Have we lost the dungeon?

[jrients]

I am not a fan of dungeons. Good dungeons take forever to design, taking into account the logic behind the dungeon's creation and/or its current occupants, as well as their internal interactions. And then, the PCs come in, miss 99% of the cool stuff in there, kill the monsters, and take the treasure. In case of my PCs, they also get bored, because they prefer the wilderness and the city environment.

As a player, I also dislike dungeons, because they always feel contrived and fake.

There is nothing inherently wrong with random, jumbled-up dungeons that make little sense. How the hobby came to a contrary conclusion is beyond me. A good dungeon has a certain sense of dreamlike irrationality. That's what gives it the inherent danger, the mystique, the edge it has. A descent into a dungeon should involve the PCs symbolically plunging into the collective unconsciousness of the world, a place where nightmares take life and wonders are beheld. I find it unseemly to try to impose a draconian sense of purpose or ecology on such phantasmagorical wonderlands. Sometimes it's okay that the ki-rin in room 23 lives in relative peace with the succubi in room 24.

 

[Mr. Kaze]

I can't play in a dungeon I can't believe in. If we're storming a fortress buried deep beneath a mountain, I have to believe in why some nitwit put a fortress under a mountain such that I'd have to go there to whallop their heiny. But figuring out why some nitwit would put a fortress under a mountain is where the DM has to do some significant work. So having a primal rallying cry of "Back to the dungeon!" supports the "DM is optional" at the cost of also supporting "More Roll than Role".

If I wanted a roll-playing game, I'd be playing Yatzee.

 

[Wombat]

I haven't really run a dungeon in donkey's years. Closest I've come to 'em was a small tomb complex (5 rooms, all small, no impossible-for-the-mechanics traps, no bad logic puzzles, only a couple undead) in a recent campaign and then running characters in an Ars Magica campaign through Calebais (which was a lot of fun, but really stretched the whole "dungeon" concept).

For the most part I find dungeons to be silly, incomprehensible, and too much a game construct, rather than something that belongs in the stories of my campaigns. They work out well if you want the wargame-y feel, but not for much of anything else. Bit too beer-n-pretzels for my tastes.

For me, I am happy to put the stake in the dungeon. It was okay to cut my teeth on, but now it is part of my past. I am much happier with wider worlds and fewer restrictions.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

In my games, there'll always be a place for a dungeon scribbled down on graph paper.

I will say that my dungeons have gotten less elaborate as time has gone on. They're much more goal-driven, rather than exploration-driven.

 

[Desdichado]

Could be because it's easier to (attempt to) write fluff than it is to write crunch???

Considering that neither dungeons nor kingdoms are crunch, I don't even know what you're trying to say.

 

[Sammael]

There is nothing inherently wrong with random, jumbled-up dungeons that make little sense. How the hobby came to a contrary conclusion is beyond me. A good dungeon has a certain sense of dreamlike irrationality. That's what gives it the inherent danger, the mystique, the edge it has.

While there may not be anything inherently wrong with random dungeons for some people, such places bug the hell out of me. Accepting a random dungeon involves more metagaming than I am willing to swallow.

A descent into a dungeon should involve the PCs symbolically plunging into the collective unconsciousness of the world, a place where nightmares take life and wonders are beheld.

That is not the way I'd describe it, but whatever works for you.

Sometimes it's okay that the ki-rin in room 23 lives in relative peace with the succubi in room 24.

Not to me. Unless there is a REALLY good reason why the ki-rin did not get rid of the succubus aeons ago. But coming up with the reason involves much more creativity than I am willing to invest, particularly because the PCs will simply ignore it.

As somebody before me mentioned, traversing a random dungeon is rollplaying, not roleplaying. These two hobbies may be similar, but not identical. I prefer the latter to the former at any rate.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Everything is a dungeon - what we took are room to room has now become flow and events (maybe bad terms), the dungeon is still there but our description of it has become something more.

 

[jokamachi]

I don't miss the dungeons and I haven't used them in years. I still think the "return to the dungeon" philosophy was ill-considered and quixotic. The market has largely grown up since those days.

And yet the game retains its original name.

 

[Desdichado]

How the hobby came to a contrary conclusion is beyond me.

C'mon, it was inevitable. How the hobby ever accepted them in the first place is beyond me. It was a foregone conclusion that the hobby would mature and move ahead.

And by mature, I don't mean to imply childish -- rather, primitive. Lacking in much development from its wargaming roots. That's not a value judgement on dungeons other than to point out that I'm surprised that a significant portion of RPG fans were ever interested in them in the first place, and not at all surprised that the hobby, in many ways, seems to have moved on once gaming became a bit more established and folks realized they could do other things besides dungeoncrawling.

 

[Desdichado]

And yet the game retains its original name.

Which proves nothing and suggests very little other than the strength of brand recognition.