How dungeons have changed in Dungeons and Dragons

[Ghendar]

Basically, if all you're doing is dungeon-delving, then the campaign is going to be pretty boring after a while.

"If this is Tuesday, we must be in Undermountain."

I understand what you're syaing but I disagree in part.
Yes, dungeon delves over and over again can get boring but it's all in the presentation. You have to make that underground environment as alive and vibrant as the above ground world. Give the players intrigue and politics, as well as combat and you have a very viable, and entertaining dungeon experience.

 

[Ghendar]

I like to emphasize PC/player choice in my games, so I much prefer a game where there are far more options. That's one reason I like city games, since one can just throw dozens of NPCs and a dozen or so plot hooks at the PCs and let them follow whichever one they want.

What about an underground city though?

 

[XO]

Recipe Oriented

Is there a point to explaining everything in 3e+ ?

As in "Here's a new magic item so I must absolutely tell you how to make one" ? Or "here's a dungeon room, with blueprints, costs, and engineering review, as well as plotlines and overly long soon-to-die monster stats" ?

 

[grodog]

With that caveat, I have to say that as a DM and a player, dungeon crawls bore the heck out of me. The primary reason is the linearity of them. I like to emphasize PC/player choice in my games, so I much prefer a game where there are far more options.

Dungeon design doesn't have to be linear. Check out Melan's post @ http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=168563 for some excellent analysis of AD&D dungeons vs. 3.x dungeons. Not all AD&D dungeons were less-linear than 3.x dungeons, nor and some 3.x dungeons offer a lot more choice in them than earlier modules (Rob Kuntz's Maure Castle levels from Dungeon Magazine are an excellent example of less-linear designs).

That's one reason I like city games, since one can just throw dozens of NPCs and a dozen or so plot hooks at the PCs and let them follow whichever one they want.

I agree completely, but you can certainly employ the same techniques in dungeon design too. Necromancer Games' Tomb of Abysthor is a good 3.x example of one.

I also enjoy combat a lot but don't want it to be the single, or even the primary, focus of the game. Most dungeon crawls end up being heavily combat-oriented, which gets boring for me after a while.

Continuous combat would bore me to tears, especially within the scope of 3.x combats (which, since I'm not MerricB, take me a LOT longer to run than AD&D combats).

So for me it's a personal taste thing. I've mostly taken dungeons out of my campaign, and I'm not keen on them in games I play in, except in small doses.

I can perfectly understand that, and if that style of play works for you and your players, then go for it. I thought it would be worth drawing Melan's thread and associated discussions to your attention in case you would be interested in a trying out a non-linear dungeon environment, though: they are fun, in many ways, and offer a very different playing experience than a city or wilderness or planar setting. The game isn't called Dungeons & Dragons for nothing

 

[TerraDave]

Your talking ancient history, not current events

Just to pick up on what some other have said: yes, in the last 30 years, there is less emphasis on the pure dungeon crawl.

I think this shift took place about 20 years ago.

Moving away from the ancient examples cited above, over the last 10 years 3rd ed edition has brought back the dungeon. Both with a reemphasis in the game itself (you see this in adventures but also in the core rules themselves where there is much more "dungeon" relevant info then in 2nd ed), and by brining back players to D&D who had left to, err, get away from the dungeon.

 

[diaglo]

With all this talk about 3e, 2e, and 1e, I think it's time for Diaglo to come in and say, "OD&D (1974) is the one true game . . . "

d'oh. i missed my cue.

OD&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.


i've always used dungeon design as a way to sculpt adventures above and below ground. check out Booklet 3 The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures.

 

[grodog]

My post above wasn't intended to single out shilsen---obviously several folks in the thread are of the opinion that OD&D and AD&D were filled with linear, boring dungeon crawls that had no context within a setting, no connection to towns or wildernesses, and no NPCs to interact with.

If that description of pre-2e D&D was the case (and yes, I'm exaggerating for emphasis), then the game would never have survived to grow into AD&D from OD&D in the first place.

 

[Psion]

Your implied recollections, doing mostly dungeons, are at odds with my memory of play in the 70s. When I was a young adventurer we had to walk 20 leagues through the snow to get to the dungeon, fightin' the whole way.

... but true.

As I told the fans over at the necro forums when some of them were busy damning 3e, I had to enlighten them to the fact that their "1e feel" was somewhat different than my "1e feel", and I was not alone.

I think my first D&D purchase was the "BECM" expert set (a friend had the basic set). So, my first "sit down and read" exposure to the game was all about wilderness adventuring. And Isle of Dread was an influential first module.

When we picked up 1e PHB and had a long term AD&D game that really did nothing to alter this. Yeah, we has some (mysterious and cool) dungeon crawls. But we also had roleplaying, power struggles, burgeoning armies, kings, knights, and (eventually) defending lords from invading assassins.

 

[Scribble]

Maybe early TSR module writers thought most DMs were like me...

I like to run a good dungeon dive every so often but actually designing and stocking said dungeon is a pain in the booty.

It's boring and time consuming.

So TSR did it for you, and let you put said dungeon wherever you wanted it.

Plug n Play.

 

[Qualidar]

OD&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.

You know, I don't think I've ever seen you misspell a word in that line. Do you actually just cut and paste it?

As to the original question; I think the change happened because as time went on the company got a better idea of what worked, and what people wanted. The pendulum swung too far away in 2E, so it's swung back to more dungeons in 3E.

As for my own tastes, the Al-Quadim modules were the most enjoyed by my players, and the few Planescape adventures I played in were far too railroady for me. Both of those were 2E, so I guess it's not really an edition thing.

~Qualidar~