D&D General Taking the "Dungeons" out of D&D

[Reynard]

I realize that a lot of people play D&D without much if any dungeon exploration, so bear with me.

Many of the rules of D&D, including 5E, are artifacts of the dungeon exploration mode of play. The thing is, very little fantasy beyond D&D (and those things directly inspired by it) does dungeon exploration. Even the original inspirations for the dungeon were much less onerous than actual dungeon exploration. Vast Moria was basically a 5 room dungeon connected by a few skill challenges.

So, what does D&D look like if you presume that you will be emulating not dungeon crawls but Game of Thrones and The Wheel of Time or Lord of the Rings? What mechanical elements, specifically, need to change, be removed or added to make D&D a general fantasy RPG rather than a genre unto itself? And can you do that and still have the game*be* D&D.

A quick note: "Play another game" is not a helpful response. Nor am I asking you for advice on how I can make my game like this. I am just starting a conversation. We're just brainstorming for fun.

 

[bedir than]

I think Gritty Realism helps change the pacing necessary to emulate WoT/LotR. It's absurd to have 6-8 encounters in a day, without dungeons (or raiding a city where everyone is the enemy).

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The obvious starting point is with the basic assumptions of six encounters in a day. That's something which basically never occurs outside of a dungeon scenario.

Following up from that means addressing basically every aspect of resource management, especially Hit Dice and spell slots.

 

[Reynard]

The obvious starting point is with the basic assumptions of six encounters in a day. That's something which basically never occurs outside of a dungeon scenario.

Following up from that means addressing basically every aspect of resource management, especially Hit Dice and spell slots.

Milestone rests might be a quick and dirty solution. That is, if an adventure has 3 acts, the party gets a short rest after act 1 and a long rest after act 2, or something along those lines. I am not sure how you might do it with a more sandboxy approach, but that's a problem with the current system too.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Milestone rests might be a quick and dirty solution. That is, if an adventure has 3 acts, the party gets a short rest after act 1 and a long rest after act 2, or something along those lines. I am not sure how you might do it with a more sandboxy approach, but that's a problem with the current system too.

If you spread those milestones out over the course of months, sure, but it's liable to cause more problems than it solves. A mid-level spellcaster in D&D is expected to cast more spells in a single day than most fictional spellcasters will cast in their lifetime; addressing that issue would involve a vast reduction in total spell slots available (or just house ruling every class to use warlock mechanics). Hit Dice basically only exist to guarantee that anyone can survive a second encounter in a day, no matter how badly they were beaten in the first one; but such a mechanic is actively counter-productive in any game where you aren't forced into mandatory combat. It would take a lot of work to make this game work well outside of a dungeon scenario.

 

[aco175]

I never cared for a massive Greyhawk or Undermountain crawl, I'm even getting sick of playing Elemental Evil line with all the crawls. I like to have places to explore and a Moria may be only 5 rooms of encounters and challenges, but the description and feel is that it is massive. The players should feel like they can explore all they want even if the DM has only a few things planned and ready.

 

[Dausuul]

So, what does D&D look like if you presume that you will be emulating not dungeon crawls but Game of Thrones and The Wheel of Time or Lord of the Rings? What mechanical elements, specifically, need to change, be removed or added to make D&D a general fantasy RPG rather than a genre unto itself? And can you do that and still have the game*be* D&D.

Well, hold on now. Are we emulating "Song of Ice and Fire," or "Lord of the Rings," or "Wheel of Time?" Those are three very different styles of fantasy and they will require different elements.

The primary focus of "Song of Ice and Fire" is politics and intrigue, with a side order of realistic medieval warfare. Magic does exist, but it is extremely rare, and it is dangerous and unpredictable. Even professional spellcasters, like the warlocks of Qarth or the red priests, have little understanding of the powers they wield. An RPG along these lines would have well-developed social mechanics, gritty combat rules that emphasize martial skill over magic, and probably a mass combat system of some kind.

