PDA

View Full Version : DM Help Proper old-school dungeon design



VoxRationis
2017-08-07, 01:17 AM
(While I'm playing 2nd edition AD&D, this is a question not so much of mechanics and rulesets as much as flavor and design techniques, so I'm putting this in the general RPG forum.)

I've finally acquired all three core rulebooks for AD&D and have been inspired to make a dungeon crawl in the classic style, suitable for the classic game. However, as I idly fill my graph paper with hallways and rooms, I find that my brain, used to playing 3.5, and that not in a dungeon-light sort of paradigm, does not readily supply me with appropriate non-monster challenges to fill such a dungeon. I mean, I can think of putting snare-wires for thieves to cut and keys to hide in various places far removed from their respective locks, but what other sort of exploration-centric elements should I include? What such elements--the sort that reward investment into non-combat abilities--can I include?

Mith
2017-08-07, 01:24 AM
Think of good puzzle obstacles such as rotating rooms, platform crossing, and similar things that can either have a direct approach of solving such as feats of raw strength or dexterity, or creative solutions can also get players to their goal without having to rely on the luck of the die roll.

I am not sure about what would rely on more mental stats such as intelligence and Wisdom, except for perhaps illusions where one party member might see something slightly different then the others for a hint that all is not as it seems.

Koo Rehtorb
2017-08-07, 03:31 AM
Climbs, underwater passages, rickety rope bridges, inclined slippery mud filled tunnels, broken staircases, chute traps, pit traps, fire traps, invisible odorless poison gas traps, a maze of natural caves before you even get to the dungeon, ambushes from creatures sitting in disadvantageous terrain, curses, chambers filled with seething magical darkness (and full of shadows).

Deliverance
2017-08-07, 05:52 AM
It isn't a proper old-school dungeon without secret doors, traps, and misdirection. A dungeon doesn't have to make any sort of sense beyond the intentions of its in-universe creator.

False entrances, secret doors, one-way secret doors, trapped doors, trapped secret doors, secret doors leading to traps, secret doors leading to trapped secret one-way doors leading to traps, sphere of annihilation in the statue's mouth... no, just kidding. Obligatory TOH reference. Of course TOH is notoriously unfair - for those whose idea of fairness is that players with good character stats and decent skill should be able to survive passing unscathed through a death trap specifically designed to entice players into reaching the wrong conclusions where some of its traps are concerned.

I certainly wouldn't advise anybody to build something as deadly as the TOH for a more casual "let's try some old-school design" adventuring, but nevertheless, if you haven't read it it does give some provide ample fodder for the fertile mind. 1st ed has the TOH, 2nd ed has the Return to the TOH, but since this is just for possible inspiration for your 2nd ed game you might want to read the publicly released 3.5 ed version of the original 1st ed TOH which WOTC made public a few years back. A quick internet search shows it is still available on the internet in this google doc (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-1EOLwk4v2WVmxhUWpsMUZwelk/edit)

Of course, if you just want that one trap that shouts "I'm a ****", consider something like this one (http://i.imgur.com/oqXxgWe.png) which is not from TOH. (I don't know where it is from; I saved the link some time ago as it is an awesome trap-combination.)

Also if you've got access to the old Fighting Fantasy books, #6, Deathtrap Dungeon is great for inspiration.

If you are really into traps (and who isn't? :smallcool:), try finding information on Grimtooth's traps (http://geekandsundry.com/grimtooths-traps-are-an-old-school-way-to-cause-dd-chaos/) - traps with style.

While some deathtraps are of the "haha" variety where no skill checks or intelligence will help, more commonly extreme paranoia and taking precautions may help save the day if the DM is so inclined. Interview earlier survivors, if any - examine architecture - don't be loaded down for bear but be nimble on your feet - always be alert - take your time and investigate - sources of information in the dungeon that can be interrogated or persuaded to help or provide crucial information - include ways to avoid combat encounters by climbing/negotiating/avoiding/using traps against enemies.....

Finally, the most scary enemy you can include is one that can think and plan and doesn't just react to your adventurers - the tale of Tucker's Kobolds (http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/) is well worth keeping in mind should you want to provide something that can be solved as a series of combat encounters but is much better solved by avoiding combat if possible; they were "just kobolds", but they were fighting on their own turf in a home designed for defense.

