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

[Greg Benage]

On what basis are those judgements being made? What principles are at play? Do thematic priorities ever override game priorities? What is being communicated? How can players be assured of what information is correct and what is conjecture?

Fighter: I roll a barrel down the stairs to topple the zombies climbing up to the balcony!
DM [thinking about it a moment]: The zombies are slow and clumsy even when they're not climbing stairs [judgment]. Roll 1d6 and you'll knock 'em down on a 1-4 [communication].
Dwarf: I jump in the barrel!
DM: Yeah, that just works. The dwarf-laden barrel smashes into the zombies and they go tumbling down the stairs [judgment].

That's how most of the classic game works. Well, that's the way it works for me, anyway. I don't need different procedures for marching down corridors and avoiding wandering monsters (or not). That "procedure" has always worked really damn well for me, whether I'm playing or DMing. And I don't mean to trigger anyone with the gonzo "rule of cool" example -- it works for most any of the infinite actions a player might try in the game. Maybe throw in an ability roll if appropriate. The communication -- the conversation between player and DM -- means it can be just as transparent as "a wandering monster is encountered if I roll a 1."

Again, YMMV.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Fighter: I roll a barrel down the stairs to topple the zombies climbing up to the balcony!
DM [thinking about it a moment]: The zombies are slow and clumsy even when they're not climbing stairs [judgment]. Roll 1d6 and you'll knock 'em down on a 1-4 [communication].
Dwarf: I jump in the barrel!
DM: Yeah, that just works. The dwarf-laden barrel smashes into the zombies and they go tumbling down the stairs [judgment].

That's how most of the classic game works. Well, that's the way it works for me, anyway. I don't need different procedures for marching down corridors and avoiding wandering monsters (or not). That "procedure" has always worked really damn well for me, whether I'm playing or DMing. And I don't mean to trigger anyone with the gonzo "rule of cool" example -- it works for most any of the infinite actions a player might try in the game. Maybe throw in an ability roll if appropriate. The communication -- the conversation between player and DM -- means it can be just as transparent as "a wandering monster is encountered if I roll a 1."

Again, YMMV.

Yup some DMs ran it that way, but in my experience many more made the fighter make a very difficult to achieve d20 roll then on a fail, adjudicated that the barrel hits the third step and spins throwing the dwarf clear who take 3 falling damage and is attacked and killed by the zombies and the barrel roll sideways off the stairs.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Clearly a new rule is needed.

See One D&D DMG, page 1,107, "Using a Barrel to Knock Enemies Off Staircases"
"A barrel or similarly cylindrically shaped object, weighing no less than 50 pounds, may be rolled down a flight of stairs (see page 884 for definition of 'flight'), causing all creatures on the staircase to make Dexterity saving throws (DC of 8 + PB + Str modifier of the roller) and on a failure will be knocked to the bottom of the staircase (see page 1,372 for "Falling damage on uneven, less-than-vertical surfaces.). If a creature of size S or larger is in the barrel, the saving throws are made with disadvantage."

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Clearly a new rule is needed.

See One D&D DMG, page 1,107, "Using a Barrel to Knock Enemies Off Staircases"
"A barrel or similarly cylindrically shaped object, weighing no less than 50 pounds, may be rolled down a flight of stairs (see page 884 for definition of 'flight'), causing all creatures on the staircase to make Dexterity saving throws (DC of 8 + PB + Str modifier of the roller) and on a failure will be knocked to the bottom of the staircase (see page 1,372 for "Falling damage on uneven, less-than-vertical surfaces.). If a creature of size S or larger is in the barrel, the saving throws are made with disadvantage."

This was 40 years ago but I would go with strong advice in the DMG to say "Yes and..."

 

[Reynard]

Clearly a new rule is needed.

See One D&D DMG, page 1,107, "Using a Barrel to Knock Enemies Off Staircases"
"A barrel or similarly cylindrically shaped object, weighing no less than 50 pounds, may be rolled down a flight of stairs (see page 884 for definition of 'flight'), causing all creatures on the staircase to make Dexterity saving throws (DC of 8 + PB + Str modifier of the roller) and on a failure will be knocked to the bottom of the staircase (see page 1,372 for "Falling damage on uneven, less-than-vertical surfaces.). If a creature of size S or larger is in the barrel, the saving throws are made with disadvantage."

"Falling damage on uneven surfaces is 5/8 bludgeoning damage, 1/4 slashing damage, and 1/8 piercing damage, but only if that damage is greater than the falling creature's damage conversion threshold."

 

[James Gasik]

"Falling damage on uneven surfaces is 5/8 bludgeoning damage, 1/4 slashing damage, and 1/8 piercing damage, but only if that damage is greater than the falling creature's damage conversion threshold."

That reminds me of the 3e rule for "scalding damage" (which is not fire damage, by the way), a rule I never quite understood the reason for, as it was so random, and led to many, many jokes about taking out a red dragon (who can swim in lava!) with boiling water.

 

[Bill Zebub]

"Falling damage on uneven surfaces is 5/8 bludgeoning damage, 1/4 slashing damage, and 1/8 piercing damage, but only if that damage is greater than the falling creature's damage conversion threshold."

Unless the stairs are carpeted.

 

[Greg Benage]

Yup some DMs ran it that way, but in my experience many more made the fighter make a very difficult to achieve d20 roll then on a fail, adjudicated that the barrel hits the third step and spins throwing the dwarf clear who take 3 falling damage and is attacked and killed by the zombies and the barrel roll sideways off the stairs.

There's definitely a question of style in this particular example (how zany do you want your game?), but if you have that conversation between the players and DM, it can still be transparent. What does @iserith say, "probabilities and stakes"? Even this "mean" DM can say, "Hey, this isn't Looney Tunes, you can try that but it's going to be tough and risky. You'll need to make a Str ability roll at a -10 penalty and if you fail, the dwarf will be thrown from the barrel and take damage."

IME the "bad" experiences with the classic game come when there isn't this conversation. The player tries something, the DM rolls some dice behind the screen, and then describes the catastrophe that befalls the poor character. Compared to that, there is a clear advantage to having rules and procedures in black and white from a player decision-making perspective, even for someone with my preferences.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

There's definitely a question of style in this particular example (how zany do you want your game?), but if you have that conversation between the players and DM, it can still be transparent. What does @iserith say, "probabilities and stakes"? Even this "mean" DM can say, "Hey, this isn't Looney Tunes, you can try that but it's going to be tough and risky. You'll need to make a Str ability roll at a -10 penalty and if you fail, the dwarf will be thrown from the barrel and take damage."

IME the "bad" experiences with the classic game come when there isn't this conversation. The player tries something, the DM rolls some dice behind the screen, and then describes the catastrophe that befalls the poor character. Compared to that, there is a clear advantage to having rules and procedures in black and white from a player decision-making perspective, even for someone with my preferences.

I agree and it is the principle reason that we went overboard in the 3.x era with RAW dominating the conversation.

 

[Reynard]

Unless the stairs are carpeted.

Fire damage!