D&D 5E Do You Delve?

[doctorbadwolf]

Thank you for helping to crystalize this thought. Me and my brother got our start with D&D by transitioning from Heroquest, so the dungeon delve has a special place in our hearts. But these days, every time our group tries to stick a traditional dungeon run into our campaigns it always gets grindy and boring well before we're done. Working towards story objectives and narrative goals is just more fun for us.

Absolutely. I also came to D&D via HeroQuest, and frankly it does delving better than modern D&D editions, IMO.

In large part, I think it's because video games do it better. If you want to delve into an unknown dungeon, killing monsters and dealing with terrain hazards to fill your bags with loot, then retreat to a safe base camp to dispose of your treasure and resupply, and finally do it all over again... well, Diablo and its kin are right there. Offering infinite procedurally generated dungeons, vast arrays of character advancement and unique gear, and as much or as little of it as you want at any moment.

Yeah barring a really cool concept, my group is just never going to be interested in dungeon delve style gameplay, regardless of what the “dungeon” is.

The unique lure of a TTRPG is that it has a story that's custom tailored for our PCs and their actions. We can make the choices and set the goals and never have to sigh and pick from the two or three pre-set options that are all the game devs programmed for. We're free in a way that video games can't come close to. So I believe that's why we lean towards games that take full advantage of that. And if I get that itch from some dungeon delving and loot grinding, Diablo is only a few clicks away.

Hell yeah. Heck, a lot of my game sessions aren’t even strictly linear in terms of time and causality, and some only follow a structure in that “sit down, tell story using action resolution mechanics, eat snacks” is a structure. My D&D sessions don’t teach that level of free imrpov as often as when we literally just describe our characters as if writing a story about them and then use 2d6 with advantage or disadvantage where appropriate based on circumstance and character, but it does sometimes get super loose.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean, “every adventure is a delve” was my initial assertion, so yeah. But, I think @TwoSix communicated what you meant by delve in a way I understand better. By that definition, yes, I do generally run delves. I believe that mode of play is what 5e is designed for (not that you can’t use it for other modes of play of course).

Okay. Sorry, I just get…frustrated, with every thread about differences between a given set of things always having someone claim that they’re all the same thing, actually. It’s a thing that bothers me. Things are different. I don’t understand or remotely share the impulse to try to find the “these are actually all this super broad thing” point, or like…what that adds to a discussion?

like genuinely, no rancor or anything, what is the purpose of such a post? What do you see as the benefit of saying “all adventures are delves”, to the discussion? I’d like to understand where you were coming from, at least, because unlike some other folks who haven’t shown up yet in this thread, I think you are very much seeking to contribute meaningfully to the discussion and I value your insight even when I strongly disagree.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I believe that mode of play is what 5e is designed for (not that you can’t use it for other modes of play of course).

For instance, I strongly disagree with this. 5e was absolutely designed to include that playstyle, but it was also designed to include a range of other play styles, IMO, and IME most people don’t play in a delving playstyle.

 

[Kurotowa]

Absolutely. I also came to D&D via HeroQuest, and frankly it does delving better than modern D&D editions, IMO.

I think D&D can still do it, but you have to really purpose build the campaign for it. A large non-linear dungeon (or dungeon-like location) to delve into repeatedly, the right mix of combat and exploration hazards with treasures to pull out as your rewards, a safe base camp location you can retreat to between delves, dungeon inhabitants that will adapt a little between delves but not so much as to invalidate your hard won progress... you can't just slap a few tunnels together with orc and pie at the end. But I agree it's not the main design focus anymore, and it doesn't come automatically to 5e.

Though if we really get the hankering for that old delve feel, my brother splurged on that Heroquest deluxe rerelease Kickstarter and I think it's supposed to deliver this year. So we'll be all set to go all the way back to the beginning.

 

[Charlaquin]

Okay. Sorry, I just get…frustrated, with every thread about differences between a given set of things always having someone claim that they’re all the same thing, actually. It’s a thing that bothers me. Things are different. I don’t understand or remotely share the impulse to try to find the “these are actually all this super broad thing” point, or like…what that adds to a discussion?

That’s fair, sorry for any frustration I may have caused.

like genuinely, no rancor or anything, what is the purpose of such a post? What do you see as the benefit of saying “all adventures are delves”, to the discussion? I’d like to understand where you were coming from, at least, because unlike some other folks who haven’t shown up yet in this thread, I think you are very much seeking to contribute meaningfully to the discussion and I value your insight even when I strongly disagree.

Thanks. Mostly, I think “every adventure is a delve” is a powerful way to think about adventure design. If you like dungeons, you can build any sort of adventure like you would a dungeon. If you struggle with dungeons, you may have more success building them like you would some other sort of adventure. I think dungeons get a lot more flak than they deserve because people tend to think of them like this unique class of Thing that works differently from the rest of the game, and I think that way of thinking is often exactly what leads people to think they don’t like dungeons.