Kane0
2017-08-07, 07:32 AM
Not sure if it's old school enough for you, but this has some nice design tips regardless:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLhyKYa0YJ_5AMGoUXHunTPWEOKvKfSQOq

Darth Ultron
2017-08-07, 07:33 AM
You might want to grab any old school dungeon adventure and see what they did. You should be able to find at least one at any used book store, or online. Also Wizards had a ton of 2E stuff for free to download once upon a time. TV shows like Warehouse 13, Leverage, Chuck and The Librarians are full of trap ideas, but you can also watch most action adventure TV shows and movies too.

Other then traps and the things mentioned so far....

Skill Challenges: Pick a skill, and make a challenge around it. Take Climb. You want something of value high up in a hard to get to place. With flat, smooth walls or spiked walls or such. Swim is also a good one with a pool of water, river or such. Balance to walk across a narrow ledge or rope. You can also mix and match more then one skill.

Non-Skill Challenges: The tricky ones the characters won't have ''by the book rules for''. Like the characters have a key ring with 25 keys, and the stone treasure chest is at the bottom of a 30 foot pit of water. How do the characters open the chest and get the loot?

Somewhat non-hostile monsters-All ways go for diplomacy or such. From the goblin tribe that wants to be left alone, to the trapped demon that just wants out of it's cage.

Weird Stuff: Ignore the rules and make up some weird stuff. Animaited ''sunflowers'' growing under an artificial light that shoot fire. A rock garden that sends the character back in time. A room full of silver beetles building a large silver statue of a lobster. A hear shaped pool filled with lobsters and lonely love poems written on stone tables (that, um, turns lonely single people into lobsters...).

HidesHisEyes
2017-08-07, 08:33 AM
I highly recommend this article if you haven't read it. It's long and rambling but there is a great idea in there for non-combat dungeon challenges that might help you out.

http://theangrygm.com/hacking-time-in-dnd/

Thrudd
2017-08-07, 11:17 AM
It should be noted that old dungeons were not so much about presenting mechanical non-combat obstacles for the characters. In earlier editions there were no skills (other than thief skills) and no universal ability checks. It is more about challenging the wits of the players. Traps can be found and disarmed by thieves, true, but clues can also be provided in the descriptions, and smart play role play rewarded.

Dungeons often have secret doors, concealed doors, trap doors and pits, spike traps, trapped locks on doors and chests with poison needles or the like, illusions that conceal passages, treasures or traps. Areas with alarms or things that make noise and attract nearby monsters (the sole purpose for "shriekers"). Puzzle rooms which the players will need to solve based on your descriptions. Monsters that cooperate or coordinate or use one another. Clues about how to find a secret or solve a puzzle hidden elsewhere in the dungeon. Passages which link and loop back and connect in more than one way (so it isn't just a straight walkthrough with no decisions to make).

Just because it's "old school" doesn't mean the contents don't need to make sense or at least have some nominal explanation for being there. Every dungeon should not be "an insane wizard left all this random stuff here".

VoxRationis
2017-08-07, 12:01 PM
The AngryGM's talk about time is interesting; I was just noticing that a lot of the old dungeons inflict some sort of condition upon the PCs, or some of them, that imposes a good reason to move quickly. Return to White Plume Mountain, for example, tries as hard as possible to infect your mage with an effect that will turn them into a mindless husk in service to the enemy if they don't complete the dungeon in time. The 3.5, but old-school, Legacy of the Savage Kings is similar.

GungHo
2017-08-07, 02:20 PM
Just make sure that people know that if they enter, they're going to die. Actual locality doesn't need to matter. It could be on the top of the highest mountain. In the depths of the deep sea. On another plane. Or right next to a school. Hell, preferably next to a school. Not even an evil school. It shouldn't matter that in no way could it have any proper function as a domicile, vault, or prison. The only thing that should be certain is death.

kyoryu
2017-08-07, 02:30 PM
So, the things that really make a dungeon "old-school" to me are:

1) Size. It's gotta be big enough that "where do we go?" is an interesting decision. Preferably big enough that there are different factions - smart adventurers will use that to their advantage. Running from the goblins to the orcs may make sense - even if you can't convince the orcs to help you, they might hate the goblins just as much.

