D&D General Hot Take: Dungeon Exploration Requires Light Rules To Be Fun

[borringman]

I kinda hate everything about the attitude you describe. Build culture is what is "unfun" to my mind.

Fair. I ain't saying it's the way it should be, just how it be.

 

[Remathilis]

It works fine if you don't ignore those other things too. There's just more going on. Assuming that it doesn't is just projecting your preferences on others.

In your drive-by sniping, did you happen to read what that was a reply to?

 

[ezo]

Do you agree? What are your thoughts on dungeon crawling versus rules complexity?

All the game world is just a dungeon. The only thing that changes is the scale...

Every part of the game deals primarily with a location, a challenge, and a measure for progression or success.

If you consider exploring a city or section of wilderness, the game devolves into encounter locations (buildings, natural landmarks, an ambush site, or whatever), paths to get from one location to another (streets, roads, rivers, trails)--even if the PCs forge their own, some event related to the story happening at the location (a battle, mystery, NPC meeting, etc.), and so on.

Whether the PCs are exploring a dungeon, where the locations are (primarily) rooms, the paths between locations are halls, stairs, etc., challenges are encounters (creatures, traps, puzzles, whatever), and of course progress or success moves the story along.

The trappings change, but the game is always the same with only minor variations. I explained this once to a new DM, and it sort of blew his mind. He was stressing over running different types of adventures, but I told him about this and how what really matters (IMO) is the story/adventure. Everything else is just set dressing.

So, rules-light or rules-heavy shouldn't really matter to much IME. If you're tracking time, resources, etc. during a dungeon crawl, aren't you also doing it during wilderness exploration? When adventuring in a town or inhabited area? The resources might alter a bit, or the focus on which type of resource perhaps, but I know I am always tracking time (for example), even if the scale of the time changes (minutes or hours in a dungeon typcially, hours generally in towns, hours or days for wilderness--even weeks or months at times).

Thus, I have to question why do you think rules-light works better for dungeons, when it doesn't work then for these other forms of dungons such as towns, wilderness, etc.?

 

[Stormonu]

I disagree with this. I think you measure the "weight" of the game by the core components that aren't presented as optional.

(For the record, I agree that all game rules are, in reality, optional if you are brave enough, but I am talking about what the game tells you is core versus optional.)

Wow, you didn't just move the goal posts, you went to another stadium.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I ran Abomination vaults for a little bit as a method to learn PF2E, and found that the the complex rules made dungeon delving a chore. I ran and played in a 5E Rappan Athuk game with similar results, plus incongruities of matching that system to old school sensibilities. There were other attempts at dungeon crawling with PF1 and 3.x era D&D, all failures to some degree or another.

Upon discovering 5 Torches Deep, Shadowdark and other rules light D&D inspired games, i have come to the conclusion that dungeon crawling requires a rules light approach in order to be fun. Unwieldy, complex systems are slow, and turn the crawl into a grind. The juice isn't worth the squeeze, as the saying goes.

Do you agree? What are your thoughts on dungeon crawling versus rules complexity?

Returning to this, because I had sort of glossed over these examples due to being unfamiliar with them.

Reynard, what, exactly, do you think a "rules-light" game is?

Because I would not describe either of these games as "rules-light." Rules-medium, perhaps. The "quick start" book for Shadowdark is 58 pages. Five Torches Deep, based on reviews I've seen, only manages to slim the core book down to 46 pages by almost purely piggybacking off of the existing rules of 5e, which is in no way a "rules-light" game.

So..what exactly does "rules-light" mean to you?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

"Light" rules for "dungeon exploration" makes a lot of sense actually.
I think we get that in the Glossary.

 

[pemerton]

Of course you need light rules for dungeon crawling. Otherwise, how do you know when the torches run out?

I was about to post the same - but got ninja'd in the darkness!

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

When I talk about "grind" it isn't an issue of monotony so much as it is an issue of things coming to a near halt due to rules interactions

Outside of maybe my first 1-2 sessions where everyone at the table was learning the rules, I've not had this happen at all in pathfinder during exploration. The rules are very simple, straightforward, and easy to apply. It takes maybe 20 seconds to look something up and resolve as needed.

