D&D 5E Megadungeon delving as a campaign’s core; is it compatible with modern play?

[iserith]

This seems, to me, to bring up the Coco Chanel moment....

The question in the OP was about making megadungeons compatible with modern play. Given that folks have limited time at the table, the typical old megadungeon play must be edited down to allow space for the modern play moments to happen.

Which megadungeony concerns do we set aside, then?

None. There's no need in my view.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Can you explain what you mean by "modern play" here?

Limited time at any given session doesn't preclude serialized play.

Yeah my intended meaning of modern play was more the ‘character story first’ attitude as opposed to ‘module story first’ way or limited play time as they seem to of interpreted it.

 

[MNblockhead]

This seems, to me, to bring up the Coco Chanel moment....

The question in the OP was about making megadungeons compatible with modern play. Given that folks have limited time at the table, the typical old megadungeon play must be edited down to allow space for the modern play moments to happen.

Which megadungeony concerns do we set aside, then?

I think megadungeons fit better with variable time limits and changing groups of players. As long as players have the ability to go in and out, they just delve in for a period of time you have for play. I think it is more that more modern sensibilities want to hit specific notes each session. The mega dungeon is less plot driven and that might not be as satisfying for many groups.

In terms of time management, a mega dungeon is not really any more difficult than any sandbox environment. I think a lot of the same issues in determining a good cut off point would present themselves in a hex crawl, for example.

If the players don't expect that every session will hit on certain plot points that drive the overall story forward, then I don't see the need to change how I run a mega-dungeon.

 

[iserith]

Yeah my intended meaning of modern play was more the ‘character story first’ attitude as opposed to ‘module story first’ way or limited play time as they seem to of interpreted it.

Right, and my general advice for that as above is to have the players tie their 10-page backstories to the adventure location in some way so that it's relevant to the characters' interests beyond gold and XP. There's no need to actually "set aside" dungeon exploration in my view. Maybe add some dungeon shopkeepers so players can kill half the session shopping or something like that.

 

[MNblockhead]

Yeah my intended meaning of modern play was more the ‘character story first’ attitude as opposed to ‘module story first’ way or limited play time as they seem to of interpreted it.

If character story first is the priority, than the group may not like a megadungeon whatever the session length. But if they are up for character stories that emerge from the exploration and actions, rather than an overall story arch, they should still enjoy it.

 

[Umbran]

If the players don't expect that every session will hit on certain plot points that drive the overall story forward, then I don't see the need to change how I run a mega-dungeon.

Then, in what ways are you working with more modern gaming styles?

 

[MNblockhead]

Then, in what ways are you working with more modern gaming styles?

I guess, strictly speaking, I'm not. But I think what is different from how I might have run a dungeon in the 80s compared to the campaign that I'm running now, is that there are many plots. But it is not like there is a specific storyline to follow. In addition to the huge number of locations and possible encounters that are highly interlinked, there are different factions with different goals, a lot of history, a lot of potential plots and quests. But what the story becomes is entirely up to the players. Initially, it can be a bit disorienting for players used to more modern story-driven adventures. But what quickly happens is that plots emerge and take on a life on their own. They have a story to follow, but that story never had to be the story. The decisions and actions of the PCs decide the plot.

What I do think is important for many players is that they have a reason to go into the dungeon in the first place as @iserith stated in an earlier post. But after a few sessions, reasons to continue going back emerge. After a few sessions, I don't find that the mega dungeon has any less story than a typical modern adventure.

Other more modern preferences work just fine in a mega dungeon. You don't want to spend large amounts of game time explaining in detail how you are searching or how you deal with a trap or locked door. Passive perception and skill checks can be used. You really like spending time acting out your character in social interactions, there are opportunities for that. You don't want to try to draw out a map as you explore, there are VTTs that will clear fog as you explore. You want normal XP earning, that works fine. Lots of things to kill in a mega dungeon. Milestone leveling? Sure, when you reach a certain area or defeat a certain foe then level up.

I have trouble thinking of anything that would really prevent newer more "modern" players from enjoying a mega dungeon, other than they don't like the setting. But that can be an issue with any setting or adventure.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If character story first is the priority, than the group may not like a megadungeon whatever the session length. But if they are up for character stories that emerge from the exploration and actions, rather than an overall story arch, they should still enjoy it.