For instance, I strongly disagree with this. 5e was absolutely designed to include that playstyle, but it was also designed to include a range of other play styles, IMO, and IME most people don’t play in a delving playstyle.

I definitely agree that most people don’t play in what you call a delving playstyle. I also find that most people don’t run the game at all like it’s written. There are tons of rules that are rarely ever used, tons of rules that are widely misremembered or commonly house ruled… The way the game runs when played as written (which is to say, as it was designed to be played), the result ends up very much being that delving sort of campaign. But very few groups actually run it that way.

Now, of course, people are free to run and play the game however they like. But, I believe a lot of people run the game differently than how I believe it was designed to be run and played, not because they dislike the way it’s designed, but because they don’t even realize they’re doing so. They learned it a certain way, and it works and they like it, so they continue running it that way, never realizing that they’re actually deviating quite a lot from the rules as written. And I think that’s a shame, because I think a lot of people would really like the game as written, if they actually tried it.

 

[ccs]

Frequently. Most recently the PCs had t "delve" Castle Ravenloft.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That’s fair, sorry for any frustration I may have caused.

It’s cool

Thanks. Mostly, I think “every adventure is a delve” is a powerful way to think about adventure design. If you like dungeons, you can build any sort of adventure like you would a dungeon. If you struggle with dungeons, you may have more success building them like you would some other sort of adventure. I think dungeons get a lot more flak than they deserve because people tend to think of them like this unique class of Thing that works differently from the rest of the game, and I think that way of thinking is often exactly what leads people to think they don’t like dungeons.

Okay, fair. I think that maybe a different term is in order to be able to discuss both how delves differ from investigations and heists and whatever else, and how all stories follow a structure that can be built for in a relatively similar way.

I definitely agree that most people don’t play in what you call a delving playstyle. I also find that most people don’t run the game at all like it’s written. There are tons of rules that are rarely ever used, tons of rules that are widely misremembered or commonly house ruled… The way the game runs when played as written (which is to say, as it was designed to be played), the result ends up very much being that delving sort of campaign. But very few groups actually run it that way.

Now, of course, people are free to run and play the game however they like. But, I believe a lot of people run the game differently than how I believe it was designed to be run and played, not because they dislike the way it’s designed, but because they don’t even realize they’re doing so. They learned it a certain way, and it works and they like it, so they continue running it that way, never realizing that they’re actually deviating quite a lot from the rules as written. And I think that’s a shame, because I think a lot of people would really like the game as written, if they actually tried it.

Fair enough. I disagree that the design intent was a specific gameplay style, but I’m not sure it really matters.

 

[Yora]

I'm sort of surprised by the idea that so many people don't do dungeon crawls.

Do you mean you don't use the fictional dungeon environment? Or that you never explore a location based on a map with more than about 2 or 3 rooms?

Not to be a smartass, but I am genuinely surprised that people are surprised by this. (Which a lot of people here seem to be.)

 

[darkbard]

Okay. Sorry, I just get…frustrated, with every thread about differences between a given set of things always having someone claim that they’re all the same thing, actually. It’s a thing that bothers me. Things are different. I don’t understand or remotely share the impulse to try to find the “these are actually all this super broad thing” point, or like…what that adds to a discussion?

I think this is the inevitable byproduct of sharing ideas in a public forum. There's an old adage that the world is divided into "lumpers" (those who primarily see the commonalities in things) and "splitters" (those who focus on the differences between things). Peoples' brains are just wired differently. Viewing this necessarily as an intended source or rancor and conflict is just going to get you worked up a bunch.

 

[TwoSix]

I definitely agree that most people don’t play in what you call a delving playstyle. I also find that most people don’t run the game at all like it’s written. There are tons of rules that are rarely ever used, tons of rules that are widely misremembered or commonly house ruled… The way the game runs when played as written (which is to say, as it was designed to be played), the result ends up very much being that delving sort of campaign. But very few groups actually run it that way.

Sure. I mean, I think a lot of the conflict in the "6-8 encounter per day" topic comes from the fact that 6-8 encounters is actually pretty reasonable if you're in a delve environment, like what a lot of WotC's modules look like (the few I've looked at, anyway). But when you're doing what I described earlier, or what @doctorbadwolf described, then those assumptions really don't work very well.

I don't watch Critical Role, but from what's been described to me, they're much more scene-based that delve-based, which I also think informs a good portion of the player base as to what play should look like. It wouldn't shock me if the recent move to "Prof mod per long rest" abilities is based on players doing less encounters per long rest than initially anticipated because of scene-based play.