Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rod Staffwand" data-source="post: 6668511" data-attributes="member: 6776279">I'm not a fan of the classic dungeon of any size. It just seems like such an artificial environment to me with its seemingly randomly sprinkled traps, treasures and monsters. I certainly not interested in writing, mapping and stocking a 100 room complex as a DM or the dungeon-crawling routine as a player. Luckily, D&amp;D does very well without the D. I suppose you could run it without the other D as well, but I don't know why you'd want to.When I use complex environments (say the PCs are sneaking into an enemy fortress) I will outline general areas, points of interest, obstacles and dangers rather than doing a full map. Points of interest (the wizard's laboratory, the dragon's den) get more in-depth write-ups while the areas that surround them (corridors, generic storerooms) will be improvised during play. Each point of interest will usually have 2-3 access routes that the party can investigate and choice from. Some might be trapped or guarded, others might be secret or require special movement to use.Unused points of interest often get repurposed for other adventures. I'll usually do this with traps, obstacles and complications since I'll often need to interject these with the party goes &quot;off script&quot; and I have to quickly come up with content.This all works because I never run dungeon exploration games wherein the party's primary goal is to literally explore a dungeon. We all find it a rather dull motivation. If the PCs go to an adventuring environment its always to retrieve a relic, stop a villain, seal a portal, find information, save the world, etc. So in that sense, what's important is their goal and the obstacles between them and it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rod Staffwand, post: 6668511, member: 6776279"] I'm not a fan of the classic dungeon of any size. It just seems like such an artificial environment to me with its seemingly randomly sprinkled traps, treasures and monsters. I certainly not interested in writing, mapping and stocking a 100 room complex as a DM or the dungeon-crawling routine as a player. Luckily, D&D does very well without the D. I suppose you could run it without the other D as well, but I don't know why you'd want to. When I use complex environments (say the PCs are sneaking into an enemy fortress) I will outline general areas, points of interest, obstacles and dangers rather than doing a full map. Points of interest (the wizard's laboratory, the dragon's den) get more in-depth write-ups while the areas that surround them (corridors, generic storerooms) will be improvised during play. Each point of interest will usually have 2-3 access routes that the party can investigate and choice from. Some might be trapped or guarded, others might be secret or require special movement to use. Unused points of interest often get repurposed for other adventures. I'll usually do this with traps, obstacles and complications since I'll often need to interject these with the party goes "off script" and I have to quickly come up with content. This all works because I never run dungeon exploration games wherein the party's primary goal is to literally explore a dungeon. We all find it a rather dull motivation. If the PCs go to an adventuring environment its always to retrieve a relic, stop a villain, seal a portal, find information, save the world, etc. So in that sense, what's important is their goal and the obstacles between them and it. [/QUOTE]

Verification