2) Cause and effect. What you do matters. The dungeon denizens live there, and will react to your presence. It's a living thing - and yes, being there too long will become increasingly bad, as various denizens figure it out. It's a heist, not an assault.

3) Really, it should be GP for XP. The point is that it's a *heist*, not a serial murder. Get in, get the gold, get out. Combat is to be avoided.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-07, 03:32 PM
It should be noted that old dungeons were not so much about presenting mechanical non-combat obstacles for the characters. In earlier editions there were no skills (other than thief skills) and no universal ability checks. It is more about challenging the wits of the players. Traps can be found and disarmed by thieves, true, but clues can also be provided in the descriptions, and smart play role play rewarded.

Dungeons often have secret doors, concealed doors, trap doors and pits, spike traps, trapped locks on doors and chests with poison needles or the like, illusions that conceal passages, treasures or traps. Areas with alarms or things that make noise and attract nearby monsters (the sole purpose for "shriekers"). Puzzle rooms which the players will need to solve based on your descriptions. Monsters that cooperate or coordinate or use one another. Clues about how to find a secret or solve a puzzle hidden elsewhere in the dungeon. Passages which link and loop back and connect in more than one way (so it isn't just a straight walkthrough with no decisions to make).

Just because it's "old school" doesn't mean the contents don't need to make sense or at least have some nominal explanation for being there. Every dungeon should not be "an insane wizard left all this random stuff here".

lol, this kind of makes me laugh. Yes, we had non-combat obstacles. As far as the whole non-weapon proficiency, one of the things I didn't like about adding them into 1st edition is players kind of lost something. Rather than having the skills, DMs (not all of them) would say ok you are trying to do X roll [some die/dice rolls]->some kind of result. In a sense, you had opportunities that could be lost when you were later "required" to choose NWPs. Just a point from the old days from my perspective. Were the results consistent between DMs? Hell no, it was run off the top of our heads. Was it good? Hell it was @#$%ing great!

As to "proper" old-school, it is a point to say this whole "old-school" is tough to listen to sometimes. Hate the term personally because people assign all kinds of "facts" and "rules" about how it should be. I suspect a lot of more vocal ones never played back in the day. Back then, we didn't have or need a lot of rules imo. Experimentation was high fme.

So if I had one suggestion it would be experiment with the game using rules that came before UA 1st. The older the better. If you have white box, use that. Forget all that came after.

Thrudd
2017-08-07, 06:15 PM
lol, this kind of makes me laugh. Yes, we had non-combat obstacles. As far as the whole non-weapon proficiency, one of the things I didn't like about adding them into 1st edition is players kind of lost something. Rather than having the skills, DMs (not all of them) would say ok you are trying to do X roll [some die/dice rolls]->some kind of result. In a sense, you had opportunities that could be lost when you were later "required" to choose NWPs. Just a point from the old days from my perspective. Were the results consistent between DMs? Hell no, it was run off the top of our heads. Was it good? Hell it was @#$%ing great!

As to "proper" old-school, it is a point to say this whole "old-school" is tough to listen to sometimes. Hate the term personally because people assign all kinds of "facts" and "rules" about how it should be. I suspect a lot of more vocal ones never played back in the day. Back then, we didn't have or need a lot of rules imo. Experimentation was high fme.

So if I had one suggestion it would be experiment with the game using rules that came before UA 1st. The older the better. If you have white box, use that. Forget all that came after.

I didn't say there were no non-combat obstacles. I meant that there was no official skill system, and many non-combat challenges were resolved by players' wits/role playing rather than rolling the dice. You didn't design a dungeon by thinking "Ok, I want x number of Int challenges, and X number of wis challenges, and x number of dex challenges..." - that wasn't a thing. A pretty common house rule was some version of the "roll under attribute" to resolve things sometimes, but I definitely never used "roll under your INT to have me tell you how the mechanism works" or somesuch - that's for players to figure out with in-character experimentation.