The primary focus of "Lord of the Rings" is a mythic clash of good and evil. Intrigue and war, while present, are mostly just a backdrop for spiritual conflicts--we are told repeatedly that Sauron cannot be overcome by force of arms. Instead, it is by the faith and virtue of the protagonists that he is defeated. I'm not sure how you would emulate that in an RPG; I think you'd need to junk the entire D&D model and look to story-driven systems to really recreate the feel of Tolkien's saga.

The primary focus of "Wheel of Time" is the breasts of the female characters... okay, okay, I'll quit snarking. The primary focus of "Wheel of Time" is conflicts among magic-wielders. Magic is very powerful, fairly controllable, and a lot of people can use it. Even the non-channeling protagonists get magic powers: Perrin's wolf-magic, Mat's luck and amulet, the supernatural gifts of the Warders. Anybody without magic is apt to end up in a supporting role. An RPG emulating WoT would have a very well-developed magic system and would give at least some magic to pretty much every PC.

 

[billd91]

As far as mechanics go, a number of people around here would be advocating for more robust mechanics for social interaction because that would likely be a larger proportion of the game than your typical dungeon crawl - but I honestly don't think it's necessary. I don't think there really needs to be any changes in mechanics in D&D - the change in focus from dungeons to bigger and broader issues and above-ground settings and politics mostly just involves a change in focus for the gameplay. It would still be D&D. Dungeons (and Dragons) are strictly optional.

 

[Greg Benage]

So, what does D&D look like if you presume that you will be emulating not dungeon crawls but Game of Thrones and The Wheel of Time or Lord of the Rings? What mechanical elements, specifically, need to change, be removed or added to make D&D a general fantasy RPG rather than a genre unto itself? And can you do that and still have the game*be* D&D.

I don't think any mechanics or rules need to change. Your game just might not engage all the dungeon-based resource-management systems and mechanics at all. If the PCs are supposed to figure out who killed Jon Arryn and why, none of that stuff (rests, Hit Dice, etc.) is really relevant to the challenges they'll face. You just don't use those systems.

Other things (such as detect thoughts and speak with dead), you will have to address, but these have nothing to do with dungeons.

(You also have to make sure you don't retcon the solution to your "mystery" in such a way that it makes the entire investigation plot extremely unsatisfying. I'd recommend not "plotting" a murder mystery by the seat of your pants.)

 

[Umbran]

I don't think there really needs to be any changes in mechanics in D&D - the change in focus from dungeons to bigger and broader issues and above-ground settings and politics mostly just involves a change in focus for the gameplay.

Yes, well, the things we NEED are like, oxygen, water, food. Beyond that, we are not all going to agree on what "need" really means. We don't actually NEED all the combat rules either. Have you tossed them out yet? No? Why not?

How about "should have", rather than "need"? You should have robust rules for the areas of play that you want the players to engage in. If you want them to swing swords and spells around in fights, you should have robust rules for that. And lo and behold, we have those.

If you want the players to engage with politics, social positioning, war, and interpersonal relations, you should have robust rules for that and... in D&D, we don't. We have hand-waving. There should be ways for them to plan tactics and have special abilities around persuasion and intimidation, for example. In general there should be feats and class abilities that relate to these areas of play. There should be rules for use of resources on larger scale than small squad battles. And so on.

If you don't have those rules, the players cannot reliably form cogent plans. The rules are their handles on how the game functions. If you don't give them rules, then they start to play the GM's personal quirks and tendencies as a set of rules. However, the GM's operation is generally a black box, which can be frustrating and unsatisfying.

Our rules systems help assure that players have reasonable and interesting things to do within the context of whatever the action is, which effectively helps make sure everyone gets a bit of spotlight time. No rules? Unless the GM is very attentive, the bulk of play is apt to go to the most personally persuasive player, which is kind of bogus. The GM should have tools that help them organize play in a way where spreading the action comes out of the process of play.