“Dungeons” are a major trope of RPGs, whether that means actual dungeons, goblin caves, bandit lairs, labyrinthine slums, office buildings, the bowels of a spaceship or a 9-dimensional dream-construct with walls of psychic energy and empathic locks. I’m getting into pretty vague territory here, and there are plenty of things that aren’t dungeons, so let’s aim for a loose definition. In general, a dungeon tends to involve:
- Isolation from the outside world, and being largely self-contained (often simply by being indoors or underground, but sometimes through being inside a pocket dimension or separated from the void of space by a foot of plasteel)
- Subdivision into discrete areas with different natures (great hall, bedroom, plasma lab, torture chamber, bridge, kitchen)
- Restricted movement of both NPCs and PCs between areas, and limited awareness of events in other areas (generally because of walls, doors and other obstacles)
- An unknown environment, which PCs have to explore to find information, items, creatures or simply a way out
- A fairly static environment, with the contents and inhabitants of rooms not changing much without intervention by the PCs
- Passive rather than proactive in interaction with the PCs, with PCs mostly initiating interactions (choosing where to explore, opening doors, fiddling with equipment, walking into armed guards) rather than responding to ongoing events. PCs maintain overall control of the pace and direction of their interaction (attacking a guard might attract reinforcements from the next room, but probably won’t bring the whole dungeon down on their heads)
I think there’s a meaningful distinction to make between dungeons like this and scenarios that take place in open environments (like cities and jungles), or that are based around events rather than locations (which may handwave locations and travel, or adjust them to keep events going smoothly).
Scenarios, even if they start out on a lonely forest road or in a cosy village, often boil down to investigating dungeons, either to kill something or to get something. Why? Partly I suspect it’s a matter of tradition; dungeons are the essence of the classic D&D scenario, plus it’s rooted in gritty picaresque adventuring stories full of raiding wizards’ towers, fighting through beast-infested caves and so on. John Carter of Mars and Star Wars have their fair share of dungeons too. It’s very natural to design and set up storylines based around a dungeon.
Another thing is that dungeons are a nice, contained environment for adventure. They offer a natural way to have groups of NPCs or enemies in close proximity and fairly static. Certain types excuse having a diverse array of creatures: the gloomy caves have stink mould, rats, three bandits evading the law, a band of goblin aescetics and a giant off-white slime. Others suit organised integrated sets of NPCs that interact, from the prison complex (guards and prisoners) to the palace (servants, guards, royals, messengers, petitioners, visitors...). They limit how far off-track the party can get, since it’s more natural to keep exploring the dungeon than to run off entirely, whereas in more open environments it’s easier to get distracted and leave the plot behind. Of course, a dungeon-crawling party might not do what you expect, but you probably won’t have to invent a dozen NPCs, an entire city and a new storyline on the spur of the moment. The containment also constrains the plot and the adventure, so there are natural endpoints available. They’re a natural for published scenarios because they have a clear starting point and a natural stopping point.
The thing is, dungeons aren’t necessarily a good fit for everyone. Sometimes it’s players aren’t that interested in exploring dungeons, or lose motivation, or the PCs always seem to be avoiding them. A couple of interrelated factors here are the specific players and the in-game party as a whole. I don’t pretend to be an expert here, this is just some ponderings I’ve scribbled down.
Players
In terms of players, dungeons are well suited to what Shannon classified as Action Heroes and Explorers. They’re usually full of challenges for Action Heroes to hurl themselves against, and events are mostly dictated by the players. There’s lots going on in a small area, so the PCs aren’t wandering across the land on quests, hoping some action kicks off soon. They tend to be fairly straightforward, so there’s no worry about sabotaging yourself by starting a fight with someone who turns out to be an important official or local guardian spirit, or having a gaggle of orphans turn up accusingly after you kill some guards. Meanwhile, Explorers have a constant and natural supply of New Stuff to see and interact with, more or less at their own pace.
Tacticians and Communicators don’t get such a good deal. Tacticians may well not consider the game worth the candle, and might prefer alternate strategies that avoid the whole “traipsing through an unknown, monster-ridden hole” business altogether. Communicators may find themselves starved of interaction. While dungeons often have a certain amount of peaceful NPC interaction, it’s generally limited and often in self-contained chunks that don’t have much effect on the rest of the dungeon. Being stuck in a dungeon limits opportunities to call in favours or external resources, and dungeon NPCs tend not to be especially deep or interesting because they’re not designed for socialising or long-term play. Either player, by following their inclinations, may simply skip large chunks of content, and wind up without much to do.
