D&D (2024) What could One D&D do to bring the game back to the dungeon?

[tetrasodium]

So how does one create those feelings of risk, disorientation, and uncomfortableness in an rpg?

There's a whole anime about it, the main character has severe PTSD & the caves are always dark . The first episode starts with a TPK that was almost reversing till a longsword clanged off an uneven ceiling. At one point there's a huge battle outside... you guessed it if you assumed it was at night when it was dark & death was easy

 

[Manbearcat]

I look back at the old 2/3e dungeons and I think the equipment list as Matt Colville has eluded to was the core of the dungeon crawl. We as DMs wanted to reward our players when they took the time to load up on some of that gear and when encountering some of your best laid shenanigans, they overcome it because they had a pound of flour or ball bearings. Many of today's cantrips simple hand wave a lot of these problems with no disruption to the inventory and really no pre-thought. Are the older Dms annoyed at this? Do you feel cheated? Is there a expectation of because dungeons were hard "back in the day" they should be just as hard now? These questions are simply to reflect on. Ask yourself. Game on!!

Unclear to me what the intent is of this post or if I'm included in the target audience, but my response to this post lies in my post just upthread.

I feel neither annoyed nor cheated nor "back in my day HARRUMPH-ey" by a "dungeon play" (lets call it) experience that isn't about logistical management of a dangerous obstacle course via tightly systemitized turn-based exploration + a countdown clock (like The Grind or Light in Torchbearer or Wandering Monsters in Moldvay Basic) + difficult inventory management and loadout decisions + harsh to negotiate attrition model + consequences with teeth at multiple layers of play + the imperative of deft management of multiple types of resources to even survive the through line of play + difficult decisions around an advancement scheme that requires failure (in a game that brutally punishes failure...thereby creating complex incentive structures).

When I run games, my apex priority is "game as game" and, specifically, the game I'm running right now (I don't run Torchbearer to get a Mouse Guard experience nor D&D 4e to get a Dogs in the Vineyard experience nor Blades in the Dark to get a Stonetop experience etc). So when it comes to a "dungeon crawler", I want play to constantly feature layered, interesting, impactful decision-points and consequences that create a particular type of thematically-potent challenge experience right now and through the longitudinal experience of both the entire crawl and the play loop at large (so like in Torchbearer, you're talking Town Phase > Journey Phase > Adventure Phase > Camp Phase > Adventure Phase > Journey Phase > Town Phase).

There are designs for that. And there are designs that take that away and, in its stead, provide an alternative "dungeon play" experience.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So having read 13 pages of comments I come to the conclusion that the issue is not "dungeon crawling" per se nor even inventory management that 5th edition manages just fine and dandy but a particular style of play that involves interaction with a (very) challenging environment with very little buffer provided by the characters innate competencies as listed in the character sheet.
What I mean my innate competencies would be stuff like cantrips, and other powers that allow challenges to be bypassed without interaction. I would all passive skills to that list.
I am sceptical that darkvision is itself an issue, if the rules were enforced and the passive skills were removed and light brightness and dimness radii were enforced.
I could be wrong in my interpretation but that is what I am getting.
Can 5e provide such a game, out of the box I would say not but I think it could be easily modded to get close. Remove passive skills, maybe make casters use hit dice or something else to represent the tax of continuous cantrip usage (or the exhaustion rules). Replace the XP rules with something else and stay below level 7 though I have to ask why not play an OSR game at that point?

Again, working within the 5e framework (at least in broad strokes) seems necessary these days if you want to have actual players for your game. I wish that weren't the case, believe me.

 

[Digdude]

Unclear to me what the intent is of this post or if I'm included in the target audience, but my response to this post lies in my post just upthread.

I feel neither annoyed nor cheated nor "back in my day HARRUMPH-ey" by a "dungeon play" (lets call it) experience that isn't about logistical management of a dangerous obstacle course via tightly systemitized turn-based exploration + a countdown clock (like The Grind or Light in Torchbearer or Wandering Monsters in Moldvay Basic) + difficult inventory management and loadout decisions + harsh to negotiate attrition model + consequences with teeth at multiple layers of play + the imperative of deft management of multiple types of resources to even survive the through line of play + difficult decisions around an advancement scheme that requires failure (in a game that brutally punishes failure...thereby creating complex incentive structures).

When I run games, my apex priority is "game as game" and, specifically, the game I'm running right now (I don't run Torchbearer to get a Mouse Guard experience nor D&D 4e to get a Dogs in the Vineyard experience nor Blades in the Dark to get a Stonetop experience etc). So when it comes to a "dungeon crawler", I want play to constantly feature layered, interesting, impactful decision-points and consequences that create a particular type of thematically-potent challenge experience right now and through the longitudinal experience of both the entire crawl and the play loop at large (so like in Torchbearer, you're talking Town Phase > Journey Phase > Adventure Phase > Camp Phase > Adventure Phase > Journey Phase > Town Phase).

There are designs for that. And there are designs that take that away and, in its stead, provide an alternative "dungeon play" experience.

Nothing personal I assure you. Was just reflecting on my dungeoneer perspective and offering up a opinion.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think simplifying and speeding character creation can really help. A lot of the OSR games I enjoy that are dungeon focused have fast character creation, and OD&D was relatively fast as well. I tend to associate back to the dungeon with a bit more lethality so being able to quickly make a character and jump back into the game is helpful.