1e non-weapon proficiencies were mostly stuff like blacksmithing and rope making, describing careers characters might have had prior to adventuring, not usually things that could be used in the dungeon or to resolve challenges (unless it was "who can make a better horseshoe? Roll your blacksmithing proficiency...").

It's true that everyone was doing their own thing in the "old days" (and still are today), so every table was different. When I personally am talking about how "old school" was or should be, I'm talking about the written rules of the game and the sort of things that are implied by and will naturally result from following those rules, not assuming any house rules or other unofficial modifications (even the very common ones). I take questions about how "old school stuff" worked to be questions about how the rules worked and what those rules made possible.

Psikerlord
2017-08-07, 06:22 PM
I think 2 or 3 entrances to a dungeon helps make it old school, with different geographic factions that might be used against one another, was also common.

Makes the dungeon less linear, players feel like there are lots of meaningful choices to be made.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-08, 12:26 AM
I didn't say there were no non-combat obstacles. I meant that there was no official skill system, and many non-combat challenges were resolved by players' wits/role playing rather than rolling the dice. You didn't design a dungeon by thinking "Ok, I want x number of Int challenges, and X number of wis challenges, and x number of dex challenges..." - that wasn't a thing. A pretty common house rule was some version of the "roll under attribute" to resolve things sometimes, but I definitely never used "roll under your INT to have me tell you how the mechanism works" or somesuch - that's for players to figure out with in-character experimentation.

1e non-weapon proficiencies were mostly stuff like blacksmithing and rope making, describing careers characters might have had prior to adventuring, not usually things that could be used in the dungeon or to resolve challenges (unless it was "who can make a better horseshoe? Roll your blacksmithing proficiency...").

It's true that everyone was doing their own thing in the "old days" (and still are today), so every table was different. When I personally am talking about how "old school" was or should be, I'm talking about the written rules of the game and the sort of things that are implied by and will naturally result from following those rules, not assuming any house rules or other unofficial modifications (even the very common ones). I take questions about how "old school stuff" worked to be questions about how the rules worked and what those rules made possible.

I was talking about the OSR people who claim the term old school means all kinds of things. Plus we never called them megadungeons.

Your non-weapon proficiency you mean secondary skills from DMG? They were also called non-professional skills. I was referring to the NWP as actually called in the Dungeoneeer/Wilderness Survival Guides.

VoxRationis
2017-08-08, 12:35 AM
I think 2 or 3 entrances to a dungeon helps make it old school, with different geographic factions that might be used against one another, was also common.

Makes the dungeon less linear, players feel like there are lots of meaningful choices to be made.

I did catch onto that. My current sketches of the dungeon have four different ways to get into the first true dungeon level. As for multiple factions... That's going to be interesting. I have it right now as a castle controlled by an evil wizard and his minions, but there's a series of catacombs under the dungeon that are filled with undead hostile to everyone. I suppose I could try to stick additional factions in somewhere.

Blymurkla
2017-08-08, 03:46 AM
An important thing that seems to have gone unmentioned are empty rooms. When designing an old school dungeon it is fine - no, necessary - to have plenty of empty rooms.

When I say 'empty' I mean 'empty of creatures'. Not every room should contain a fight, turning exploring the dungeon into a slog. Empty rooms are needed for a change of pace and a chance for the PCs to rest for a while and think. It's also vital for that veneer of realism that you want - how did the wandering grey ooze make its way to the party, if every room it conceivably had to pass through was filled to the brim with goblins?

Some of these rooms empty of creatures can contain other types of challenges - others in this thread have give much better advice on the subject than I could have done - but some can actually be entirely devoid of combat, traps, other challenges or treasure. Just make sure you give them at least a tiny detail, a dead rat in the corner, a burnt out torch, a carving of a soldier above a door, so the players can remember that they've been to the room when the return (of course, you could want certain dungeons to be especially hard to navigate and make them contain identical rooms, but that should not be the norm).

JellyPooga
2017-08-08, 04:12 AM
An important thing that seems to have gone unmentioned are empty rooms. When designing an old school dungeon it is fine - no, necessary - to have plenty of empty rooms.

