What makes a dungeon great? What makes a dungeon-like open area

>>51427139
Depends on what kind of game you're talking about. Design behind dungeons from B/X are very different than AD&D are very different from 3.PF are very different from 4E are very different from games that aren't D&D.

Probably start by looking at essays on The Five Room Dungeon and Quantum Ogre Theory, figuring out what are generally acknowledged Great Dungeons, shitty ones, read them, play through them, etc.

You're already in trouble if you're putting dungeons and open areas into the same thought process

>>51427860
>Depends on what kind of game you're talking about. Design behind dungeons from B/X are very different than AD&D are very different from 3.PF are very different from 4E are very different from games that aren't D&D.

I'm talking about design philosophy in general, the balance between challenge, adaptability, reward, combat, storytelling, etc. While mechanically these elements may be different, there are various similarities on how to approach them from a design perspective, things like scale and flow aren't necessarily restricted by a game but by a mentality or by the possibilities of the dungeon itself and what it can offer to the players.

For example, designing dungeons for D&D and Shadowrun is oddly similar even though they're radically different at a core level, because the elements of space, puzzle, scale, combat, storytelling and reward are very similar between shadowrunners going into a facility for a gig and a bunch of mercenaries/adventurers entering the lair of a lich.

>You're already in trouble if you're putting dungeons and open areas into the same thought process

By dungeon-like open areas i mean things like labrynth forests and other things that while not a dungeon per se still have a similar structure to a dungeon in the same regards as above.

>>51427963
Doesn't sound like you're engaging with specific mechanics, nor specific design philosophy. That you don't even think of them as necessarily contextually different is a bad sign, and you seem more interested in empty armchair generalization.

Good luck.

>>51427139

Your question is a bit vague so my two cents might not be relevant to what you're looking for.

I've always found that dungeons that tell and follow a story end up being the most memorable.

https://roleplayingtips.com/rptn/rpt156-6-methods-making-dungeons-interesting/

This is a great guide and it's helped me a lot in my design of dungeons as a method of storytelling rather than a set-piece to be mowed through.

I set up each section as a part of a narrative, with plot-structure that follows the traditional structure: Exposition > Rising Action > Climax > Falling Action > Resolution

This same technique can be applied to set-pieces and plot hooks.

It doesn't have to be a dungeon. It could be market square. A group of slaves are being hung for inciting dissent. If the players don't intervene maybe a group of slaves revolt and try to save their brothers. This leads to an encounter that has exposition, giving players agency to pursue the rising action to it's climax and resolve the story.

>>51428349
That's actually very helpful and actually one of the things I was looking for, thanks for your input.

File: 1434052457923.jpg (87KB, 736x412px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 736x412px

>>51427139
>What makes a dungeon great?

The walls that keep a treasure safe of outlanders?
Lets make the Dungeon Great Again!!!

>>51428846
Just to expand upon my earlier points I'll give you an example of a set-piece I made for a game I ran recently.

It's set in a graveyard/crypt. The players have heard that there is a valuable magic ring somewhere in or around the crypt. Outside of the main necropolis is a courtyard with a golem. When they try to enter the crypt the golem awakens and attacks them.

The players can either defeat the golem or run into the crypt and close off the door. The golem will continuously try to gain entry to the crypt while they're inside.

Once inside the players will search for the resting place of ring's last known owner. They will encounter a group of skeletons and a wight during their search.

Once they find the resting place of this wizard, they find the ring gone but the wizard's spirit is haunting his journal (which was buried with him) and they can either negotiate with him or fight.

Either way, they will find out (whether through conversations with the spirit or reading through the tattered remains of his journal) that the ring is sentient and has a tendency to create a golem for itself using whatever natural materials it can find nearby.

The players go back out of the crypt to find the golem and retrieve the ring. If they had originally defeated the golem they will find it has partially recreated itself and will need to fight it again.

Most likely, the players will have originally fled from the golem. He hits hard and can fairly easily kill the players if they try to stand and fight without a good plan.

Rather than killing the golem, they can try to simply get the ring off of it's finger, rendering it inert. They may think of this themselves or find this information out from the wizard's spirit or journal.

This set-piece tells a small story that might not be very consequential for their overall campaign but it's memorable and my players really enjoyed it.