Mastering Dungeons, Part I
May 10th, 2010
Hello everyone. Today we’re going to talk about something that is a purview not only of game designers, but also of DMs (and GMs, Storytellers, and Keepers of Arcane Lore, for that matter, though this article may be less relevant to the latter two…), as part of an attempt to play around with the boundaries of what, precisely, Dark Designs is supposed to cover. Up until now it has been primarily a place for me to tell design stories, pretend I’m Mark Rosewater, and generally wax on about game design theories. All of these things are near and dear to my heart, but it’s important to me that Dark Designs is something that is relevant to you, as well as (hopefully) entertaining. So one of the things that we’re looking into is whether the article can also deal with some aspects of the tiresome and thankless labor of love that is DMing. As it turns out, game design and DMing have a lot of overlap (though, to hear me tell it, game design and just about anything have a lot of overlap). So, if you like today’s article, and would like to see more like it (or hate it and want to hear more design diaries) send me a note.
And if you’re just here for the Eldrazi (this week featuring the dread drone), you’ll find it at its customary location at the bottom of the article.
So, what is today’s topic, precisely? Dungeon design, and how to do it well. I’m not the first to cover the topic, and I probably won’t be the last. Wolfgang Bauer wrote an excellent series of articles which can, for the time being, still be found on the old 3.5 D&D archives, though let me tell you that they were harder to dig up than a dragon skeleton. Though the articles are written for 3.5 (obviously) a lot of what they have to say is relevant for other systems as well, including 4th edition. I personally subscribe for the most part to his school of thought in dungeon design, and I’ll cover some of the same points he does below, though in some cases with slight tweaks. And, of course, I have other thoughts on the subject as well. But if you don’t have much faith in my dungeoncrafting skills, or are just looking for more information on the topic, you could do a lot worse than what he had to say.
The first and foremost thing I recommend is to figure out your encounter mix. The Dungeon Master’s Guide contains a table listing what percentage of encounters should be which power level, relative to the PCs. For example, so many encounters should be challenging (roughly the party’s CR) and so many should be easy (1-2 below) or hard (1-2 above) with a very small number ridiculously easy or hard. There’s most likely a similar table in the Pathfinder book and the 4e DMG, but I’m not sure off the top of my head. Either way, they’re just guidelines, so you can feel free to make your own table (though I caution that this should really only be done by people who know what they’re doing…). Once you have a guide for determining your spread of encounter CRs, you should take a look at your spread of encounter content. Here I’m building on Wolfgang’s model, above. According to his articles, you should make sure to spread out your encounters into things besides hacking, slashing, and breaking down doors. Have a few skill challenges (locks and traps count, but so do large chasms which need to be jumped over, powerful enemies which require a little diplomacy—or else a very hard fight—or a cryptic puzzle requiring spellcraft or knowledge: history to solve) that allow skillful players to shine, and maybe a few challenges which specifically play to the strengths of a particular class (for example, undead allow a cleric or paladin to shine, or you could include a ranger’s favored enemy—as an aside, one of the major advantages you as a DM have over me as a game designer is that you know your group and can custom-build the adventure to suit them, while designers need to create a product which will have something for everyone, making this particular step a lot harder and less fulfilling). The articles, again, have a more comprehensive list of suggestions, but the point is that everyone in the party should have several encounters designed for them, whether it be to suit their play-style (raw combat for the guy who likes that, and a talky-encounter for the guy who likes that, etc) or their characters’ strengths.
Now what you need to do is compile the two lists. Hopefully they’re about the same length, though if the “encounter style” list is longer that’s OK, you can double up on some encounters (an encounter might, for example, be designed to showcase ranged fighters AND feature your ranger’s favored enemy). Match encounter difficulties to encounter styles in whatever way suits you. Have a very challenging cliff the players have to climb (slippery, sheer, or have something attack them while they’re on it. Just remember that you’ll need to make sure that the DC for any skill-related things varies according to the party’s level and the relative difficulty for the encounter. DC 12 + party level is a good base, with +/- 5 depending on how difficult the encounter should be), a relatively simple lock, a tough encounter that’s made a little easier because one party member is very well-suited for it, whatever you want. One of my favorites is to combine the “difficult if not handled properly” encounters with encounter styles like Diplomacy or other skills (Decipher Script, Knowledge, Stealth or Acrobatics come to mind) so that they are provided with a very difficult encounter that can be circumvented with a relatively easy skill check. When you’ve matched up all your encounters, you have a pretty strong encounter skeleton for your dungeon. Mechanically speaking, the dungeon pretty much writes itself from this point. But if mechanics were all there was to the dungeon, the game would be pretty boring.
