When "fun" just isn't enough.

[Reynard]

This will remove some of the 'dungeon survival' fun from the game. Mostly because characters will survive more things and are expected to last in the long-term. Also because characters won't become super-powerful and able to negate most dangers with a flick of a wand (which is about being able to 'beat' a dungeon more than about saving the day). Traps won't be as instantly deadly (rust monsters won't eat everything all at once, no Ear Seekers, etc.). Characters will live longer, because they're heroes, not survivalists.

Which is all very unfortunate. In every edition prior to 3.5+, I was able to run any kind of game I wanted with little to no rules tweaking and still making use of much of the source material. But these last couple years have shown that the Des&Dev department of WotCehas clear ideas about what is fun (i.e. what will sell to the most people) and with 4E they have decided to actively excise those things. "Dungeon Survival" is, to me, more fun than being a summer-blockbuster action hero. Apparently, I am wrong.

 

[shilsen]

"Dungeon Survival" is, to me, more fun than being a summer-blockbuster action hero. Apparently, I am wrong.

Nah. You're right about it being more fun for you. You'd be wrong if you thought that it was more fun for everyone, or that WotC was creating 4e to cater to it, but as long as you don't, you're good. And "Dungeon Survival" is something that it's really easy to focus on in the game right now (3.5e) with minimal or no house-ruling, so chances are you'll be able to do the same in 4e. And if you aren't, it's not as if you have to play it.

 

[Reynard]

And "Dungeon Survival" is something that it's really easy to focus on in the game right now (3.5e) with minimal or no house-ruling, so chances are you'll be able to do the same in 4e.

Between the end of vancian casting, constant self healing, the removal of "unfun" save-or-die/suck effects, the treatment of traps as terrain and the dungeon as an arena/gauntlet, I somehow doubt gritty dungeon survival is even considered as a playstyle appropriate to 4E.

And if you aren't, it's not as if you have to play it.

You're right about that.

 

[shilsen]

Between the end of vancian casting, constant self healing, the removal of "unfun" save-or-die/suck effects, the treatment of traps as terrain and the dungeon as an arena/gauntlet, I somehow doubt gritty dungeon survival is even considered as a playstyle appropriate to 4E.

At lower levels, however many resources the PCs may have, they're generally so fragile that gritty dungeon survival is easy to pull off even if the system's preferred playstyle is very different. In 3e you can threaten PCs up to about 5th lvl with orcs wielding sticks and rocks. Hell, I've threatened 10th lvl PCs with orcs wielding sticks and rocks, though admittedly the sticks and rocks had poo on them. They may be a little more resilient in 4e, but I seriously doubt that they're so resilient that you can't do gritty dungeon survival at low levels.

I've generally found that if you have a good grasp of the system, you can do all sorts of things that the system supposedly isn't designed for. My Eberron game, for example, breaks many of the boundaries that 3e is supposedly designed to work within. I don't do dungeon crawls at all. I don't award XP by the given formulae, and in fact don't award XP for anything done in-game. Instead of multiple encounters in a day which diminish PC resources by attrition, most of the time my PCs have 1 encounter a day and maybe 2, almost always against enemies that they are at least twice as strong as. The PCs are built with a point buy system more powerful than any in the DMG and have wealth well ahead of the amount recommended for their level. And I've basically taken death out of the game.

Yet with all of the above, we get together every session to have a damn enjoyable game and for the PCs to be constantly challenged and pushed all the way to the edge. If I can do that in 3e, I'm pretty sure I'll be able to do that in 4e too. Chances are you will be too, though since your aims and tastes are clearly very different from mine, you'll have to tweak different things than I will.

 

[Doug McCrae]

constant self healing

Source? Second wind is 1/day.

I don't see how you couldn't construct a very challenging dungeon environment in 4e. Just keep upping the levels of monsters and traps.

 

[Reynard]

Source? Second wind is 1/day.

I seem to recall a number of references to other healing abilities in the various playtest reports.

I don't see how you couldn't construct a very challenging dungeon environment in 4e. Just keep upping the levels of monsters and traps.

But "dungeon survival" isn't just about how many/tough the traps and monsters are. it is about managing limited resources, dealing with save-or-die dangers, exploring avenues that don't necessarily lead directly to the BBEG, scrounging for treasure, fighting off wandering monsters and all those other things. "Wandering monsters" are apparently out. "Traps" as we've known them are out. "Save or die" is out. The Dungeons Des&Dev article goes a long way toward redefining the dungeon as an arean and/or gauntlet.

I am sure there are lots of things that 4E will do very well, but gritty dungeon survival doesn't appear to be one of them.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

No rest for the wicked...

Between the end of vancian casting, constant self healing, the removal of "unfun" save-or-die/suck effects, the treatment of traps as terrain and the dungeon as an arena/gauntlet, I somehow doubt gritty dungeon survival is even considered as a playstyle appropriate to 4E.

