Big Dungeons - An unrequited love?

[Woas]

I tend to agree. Although I like large dungeons that have good spacing: that is, instead of having a huge, 3 mile by 3 mile area of hallways, throne rooms, unused closets... like, a huge underground castle or fortress, there are smaller dungeons strung together by natural caverns or even overland travel.

 

[LostSoul]

I think that if you used the big dungeon in a different way - taking the NPCs and using them as opposing factions, each with their own goals, and their dungeons are their bases of operation/fortresses from which they sally forth to do evil and challenge the PCs - it could work.

That was how I was running the RttToEE. I gave the NPCs things to do, which naturally cut across the interests of the PCs (although sometimes the PC's goals and the NPC's goals would align). I didn't plan on running through the dungeon except when the PCs were making an assault on the NPC's base.

 

[Grimstaff]

Big dungeons were more practical in 1E days for 2 big reasons:

1) Combat much faster in 1E, and
2) I was much younger and could do marathon 12-16 sessions every week.

As a 30-something with responsibilities and attacks of opportunity, mega-dungeons just dont get play any more from my group...

 

[howandwhy99]

I think very large dungeons tend to limit player choices. Barring teleport, if your PCs are in a HUGE dungeon, they are pretty much stuck there. If they get bored, leaving to do something else is hardly an option.

I think massive dungeons can work. But I don't think they can be used with the traditional mindset. "Clearing" Undermountain is absurd. Even having to clear half of one, like in RtToEE is frustrating and tedious. They just are not single adventure locales.

Also, Crypts should be considered a separate entity. Tomb of Horrors would be madness on a massive scale.

Two massive dungeon types I think that don't work too well are:
1. Enormous randomly sprawling ones with room after room of monsters, traps, tricks, and treasure. Undermountain I think typifies this. It can be fun, but the PCs really need a motivation to be there. Otherwise, I believe, the sense of accomplishment is significantly lowered.

2. The other kind are narrow, very long dungeons. (like RtToEE) This kind of adventure construction is very prevalent these days. The PCs have 2 maybe 3 choice on where they can go, but ultimately each path leads to a single end. Be it Sunless Citadel, Forge of Fury, or any other "linear" "simplified flowchart" dungeon. These are fun for awhile, but after about 50 rooms, I find the fun factor wears thin.

Massive dungeons I think can work are ones like Mines of Moria. Here the 1000+ room dungeon is built not to be overcome, but simply get to through like in LOTR. Most of it is vacant and maps are kept in case PCs get lost. If they want to explore, they can. Sometimes they may have to take different routes to bypass "occupied areas", but generally the goal is to get out, not explore. In this way truly massive dungeons are more like Wilderness adventures and overland travel. The PCs might get lost, but they should be able to get back with a few well placed clues littered throughout the dungeon. If their goal is to find, say, Moradin's lost hammer, then I would warn PCs before entering without some clue on where it may be hidden inside. (just like hunting for a fairy ring in a massive forest) MERPS Moria can be modified to do this "wilderness" theme fairly well and placed in just about any world. (it's also larger in scale than anything I've ever seen published elsewhere)

While the original ToEE and the more complex Rappan Athuk (RA) are well made, if somewhat smaller dungeons, I think they succeed by having many exits and entrances. RA also includes many smaller climaxes and numerous shortcuts to deeper areas. These go a long way to keeping it viable. Path choices are numerous and interweaving, and players can also complete a portion and then return much later to delve for fun without a loss of continuity.

 

[Shemeska]

Never really had a good experience with big dungeons. Right or wrong in my opinion here, they've always rubbed me as something that would have worked for a group of 12 year olds, or a staple of the earliest editions of the game which I never played. I don't have any nostalgia when I look at a giant dungeon, I just have a huge problem with suspending disbelief with them.

With slim exception (Undermountain being the posterchild since it has a rather nifty backstory), alot of them just seem goofy with a randomized hundred room dungeon with monsters just waiting there with their slices of pie. Again, this is only my perception, but it's been one that has not endeared me to the idea of them, especially with not being all that keen on the 3e 'back to the dungeon' design approach.

*shrug* I can do dungeons, but they have some hurdles to overcome before I do. When I use them they always have context, they're not just randomized rooms, and it takes a nice amount of work for me to shrug off the bad taste they generally leave in my mouth.

 

[howandwhy99]

Just thought of another type that works. Banewarrens.

[SPOILERS AHEAD]
[sblock]This one is sort of a hodgpodge of smaller dungeons strung together in a linear way. The original premise of the adventure requires the PCs complete everything, but this occurs in steps. One of the nicest things is the mention of other explorers and changes to the dungeon once it is opened.

Essentially there is a small upper dungeon with a sealed door close to the front. Completing the top portion leads to opening the sealed door. Beyond it is a small many-fingered dungeon with one finger's final trick leading to the deeper portions. The deeper portion is a tiny linear that must be completely searched to find the mid-sized sprawling dungeon. This level is fun, but the point is to find the "one way deeper still" which can be tedious not to mention deadly. Once the "Deepest" (actually highest - the interior of a spire) level is found the PCs are back in linear mode until the end.

This adventure works by allowing PCs repeated access to new levels with some ease, but also allows intervention by others as mentioned above. Unexplored areas are dynamic and have creatures that can fill in the cleared path to deeper levels. Plus, returning to finish the Deepest portion remains difficult and feels like an accomplishment. I think more shortcuts between levels and removal of the "one way only" advancement routes could improve it. Also, the adventure premise of completing the dungeon is a limit. But it is one of the more enjoyable "BIG dungeons" out there.
[/sblock]

 

[Psion]

Undermountain being the posterchild since it has a rather nifty backstory

To me, Undermountain has a lame backstory. "A crazy mage made this place." O-kay.

But I love it nonetheless. In my campaign world, I took the dungeon and tacked on my own backstory.

I think what makes undermountain tick for me is that it's almost as much a setting as a dungeon.

 

[Mystery Man]

To me, Undermountain has a lame backstory. "A crazy mage made this place." O-kay.

Just to clear things up...

Dwarves made it. Drow killed them all. Carzy mage killed the drow and moved in.

sorry, couldn't help myself.

 

[Psion]

Dwarves made it. Drow killed them all. Carzy mage killed the drow and moved in.

They just made the hole in the ground. The whole "teleport proof and random portals to everywhere" where more instrumental design challenges AFAIAC.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

The best way to handle them are having specific missions in the dungeon, such as finding a specific item, killing or meeting with a specific NPC, or getting to a certain location. Then set up the layout in a reasonable manner so that the PCs can figure out where they're going and get through without killing every monster in the place (unless they decide that that's what they want to do) Put a time limit on it too so you don't get bored while they're looking "behind door #3", or you can give them a reason to keep it short, like in "The Lost Temple of Tamoachan" where the PCs take damage every few minutes due to a weak poison gas.