Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 8697241" data-attributes="member: 7026594">The school of dungeon design laid out at least as early as, for example, Dragon issue 10, in Richard Gilbert's Let There Be a Method to Your Madness article.&nbsp; Then we have the &quot;Gygaxian Naturalism&quot; idea which Gary put in a lot of his later module work, trying to rationalize dungeons a bit, putting at least a nod in to food chains and so forth.The other major school of thought (aside from just occasional funhouse dungeons meant as an exception to the rule) is the Mythic Underworld concept Jason &quot;Philotomy Jurament&quot; Cone explicated early in the OSR (2007, I think?), as a way of explaining and extrapolating on the original weird dungeon rules from OD&amp;D.&nbsp; Stuff like why doors are normally stuck for PCs but open easily for dungeon dwellers.&nbsp; Or how PCs can't see in the dark but inhabitants of the dungeon can by default.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.grey-elf.com/philotomy.pdf[/URL]I think there's definitely some value to having at least some things about the campaign world be kind of casually realistic.&nbsp; Physics working more or less as it does in reality, for example, so players can engage in problem solving by doing stuff like using a marble to detect a sloping floor, or water to find a crack in the ground, or a crowbar to help them open a stuck door.&nbsp; But I definitely enjoy the Mythic Underworld concept and how it reminds us that we have license to make dungeons and adventure sites places of strangeness and mystery where &quot;realism&quot; is at best a secondary concern.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 8697241, member: 7026594"] The school of dungeon design laid out at least as early as, for example, Dragon issue 10, in Richard Gilbert's [I]Let There Be a Method to Your Madness[/I] article. Then we have the "Gygaxian Naturalism" idea which Gary put in a lot of his later module work, trying to rationalize dungeons a bit, putting at least a nod in to food chains and so forth. The other major school of thought (aside from just occasional funhouse dungeons meant as an exception to the rule) is the Mythic Underworld concept Jason "Philotomy Jurament" Cone explicated early in the OSR (2007, I think?), as a way of explaining and extrapolating on the original weird dungeon rules from OD&D. Stuff like why doors are normally stuck for PCs but open easily for dungeon dwellers. Or how PCs can't see in the dark but inhabitants of the dungeon can by default. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.grey-elf.com/philotomy.pdf[/URL] I think there's definitely some value to having at least some things about the campaign world be kind of casually realistic. Physics working more or less as it does in reality, for example, so players can engage in problem solving by doing stuff like using a marble to detect a sloping floor, or water to find a crack in the ground, or a crowbar to help them open a stuck door. But I definitely enjoy the Mythic Underworld concept and how it reminds us that we have license to make dungeons and adventure sites places of strangeness and mystery where "realism" is at best a secondary concern. [/QUOTE]

Verification