Classic dungeons: What makes them great?

[howandwhy99]

The best thing about classic dungeons is they were innovative. They didn't follow a particular theory on how things must be done. Fun has nothing to do with absolute methods. It crawls out of the deepest, darkest places.

That said, I think they thrill the imagination. What happens is actually seen in the mind's eye, because it is just too cool to describe in rulespeak.

 

[Marshal Lucky]

On the other hand, if you look at 'Caves of Chaos', you mostly get chaos.

Maybe that's why they're called...


...the "Caves of Chaos". DUH!

There are themed sections, but very little in the way of a story. Most players go through the dungeon with no clue about what is going on and with very little non-combat interaction with the inhabitants. It's very basic dungeoneering - kill things and take thier stuff. Nothing wrong with that, but you can kill things, take thier stuff, and be part of an exciting story at the same time. There are alot of things about CoC that has always bothered me. One of them is that if you don't steer the players, they are very likely to get in over thier heads in a hurry. Any door but the kobolds or the goblins is likely to TPK a party of first levels almost immediately.

Or the PCs can run away.

You used the word "story" 20 times before I stopped counting. Am I to assume from this that you think there should be a "story" in D&D. That's funny, I thought D&D was a game. Papers & Paychecks said it best:

"The role of a superior DM is NOT to tell a story to his or her players. The DM need only provide an interesting and challenging environment for the players to explore and then administer that environment totally impartially. Superior players will be able to create a character-driven, interactive story from these raw materials, and neither the players nor the GM can tell where the story is headed."

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

QFT. There's no OSHA (Occupational Safety & Health Administration) for dungeon workers in AD&D. The "kobold in one room, red dragon in the next" nature of some AD&D adventures is criticized as silly and illogical, but the basic concept of "some encounters are very easy for the heroes, some will most likely kill you" makes the game exciting on a visceral level, and keeps the players on their toes.

Not really. It just makes you not care about the game. Oh, you touched a statue. you die. No save.

Next room. Oh you didnt touch the statue. You die. No save.

You open a door, the tarrasque eats you. If you'd opened the other door, the level fairy would have made yo 20th level though!

Any DM can kill characters all day long and pin them on their fridge. I'd like to think most DM's grow out of that phase, but sadly it doesnt appear to be the case. At least not on enworld, with its staunch anti player sentiment.

And that's been nerfed in the officially encouraged ways of playing 3e. Using only "appropriate" monster CR for the party, and even worse choosing the monsters so they fit the party (e.g., no undead for the party without a cleric) reduces the fun, IMHO.

If you wanna feel like a tough guy and use your god powers to kill your friends' characters, no one is stopping you. It is rather busch league.

CR isnt a straightjacket. Its a guideline for how tough a monster is. Sort of like "dungeon level" monsters were in 1st edition. Remember those? Or do you want to conveniently sweep those under the rug as well....

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Maybe that's why they're called...


Or the PCs can run away.

The average party has someone moving at 20' per round (or 4 inches in earlier editions). Unless they are willing to ditch their friend, they will most likely get caught by anything other than legless zombies and drunk oozes. Running away has almost never been a viable option outside of DM fiat. Its not a tactic any more than an "I win" button is.

 

[funkysnunkulator]

greatness makes them great, of course!!!

hahahaha.

they seemed designed more for fun than for balance or intricate plots and such. they are therefore easy to integrate into a campaign. also, shortness makes it easy to get together for an ad hoc game.

useful, streamline, sometimes silly, sometimes deadly, always a hoot!!

 

[grodog]

I very much like Melan's "circuit diagram" analyses of linear vs. complex dungeons he posted a few months ago because it illustrates perfectly that linear dungeons really do limit the availability of "significant choices" the players can engage in when exploring a complex. The more non-linear the dungeon the more significant each choice the players make can be.

A great thread. For reference: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=168563

 

[Gentlegamer]

The average party has someone moving at 20' per round (or 4 inches in earlier editions). Unless they are willing to ditch their friend, they will most likely get caught by anything other than legless zombies and drunk oozes. Running away has almost never been a viable option outside of DM fiat. Its not a tactic any more than an "I win" button is.

There are so many things wrong with this statement.

 

[Tarek]

What makes the classics "classic" is that they are outlines.

Keep on the Borderlands is great because it is a starter campaign setting, not just a dungeon. You have a town, with a small keep, and an area to adventure in.

Further, all of these settings, with the exception of ToH, are dynamic; things *change* as a result of the character's actions. If the characters go into the Hill Giant Steading, kill some of the giants, and go away to recover, then you can bet the giants won't be feasting when the party comes back... and there will be a few alert giants as guards rather than the sleeping ones the party met before.

That's what makes them classic; they present the idea of a real world where things change as opposed to a static one where you'll always find five skeletons and three zombies in room 5a, the one with the pit trap in the corner next to the broken torch sconce.

A lot of the 3e dungeons feel static to me, particularily the ones that have "boxed text dialog".

They're also very challenging and they force players to think strategically, not just tactically. None of these encounters are "level appropriate" nor are they "balanced".

 

[Marshal Lucky]

The average party has someone moving at 20' per round (or 4 inches in earlier editions). Unless they are willing to ditch their friend, they will most likely get caught by anything other than legless zombies and drunk oozes. Running away has almost never been a viable option outside of DM fiat. Its not a tactic any more than an "I win" button is.

Then the average party has a decision to make: Ditch the extra stuff you're carrying and run for your lives, or die in humiliating fashion. Oh, I forgot the third option: whine that the module is too tough and the DM needs to keep to a "story" to save the players from their own poor gaming.

 

[Melan]

Ehren37 -- do you ever post anything on these boards except anti-1e drivel?