Party
The nature of the adventuring party is another thing to consider. It’s a bit of a nebulous thing, influenced by the classes (or equivalent) of PCs, their personalities and goals, and also by the backstory and aims of the whole party. The relationship and interaction between both PCs and players also plays a part. There are parties who see dungeoneering as an end in itself and perk up at the mention of a sinister cave, parties who freely follow quests or hooks that lead to dungeons, and parties who rein in the horses and look for another strategy.
Broadly speaking, I suspect that a party with a lot of combat or sneaky classes is going to be more dungeon-friendly. People tend to pick classes that suit their playstyle, and if you have three fighters and a couple of rogues, they’re probably looking to break some heads, thwart some traps and get some loot. I mean, they might be a trio of professional duellists and their escapologist friends, or three zealous pacifists who seek spiritual purity through combat drills accompanied by two con artists, but it’s less likely. The party’s skill-set also lends itself to dungeoneering (though the lack of healing or arcane magic could get awkward). A party like that is likely to be proactive in looking for trouble, and fairly quick to resort to combat and direct methods when the trouble starts.
In contrast, a party made largely of artistic bards, pompous wizards, scheming tricksters, finicky clerics or precept-declaiming monks might well not be so suitable. Characters like that are inclined to favour socialising over fighting, to avoid unnecessary conflict and look for ways to overcome the dungeon without getting their hands too dirty. Nothing wrong with those qualities, but they do make dungeoneering less suitable as a playstyle.
Similarly it’ll depend on the party background and backstory. A group of roaming adventurers in a gritty and selfish world might see a boding dungeon as an opportunity to get rich or powerful, and not need much more motivation or excuse. A boisterous group of thrill-seekers and self-appointed heroes might actively seek them out, a way to see new things, learn secrets and test their mettle. On the other hand, a set of royal knights on a quest for the king might see the dungeon as an obstacle between them and their goal, an annoying distraction, or even someone else’s problem entirely.
Any ideas?
So that’s a few thoughts on how dungeons and players and PCs interact, but no practical help. Thanks, me. What to do if dungeons don’t seem to be working out? Well, frankly I don’t know, but some things might work (in fact, I plan to try some things out). Shannon already made some very good points in Lacking Dungeon Endurance.
One obvious but difficult one would be, if your party and players don’t warm to dungeoneering, don’t use dungeons. It does leave you pretty limited though, and takes a huge proportion of pre-written scenarios or plots right out of the equation.
The other thing is to try and mix up. A dungeonesque adventure doesn’t have to be all dungeon all the time. Some lend themselves pretty obviously to variety, like the castle or spaceship I mentioned earlier; a lot of a castle’s inhabitants are not soldiers, so there’s plentiful opportunity to impersonate a guest and gossip, flirt with gardeners, grill librarians for information, and so on. The machinery and mechanisms of a spaceship can present physical danger, intriguing sources of information, or spare parts. The dream-construct might offer you valuable glimpses into the thoughts of the sleeping world, or visions of your childhood, or the opportunity to spend hours crafting beautiful things from the stuff of raw imagination (they won’t last; they never do). The sinister caves might turn out to be a scholar’s paradise, full of rare and fascinating fungi to collect, or the home of reclusive elemental beings who’ll shyly trade with the party.
Another thing is whether player and PC aversion to dungeons is related. It may be that the players of foppish elven aesthetes are perfectly happy to explore dungeons if their fop has a good reason to, in which case it’s down to the DM to think of ways to accomplish that. On the other hand, if the problem is the player just isn’t into dungeon crawling, they need to be motivated in some other way, or the DM could run a mix of game types so everyone gets some of what they like.
This is definitely something I need to think about before I resume the L&L game, but things are on hold for a while so I’ve got time. More research needed, I think.
I've gotta add that sometimes swapping the sub-genre will work. A dungeon can lend itself quite easily to mystery (what's it for?), investigation (what killed and raised all these undead), or survival horror (get out!), among just a few.
ReplyDeleteI hate dungeons, but I LOOOOVE survival horror and apocalyptic horror, which lends itself well to dungeon design, so sometimes all you need do is change up the aesthetics, vary the puzzles, and bingo!
Now I'm off to be super-duper-incestuous and link back to this cool article.
I think that the most important thing here is players and, perhaps more importantly, player expectations. (I'm not, for what it's worth, wild about categorising players for lots of reasons - different people want different things at different times, and even when people do want the same things they often want them in different ways and for different reasons).
ReplyDeleteAt the risk of sounding like a *complete* dickhead, I think you could make a good argument that a dungeon is actually a process rather than a place. That is, a dungeon is not really a big hole in the ground full of monsters and loot but rather that a "dungeon adventure" is an adventure characterised by area-by-area exploration of an unknown and hostile environment.
I tend to include a lot of dungeons in my D&D game, but I tend to design them in ways that minimise the things I personally dislike about dungeoneering. So floors tend to be quite small and the layout quite clear to minimise the room-by-rooming, and I tend to stop dungeon-building the moment I run out of ideas for stuff to put in it. I also (to bring things back to the trap posts further up) tend to avoid including traps because they slow things down too much.
