Monday, December 17, 2018

What is a Dungeon Crawl?

The blinding blackness of the underworld held back only by the sputtering light of your candles, lanterns and torches -- dim points in a vast ocean of darkness. Dank stone walls close in the and the weight of earth and stone above grinds down on a maze of corridors, galleries, vaults, tombs, caverns and ancient fortresses.  You trespass in the domains of long extinct subterranean peoples - the histories of their underworld unclear or unknown, their wealth abandoned and unclaimed. The darkness is full of death, yet it draws fools and fortune hunters with whispered intimations of gold for the plundering, only to devour them -- the dead's monuments melted candle stubs and mummified corpses clad in rusted mail laying forgotten in dusty endless halls.

The Rakshasa - 1977, Dave Trampier
AD&D Monster Manual
This is the stereotypical setting for fantasy table-top games, the titular ‘dungeon'. Acknowledge for a moment that the ‘dungeon’ is an utterly bizarre conceit, a setting that has few if any corollaries in the real world, an expansive multi-level maze of tunnels and rooms beneath the earth filled with treasures and home to monsters. Despite the absurdity, there are plenty of ways to justify and visualize this classic setting in the context of fantasy world building.

Planning and running the exploration of such dungeon, or at least running it well, is a bit more complex than a fictional origin and a few evocative descriptions of stone corridors or caverns teeming with bats. Running a TTRPG in a dungeon setting requires an understanding of a play style that’s fallen out of favor or been set aside in recent years and editions, and benefits from mechanics and adventure design principles that can at first glance appear antiquated or burdensome. The earliest editions of Dungeons & Dragons were designed with a vast underground maze drawn on graph paper as the playing field and largest, first, part of the setting: this is not true of more modern editions and adventures, including 5th Edition, which are designed with the idea of the adventure as a series of encounters which together create a story.

This difference in design is the first important element in running a dungeon crawl -- a dungeon is spatial environment, not a narrative one. There is little or no predetermined, expected or designed story in a dungeon crawl campaign. The players characters tend to be less complex at the beginning then contemporary players may be used to and their motivations and personal backgrounds aren’t intended to be the source of future narrative. There are ways of talking about these conventions and how to play older editions that depend on phrases like: “Rulings not Rules” and “Heroic, not Superheroic” (both from Matt Finch’s excellent Quick Primer for Old School Games) but here I don’t want to talk about how to understand an older system. I want to talk about how to use a contemporary system to create the play style and game feel of an older style of adventure. Old School primers such as Finch’s may offer some ideas on ‘design principles’ and ‘game ethos’ (Ben Milton & Steve Lumpkin’s Principa Apocrypha is similarly interesting source available online), but without the ruleset to support them, cultural notes and a set of aspirational maxims will only go so far. This blog will try to note the distinctions between more contemporary play styles as well as suggesting a set of rule changes to 5th edition that may better support “Classic Dungeon Crawl”.

Obviously a dungeon crawl is a setting, adventure, or part of an adventure where the characters spend the majority of the time exploring some kind of maze of rooms: a cave system, a buried city and hidden tomb or whatever else doesn’t stretch suspension of disbelief too far. Yet the dungeon need not be underground and it might not be a maze. An abandoned city is another traditional location which works well for dungeon crawl play. Others have written about the nature of the dungeon more eloquently than me, but a definition of the dungeon that focuses on its mechanical elements and design principles should be more useful to the GM then one that looks to its metaphysical purpose.

Interestingly, the first edition of Dungeons & Dragons has nothing to say about the existence or nature of the dungeon - though Underworld & Wilderness Adventures (booklet 3 of the 1974 edition) immediately launches into peculiarities and specific rules regarding exploration, lighting and design of dungeons. The 'why' of the dungeon is assumed, even in the first edition of the Dungeon Master's Guide, where Gygax is far more interested in justifying and describing how one might play the game in non-dungeon environments: the wilderness, under the sea, on alternate planes of existence and spends pages describing these environments, their fictional relationship and underpinnings, as well as the rules that make them mechanically different from the default environment of the dungeon.

This assumption of the dungeon as default setting is still such an inevitability by the time of the publication of the Dungeon Master's Guide, four years later, that it's section on "THE ADVENTURE", after an admonishment to draw a map, begins:

"Naturally, the initial adventuring in the campaign will be those in the small community and nearby underground maze."

- Dungeon Master's Guide (First Edition - 1979) Gary Gygax, pg. 47.

The 'dungeon' is such a central concept to classic Dungeons & Dragons, yet there is very little about how to run a game in one. Even the sections that seek to aid new GMs in running dungeon adventures are, much like those in the 1974 edition, expositions of specific mechanics such as underground movement and searching speed. Rather then offer a theory of dungeons or how adventures in them work (something that the Guide does with wilderness and other types of adventure) Gygax provides the partially keyed map of a dungeon level beneath an old abbey along with examples of play. There are some other hints in the Appendices, including a large section on random dungeon generation, but the assumption that readers will already use and understand the underground maze as the chief location for adventure is absolute.

