Dungeon layout, map flow and old school game design

[Garnfellow]

One thing about the old school, branching adventures: their non-linear structure probably reads a heck of a lot better to budding DMs than they actually play at the table.

I cut my teeth on the old modules, and the stuff I loved -- freaking loved! -- about those modules were all the weird, secret things that were devilishly hidden behind lost portals or under long-forgotten trap doors. You know what I’m talking about: strange magical effects that would only be produced if one were to correctly place the right number of mystical items in just the right combination at precisely the right moment. Put three rubies in that magical censor and you would be instantly disintegrated, no save. But put two EMERALDS in the censor, and you would open up a gate to the Elemental Plane of Water, where a powerful demigod would give you a permanent +2 to your Wisdom score!

When I would run those modules, I would wait in fevered anticipation for the players to approach one of these special, secret areas. Would this be the time they summoned the Elder Elemental God? Would this be the time they free the angry spectre trapped in the mirror? Oh my, oh my, the possibilities!

But instead, they usually just missed that secret door.

Or maybe worse, sometimes they went over every square inch of the dungeon with a whisk and a magnifying glass, cataloging and mapping every feature with a thoroughness that would make the team from CSI: Greyhawk green with envy. When the PCs did find the super secret special areas, they would systematically dismantle it with grim efficiency, almost never stopping to experiment. They never found out what would happen if two emeralds were placed in the mystical censor, because dammit, those things had real gp value and besides, that dungeon trick stuff was just as likely to screw you as help.

Sometimes I would be so eager to see one of these special secret areas that I would drop hints (often clumsily). The players often missed these hints, or were (rightfully) distrustful. And even if they did follow up, I was usually let down by the result because it felt like I was cheating.

After a while, I began to question the point of some of the more esoteric secret areas. My time making and running dungeons is precious and fleeting. If these super secret area are so hard to find or use that almost no one ever does so, why even put them on the map? A cleverly hidden treasure vault makes perfect sense in a wizard’s tower, and the players will be naturally scouring the tower area for it. But a secret temple lost millennia ago and that absolutely no one knows about and is buried under 12 tons of rubble? Why bother to fully key out something like that when a cryptic suggestion in the text would serve just as well?

 

[Delta]

Presenting data as support for one's opinion tends to invite argument over the opinion. Presenting data straight, as is, invites discussion of the data.

That I would have to disagree with. You might consider philosophers such as Habermas or Foucault on the issue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_(philosophy)

Or, as Richard Unger wrote in the preface to The Ship in the Medival Economy, "It is easy to fall into the trap of concern for the data itself."

 

[Quasqueton]

Habermas, Foucault, Unger weren't posting on Internet message boards.

Quasqueton

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

One thing about the old school, branching adventures: their non-linear structure probably reads a heck of a lot better to budding DMs than they actually play at the table.

I don't know about that. My 13 year-old self had a real problem figuring out how to use those original modules. When I saw the open-ended module, I couldn't figure out what to do with it. I needed more guidance at the time, whereas now I can figure out what to do with them.

But instead, they usually just missed that secret door.

I'm with you there. Secret doors are a challenge - they're secret, yet as DM, you want them to be found.

As for Melan's point - I think that non-linear vs. linear dungeon design and story concerns can be isolated from one another. One can have a perfectly good story that is non-linear.

 

[Ourph]

I'm with you there. Secret doors are a challenge - they're secret, yet as DM, you want them to be found.

That attitude is part of the reason why linear dungeons have become so popular. If you have a vested interest in the PCs finding a secret door or discovering a specific item you're much more likely to get that outcome if the PCs have only a single path to follow. If the adventure pretty much stops when the PCs miss the secret door then they'll probably keep searching until they find it. Whereas if there's always another hallway to explore or another level to move onto, that secret door may go undiscovered for the entire campaign. A non-linear dungeon requires the DM to be an impartial judge rather than a cheerleader or storywriter.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

If the adventure pretty much stops when the PCs miss the secret door then they'll probably keep searching until they find it.

True. I tend to avoid such things as much as I can in my games - the secret door may conceal something cool, but I don't have any problem if they miss it. Any unused/undiscovered design-work from one scenario can be made use of in a later one if it fits, or even used in a later campaign.

 

[Mark]

I don't view secret doors as a device to keep things hidden from PCs but rather to explain why other NPCs or creatures haven't discovered what is beyond them.

 

[Rothe]

Melan, excellent post. Have you done any other dungeons or take requests perhaps?
I would love to see The Caverns of Thracia analyzed what with the mulitiude of secret doors and sub-levels.

 

[Rothe]

...snip...
As for getting good maps, I highly recommend anything Paul Jaquays did (Necromancer Games recently re-released Caverns of Thracia, which is a good start), but there is no way his maps are getting graphed. Simply too complex - Paul's use of the third dimension is unparalleled in game design.

Should have read the whole thread first. Can you be convinced to try otherwise?

 

[Mycanid]

Very nicely thought out Melan. Man, I would never have the patience to sit down and organize it all out like that.

On the whole, though, I find that I also tend to like linear dungeons that MAKE SENSE. For me this is the biggy. Items and "clues" and what not (i.e. "important" things) can easily be put at "bottleneck" locations between areas on the map if you wanted to have variety in types of mapping, of course, but, as the others have said, I really think the map has to make sense and harmonize well with the basic dungeon/adventure design.

But others have already said basically this anyway. Just wanted to say "hoorah" to your effort and add my two cents.