D&D General Hot Take: Dungeon Exploration Requires Light Rules To Be Fun


log in or register to remove this ad

I ran Abomination vaults for a little bit as a method to learn PF2E, and found that the the complex rules made dungeon delving a chore. I ran and played in a 5E Rappan Athuk game with similar results, plus incongruities of matching that system to old school sensibilities. There were other attempts at dungeon crawling with PF1 and 3.x era D&D, all failures to some degree or another.

Upon discovering 5 Torches Deep, Shadowdark and other rules light D&D inspired games, i have come to the conclusion that dungeon crawling requires a rules light approach in order to be fun. Unwieldy, complex systems are slow, and turn the crawl into a grind. The juice isn't worth the squeeze, as the saying goes.

Do you agree? What are your thoughts on dungeon crawling versus rules complexity?
I don't agree. I think you require it that way so you find it fun. More complex exploration rules can be just as fun if you appreciate more granularity in that area. My wife, for example, is an amateur survivalist, and rules that emphasize that aspect get a thumbs-up from her (and from me).
 

Depends on what you consider dungeon crawling. If it’s the actual searching, avoiding traps, mapping, getting lost, dealing with light and having to track resources portion of dungeon crawling, I agree. Conversely, I played through Dungeon of the Mad Mage with 5e and we essentially passed over the aforementioned nitty gritty of dungeon crawling and the dungeon became largely the setting for the adventure, but it still played wonderfully with plenty of traps, strange things to interact with and obviously plenty of encounters. But because we were 5e characters, there wasn’t the same threat of “death waits around every corner if you aren’t cautious” feeling.
See, I really want that feeling when I'm in a dungeon, otherwise it feels to me like a sport.
 


Can you do dungeon crawling without resource management? I don't think you can.

I don't think you need rules for describing things. What would that look like?

Again, how do you dungeon crawl without obstacles and hazards?

I am not really talking about eliminating important aspects of dungeon crawling to make the game lighter, I am talking about building systems that are concise and quickly resolved but still essential. Things like slot encumbrance is a good example, as are supply dice.
IME, player really balk every time a mechanic like supply dice doesn't go their way. It tends not to be worth it IMO.
 

My players bounced off exploration activities, and I did not take to tags/traits as well as I imagined I might. Overall, the quantity of moving parts in PF2E was just too much for me, and the exploration suffered more than the combat. I gave it an honest go, but couldn't last long enough to get proficient.
I will say PF2 is far too gamey for my tastes anyway, dungeon delving or not, so I agree with you there.
 

I find dungeons in 5e work best when you treat each room as a discrete encounter, 5 room dungeon style (could be more than 5 rooms, but the point is that each room is there to pace the session).
...but if you do that, you aren't really running a dungeon crawl, which for me centers around the risk-reward of survival and exploration. In a dungeon crawl, random encounters should be things for the characters to avoid and for the players to deal with in a short (in real world time) combat or chase. Further, the dungeon should function as a cohesive entity, not just a series of encounters separated by room.

@Gus L makes this point better and at more length here: Classic Vs. Five Rooms
 




Remove ads

Top