The Lost Art of Dungeon-Crawling

There is a certain type of adventure that in recent years seems to have fallen out of popularity: dungeons.

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

"I Look Up!"​

The release of several old D&D modules got me looking at some of these old original adventures, and they are quite eye-opening on the subject of dungeon design. These are the first games of D&D we played and while some are a little dated, it's easy to see why they kept us playing. While almost everything in those adventures was dangerous, there was magic and mystery in the rooms you found. There were rooms with strange orbs suspended from the ceiling; mysterious indoor gardens full of medicinal plants, poison and monsters; ghostly feasts that share a tragic history; and mysterious keys guarded with fiendish traps.

I think I know why dungeons fell out of vogue. Way back in the early 80s we discovered city adventuring. Modules then became quests or investigations across a cityscape full of NPCs and role-play opportunities with all manner of details and cultures. This new way of gaming outside a maze opened a whole new sandbox. This change in adventure design opened new vistas for adventurers, but crowded out the traditional dungeon crawl as a result.

A Return to Form​

Luckily, in recent years we have seen a more interesting return to dungeons. More designers are coming back to them and trying to break the myth. Mork Borg has its share and a other ‘old school’ games have sought to blow the dust off the idea of raiding underground facilities. Its fun to dive into these lairs once again, and a simple diversion from what has become the usual kind of game. While I’m certainly more on the side of narrative play and character interaction, sometimes it is nice to know that you just need to pick a door rather than work out the villain’s plot and craft an elegant plan (that one of the players may just ignore anyway).

If you are thinking of crafting a dungeon of your own, here's a few pointers.

Give the Place A Reason​

Whether it is an old ruin or an underground laboratory, make sure the dungeon has a reason to exist and some sort of history. A hole in the ground isn’t very interesting so give it a back-story, even just a small one. It might be a tomb, an old ruin creatures have taken over or a lab where magic went wrong. It need not be especially clever, just as long as you can place it in your setting.

A Dungeon Need Not Be an Actual Dungeon​

What you are creating is a place full of rooms linked with doors and corridors, so it need not be underground. A house or a castle is basically the same, as is a sky city, large airship, underwater citadel or even a walled in town (put a roof on real world Venice and you have an epic dungeon).

Don’t Construct It with Only One Path​

When you are making a lot of cool stuff it is very tempting to make sure none of it gets missed. But you should avoid the temptation for having only one path through the dungeon that takes in every room. If the player characters miss out rooms 34-48, you can use them in the next adventure. Nothing is wasted. But if you insist they follow one path you are ruining the fun of exploring a dungeon and taking away the agency of choice. If you offer several different paths, when they enter the room of certain death you can point out with a clear conscience that they didn’t have to open the black door with the skull on the front.

Corridors Are Rooms Too​

Don’t reserve encounters just for rooms. They can happen anywhere in the dungeon, in corridors, on stairwells; anywhere the player characters don’t expect one.

Add Some Mystery Not Just Monsters​

While you will need a few monsters to fight to gain some treasure, put in traps and just weird stuff too. Not everything need be deadly, just something weird to make the player characters think can be fun too, if only to cross a room (the Crystal Maze will be a big help here). With magic in the world you can put some very odd places in a dungeon. Just imagine something that would look strange and enticing when they open the door and then figure out what it does. It might be a room full of glass spheres, a garden with odd looking plants, a table set for a feast with only statues as guests. The weirder the room the more the player characters will be intrigued.

Make Sure There Are A Variety of Encounters​

This relates to the above; don’t rely on one sort of encounter. Make sure you have a mixture of traps, monsters, weird rooms and role play encounters. Try to avoid having the same type of room twice in a row if you can.

Don’t Skimp on the Role-Play​

Even dragons might chat; just because it is a dungeon doesn't mean there are opportunities to role play. Trapped creatures, intelligent monsters under a curse or a contract and even the odd guard might be talked to as easily as fought. You can let the player character make this decision, by who they choose to attack on sight. But remind them that they can talk their way out of situations as well.

Make Every Door Worth Opening​

If you do the job right, each door the player characters come across will fill them with a mixture of fear and anticipation. What lies beyond this door, a trap, a fearful death, untold riches or wild magic? If a room or encounter doesn’t’ feel that interesting to you, cut it from your dungeon. Maybe consider it a little and use it later on when you’ve made it work better. A dungeon need not be a sprawl, and a shorter one has the advantage of potentially allowing the player characters to escape and try another one some other day.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Unless the characters can walk through walls, they can't pick a random direction and start walking in a dungeon. You can pick a random direction and start walking in a forest or desert. The enclosed nature of the dungeon limits options. It also happens to focus play through those limited options. Which would be great, if those limited options weren't almost always combat focused. There's also the question of what makes sense in a dungeon vs what makes sense in a wilderness. A wandering merchant could make sense in a wilderness, a wandering merchant would be a lot harder to make sense in a dungeon. Monster ecology and all that.