Maybe, but the thread premise is if it’s possible to bridge and combine the two, character story first in the megadungeon setting, I guess without being required to specifically tailor their characters to the dungeon setting.

 

[iserith]

Maybe, but the thread premise is if it’s possible to bridge and combine the two, character story first in the megadungeon setting, I guess without being required to specifically tailor their characters to the dungeon setting.

I think we'd have to define what "character story first" actually means in context. To my mind, that's when players submit their backstories which the DM then makes some kind of game around. Certainly not my preference, but I think that's what is meant. If that's the case, then the player does bear some responsibility in my view to ground their character in the setting and on the focus of play, whether it's a megadungeon or not.

 

[Stormonu]

Maybe, but the thread premise is if it’s possible to bridge and combine the two, character story first in the megadungeon setting, I guess without being required to specifically tailor their characters to the dungeon setting.

Yeah, I think that's possible - it will likely mean that exploring the megadungeon is more than "because we can" and there's now a story behind why the group is foraying into its depths, and there may be more impetus to any trips back to town as more than a drop off treasure and resupply point.

I think B4 - Lost City would excel at this, considering the factions and undercity within it. Undermountain and its Skullport area would mesh with this nicely as well.

 

[beancounter]

We finished Undermountain through level 7 recently, and had plenty of RP opportunities. Not sure why they are incompatible.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think we'd have to define what "character story first" actually means in context. To my mind, that's when players submit their backstories which the DM then makes some kind of game around. Certainly not my preference, but I think that's what is meant. If that's the case, then the player does bear some responsibility in my view to ground their character in the setting and on the focus of play, whether it's a megadungeon or not.

Yeah I think I could agree on that definition, perhaps maybe a caveat of the story being led by the character’s actions and established backstory plot hooks.

Edit: actually that’s probably pretty redundant on top of your statement

 

[iserith]

Yeah I think I could agree on that definition, perhaps maybe a caveat of the story being led by the character’s actions and established backstory plot hooks.

Yeah so any adventure location where the players can decide what to do fits your first criteria and then plot hooks would just have to be related to said adventure location. My parents were killed by the orcs that now claim the Stone Tooth and I must have revenge or whatever.

 

[R_J_K75]

I love the idea of a campaign based on reclaiming a “mega dungeon” that was once a great citystate.

The Ruins of the Shoon Imperium and the Ruins of Myth Drannor in the Forgotten Realms come to mind as good examples whete this could take place.

 

[LordEntrails]

My experience is the opposite. Part of it may be because the dungeon is so huge it is no small feat to travel out of it. Even now that the party is at high levels, teleporting out means that things could be much worse when they come back and they may have to "start over" in clearing out an area or completing their current objective.

Huh? Your experience with LTH is opposite because of teleport? If your party is teleporting in and out to rest, why would they need LTH? If they are not, and are using LTH to rest anywhere they want, then why isn't the situation worse when they emerge?

For me, if you stop short of an objective and making a safe space, you are probably going to have to start over (though things will have changed, for better or worse). Doesn't matter if you use teleport or LTH or are just allowed to bar a door.

In terms of time management, a mega dungeon is not really any more difficult than any sandbox environment. I think a lot of the same issues in determining a good cut off point would present themselves in a hex crawl, for example.

It depends, sounds a lot like you are thinking a megadungeon has to be run as kick-in-the-door and not used like a dynamic setting with lots of factions and locations. When used in a such a way, time management is no different than any other setting But my group runs 2 hours sessions, and we are used to stopping in the middle of battles when we have to. We don't have the expectation that every game session needs to be wrapped up like some chapter in a book or TV episode.

That's the advantage of playing weekly, our memories are still good enough we can remember where we were a week past.

 

[Hussar]

I think one of the bigger changes, and this has been touched on, that DM's need to incorporate is that HP are now a strategic level - ie encounter - resource, not a logistical one. HP are a way of controlling pacing and strategy in combat. But, between combat? No, not really. It's typically trivially easy to restore everyone to full HP repeatedly during an adventuring day.

This is largely due to the way 3e played and has continued since then. If you had a group with wands of cure light wounds, then HP attrition vanishes as a resource to be managed. You just have such an enormous pool of HP that you may as well just hand wave it and say you start with full HP in every encounter, because that's the way it's going to play out.