It appears to me as if traps in 4E are not terrain, but more like a monster, but I might be wrong on that (or it varies depending on the kind of trap.)

The old-style "attrition-based" gritty dungeon survival may be done. But so far, most 4E playtest reports I read indicate that the individual fights are still pretty tough, with characters dropping right and left*. Admittedly, they are standing again after a few rounds, but that's only because in the end, someone survived to patch them up, and they weren't dropped dead, just unconcious...
If players know to get through a dungeon they will have to face mutliple of such encounters, they feel challenged. They feel like their very survival is threatened, because in each individual encounter, one of them could have died. Or all of them. The enemies have to get lucky only in one encounter - the PCs in every single one of them.

In the attrition-based style, players enjoy a little more safety - in the beginning - , because they know that it will take some time until their resources are mostly down. They know that it's unlikely (assuming good tactics and teamplay and a fair DM) that an individual encounter will cost them all their resources (or their life). Only at the end of the adventuring day they will face the real challenge, because their remaining resources are challenged, and only at this point they will figure out whether they were good enough in the previous encounters to have enough for this one.

The main difference will be pre 4E, people used to rest inside dungeons if there was any chance to make that possible. In 4E, this will no longer be neccessary, and the PCs will run for their life to get the fastest out of the dungeon then possible. (Assuming it's such a gritty and nasty one).
From a versimilitude point of view, I think I prefer the latter "strategy". Resting is reserved for wilderness travel or visits in settlements.


*) if you find any exaggerations in this post, you may keep them.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But "dungeon survival" isn't just about how many/tough the traps and monsters are. it is about managing limited resources, dealing with save-or-die dangers, exploring avenues that don't necessarily lead directly to the BBEG, scrounging for treasure, fighting off wandering monsters and all those other things. "Wandering monsters" are apparently out. "Traps" as we've known them are out. "Save or die" is out. The Dungeons Des&Dev article goes a long way toward redefining the dungeon as an arean and/or gauntlet.

I am sure there are lots of things that 4E will do very well, but gritty dungeon survival doesn't appear to be one of them.

Wandering Monsters: What are they?
1) random monsters in a dungeon you bump into?
2) monsters that attack the PCs while resting?
3) are they dungeon inhabitants that hear a nearby combat and come to aid their comrades?
I tend to believe I am missing something here, but if not, these seem to be nothing that could be avoided by 4E. ( maybe 2) if PCs rarely rest in dungeons or in the wilderness)

Save or Die dangers: What is your defining aspect of these? Is it that they add a random chance of death to the game? (In that case, 4E in fact seems to avoid that.) Or is it something else? The challenge of identifying a dangerous obstacle and avoiding it? (In that case, there are still possibilities. Just because someone doesn't outright kill you doesn't mean it's not wise to avoid it)

Exploration & Treasure Scrounging: I don't think that game rules have much effect on these. If you want to explore an area, you can always do it. As long as their are hidden areas with potential treasure, exploration is interesting.

Managing Limited Resources (over a longer period then one encounter): This definitely is something 4E seems to make more difficult.
Or not? There are still "per day" resources, and from R&C and the blog posts it appears to me as if next to anyone will have some valuable "daily resources". The question is whether they are valuable enough to be survival-dependent? How much can the healing abilities heal? Can you always be restored to full (or at least significant portion of your) hit points?
What other resources could exist for "dungeon survival".

 

[Doug McCrae]

I seem to recall a number of references to other healing abilities in the various playtest reports.

As far as we know, none of them are constant. As opposed to 3e which does have constant healing as soon as wands of CLW are available.

But "dungeon survival" isn't just about how many/tough the traps and monsters are. it is about managing limited resources

There will still be limited resources in 4e.

dealing with save-or-die dangers

Effectively there's no difference between SoD and lots of damage. Hence my point in the previous post about increasing the power of traps or monsters.

exploring avenues that don't necessarily lead directly to the BBEG

What about 4e makes this less likely than previous editions? Mike Mearls hasn't banned T-junctions.

In fact it should be more likely than 3e where short term buffs gave a strong incentive to rush from encounter to encounter, trying to complete the dungeon inside the min/level time limit.

scrounging for treasure

Why can't you scrounge for treasure in 4e?

fighting off wandering monsters and all those other things. "Wandering monsters" are apparently out.

Wandering monsters have been rightly regarded as implausible since the mid-80s or earlier but, as with every edition, how you use monsters is up to you.

"Traps" as we've known them are out.

They're going to be a bit more interesting. Instead of a single roll by the rogue followed by a saving throw versus damage they are going to be more complex, involving participation from more party members. I don't see the problem here.

 

[haakon1]

Wandering monsters have been rightly regarded as implausible since the mid-80s or earlier

Huh? It's more plausible that each monster only stays in its designated encounter area?