I think I feel much the same way about dungeons as I feel about room-by-room investigations in Call of Cthulhu, for example. I quite like going into exciting new places and seeing exciting new things, but I have no investment at all in deciding whether I go left or right at a given junction.
I agree with you whole-heartedly. That's the kind of dungeon I'd like to delve in. At the risk of sounding like more of a dick, I tend to use the word 'dungeon' to describe old school monster + room = loot style of play. The way you describe dungeons is the kind of thing that I would enjoy.
DeleteI also agree with you about player categories being problematic even though I'm the one who made the above examples up. Like all models, its fundamentally wrong but for me it can provide a kind of shorthand so people can say 'This is the kind of game I like' or 'This is what I want to do right now'. Since its often difficult to describe what you want out of something, such terms can often help provide a framework to help a person describe their gaming needs.
I quite like dungeon-as-process. It's a pretty nice compact definition. That being said, I don't think it actually contradicts what I wrote, it seems more of a complementary view to me? One is sort of what it's physically like, and the other is how it works. I can't at the moment think of anything that fits one and breaks the other, but I'm sure there'll be something.
DeleteFWIW, I was throwing in Shannon's player categories because they seem like handy shorthands for preferences, even just in terms of what you want in that particular session, and borrowing someone else's seemed just as good as inventing my own. OTOH I could just have written out a couple of paragraphs of what dungeons offer and what they don't, which would have worked too.
One thing about dungeons in general is that there seems to be an idea they should be sprawling multi-level things, which don't really tend to exist except in actual military bases. So yes, small and reasonable seems the way forward. I mean, unless you're in a cave system full of spiders or something, rooms do tend to have obvious functions and there's usually some logic to the layout.
As a matter of interest, I know Dan doesn't like fiddly tracking and arbitrary decision points, and neither of you like completionist room-clearing and stacks of similar challenges, but what do you like about dungeon adventures?
Can you expand at all on the player expectations bit? I'm not sure if you're trying to make a separate point there, or if it's just part of the dungeon-as-process thought.
One is sort of what it's physically like, and the other is how it works.
ReplyDeleteMore or less, but I'd consider any adventure where I was (to be glib) expected to decide whether I turned left or right at a junction to be a dungeon adventure, even if it took place wholly outside. That said, I think the controlled environment is also a really important part of the whole thing.
What do you like about dungeon adventures?
Glib answer: Killing things and taking their stuff.
Less glib answer: The feeling of baiting evil in its lair/taking the fight to the enemy. Clearly defined goals. Perhaps paradoxically I *do* like the sense of exploration even if I often get bored with the reality of it. The controlled environment is really useful too.
Of these, controlled environment is the biggest advantage as a GM. To take an example from my recent D&D campaign, the players recently took out two groups of giants. The Frost Giants were in a huge castle on a cliff on the edge of a high mountain, so the players ... knocked the back wall of their castle down with a transmute rock to mud spell, then flew in under an invisibility spell and dropped things on the giants. The players were massively outnumbered but with high level spellcasting they completely dominated the tactical situation.
The Fire Giants were in a magical iron fortress underneath a volcano, and the players had a *much* harder time of it. They couldn't see inside to teleport in (which they could with an open keep and aerial scouting) so they had to rely on much riskier hit-and-run tactics.
They were both fun, but the conventional dungeon has serious strategic advantages.
Can you expand at all on the player expectations bit? I'm not sure if you're trying to make a separate point there, or if it's just part of the dungeon-as-process thought.
Basically I think that it's a mistake to treat player types and character types as separate. If I love dungeoncrawls then even if I'm playing a pampered Elvish princess with maxed out Diplomacy, I am probably *still* going to love dungeoncrawls. If I like intrigue and diplomacy, I am probably still going to love intrigue and diplomacy even if I am playing a hard-drinking dwarvish battle spelunker.
The other big thing is that I think players will often object to dungeoncrawls if they weren't expecting a dungeon-focused campaign (this sounds like it was Shannon's problem with the Crimson Wossname). If I've rolled my Bard with the express intent of throwing myself into the courtly politics of the kingdom of Knarf, and instead I find myself knee deep in Kobold dung, I'm going to get a bit narked.
Yeah, I think that was about it. In Crimson Throne it sets it up as a mixture of smaller dungeons with more complex issues surrounding people and city-wide events and then it goes into an outside dungeon crawl in the 4th book and then a massive castle dungeon crawl in the 5th.
DeleteAs for dungeons themselves, I'm just not that big on combat. For some reason, it never seems to resolve anything to me (even with the foe dead) and ends up feeling a bit repetitive. Having said that, I can be wowed with strange clues as to the locations' function, interesting tidbits of backstory about the villain or the location, and set piece battles.
I do like traps when they're interestingly done but they're hard to engage with because they're generally - make this DC or take damage - and there's not a lot to do there.
Basically, give me hand outs as little treats for defeating monsters. I've cleared entire locations in Fall Out 3 (I know, a videogame, but still) in the search for a single hand out talking about how the American government dealt with the war.
Alternatively, you could do research into castles or fortresses or what-not from that era and feed me tidbits of medieval life. No lectures, please, but a Knowledge Dungeoneering check to give me a brief tidbit on a fortification or how stained glass windows were set would actually interest me.
*snickers* See? Back to the Player Types - I'm an Investigator no matter what I do. Give me a chance to learn something new and I'm sold!
I'd consider any adventure where I was (to be glib) expected to decide whether I turned left or right at a junction to be a dungeon adventure, even if it took place wholly outside.
DeleteI think an adventure that takes place throughout a number set of forest clearings or discrete plateaux in a mountain, for example, still fits the criteria I suggested. Whereas if you're looking at something that doesn't have those kind of divisions, maybe on the plains or in a forest with only hazy subdivision, it's really not the same sort of thing (but as you said, you're not likely to bother about directions).
Another thing is that 'dungeons' as I described don't have to involve navigation, or checking every room. You might be in an office building with a map in the foyer, so you can just decide where to go and not worry about the specifics. Or wandering around a castle with a sensible layout and mostly generic rooms. "You find the noble quarters. Do you want to look around? Okay, in one room you see..." and that sort of thing where you just concentrate on key elements, depending on what the group wants to know. So long as the DM has a rough idea how things are laid out to handle intervening things, the specific layout mostly doesn't matter. And they can use a rule of thumb to judge what guards or obstacles you might encounter en route.
I do like "dungeon adventure as a process" as a way of thinking about stuff. I mean, even if you're in a dungeon space, if it's extremely active (rather than staying fairly static and reacting to the PCs on a local level) then the adventure will be quite different from a dungeon crawl. Similarly, if what you're mostly doing is tracking down a neutral NPC for a civilised discussion in an unknown part of town, exploration is going to be more a sideline than an objective.
What do you like about dungeon adventures? Glib answer: Killing things and taking their stuff.
Okay, it is slightly glib, but it's not too far off the mark. Sometimes that's enough fun by itself.
Less glib answer: The feeling of baiting evil in its lair/taking the fight to the enemy. Clearly defined goals. Perhaps paradoxically I *do* like the sense of exploration even if I often get bored with the reality of it. The controlled environment is really useful too.
I definitely agree with the first point, because (at least if given a reasonable setup) dungeon adventures often seem to be the main way for PCs to take the initiative rather than just reacting to a situation, and breaking into the Inner Sanctum of the Villain has a bit more umph to it than farming woods for bandits. Goalswise, I think you're generally okay if you're led up to raid a dungeon yourselves, though the motivation to start exploring one can be difficult.
Personally I do tend to find exploring places fun, partly because I'm just nosy and wonder how things work and what's going on, but it seems to vary a lot between people. Can I take it it's the repetitive and mappy bits that end up boring, or do you just find finding new stuff ?
What do you find helpful about controlled environments as a player? Sorry for the inquisition, I'm just interested in what works because I don't really have that much experience.
The Frost Giants were in a huge castle on a cliff on the edge of a high mountain, so the players ... knocked the back wall of their castle down with a transmute rock to mud spell, then flew in under an invisibility spell and dropped things on the giants.
This has given me an idea for another blogpost. We'll see. Good solid military tactics, anyway.
The other big thing is that I think players will often object to dungeoncrawls if they weren't expecting a dungeon-focused campaign (this sounds like it was Shannon's problem with the Crimson Wossname).
Yeah, I can see that.
Sorry, life is busy, replies are belated.
As for dungeons themselves, I'm just not that big on combat. For some reason, it never seems to resolve anything to me (even with the foe dead) and ends up feeling a bit repetitive. Having said that, I can be wowed with strange clues as to the locations' function, interesting tidbits of backstory about the villain or the location, and set piece battles.
DeleteI'm just wondering if that's partly because quite a lot of combat (at least in written scenarios) feels a bit makeweight. It's a bit like lots of traps, actually. The fight's there to be an obstacle for the players, but doesn't necessarily have much story build-up behind it, so there isn't really much to resolve even if you kill everyone. If you weren't in their territory messing with their stuff, they wouldn't bother you, and if you could find a way to avoid the fight entirely there'd be no real downside. Whereas with villain confrontations and so on, there's an actual situation set up that demands some kind of resolution, and combat can be a way of providing that, alongside other options.