Little has improved, and perhaps the knowledge that underpinned Gygax’s implacable assurance has withered. The 5th Edition Dungeon Masters Guide, while it's discussion of how to place Location Based adventures within the game is limited, does a better job of encouraging their adoption, and notes a key conceit of the Dungeon Crawl that make it distinct.

"Within a dungeon, adventurers are constrained by walls and doors around them, but in the wilderness,adventurers can travel in almost any direction they please. Therein lies the key difference between dungeon and wilderness: it's much easier to predict where the adventuring party might go in the dungeon because the options are limited- less so in the wilderness."

Where the 5th edition fails is that it doesn’t seem to understand what this limitation means. It doesn’t point out how the spatial limits of the dungeon encourage emergent narrative and exploration play. 5e’s advice on designing locations is limited to using them as backdrops for challenges, encounters and external narrative that predict player choice. The Guide seems reluctant to embrace the dungeon crawl, despite a note that "Many of the greatest D&D adventures of all time are location-based. Creating a location-based adventure can be broken down into a number of steps."

It follows this praise with steps that include providing the characters an explicit goal in the adventure/location, the villain of the adventure/location, NPC allies for the adventure, a way to begin or force the players into adventuring in the location and the adventure's climax. These tables are somewhat bland (e.g. a climax "The adventurers confront the main villain and a group of minions in a bloody battle to the finish.") but aren't totally useless; however, they don't really give much of an idea on how to build a location based adventure as much as how to 'plot' an adventure that occurs at a location. The focus on plotting is compounded by the first part of the 5th Edition Dungeon Masters’ Guide's chapter on adventure design which insists that adventures follow a story based structure of beginning, middle, and climactic end.

While the 5th edition makes a distinction between 'Location Based' and 'Scene Based' adventures it’s meaningless as written into 5E - as long as the location based adventure is simply a series of plotted scenes that occur at a single location, the distinction isn't fully realized or remotely interesting. The classic dungeon crawl does not intentionally conform to a plot structure, the villains and allies among it's factions aren't determined in advance, and it has no specified climax.

As the 5th Edition Guide notes, the dungeon is first a simplification and a gamification - a game board that strips away many of the complex problems of an open fictional world - social interaction, politics and moral concerns for example, except of course it doesn’t, but we’ll get to that in later posts. As a game ‘board’ rather than a ‘structure’ or ‘narrative’ the dungeon first creates spatial puzzles - its mechanics and principles often relate to how best to move through it as a location. With a spatial orientation in its design (the map being far more important in a Dungeon Crawl then it is a scene based game) the spatial puzzle leads to exploration, a game where it’s valuable for players to determine and understand the physical layout of the dungeon: entrances, exists, regions, locations of interest and the interrelations between them.

Traditional Location Based adventure design is distinct from Scene Based design precisely because it minimizes or externalizes the questions of plotting and 'story'. The GM may provide a few hints, rumors, reasons or hooks that will bring a location to the attention of the players, but it is up to the players to decide when, how and why they will explore a given location (failing to do so before a certain number of session may of course allow factions related to that location to advance their goals if one is using sandbox campaign mechanics). Rather then focus on on the utility and place of Location Based adventures within a campaign, it suffices to say that they are useful because they exist and allow the party to explore them, and that the challenges and revelations associated with Exploration (touched on above and subject of the next post), Factional Intrigue and Moral Play are the keys to the 'Dungeon Crawl' style of play.


  1. I'm enjoying this series of posts so far!

    I do have a bone to pick with the term "emergent narrative," though, less with you than it's adoption by the OSR crowd in general, namely its use to attempt to contrast "location" and "scene based" games. "Narrative" in this context, appears to mean "a chronological of events that can be narrated." This is no more or less true of location based play than scene based play.

    Emergent. Every game with random elements and actions by multiple participants is going to have an "emergent narrative" in this sense. There is no "scene based" adventure module so structured that the narrative would not vary given the actions of players and rolls of the dice.

    What is truth of sandoxes/location based play is that they have no dramatic structure. Scene-based play tends to have a bit of this, though it can be loose or relatively tight like an "adventure path."

    1. "Emergent Narrative" is certainly something I'll need to grapple with in another post. I do think it gets lauded a bit much, but I also think there's a difference between the sorts of stories that location and scene based play encourage and that it's a topic worth addressing. It's also entirely true that wherever there's player choice some different elements of story will tumble out.

      For location based scenarios and play I think that a key element that can get missed is that the scene based adventure effectively uses narrative or story structure to create a map. This is no longer necessary when one has a significant spatial map and it becomes rather tricky to overlay the spatial and narrative maps effectively. I think this is something that The Hickmans' experiment a lot with, Ravenloft being the key example I can think of, and I'm not sure how well it works.

      The key idea for me in 'Emergent Story' is that the lack of a GM built player facing narrative (which is used as an attack on location based play - painting it as slogging through halls without meaning engaged in repetitive play)doesn't eliminate the possibility of stories being told, especially those generated by player decision and interaction with the setting.


Old Games

Let’s talk about old tabletop roleplaying games - specifically the kind of games played in the 1980’s and recently depicted in the nostalgia...