I have an outline for a forest dungeon I actually created to teach a new friend of mine about Dungeons, and about how learning to create them is really just learning to structure adventure content in general, as a comparison to the earlier slides which had traditional walled dungeons. In it, I have a mechanic where leaving a trail can allow the party to navigate to the other locations (rooms, basically, although some of them were mini dungeons in their own right) in the forest in a non sequential fashion, but in order to do so, they have to pass survival checks, or end up someplace else, run into tough monsters, and etc (this was a rough outline, so it was just phrased as an example). Its such a small mechanic to add for these 'you can off-road' situations that off-roading is hardly disqualifying for a 'forest' as dungeon scenario.

In my case, it was actually inspired by Mirkwood in The Hobbit, and Gandalf's warning not to go off the trail.

Edit: In fact if anyone is interested, here's the rough and dirty notes for that lesson, the forest is slide 5

 

[Doctor Futurity]

Respectfully, I don't think dungeons have fallen out of fashion at all. For 5E there are Princes of the Apocalypse, the Underdark in Out of the Abyss, Tales from the Yawning Portal, Tomb of Annihilation, Dungeon of the Mad Mage. In the OSR there are tons and tons of dungeons, plus older D&D products from the D&D classics.

This here. I think maybe some groups (such as the OP) may have moved away from it, but I actually have found myself leaning hard into dungeon type environments for the last year+ as they are easier to run on Roll20.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

What is rule format for "the procedures for a dungeon crawl?" (aside from morale, I guess which I only ever used briefly and discarded for just my sense of what kind of behavior makes sense based on what I know about the creatures and context and never seemed unique to dungeon-delving to me)

I have played every edition of D&D at least once and am having trouble remembering the rules for these "procedures." Exploring dungeons have basically remained the same in my games except for the kinds of dice you roll and what they might be called for the equivalent of perception check or looking for secret doors, etc. . .

D&D 3.5 back in the day had particularly clear (and over abundant) rules for dungeon delving. Pathfinder 2E has a really good section on this as well.

That said, I actually think D&D 5E also handles it just fine, too, but maybe just a tad more loosely than its predecessors and competitors.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

While I agree that dungeons don’t have to be static locations, and usually aren‘t when they’re being run by an experienced and creative DM, I do have to agree that published dungeons rarely include dynamic events. Other than some notes that faction A is in a struggle with faction B over location X, and the occasional details of how an organized group responds to repeated forays by PCs, dungeon write-ups are largely inert.

I‘d like to see more dynamic situations fleshed out, like the timing of the movements and relocation of monsters, detailed tactics around ambushes and hunting parties, big events that dramatically change the environment or the balance of power, and time-sensitive crisis that the PCs have to respond to. For whatever reason, whether its conservatism or just page count, designers have been reluctant to include that sort of content in published dungeons.

For example, Rappan Athuk has been republished many times, and each time we get more levels and more locations. To the point where nobody is ever going to use even half the content of the latest iteration. But there is still very little explanation of the bad guys, their agenda, tactics, alliances, and movements. All it would take is maybe 7-8 pages to provide some dynamic content and guidance. But instead we get 50 or 60 more rooms to tack into the 1,374 already in the dungeon.

This is both a feature and a bug of dungeons, stemming from the old school approach. For many, the design intent is to lay out the pieces and then let things happen organically in play.....traditionally modules that provided too much outlined exposition tended to not fare as well as those which provided the bare minimum because it would actually hamper gameplay (ime, ymmv). If the module tries to predict player interactions with NPCs too much, it can end up wasting precious space on outlining courses of action that overlook the one thing the module author never predicted but which the players do. If the module provides too much info for the GM on dungeon occupant behavior it makes it harder for the GM to riff on the cuff of the moment.

Again, YMMV but for me, I often stop and put the module down it it takes more than 1 page to provide some backstory, as that's usually already more info than is ever going to be necessary in actual play. In fact I love the Goodman Games DCC approach as they have a severe economy of design, focusing on just enough info to hint at the dynamics of a dungeon without overwhelming the GM with too much information.