When I say 'empty' I mean 'empty of creatures'. Not every room should contain a fight, turning exploring the dungeon into a slog. Empty rooms are needed for a change of pace and a chance for the PCs to rest for a while and think. It's also vital for that veneer of realism that you want - how did the wandering grey ooze make its way to the party, if every room it conceivably had to pass through was filled to the brim with goblins?

Some of these rooms empty of creatures can contain other types of challenges - others in this thread have give much better advice on the subject than I could have done - but some can actually be entirely devoid of combat, traps, other challenges or treasure. Just make sure you give them at least a tiny detail, a dead rat in the corner, a burnt out torch, a carving of a soldier above a door, so the players can remember that they've been to the room when the return (of course, you could want certain dungeons to be especially hard to navigate and make them contain identical rooms, but that should not be the norm).

Heh...a party I ran through a "traditional" dungeon were stumped by the first empty room they came to. It was an oddity because I'm big on dungeon furniture and descriptions, so when they opened the door and said "it's an empty 20x20 room with a door on the far side", they immediately assumed it was a trap. After about an hour of searching, dice rolling, divinations and so forth to try and find the trap (that wasn't there), they closed the door and chose a different route without setting foot inside!

Deliverance
2017-08-08, 07:11 AM
Heh...a party I ran through a "traditional" dungeon were stumped by the first empty room they came to. It was an oddity because I'm big on dungeon furniture and descriptions, so when they opened the door and said "it's an empty 20x20 room with a door on the far side", they immediately assumed it was a trap. After about an hour of searching, dice rolling, divinations and so forth to try and find the trap (that wasn't there), they closed the door and chose a different route without setting foot inside!
That sounds moderately awesome.

I wonder how your players would have reacted if you'd included a single object in the room for them to discover after careful examination, such as "in what appears to be the dead centre of the room, you discern what seems to be a potato lying on the floor".

goto124
2017-08-08, 09:22 AM
such as "in what appears to be the dead centre of the room, you discern what seems to be a potato lying on the floor".

No no, it should be a herring, preferably of the red-colored variety.

Jay R
2017-08-08, 11:42 AM
Not all traps are planned. A ceiling about to collapse, a cave-in that reveals a previously unknown cave while closing off the old tunnel, a passage flooded long after it was built and not by the hands of the builders, a wall that is slightly leaning, and will fall as soon as somebody pushes on it, etc.

A trapped door can be a simple as a black widow living behind the doorknob.

A gas trap can just be a flammable, or unbreathable, gas that has slowly seeped up from below.

A room might now merely have two inches of water covering the floor - which covers the spiky bits, or which has a layer of petroleum on it.

And an undead could simply be a long forgotten prisoner locked in a (real) dungeon, until it's released by exploring PCs.

The reagents in a long-abandoned alchemical lab might be extremely volatile over time. Or perhaps a well-labeled dust of appearance has, slowly, over time, degraded into a contact poison.

For that matter, Potion of Confusion is labeled "Strength Potion", or some such. [It's easy to spot if you use Identify, but who bothers when it's labeled?]

The carefully (and correctly) labeled box of powdered silver is now just tarnish.

And for planned traps, note that the original owner didn't want to set them off herself, so the path to the trap is obvious, while a secret door nearby would lead to the treasure room or alchemical lab.

goto124
2017-08-08, 01:05 PM
For that matter, Potion of Confusion is labeled "Strength Potion", or some such. [It's easy to spot if you use Identify, but who bothers when it's labeled?]

Potion of Wisdom :smalltongue:

Thrudd
2017-08-08, 03:23 PM
Potion of Wisdom :smalltongue:

The guy who made the labels drank some of the stuff first. He totally thought he used the right recipe.

Faily
2017-08-08, 04:49 PM
Things I noticed when running through old school modules (though our GM updated them for Pathfinder when it came to the mechanics):

1. The dungeon-population makes no sense! In one room you fight a mummy, and in the next there's a solitary orc guarding a chest. And further into the complex, you might meet some small tribe that has lived there for generations... surrounded by monsters left and right, and with no way out or further in. I wish I could say I was joking, but the old modules we ran through had a surprising amount of these things in their dungeons. And speaking of the unlikely tribe, it brings me onto my next point...

2. Where do they get food?! Or what about the "call of nature"-business? This doesn't only apply to the aforemention unlikely tribe, but also *anything* that lives in the dungeon.