Flavor-wise, there are a lot of simple techniques that can enhance your dungeon. One of the most important, in my opinion, is making your dungeon feel more organic and real. There are several ways to do this, but I’ve gathered a few here that can go a long way with relatively minimal effort, and they’ll mean a lot to a variety of players, from the ones who come to the game for the strategic angle to the ones who come purely for the flavor.
The first way to give your dungeon depth is to give it a history. For the most part, especially at lower levels, the denizens of your dungeons are primarily squatters: they didn’t build the place, they just moved in after it was abandoned. It doesn’t matter whether your dungeon is a cave complex, a ruined keep, or the ancient tomb of the arch-Lich of Gorgynia, the odds aren’t bad that the orcs and goblins who live there weren’t the place’s original occupants. As you’re designing the dungeon, in each room (or even before you start mapping) take a moment to think about what the place was originally. Sure, now this is the goblin king’s room, but what was it before? If the goblin king set his bedroom in what used to be a shrine of dark magic, it’s going to look a lot different from if he set it up in what used to be the kitchen. These details can have a dramatic impact on the rooms and their layout, and players will appreciate the consistency—both in their ability to plan (“this room was clearly the kitchen, so one of the adjoining rooms used to be the larder. Maybe we can find some salt to complete the ritual”) and for the internal consistency and flavor of it all. Just be sure to add a few clues her and there as to what a room used to be. There’s only so much point in knowing that the room used to be a barracks if the goblins cleared out every bed and trunk, leaving the room spotless and featureless. You can also use the dungeon’s history as a way of including a few monsters, traps, or other things that don’t quite fit the dungeon’s theme (more on that in next week’s article).
Speaking of next week’s article, it seems we’ve run out of time for today. Before we go, once again, I’d like to ask you whether you like this direction for Dark Designs, and if you’d like to see more DM-centered articles, so send me an e-mail. Join me next week when I finish this discussion of dungeon design by examining how you can make your dungeon more dynamic, consistent, flavorful, and just plain cool. In the meantime, enjoy this week’s Eldrazi of the Week, the Dread Drone.
First, for Pathfinder:
Dread Drone (CR 7)
XP 3,200
N Huge aberration (Eldrazi)
Init +5; Senses darkvision 60 ft.; Perception +16
Aura corpsehatch 25 ft
DEFENSE
AC 17, touch 9, flat-footed 16; (+1 Dex, +8 natural, –2 size)
hp 75 (10d8+30)
Fort +5, Ref +5, Will +9
Immune: Negative Energy
OFFENSE
Speed 40 ft.,
Melee 2 claws +12 (1d10+6)
Special Attacks Essence Drain (DC 22)
Space 15 ft.; Reach 15 ft.
STATISTICS
Str 22, Dex 12, Con 16, Int 2, Wis 17, Cha 20
Base Atk +7; CMB +14; CMD 26 (30 vs trip)
Feats Improved Initiative, Ability Focus (Essence Drain), Lightning Reflexes, Weapon Focus (claw)
Skills Perception +16;
Languages Eldrazi (can’t speak)
SPECIAL ABILITIES
Corpsehatch (Su): Whenever a non-Eldrazi creature within range (5x the dread drone’s Charisma modifier in feet) is reduced to 0 or less hit points, the drone’s presence twists and corrupts the body, making it a spawning ground for more Eldrazi. In 1d6 rounds the corpse explodes as 1d4 Eldrazi Spawn per 2 HD the creature possessed emerge from it fully formed. A creature destroyed in this way can only be resurrected by spells that do not require the subject’s body to be whole.
Essence Drain (Su): As a standard action, the dread drone can attempt to siphon the life-force of a single target within 60ft. The dread drone must succeed on a ranged touch attack, and the target resists the attack with a successful Fortitude save. If the attack is successful, the target gains 1d4 negative levels. For each negative level bestowed in this way, the dread drone gains 5 temporary hit points. The save DC is Charisma-based.
ECOLOGY
Environment any
Organization solitary, brood (1-6 plus 3d10 Eldrazi Spawn)
Treasure incidental
And then, for 4e:
