D&D General (+) What Should Go in a D&D Book About Dungeons?

[Reynard]

Two groups of PCs enter two dungeons. The first group is in a dungeon where things are just raondomly thrown together. Each challenge is fun. However, nothing make sense. The second is in a dungeon that has a storyline behind it and where the DM has made efforts to make sure that the placement of everything works to support that story, and in the ecology of the dungeon.

These things aren't related. Like, at all. You can absolutely have a strong story to a dungeon despite it being a place where the regular rules are suspended. It's a collapsing demiplane crafted by a long dead wizard. It is the dreaming subconscious of a mad God. It is the ruins of the outpost of a long gone interdimensional technomagical civilization. It is the "mythic underworld" where the laws of fear outweigh the laws of physics. It's Wonderland.

You don't need to know where the kobolds poop for a dungeon to be compelling and powerful. And chances are, the more real you make it, the more boring the dungeon will be, because every interesting, dramatic thing you might want to do has to pass an arbitrary "realism" test.

Of course, I'm just defending and explaining my point of view. Folks should do what is fun and makes them happy.

 

[Zaukrie]

If you want a video game hack and slash style game - agreed, to an extent. But if you want a dungeon to feel 'real' to the players, it has to make sense.

Why bother making it feel 'real' (and yes, I know it is a fantasy game, but you know what I mean so let's not play that game)? Because it encourages players to treat it real which facilitates a lot of options.

Two groups of PCs enter two dungeons. The first group is in a dungeon where things are just raondomly thrown together. Each challenge is fun. However, nothing make sense. The second is in a dungeon that has a storyline behind it and where the DM has made efforts to make sure that the placement of everything works to support that story, and in the ecology of the dungeon.

In each dunegon the PCs encounter a room that has stairs rising up into the air that end in the middle of the room. Some aggressive orcs are in the room and they immediately attack the PCs. What are the reactions of the two groups?

The first group, from the random dungeon will look at that room, kill the orcs, loot and move on to the next area.

The second group will likely also kill the orcs and loot - but then they'll stop to ask why there is a staircase in the center of the room that goes nowhere. These PCs have a reason to explore and challenge the environment. They get a chance to have more in depth stories with more tools to build the story and build challenges around - because there are more ways to give significance to the elements put into the dungeon.

So, there's a right way to play?

 

[Bill Zebub]

If you want a video game hack and slash style game - agreed, to an extent. But if you want a dungeon to feel 'real' to the players, it has to make sense.

Why bother making it feel 'real' (and yes, I know it is a fantasy game, but you know what I mean so let's not play that game)? Because it encourages players to treat it real which facilitates a lot of options.

Two groups of PCs enter two dungeons. The first group is in a dungeon where things are just raondomly thrown together. Each challenge is fun. However, nothing make sense. The second is in a dungeon that has a storyline behind it and where the DM has made efforts to make sure that the placement of everything works to support that story, and in the ecology of the dungeon.

In each dunegon the PCs encounter a room that has stairs rising up into the air that end in the middle of the room. Some aggressive orcs are in the room and they immediately attack the PCs. What are the reactions of the two groups?

The first group, from the random dungeon will look at that room, kill the orcs, loot and move on to the next area.

The second group will likely also kill the orcs and loot - but then they'll stop to ask why there is a staircase in the center of the room that goes nowhere. These PCs have a reason to explore and challenge the environment. They get a chance to have more in depth stories with more tools to build the story and build challenges around - because there are more ways to give significance to the elements put into the dungeon.

There are a lot of opinions here…perfectly valid opinions, mind you…presented as objective facts.

This may be your experience, but it is by no means universally shared.

 

[Minigiant]

I think this is over rated. Dungeons don't need to make ecological sense. That's not what they are for.

I'll say it again..... This is a fantasy game, and not everything needs to make sense, and not everything has to reflect earth reality.

You can't always use a ticking clock. Not everything is a "fate of the world lies in the balance" (or whatever) situation.

Way too gamist a philosophy for me.

That’s a pretty narrow definition of ticking clock.

You are in the dungeon to save somebody from being sacrificed and you think you only have until midnight.

Something is chasing you.

The caves flood at high tide.

You have to return with the McGuffin by a certain time to succeed (all sorts of variants of this one)

Rivals are trying to beat you to the prize.

The monster always usually sleeps for X hours

There’s poison gas in the dungeon (Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan)

This is why I say the DMG should teach different styles.

The DMG should teach you how to populate a dungeon for great encounters, a great story, or a logical ecology.. Or randomly.

4 ways to pop a dungeon.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That’s a pretty narrow definition of ticking clock.

You are in the dungeon to save somebody from being sacrificed and you think you only have until midnight.

Something is chasing you.

The caves flood at high tide.

You have to return with the McGuffin by a certain time to succeed (all sorts of variants of this one)

Rivals are trying to beat you to the prize.

The monster always usually sleeps for X hours

There’s poison gas in the dungeon (Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan)

Not every situation is appropriate for a time crunch.

 

[Micah Sweet]

These things aren't related. Like, at all. You can absolutely have a strong story to a dungeon despite it being a place where the regular rules are suspended. It's a collapsing demiplane crafted by a long dead wizard. It is the dreaming subconscious of a mad God. It is the ruins of the outpost of a long gone interdimensional technomagical civilization. It is the "mythic underworld" where the laws of fear outweigh the laws of physics. It's Wonderland.

You don't need to know where the kobolds poop for a dungeon to be compelling and powerful. And chances are, the more real you make it, the more boring the dungeon will be, because every interesting, dramatic thing you might want to do has to pass an arbitrary "realism" test.

Of course, I'm just defending and explaining my point of view. Folks should do what is fun and makes them happy.

Every one of the examples you mentioned are ways to establish the dungeons "rules", and therefore give the players options to figure them out and use them to your advantage.

 

[Lanefan]

These things aren't related. Like, at all. You can absolutely have a strong story to a dungeon despite it being a place where the regular rules are suspended. It's a collapsing demiplane crafted by a long dead wizard. It is the dreaming subconscious of a mad God. It is the ruins of the outpost of a long gone interdimensional technomagical civilization. It is the "mythic underworld" where the laws of fear outweigh the laws of physics. It's Wonderland.

Yes; and all of those are examples of places which are clearly not the base setting where all the other adventuring takes place.

In one-off locations like these, sure, you can go as gonzo-crazy as you like and it won't affect a thing in the greater setting. They can make a fine change of pace, and serve to keep theplayers on their toes.

But I think most of us are talking about dungeons that are a part of the base setting and located on the game world - the castle on the hill, the tombs beneath the swamp, the abandoned mines, etc. - and in sites like these the regular rules would, one might think, mostly hold sway.

That said, in this hypothetical book about dungeons devoting a few pages to ideas around designing gonzo or fun-house or otherwise-bizarre dungeons would seem to make sense.

 

[CreamCloud0]

These things aren't related. Like, at all. You can absolutely have a strong story to a dungeon despite it being a place where the regular rules are suspended. It's a collapsing demiplane crafted by a long dead wizard. It is the dreaming subconscious of a mad God. It is the ruins of the outpost of a long gone interdimensional technomagical civilization. It is the "mythic underworld" where the laws of fear outweigh the laws of physics. It's Wonderland.

You don't need to know where the kobolds poop for a dungeon to be compelling and powerful. And chances are, the more real you make it, the more boring the dungeon will be, because every interesting, dramatic thing you might want to do has to pass an arbitrary "realism" test.

Of course, I'm just defending and explaining my point of view. Folks should do what is fun and makes them happy.

i think the point they were getting at is there's a difference between 'this dungeon doesn't have any logic to why it is filled with random monsters and unstructured architecture because i the GM didn't bother to think about those things when designing it, i just put things in it for them to be there' and 'this dungeon is filled with random monsters and unstructured architecture because of genuine X, Y and Z lore reasons* (like being a crumbling demiplane or the subconcious of a mad god)'

edit: *i think i worded this second section not entirely correctly to what i meant: 'this is dungeon built either logically or randomly but with intent and deliberation put into it's creation'

 

[TheSword]

I’ve always liked the idea of an organized lived in dungeon having alert stages like DEFCON.

Unaware - PCs get an advantage on stealth and perception tests to spot jnhabitants

Alert - Standard rules apply - but monsters may change locations

Inflamed - Monsters use certain items and will actively search for PCs. Move in bigger groups, take precautions like locking doors.

Collapsing - monsters know that major leaders are dead are likely to parley, flee or surrender in small groups.

Depending on the size of the dungeon this might be all the inhabitants or in large dungeons one pocket of foes. Some rules and advice for how to apply this could be good.

 

[Reynard]

Yes; and all of those are examples of places which are clearly not the base setting where all the other adventuring takes place.

In one-off locations like these, sure, you can go as gonzo-crazy as you like and it won't affect a thing in the greater setting. They can make a fine change of pace, and serve to keep theplayers on their toes.

But I think most of us are talking about dungeons that are a part of the base setting and located on the game world - the castle on the hill, the tombs beneath the swamp, the abandoned mines, etc. - and in sites like these the regular rules would, one might think, mostly hold sway.

That said, in this hypothetical book about dungeons devoting a few pages to ideas around designing gonzo or fun-house or otherwise-bizarre dungeons would seem to make sense.

That was my point: dungeons are an otherworld. Or,I think they are best used as otherworlds, because the moment you start trying to make a dungeon work with regular world rules, it falls apart. It doesn't have to be as explicit as I was saying -- those examples were just to counter the idea that only realism could give dungeons a consistent story. But if you want a place where a bunch of banditsive alongside a tribe of hyena-men, just around the corner from the cursed blood fountain where the vampiric mist rules, with bizarre mechanical traps between, you have to suspend disbelief and the rules.