Old-school dungeons don't make sense, are super-lethal, and proud of it.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-08, 05:12 PM
Things I noticed when running through old school modules (though our GM updated them for Pathfinder when it came to the mechanics):

1. The dungeon-population makes no sense! In one room you fight a mummy, and in the next there's a solitary orc guarding a chest. And further into the complex, you might meet some small tribe that has lived there for generations... surrounded by monsters left and right, and with no way out or further in. I wish I could say I was joking, but the old modules we ran through had a surprising amount of these things in their dungeons. And speaking of the unlikely tribe, it brings me onto my next point...

2. Where do they get food?! Or what about the "call of nature"-business? This doesn't only apply to the aforemention unlikely tribe, but also *anything* that lives in the dungeon.

Old-school dungeons don't make sense, are super-lethal, and proud of it.

And there was nothing wrong with it.

Bet you are the type who would crap on what the wright brothers did and say you would have made jet airplanes back then.

Psikerlord
2017-08-08, 09:46 PM
I did catch onto that. My current sketches of the dungeon have four different ways to get into the first true dungeon level. As for multiple factions... That's going to be interesting. I have it right now as a castle controlled by an evil wizard and his minions, but there's a series of catacombs under the dungeon that are filled with undead hostile to everyone. I suppose I could try to stick additional factions in somewhere.

Sounding awesome. Maybe even a rival band of adventurers could complicate things?

VoxRationis
2017-08-09, 01:48 AM
I have two, actually; a group of elves and a group of dwarves. They mainly are likely to muck things up by raising the level of alertness of the enemy, as well as provide comedic flavor.

Faily
2017-08-09, 11:09 AM
And there was nothing wrong with it.

Bet you are the type who would crap on what the wright brothers did and say you would have made jet airplanes back then.

:smallconfused:

I never said there was anything wrong with it. Unless you are being sarcastic (which translates poorly in forum-format most of the time)...?

Arbane
2017-08-09, 12:04 PM
Old-school dungeons don't make sense, are super-lethal, and proud of it.

Eh, some of them make more sense than others. But:

"A Gygaxian dungeon is like the world's most ****ed-up game show. 'Behind door number one: INSTANT DEATH! Behind door number two: a MAGIC CROWN! Behind door number three: six pounds of sugar guarded by three GIANT KILLER BEES!'"

One thing I don't think has been mentioned is mapping. In AD&D-style games, dungeons are deliberately-confusing mazes, and there's none of this 'can I just remember the way out?' Nonsense. You break out the protractor and the graph paper and record EVERY STEP, or you will DIE LOST IN DARKNESS. And, of course, there's a multitude of ways to screw with the mapper to make the PCs even MORE lost: Rotating/elevator rooms, sloping passages, one-way doors, teleporters....

Oh, yeah, that's another thing: Time Pressure. The fact that AD&D was more like a heist than a crusade, and the importance of avoiding fights has been mentioned, but don't forget wandering monsters as the dungeon's way of punishing PCs for loitering. And the PCs better keep track of their light sources, or DIE LOST IN DARKNESS, again.

Jay R
2017-08-09, 05:05 PM
Eh, some of them make more sense than others. But:

"A Gygaxian dungeon is like the world's most ****ed-up game show.

Certainly. But don't forget that the Gygaxian dungeon wasn't the average. It was the far end of the scale.

kyoryu
2017-08-09, 05:07 PM
Certainly. But don't forget that the Gygaxian dungeon wasn't the average. It was the far end of the scale.

Also, when people think "Gygaxian Dungeon", they mostly think Tomb of Horrors.

Which was deliberately written to be a death-trap, when his players complained about the game being "too easy". It is not the average situation, even for Gygax.

It's kind of like saying that Dark Souls is a typical difficulty for video games these days.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-10, 01:38 PM
Also, when people think "Gygaxian Dungeon", they mostly think Tomb of Horrors.

Which was deliberately written to be a death-trap, when his players complained about the game being "too easy". It is not the average situation, even for Gygax.

It's kind of like saying that Dark Souls is a typical difficulty for video games these days.

Yes, but it won't stop punks from posturing as if that were the case for all of them.