence is already stretching it a bit.

If that were true, then we would expect the following to be true: "There are no dungeons in the real world."

But, that statement is profoundly untrue. The real world is filled with dungeons, including some truly stupendous mega-dungeons that probably vastly exceed the scope, scale, and size of anything that's been published. People actually built these things, for a real reason, and those reasons are often varied and interesting. Granted, they don't usually have anything like monsters living in them, but presumably if monsters were real, then they'd find lots of places to feel right at home in the real world.

Why did the builder invest in complicated traps to secure, e.g., just one room or corridor?

Presumably, because he didn't trust his guards to do so.

Why are most of the inhabitants not doing anyhting remotely usefull, not even maintaining a modicum of guard duty?

Why are they? Mine aren't. For that matter, I'm not sure that this is even a complaint you can level against the traditional dungeon. 'Keep on the Borderlands' contains a low to moderate realism dungeon in my opinion, yet it more than passes this test.

Why does the BBEG insist on staying in the last room with no alternative way out?

Why is he? Mine doesn't. Mine current BBEG has four layers of contingencies in place for escaping from the PCs, including, "I'm not going to be trapped anywhere without an escape route." For that matter, I'm not sure this is a complaint you can fairly make against published dungeons. Strahd certainly doesn't have this issue, and I6: Ravenloft might be one of the two or three most iconic dungeons ever. I might not find 'Steading of the Hill Giant Chief' all that interesting as an adventure, but as a Steading the map is fairly reasonable in its design and the positioning of its inhabitants neither static nor illogical. If you aren't moving the inhabitants around, maybe the fault isn't with the dungeon designer, but the one running it?

 

[gamerprinter]

If that were true, then we would expect the following to be true: "There are no dungeons in the real world."

But, that statement is profoundly untrue. The real world is filled with dungeons, including some truly stupendous mega-dungeons that probably vastly exceed the scope, scale, and size of anything that's been published. People actually built these things, for a real reason, and those reasons are often varied and interesting. Granted, they don't usually have anything like monsters living in them, but presumably if monsters were real, then they'd find lots of places to feel right at home in the real world.



Presumably, because he didn't trust his guards to do so.



Why are they? Mine aren't. For that matter, I'm not sure that this is even a complaint you can level against the traditional dungeon. 'Keep on the Borderlands' contains a low to moderate realism dungeon in my opinion, yet it more than passes this test.



Why is he? Mine doesn't. Mine current BBEG has four layers of contingencies in place for escaping from the PCs, including, "I'm not going to be trapped anywhere without an escape route." For that matter, I'm not sure this is a complaint you can fairly make against published dungeons. Strahd certainly doesn't have this issue, and I6: Ravenloft might be one of the two or three most iconic dungeons ever. I might not find 'Steading of the Hill Giant Chief' all that interesting as an adventure, but as a Steading the map is fairly reasonable in its design and the positioning of its inhabitants neither static nor illogical. If you aren't moving the inhabitants around, maybe the fault isn't with the dungeon designer, but the one running it?

This!

Especially being a professional fantasy cartographer every game map I create, including dungeons are as close to reality as I can get, granted sometimes I have to stick in something specifically magical so it fits the game, but I don't build meaningless labrynths and call it a dungeon. When I include multiple corridors, multiple secret passages, traps - there is a reason for their existence and placement. I don't place a trap/passage/corridor/etc because it would be fun at location X, there has to be reason for the placement and I insure everything has a place and a reason for existence.

This might not be true for every dungeon and every game, but it's true for every location I create for my own games, and for locations I publish and release.

 

[Gilladian]

I prefer that the dungeons have a certain degree of coherency - they fit their own story, they fit the overall campaign, the creatures within have a reason to be there and behave in a believable manner (the troll-eating unicorn and unicorn-eating troll need to be either widely separated and in conflict over the no-man's land between them, well-fortified, or both there at the behest of some other actor capable of keeping them from behaving in their natural way). When I'm running, I also try to provide a certain degree of verisimilitude with my trappings and descriptions even if the width of the corridors is very generous to support game play.

It's possible to have fun with a dungeon that doesn't care about any sort of coherency, but I find it easier to have fun if I'm not running into too many things that provoke the "aw,c'mon" reaction.

I think this is about where I fall, too. Fun is easier when everything else is reasonably coherent. I also like a backstory that can emerge in play.