The Spycraft method to Dungeons-what do you think?

[Hjorimir]

This is actually a rather interesting idea and one I wouldn't be too quick to discount actually. I'm always looking for ways to streamline my adventures while at the same time not inhibiting the freedom of choice my players have.

I don't own Spycraft, so I don't know the specifics of how this would work. I think a friend of mine has it though, so I will take a peek at his books when I get a chance to.

 

[punkorange]

How about going one step further; streamline the entire dungeon into one roll.

DM: The Caves of Chaos stand before you. If you choose to enter, roll a party level check. This dungeon is DC 11.

*clatter-clatter*
Player1: 18! Yee-ha, we beat that dungeon easy! How much XP and treasure did we get?

How's that for getting a lot done in one sitting?

players make a few d20 rolls.
DM: So you guys have travelled the endless sea slaying the legendary sea monster, ventured beneath the ancient's forge once again binding the elemental god of fire, destroyed the seven kingdoms of the fallen thrones, and restored peace to a war-torn nation. It's only 6:30, what now?

 

[Hjorimir]

I guess it is worth mentioning that I tend to design dungeons that may have many unihabited rooms or sections to give a sense of size and age. It also helps me isolate encounters in a more realistic manner. A lot of old-school D&D modules have so much population density it's hard to imagine a single fight not alerting every last encounter throughout the area.

The downside to this is that you can chew up valuable time during a session as the PC wander about. Granted, there is always a good opportunity for a random encounter or some tidbit of interesting lore hidden in these areas, but that has to be tempered with some action as well.

Anyway, I find the concept to be at least interesting.

 

[Joshua Randall]

One technique I have used:

* I create some encounters.
* I tell the party "You enter the castle and, based on your intel, you make your way to the guardroom, avoiding the pit trap that you know is on the way."
* I use one of the encounters ("Guardroom #1").
* The PCs move on. I gloss over the journey until they reach another encounter area ("Guardroom #2", "Innocent Bystander Wandering By", or whatever).
* Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[JimAde]

This is a variant of the "flowchart" approach to dungeon design. In that model, you don't map out the details, just the encounters and which encounters can lead to which others. The physical layout details are glossed over and this works well for Hjorimir's example of a large, sparsely-populated dungeon (Moria, for example).

I think the Spycraft system has a place in D&D for those cases when you are trying to do a "modern-style" infiltration. If you're trying to rob the dukes treasure vault, you really don't care where his privy and arboretum are, after all.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I've used this before, and the players enjoyed it. Then again, the campaign was more about unbalanced characters interacting with each other and uncovering the occult underground (modern-day, similar to Unknown Armies), and so a lengthy "lab crawl" would have been jarringly different in tone to the rest of the game.

One thing I find that makes this approach interesting is to tie in character's personal issues into the abstraction. For instance, one PC enlisted the help of his Girl Friday assistant for research help, which led to a romantic entanglement between the two of them, and her showing up on a later mission in a way that put her into danger. It made the whole "roll to see how well you research the target" thing personal, and had ramifications that went on for many sessions.

 

[Bobitron]

Hi there, Gundark.

To be honest, I never liked adventures where you go into a dungeon just to clear it. I don't mind a crawl once in a while, but only if there is a clear goal. I'm a Spycraft lover, so I think this could be a good thing. This method could streamline all that time and get to the meat of the adventure.

 

[Hjorimir]

Is there any chance these rules are OGL and somebody has a source for me to look at?