 

[Mannahnin]

that is what i was suggesting, just with your number of slots being derived by your strength, (51 points/slots of carrying capacity), i was interpreting your suggestion of slots being more like 'this is your headwear slot, this is your chest slot, your beltpouch slots...', previously mentioned heavy/moderate/light/trinket designations being labels for standard weight point values

Ah, I get you. There are definitely varying slot systems, so their complexity can vary, and to be fair I mentioned a couple of different types.
1. Simple "you can carry x items", where x is usually either your Strength or Con value, or a fixed number around 10-15.
2. The above +number the items in order, and there may be a mechanic for rolling to pull an item out in the middle of an encounter where items numbered lower are quicker to retrieve. The numbering also helps the DM randomly and objectively determine which are lost or damaged in certain circumstances.
3. A variant where locations are also noted, which helps the DM to adjudicate which items might be lost or damaged based on the fictional circumstances.

I generally think a system with number of slots in the 10-20 range, and item "bulk" given just one of three categories (e.g. big 2 slots, medium 1 slot, small 1/5 a slot) is going to be simpler in practice than one with a wider variety of weights and a large number of slots/pounds of carrying capacity.

A couple principles for OS (especially dungeon) play from the Old School Primer
• Rulings, not Rules
• Player Skill, not Character Abilities

The reason, I think, that basic dnd became the lingua franca of the OSR is not only compatibility with old modules, but because it allows for the above principles in gameplay. That is, it's not about the amount of rules, but a stance toward the rules, which is to subordinate them to GM rulings, especially for the sake of quick play. Rules lite games, that is, games that don't have that many rules to begin with, just more easily facilitate this kind of approach to the game. Modern OSR games would take this further and simplify even more (compared to B/X). The core resolution mechanics of Into the Odd, Knave, The Black Hack, etc are very simple and could be fit onto a page.

Expanding on this for anyone who hasn't seen it, I think Gus L has some excellent expanded thoughts on those two OSR maxims (and a few others).

7 Maxims of the OSR

Back in the aughts and the 2010’s, a decade ago now, there was a movement in older RPGs that I was part of - the “ Old School Renaissance ” ...

alldeadgenerations.blogspot.com

Five Torches Deep, based on reviews I've seen, only manages to slim the core book down to 46 pages by almost purely piggybacking off of the existing rules of 5e, which is in no way a "rules-light" game.

It also achieves that page count by only having a couple of pages of monster descriptions and rules, only two pages of spell descriptions, and zero magic items. OTOH that page count also includes some full page art, an optional system for designing dungeons using a Rubik's cube, and quick reference pages.

I think whether a game like this is "rules light" is a subjective judgement and relative. It's obviously not light compared to something like Lasers & Feelings! The core mechanic in 5TD, like 5E is "roll a d20 against a DC, add ability modifier and proficiency if applicable". It's a bit lighter than 5E in that the base DC is assumed to be 11 unless there's a special reason otherwise, and proficiencies are more loosely defined. Spell descriptions are super short, averaging around ten words.

I ran it for three years hybridizing with B/X for monsters and treasure, in particular. I think it was pretty light in that I rarely had to refer to the rulebook in play. The core mechanic is certainly simple.

 

[GMMichael]

I never understood this take. Even the one-side-of-one-page Lasers & Feelings has multiple lookup tables, and is a bit much for me to memorize in one go. I'm no one's idea of a smart person, but I'm struggling to visualize a system that meets this standard that isn't just a coin-flipping contest.

Modos RPG fits @Neonchameleon 's rules-light criteria. To address the no-tables-during-play criterion: the game has one table. It's a series of recommended benchmarks for Difficulty, what the GM uses to adjust roll results. So, PCs don't even need it. And it's small - about 2x6.

To aid your visualization, the game starts as a coin-flipping contest, but you use d20s. PCs will typically add attribute bonuses to theirs, while the GM will add difficulty to hers. The outcome is basically good or bad (Pro or Con), but since there aren't tables of outcomes, the PC and GM create the outcome together. The additional rules go on to add a structure to competitions (useful for combat!), and to add character features which are often self-explanatory (you can imagine what the Sleepless perk does).

I hope this helps!