I love D&D but not so much Dungeons, anyone else?

[Vanifae]

Basically, you put these ideas together and what you end up with a more universal maxim about successful GMing: Bring the cool.

The "cool", of course, can be about more than just big ol' slug-fests. Dungeons are a delivery method for the cool. If the dungeon isn't delivering enough cool, then you've watered down your delivery method too much. Pour some more booze in there and strengthen that drink up.

Yes I must agree with this, there is a definite bring the cool factor to my design. Endless action or constant cool stuff would basically dilute the impact of action encounters. The “dungeon” is the ultimate in directed and controlled adventure preparation. The goal is clear usually from the outset; exploration, rescue, elimination, or any other goal that rings the party to the dungeon. It’s a focused experience that provides an excellent model of pacing that is used in video games and computer games constantly; moments of exploration punctuated by moments of excitement.

I don’t want to remove the quiet moment that isn’t my intent. My intent is to remove what I consider tedium for me as a DM. I can describe a cool dungeon. For example the players are cursed and teleported into a dungeon that exists in a bottle and they can see the outside world but until they complete the dungeon and break the curse they are effectively trapped. Maybe there are denizens who also fall victim to the curse? Maybe these denizens have created factions; and why does the curse do this? These are all things that I would want to focus on in the dungeon crawl. It’s immediately evocative and provides role playing opportunities, while also providing action and also a goal to complete the dungeon.

My only concern really is just not having a whole night of you go down corridor x with cool scenery and get to room y and it is empty. Now what do you do? When I can abstract that with some description keep things calm and then bam hit them with the chamber filled with the demons churning the captured victims into soul larvae for their master. So in short I want to bring the cool I just think there may be other ways to do it.

 

[Pickles JG]

I like "site based" adventures (if I correctly remember the 3e DMG). I really only like sites/dungeons that are about one session long.
I do not see the point of dungeon exploration as skill challenges as I do not see the point of the dungeons in the first place. In general that is - the odd one done well would be good. Dungeons that take multiple return trips to finish off are bizarre from a monster bashing point of view, fine if it's moslty exploration but then I like bashing monsters not exploring...

 

[DragonLancer]

I like dungeons. I think they are cool and a vital part of the game. However, even I get fed up of them at times. As a DM I find most dungeons are boring as all Hell to run most of the time. Either they are just too big or randomly shaped, both of which are issues I have with many published modules (especially 1st ed AD&D ones). Describing the flow of the dungeon is tedious as well, and my players like to map out the dungeons they visit.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I like dungeons personally, but the universal maxim is: Do what you like shall be the whole of the game. Life is too short to play games you're not enjoying.


RC


EDIT: Of course, edition has a big impact on how adventures are presented. Fast combat = more encounters per session, so a traditional dungeon works better. If I was playing 4e, I might consider the SC route.

EDIT to the EDIT: Of course, using lots of minion-only encounters might allow for more, faster combats. Throw in the occasional tougher monster so that the players can't assume that encounters will be minion-only, and it might work........?

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Depends on what you mean. I *don't* like dungeon crawls that play like a game of Diablo (or any of the other computer dungeon-crawly games, for that matter). But I consider that kind of approach to D&D to be a caricature: not the way I approach it at all.

With that said, I *love* the dungeon concept and think it works great in the context of the game as I play it. I don't think the dungeon is the whole of play, but I certainly think it can be a central part of the game (especially at lower levels of play).

(On 4e: I think it's a well designed game, but not what I'm looking for when I want to play D&D. The TSR editions—especially 1e AD&D and original D&D—best embody what I think of when someone says "D&D.")

 

[EvilDwarf]

I ran a multi-level dungeon back in the day that our group still reminisces about, so I take that as a sign that they enjoyed at least some elements of it.

Since it WAS back in the day, I drew several graph paper pages of dungeon and level, so everything all the dungeon was mapped and filled in. But, looking back, now I would take the more modern flow-chart approach, and either just use lines with small sqaures for rooms, or just to know what's north of what, etc.

I also, though, abstracted the "story" of the dungeon, which is a little different from abstracting the map.

That is, I made some notes and knew what the story was supposed to be, but did not populate the rooms, sort of a Schrodinger's Cat dungeon. That is, there was NOTHING in any room until the PCs enterered it. If I wanted them to meet a major NPC, she would be there. If the pacing called for a puzzle, I had several I could put there. If the PCs needed a break, I had some "store" rooms for that. Sometimes they would find a dead adventurer with a map fragment that would lead them to another part of the dungeon, so I could put some "narrative distance" between encounters--for example, if they had just talked to the Dwarf King who was having problems with the resident Goblin King, I could not put those encounters in close proximity (even though there WAS no spatial proximity since everything was empty). So a few rooms later, they could find a map to a deeper part of the dungeon, and soon after they would "find" the Goblin King.

I've since tried variations of this approach, and it's worked out. It gives the players a sense of open exploration/sandbox, but allows me narrative control of the dungeon.

So, with a flow chart of a large empty dungeon and a list of encounters, you have control over narrative and pacing without worrying about the PCs missing an important clue, encounter, or feeling railroaded (even though the story railroads them, to an extent--you have to be careful that things don't appear TOO coincidental).

 

[Odhanan]

After having read the links to the Dungeon's Master.com, it's actually a very interesting take on the dungeon. It's a different approach, between a focus on the Encounter part of the adventure, and the Exploration part of the adventure, whether you favor one or the other and when.

Indeed, a dungeon could then look like a flowchart of sorts, with the links between various areas being a matter of verbal exchanges between DMs and players, and eventual Skill challenges arising from them. Depending on the results of those checks and exchanges, some prepped random encounters, or puzzles, or hazards could be triggered. It's an interesting take on the concept. Quite different from the traditional dungeon crawl, but not a fundamentally "wrong" way of doing it, for those who can't bother with listening to doors and 10-foot poles.

Cool beans.

 

[Piratecat]

I love short dungeons, 3-8 rooms. Any more than that and I get twitchy.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

It's a different approach, between a focus on the Encounter part of the adventure, and the Exploration part of the adventure, whether you favor one or the other and when.

Makes sense. I like D&D as a game of player-driver exploration ("in search of the unknown, hoping for fortune and glory"). That's one reason I like dungeons (especially dungeons that are designed to facilitate and reward skillful exploration and play). It's probably also why I prefer large dungeons with lots of space, and sandbox-style campaigns. I'm much less inclined toward seeing D&D as a series of encounters or a path.

 

[Mallus]

I like dungeons when they either nonexistent or small and full of peril and mystery. A good theme and/or reason for being is a must. I have no need to play through another mega-dungeon ever again -- though I would with my current gaming group -- they've a great track record making anything fun.

Come to think it it, I'm not overly-enamored of dragons, either. Unless they're my current Dragonborn paladin.