PDA

View Full Version : Dungeon Design and Resident Evil



EvilAnagram
2016-09-09, 09:34 AM
So, I was petering around on the internets and found this article (http://horror.dreamdawn.com/?p=81213) about the design of the Spencer Mansion in the original Resident Evil. This got me thinking about the way we design dungeons in D&D and other games, and I started contrasting it with how the professionals essentially designed a dungeon that was so successful it overcame some terrible problems in the writing and voice acting to spawn two remakes, six sequels, and approximately twelve jillion spinoffs.

I made a blog post (http://donoteatthecheese.blogspot.com/2016/09/dungeon-design-how-maps-shape-player.html) about it, but the meat of it is that Resident Evil uses puzzles to guide player behavior, rather than simply creating obstacles. This ensures that the player has access to the proper resources and story cues before opening up further areas of exploration. It's a very clever approach that encourages exploration and provides the feeling of free movement without creating a random collection of rooms, and I think it's one that we can apply successfully to tabletop dungeon design.

I'm currently running my players through a dungeon that utilizes these ideas, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on them.

AMFV
2016-09-09, 09:43 AM
So, I was petering around on the internets and found this article (http://horror.dreamdawn.com/?p=81213) about the design of the Spencer Mansion in the original Resident Evil. This got me thinking about the way we design dungeons in D&D and other games, and I started contrasting it with how the professionals essentially designed a dungeon that was so successful it overcame some terrible problems in the writing and voice acting to spawn two remakes, six sequels, and approximately twelve jillion spinoffs.

I made a blog post (http://donoteatthecheese.blogspot.com/2016/09/dungeon-design-how-maps-shape-player.html) about it, but the meat of it is that Resident Evil uses puzzles to guide player behavior, ensuring that they have access to the proper resources and story cues before opening up further areas of exploration. It's a very clever approach, and I think it's one that we can apply successfully to tabletop dungeon design.

I'm currently running my players through a dungeon that utilizes these ideas, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on them.

Well if you're currently running your players through a dungeon that features that.. wouldn't your thoughts be more relevant?

One of the key problems in this sort of approach is that roleplaying games have a lot more options as to what a player can do than any video game. This results in two main issues with trying the same sort of puzzle approach. The first being this: In video games one can generally go around clicking on things till something works, or backtrack and rexplore areas till they find a clue. That option isn't present as much in roleplaying games, which makes stumping puzzles that much more frustrating. Also because people need to declare actions, sometimes they're going to have a great deal of difficulty in guessing the "correct" solution to the puzzle. The worst DM i've ever had was one that basically wouldn't allow the game to progress until we'd found the specific solution he intended. This leads us to the second issue, you're also not really going to be allowing the players true freedom in coming up with interesting new solutions. In DOOM they can keep you from going to a room until you have the blue key, because dynamiting the walls is never an option. But in a roleplaying game, it should be, and it will frustrate players to be told "No that doesn't work," when something clearly ought to.

EvilAnagram
2016-09-09, 10:51 AM
Well if you're currently running your players through a dungeon that features that.. wouldn't your thoughts be more relevant?

One of the key problems in this sort of approach is that roleplaying games have a lot more options as to what a player can do than any video game. This results in two main issues with trying the same sort of puzzle approach. The first being this: In video games one can generally go around clicking on things till something works, or backtrack and rexplore areas till they find a clue. That option isn't present as much in roleplaying games, which makes stumping puzzles that much more frustrating. Also because people need to declare actions, sometimes they're going to have a great deal of difficulty in guessing the "correct" solution to the puzzle. The worst DM i've ever had was one that basically wouldn't allow the game to progress until we'd found the specific solution he intended. This leads us to the second issue, you're also not really going to be allowing the players true freedom in coming up with interesting new solutions. In DOOM they can keep you from going to a room until you have the blue key, because dynamiting the walls is never an option. But in a roleplaying game, it should be, and it will frustrate players to be told "No that doesn't work," when something clearly ought to.

You raise some good points.

First, I have to agree that coming up with novel solutions to puzzles has to be allowed. I'm a big believer in letting the rules dictate the results of player actions, and if they have the capacity to say, "This door offends me. Disintegrate!" that has to be an option, or else you're just suspending the rules to impede player progress.

Second, I think presentation has to be a big part of making this come across effectively. In the original Resident Evil, they make items stand out through the classic sparkle. In a tabletop game, the descriptions of the GM have to draw attention to certain features or else the players will feel lost.

And yeah, I'm sure I'll have insights after my players make it through. Until then, everyone's contributions are equal to my own.