I think the antithesis of this approach can be seen in 4E era dungeons, which were by and large full of carefully scripted and encounter-balanced events, due at least in part to the need for that edition to have to provide battle maps and associated details. Once you're in on laying it all out on maps and minis, it starts to feel like a waste if a fight doesn't happen soon, essentially.

 

[overgeeked]

I have an outline for a forest dungeon I actually created to teach a new friend of mine about Dungeons, and about how learning to create them is really just learning to structure adventure content in general, as a comparison to the earlier slides which had traditional walled dungeons. In it, I have a mechanic where leaving a trail can allow the party to navigate to the other locations (rooms, basically, although some of them were mini dungeons in their own right) in the forest in a non sequential fashion, but in order to do so, they have to pass survival checks, or end up someplace else, run into tough monsters, and etc (this was a rough outline, so it was just phrased as an example). Its such a small mechanic to add for these 'you can off-road' situations that off-roading is hardly disqualifying for a 'forest' as dungeon scenario.

In my case, it was actually inspired by Mirkwood in The Hobbit, and Gandalf's warning not to go off the trail.

Edit: In fact if anyone is interested, here's the rough and dirty notes for that lesson, the forest is slide 5

Right. And that looks cool. I understand that "dungeon" and "wilderness" and "town" and "city" are interchangeable in that they all start as blank spots for the DM to put content. That's not my hangup with dungeons. And I understand that getting from one chunk of content can largely be hand-waved and/or trivial (if the DM wants them to be). Again, not my issue with dungeons. Though I'm sure there's an in-depth and enlightening series of Alexandrian blog posts about getting from one bit of content to the next.

With pointcrawls or dungeoncrawls the DM has decided what's where and decided which way you can go, and has typically built in things that hard stop you from doing something else. See my comment above about PCs generally not being able to walk through walls. Though I prefer something like a properly open world wilderness or hexcrawl for the freedom of choice, even that isn't my issue with dungeons. And yes, I'm one of those players and DMs who utterly hates the illusion of choice. If the town is to the east and the party goes to the west...only to discover the same town that's supposed to be to the east...ugh.

And with all due respect to Mr. Kuntz, he's not the one designing the dungeons TSR, Wizards, Paizo, etc have put out over the years. I'm sure his would be better. But that's not the point. The point is, the vast majority of published dungeons focus on almost nothing but combat and are, frankly, crap. I also have zero knowledge of what most other groups / DMs do at their tables. So if DMs out there are having all these amazing experiences with dungeoncrawls, that's great. Someone please publish some good ones so the rest of us can enjoy them. If they're so mindblowingly awesome then I'm sure there's more than a bit of cash inevitably coming your way. But so far, I've been stuck with the published variety of dungeoncrawls.

Going back to the beginning of the hobby, there's what...four...five...maybe six really well-done dungeoncrawls? Well done here meaning they're more than just hack-and-slash and more potential for interaction with NPCs than simply playing one faction against another. The overwhelmingly vast majority of published dungeoncrawls are 95% combat and interaction is limited to playing factions against each other. After 37 years that's boring. Hell, it was already boring when I was 12. Hack-and-slash play is about the most boring thing you can do with a role-playing game. Most dungeoncrawls focus exclusively on hack-and-slash play.

Though I expect going back to earlier editions' style of play with a focus more on XP for treasure and combat as war instead of XP for killing monsters and combat as sport would go a long way to make even the most boring and straightforward dungeoncrawl more interesting and exciting to play.

 

[Rob Kuntz]

Right. And that looks cool. I understand that "dungeon" and "wilderness" and "town" and "city" are interchangeable in that they all start as blank spots for the DM to put content. That's not my hangup with dungeons. And I understand that getting from one chunk of content can largely be hand-waved and/or trivial (if the DM wants them to be). Again, not my issue with dungeons. Though I'm sure there's an in-depth and enlightening series of Alexandrian blog posts about getting from one bit of content to the next.

With pointcrawls or dungeoncrawls the DM has decided what's where and decided which way you can go, and has typically built in things that hard stop you from doing something else. See my comment above about PCs generally not being able to walk through walls. Though I prefer something like a properly open world wilderness or hexcrawl for the freedom of choice, even that isn't my issue with dungeons. And yes, I'm one of those players and DMs who utterly hates the illusion of choice. If the town is to the east and the party goes to the west...only to discover the same town that's supposed to be to the east...ugh.

