Published persistent mega-dungeons

[Philotomy Jurament]

I would think Rappan Athuk and Ptolus might qualify.

Those are both really big dungeons, but have a lot of what I think of as "lair style" design about them. For example, they tend to be pretty dense (not a lot of empty space) and often have smaller levels and fewer "paths" than I think is ideal for a mega/campaign dungeon.

I believe Rappan Athuk started out as a 1e AD&D dungeon, and only went to the first Temple of Orcus (level three or four, IIRC). At that time, it was very much in the vein of Temple of Elemental Evil (a big dungeon with a lair-style design philosophy). For 3e, it was greatly expanded, of course.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Maure Castle has been published a couple of times over the years; I think it qualifies.

I wouldn't include Maure Castle, either. Like some of the others, it's very cool (one of my favorites), but too small and focused for repeated campaign play, in my opinion. Rob's big campaign dungeon is El Raja Key, which I don't believe has been published.

When we had the megadungeon q/a panel at North TX RPG Con, this subject came up. A lot of it depends on how you're defining your terms. If megadungeon is just a really big dungeon, then there are plenty of published examples. However, if you're talking about a campaign dungeon that supports long term repeat play, possibly with multiple PC groups, then the examples are few and far between. Also, even the term "campaign dungeon" is a little loose, because it's possible to play a perfectly good "campaign" with big "lair style" dungeons, especially if you're looking at a campaign more like an "adventure path" that takes the PCs from 1st to X level. My view of a campaign is separate from the adventure path: it's more of an ongoing setting with a timeline and such, and it can span multiple PCs' careers and include the actions of multiple groups.

So my idea of a campaign dungeon includes the concept that it should support multiple levels of play, and that it should be able to support more than one group rising through their PC levels, and that it should be large and open ended enough to support all that without becoming empty and "beaten." That means you'll need very large levels for the first few levels, especially (where there's a lot more exploration and a lot more PC attrition). You'll also need a lot of dynamism, so that sections of the dungeon can repopulate, adapt, and change as play continues. The need for these elements is one reason why I like the mythic underworld concept for these kinds of dungeons. It provides some justification for the expansiveness and the weirdness and the changeability that makes a campaign-style dungeon viable and interesting, without just throwing the ideas of ecology, purpose, and verisimilitude out the window.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

The Blackmoor Dungeon is in The First Fantasy Campaign, published by Judges Guild in 1980. I'm not sure if it would count as a mega-dungeon by today's standards though - 10 levels, between 14 and 50 rooms on each level. The descriptions are very minimal, which I believe was the case with Greyhawk too, originally.

The First Fantasy Campaign Blackmoor dungeon is one of the published examples that best matches what I think of as a campaign-style megadungeon. (Although I still think the upper levels are a bit small.)

What I've seen of Gary's black-binder Greyhawk dungeon has a similar very minimal key. The key to my Cromlech Tor dungeon is also minimal -- little more than a collection of notes, although it has expanded as play has continued and I add details to areas that PCs are visiting.

I think one of the reasons that Castle Greyhawk was never published is because of the tension between the minimal key and the perceived needs of a published module. This was also apparently a critical point of disagreement between Gary and Rob when Castle Zagyg was being worked on. Rob wanted to present the original material as-is, and annotate it, much like he did with the Greyhawk levels and sublevels he owned. For example, in The Original Bottle City (which was a Castle Greyhawk sublevel) he published an actual scan of his hand-drawn map, and transcription of the original key, plus his commentary and annotations. Gary didn't want to do that, preferring to create an expanded and much more detailed version based on his originals. I suspect he thought buyers would like that better and would be less likely to feel "cheated." Personally, I thought Rob's approach was cool, and is how I would've liked Castle Greyhawk to have been published: warts, minimal key, and all.

 

[Ariosto]

If you're using "mega-dungeon" to mean what OD&D called "a good dungeon", then it cannot be published. The point is that it is not persistent! It is an ever changing process.

What's to explore if it's exactly the same as Dave's dungeon, and Don's, and Mike's, and Pete's, and however many others one has mapped already?

At best, you get a representation of how the dungeon was at a moment some time ago.

It's going to be at least as long ago as it took the DM to write down and translate all the stuff that for his own use need merely be in his head or in shorthand.

 

[rogueattorney]

While Gygax never published Castle Greyhawk in whole, a number of products he did publish were portions of it.

Isle of the Ape and the two Alice in Wonderland modules are the first two to come to mind. I am NOT the Greyhawk expert, so anyone who can add to the list, feel free to chime in.

Temple of Elemental Evil is a portion of another one of Gygax's campaign dungeons.

I think Tom Moldvay's The Lost City is a good "outline" to start putting together your own megadungeon, and Carr's In Search of the Unknown is a good first two levels of a mega-dungeon.