5e is largely the same. HP are not a logistical resource. They just aren't. And trying to make them a logistical resource - by changing rest periods, interupting long rests and whatnot, largely is rowing against the current. The players just have SO MANY resources at their disposal - from cheap healing potions to the fact that probably at least half the group can cast healing spells - that it really doesn't matter.

IMO, it's a better solution to simply go a different direction. Stop trying to make HP a logistical resource. Personally, I favor the idea of fatigue. Every rest, make a scaling Con save (or whatever). First rest, DC 5. Second rest DC 7, so on and so forth. Every time you fail, you gain a level of exhaustion. DC's only reset after a week of rest. A single long rest, while restoring HP and spells, and obviously reducing one level of exhaustion, doesn't reset the DC's.

Now, you have a nice little logistical mechanic that pushes the players to push forward and not rest after every encounter.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I guess, strictly speaking, I'm not. But I think what is different from how I might have run a dungeon in the 80s compared to the campaign that I'm running now, is that there are many plots. But it is not like there is a specific storyline to follow. In addition to the huge number of locations and possible encounters that are highly interlinked, there are different factions with different goals, a lot of history, a lot of potential plots and quests. But what the story becomes is entirely up to the players. Initially, it can be a bit disorienting for players used to more modern story-driven adventures. But what quickly happens is that plots emerge and take on a life on their own. They have a story to follow, but that story never had to be the story. The decisions and actions of the PCs decide the plot.

Are the given/prepared options the only ones? That is, are the players picking from a menu, even if an extensive one, or are they "in the hotseat" and actually creating story beats? AIUI, that's the gap between adaptive "Story Before" and actual "Story Now": the difference between a standard buffet of pre-cooked food and actually participating in the cooking process. One might call it "fulfilling" vs "creating." If the players are simply fulfilling what story opportunities you offer them, that might cause issues.

E.g. you said "a lot of potential plots and quests," implying picking from a prepared menu. It may be a big menu, but it's still prepared. Some "modern-style" players will chafe under those limits. Or you may feel run ragged when the players ignore every menu item and start creating brand-new dishes they want to eat.

But perhaps this is just a poor turn of phrase. Do your players get opportunities at actually creating story themselves, rather than fulfilling a story-hook you provided them?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The Ruins of the Shoon Imperium and the Ruins of Myth Drannor in the Forgotten Realms come to mind as good examples whete this could take place.

Oh yeah! Myth Drannor is perfect. I'd love to do a campaign set during the reclamation of Myth Drannor.

 

[R_J_K75]

Oh yeah! Myth Drannor is perfect. I'd love to do a campaign set during the reclamation of Myth Drannor.

It's been a while since I read the 3E FRCS and I don't remember exactly but I think that Myth Drannor/Cormanthyr was re-established when the book came out and the drow were waging war on the surface elves there. Kind of a missed opportunity for a good series of adventures or a boxed set to play out the reclamation of the area.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think one of the bigger changes, and this has been touched on, that DM's need to incorporate is that HP are now a strategic level - ie encounter - resource, not a logistical one. HP are a way of controlling pacing and strategy in combat. But, between combat? No, not really. It's typically trivially easy to restore everyone to full HP repeatedly during an adventuring day.

This is largely due to the way 3e played and has continued since then. If you had a group with wands of cure light wounds, then HP attrition vanishes as a resource to be managed. You just have such an enormous pool of HP that you may as well just hand wave it and say you start with full HP in every encounter, because that's the way it's going to play out.

5e is largely the same. HP are not a logistical resource. They just aren't. And trying to make them a logistical resource - by changing rest periods, interupting long rests and whatnot, largely is rowing against the current. The players just have SO MANY resources at their disposal - from cheap healing potions to the fact that probably at least half the group can cast healing spells - that it really doesn't matter.

IMO, it's a better solution to simply go a different direction. Stop trying to make HP a logistical resource. Personally, I favor the idea of fatigue. Every rest, make a scaling Con save (or whatever). First rest, DC 5. Second rest DC 7, so on and so forth. Every time you fail, you gain a level of exhaustion. DC's only reset after a week of rest. A single long rest, while restoring HP and spells, and obviously reducing one level of exhaustion, doesn't reset the DC's.

Now, you have a nice little logistical mechanic that pushes the players to push forward and not rest after every encounter.

That is a current I am happy to row against.