And with all due respect to Mr. Kuntz, he's not the one designing the dungeons TSR, Wizards, Paizo, etc have put out over the years. I'm sure his would be better. But that's not the point. The point is, the vast majority of published dungeons focus on almost nothing but combat and are, frankly, crap. I also have zero knowledge of what most other groups / DMs do at their tables. So if DMs out there are having all these amazing experiences with dungeoncrawls, that's great. Someone please publish some good ones so the rest of us can enjoy them. If they're so mindblowingly awesome then I'm sure there's more than a bit of cash inevitably coming your way. But so far, I've been stuck with the published variety of dungeoncrawls.

Going back to the beginning of the hobby, there's what...four...five...maybe six really well-done dungeoncrawls? Well done here meaning they're more than just hack-and-slash and more potential for interaction with NPCs than simply playing one faction against another. The overwhelmingly vast majority of published dungeoncrawls are 95% combat and interaction is limited to playing factions against each other. After 37 years that's boring. Hell, it was already boring when I was 12. Hack-and-slash play is about the most boring thing you can do with a role-playing game. Most dungeoncrawls focus exclusively on hack-and-slash play.

Though I expect going back to earlier editions' style of play with a focus more on XP for treasure and combat as war instead of XP for killing monsters and combat as sport would go a long way to make even the most boring and straightforward dungeoncrawl more interesting and exciting to play.

I understand your frustration. But I again stress that all of these home-designed addies, if and where they exist, are designed for specific campaigns, with world, regional, local specific information. So requesting that folks publish them is, well, odd. Like my GH Sewers and Catacombs. It was meant for our (Gary and my) campaign, so there's no comprehensive worth in even publishing it, you see, except for those GH purists out there or for a study, all pretty much minimal avenues. I really believe that people have to approach this like a generic product that can be plopped anywhere. Or maybe like Hussar indicated, more example for FR or the like.

And even though I had started Maure Castle and did 3 initial installments for Paizo (and one other I did as a free farewell to MC, Warlock's Walk) it's now but another partially published example of this type held by WotC. This megadungeon had more stories and twists and turns than you could imagine, Right. I do not (currently) publish adventures through Paizo or WotC, but I've created about 22-23? to date elsewhere and one for TSR (not counting Barrier Peaks contributions).

I really believe that the younger designers should be encouraged to re-explore this avenue by using the best from the past and present to recapture its grandness and then to keep mining its design territory. The dungeon concept hasn't lost its glory; it just needs an intelligent and sustained shot in the arm by adherents willing to go the extra mile for it.

 

[Reynard]

@overgeeked I think you are asking for something that is a little nonsensical. You want the publisher to create a dungeon adventure that suits your group perfectly. That's not what dungeons or any other setting can do. No one but you knows what is perfect for your group. It doesn't matter if it is a dungeon, a city or a dark forest: all a designer can do is give you a well thought out, interesting, challenging, malleable locale you can use for the adventures YOU design for your group.

Also I don't buy the idea that dungeons are inherently filled with the illusion of choice. Nor do I buy that the open hexcrawl necessarily offers more MEANINGFUL choice: everyone's time is limited and no one can design infinite choices. If you are going to rely on random encounter tables in the hexcrawl to call it infinite, you can do the same thing with a random dungeon generator. If your problem is with the idea that you are presented with an intersection that goes left or right and you are upset because you can't go forward, all I can say is that just because you have an empty choice doesn't mean you have a meaningful one.

There's nothing wrong with preferring wilderness hexcrawls to dungeon delving but it isn't inherently better or more free. It usually comes down to the GM regarding how "free" any structure is, not the structure itself.

 

[Lanefan]

Oh no, please god no. This is the worst kind of role playing. It may be an entertaining dalliance to the type of people who enjoy it, but its utterly dismaying to the rest of the party that are subjected to it. Reverse PvP. I’m aware it can be endless, it’s the gaming equivalent of pus.

Disagree completely. 'Nuff said there.

If given a choice between a soap opera and an adventure story. I’d choose treasure island every time.

To read or watch, yes. To actually roleplay as a participant, give me both at once.

 

[Rob Kuntz]

There's nothing wrong with preferring wilderness hexcrawls to dungeon delving but it isn't inherently better or more free. It usually comes down to the GM regarding how "free" any structure is, not the structure itself

Or, as the architect would say, "Here's the structure. Appoint as you see fit."

 

[Lanefan]

I think you’re confusing soap opera with romance.

Given as one almost inevitably leads to the other (in either order!) there's little to confuse.