Paul Jaquay's Caverns of Thracia is probably the best example of an expansive and extraordinarily well-fleshed out dungeon put into a digestible package. It gives a lot of the feel in a finite package.

I got the Ruins of Undermountain boxed set about 5 months ago. Frankly, I haven't had enough of a chance to review it to give my opinion on it. But it's worth mentioning, and someone who's more familiar with it might want to chime in.

 

[WizarDru]

Does "Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil" count? Yes, it's actually three or four dungeons, but once you get to the main dungeon, that seems like it would be pretty representative (complete with discussions of how to restock and alert levels and such).

 

[the Jester]

The Forbidden City (as in Dwellers of) is outdoors, but it is pretty classic mega-dungeon in style, too.

 

[Beginning of the End]

The Blackmoor Dungeon is in The First Fantasy Campaign, published by Judges Guild in 1980. I'm not sure if it would count as a mega-dungeon by today's standards though - 10 levels, between 14 and 50 rooms on each level. The descriptions are very minimal, which I believe was the case with Greyhawk too, originally.

A 3E version was also published with additional details (and alterations).

Those are both really big dungeons, but have a lot of what I think of as "lair style" design about them. For example, they tend to be pretty dense (not a lot of empty space) and often have smaller levels and fewer "paths" than I think is ideal for a mega/campaign dungeon.

I'd be very hard-pressed not to include Rappan Athuk in the category of campaign dungeon: It's not designed to fully explored. It fully supports multiple, goal-oriented delves. Its environs are well-conditioned to evolve and change in both the short-term and long-term. Et cetera.

(I may be biased because I actually used RA as a campaign tentpole dungeon.)

I get the desire to keep the "lairs" and "adventure-style locations" out of the category, but saying that every megadungeon has to look exactly like Castle Greyhawk is limiting to the form, IMO.

The dungeons beneath Ptolus are conceptually large enough to qualify, but they've never been published in sufficient detail to be considered a published megadungeon.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I'd be very hard-pressed not to include Rappan Athuk in the category of campaign dungeon: It's not designed to fully explored. It fully supports multiple, goal-oriented delves. Its environs are well-conditioned to evolve and change in both the short-term and long-term. Et cetera.

My main reasons for excluding RA are the size and density of the levels, and the fact that it doesn't support low-level play. I think the upper levels (especially) of a campaign-style dungeon are the ones that see the most exploration and play, and need to be expansive and offer empty space and breathing room, as well as many caches of low-level treasure to support multiple groups and PC attrition (i.e. "wasted" or "lost" XP points due to PC deaths). Rappan Athuk's upper levels are just too small and too dense to support that kind of play, in my opinion. I'm not saying you couldn't run a campaign around RA, or that it isn't a good dungeon. It just doesn't have some of the elements that I consider prominent for the persistent, campaign-style design.

(FWIW, I ran RA, too, when I was running 3e. I had a good time with it. I think Necromancer Games released some of the better "old schoolish" 3e modules: RA, Tomb of Abysthor, and Demons & Devils are probably my three favorites, from them.)

I get the desire to keep the "lairs" and "adventure-style locations" out of the category, but saying that every megadungeon has to look exactly like Castle Greyhawk is limiting to the form, IMO.

I wouldn't say that a persistent, campaign-style dungeon must look like Castle Greyhawk, but I do think that there are certain elements that such dungeons have in common. Of course, my personal "definition" and its list of essential elements isn't definitive or authoritative: it's just my personal definition.

It probably also has something to do with my view of the "campaign." As I mentioned in the other thread, I view the campaign from a pretty broad scope that spans more than just one group or the careers of a handful of PCs.

 

[rogueattorney]

I wouldn't say that a persistent, campaign-style dungeon must look like Castle Greyhawk, but I do think that there are certain elements that such dungeons have in common. Of course, my personal "definition" and its list of essential elements isn't definitive or authoritative: it's just my personal definition.

If I were to try to boil the "defining characteristics" to the bare minimum, I'd say...

1. It's got to be big. Duh. But the size should be expansive. It is too big to be "conquered." There is always somewhere new to go and explore. The players getting lost should be a real danger, as should running out of supplies (esp. food and light sources).

2. There should be a clear dividing line between "dungeon" and "rest of the world." There can be (and probably should be) multiple passages between "dungeon" and "rest of the world," but it should generally be fairly clear to the players that they are making that passage.

3. There should be distinct levels - layers or regions of the "dungeon" - by which the players can choose their difficulty and mark their progress. There should be multiple methods of traversing from level to level and there should be occasional means by which the players can involuntarily wind up on levels beyond their aim, so long as it become obvious fairly immediately that they've done so. ("Oh my God! We've wandered down to the 6th level!!!")