 

[Fifinjir]

Sexy dungeons!? That's how you get Bards! Do you want Bards?

New species:

Half-dungeon.

 

[MichaelSomething]

How about put out some really good dungeons that players will want to go through?? There's always the Banewarrens!

The Banewarrens - Monte Cook Games Store

An ancient storehouse of evil has been opened… In the murky recesses of time, a powerful and benevolent cleric set … The Banewarrens Read More »

www.montecookgames.com

 

[pemerton]

I have had no problem when I've wanted to add in a dungeon crawl, but my standards look nothing like Manbearcat's, above. I suggest that those are some very exacting, idiosyncratic needs for what a dungeon crawler has to have, and if your needs are that specific it doesn't make sense (as he acknowledges) to expect that a game with as huge an audience as D&D is going to orient itself around them. There are niche RPGs that would work better, or you could go with your own home-brew version of 5e if you want to keep some of its basic kit.

Moldvay Basic was not a niche game, and was oriented around @Manbearcat's desiderata. (Although frequently not played in that style.)

 

[pemerton]

I think what dungeon crawl has come to mean is any adventure that takes place in a dungeon.

<snip>

For me the "crawl" part is everything @Manbearcat talks about, including some sort of risk/reward set up. Venturing forth has to be risky, uncertain, scary even, and only done because there is some possible reward waiting. Darkest Dungeon, the videogame, is a dungeon crawler in this sense, and indeed that game was inspired by Torchbearer.

So having read 13 pages of comments I come to the conclusion that the issue is not "dungeon crawling" per se nor even inventory management that 5th edition manages just fine and dandy but a particular style of play that involves interaction with a (very) challenging environment with very little buffer provided by the characters innate competencies as listed in the character sheet.
What I mean my innate competencies would be stuff like cantrips, and other powers that allow challenges to be bypassed without interaction. I would all passive skills to that list.

I have never been very good at running classic D&D dungeons, for two main reasons:

*I find it hard to be a neutral referee - I prefer to poke and prod the players, engaging with the goals and the weak spots of their PCs ("indie"-style);

*Related to the above, I am not a big fan of adjudication that relies heavily on GM extrapolation of the fiction - it can easily become a bit adversarial, especially if the difficulty the PCs find themselves in is a result of me as GM having poked or prodded the players into a situation!​

But recently I've been running Torchbearer 2nd ed. In TB the players never suffer a loss or setback without a check against an obstacle to see what happens (they can succeed without a check if the GM determines that their declared actions are a "good idea" - though players have reasons to want to make checks, because only by making checks and either succeeding or failing can they advance their skills and attributes). The GM has to adjudicate the fiction, but for the purposes of (i) setting obstacles, and (ii) extrapolating failure consequences. It doesn't have the unmediated character of adjudicating fiction that is found in classic D&D. So it's much better for a GM like me!

Referring to UngainlyTitan's post: in Torchbearer, it is stuff on PC sheets - skills, attributes, and the gear that enhances them (eg rope helps appropriate Dungeoneer checks) or that is otherwise necessary (light sources, food) - that lets players succeed. But it doesn't allow bypassing challenges without interaction. Players can't declare an action except by describing what in the fiction their PC is doing to overcome an obstacle. Only then is the difficulty set, and the player's dice pool put together and rolled.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have never been very good at running classic D&D dungeons, for two main reasons:

*I find it hard to be a neutral referee - I prefer to poke and prod the players, engaging with the goals and the weak spots of their PCs ("indie"-style);​

​

*Related to the above, I am not a big fan of adjudication that relies heavily on GM extrapolation of the fiction - it can easily become a bit adversarial, especially if the difficulty the PCs find themselves in is a result of me as GM having poked or prodded the players into a situation!​

But recently I've been running Torchbearer 2nd ed. In TB the players never suffer a loss or setback without a check against an obstacle to see what happens (they can succeed without a check if the GM determines that their declared actions are a "good idea" - though players have reasons to want to make checks, because only by making checks and either succeeding or failing can they advance their skills and attributes). The GM has to adjudicate the fiction, but for the purposes of (i) setting obstacles, and (ii) extrapolating failure consequences. It doesn't have the unmediated character of adjudicating fiction that is found in classic D&D. So it's much better for a GM like me!

Referring to UngainlyTitan's post: in Torchbearer, it is stuff on PC sheets - skills, attributes, and the gear that enhances them (eg rope helps appropriate Dungeoneer checks) or that is otherwise necessary (light sources, food) - that lets players succeed. But it doesn't allow bypassing challenges without interaction. Players can't declare an action except by describing what in the fiction their PC is doing to overcome an obstacle. Only then is the difficulty set, and the player's dice pool put together and rolled.

I think you may be mislead by my word choice (I do not choose words as carefully as you, nor read texts as closely as you do). By "with out interaction" I mean that the challenge is overcome with the use of a power or other game mechanic that can abstract quite a lot in the fiction.

My experience of old school play was that sometime opening a door could be an hour long conversation between the DM and the player about the nature of the door (the material it is made of, the manner of construction), its placement in the wall. Whether it was locked or not and the placement of the hinges. The door, eventually being opened by popping out the pins holding the hinges.