Is it possible to have an interesting dungeon in a tabletop game where there is absolutely no combat, and isn't full of traps puzzles? Where it is a location where simply exploring it is the fun part and players will still find it entertaining/worthwhile. If you think it is possible, how would you go about doing it?
No.
>>45667582
>simply exploring it is the fun part and players will still find it entertaining/worthwhile
Do you have a single idea in your head for what they'd *find* in this dungeon that they're exploring?
>>45667582
Only if it's a macguffin dungeon or full of lore stuff
>>45667582
Sounds like it'd make a better book or video game. Players in tabletops are designed purely around combat with maybe some skills at tricking strangers thrown in second, and those are the only two things any group as a whole will agree sounds fun. You might get the rare player who wants to learn about the world but for the most part anyone who gives two fucks will be drowned out in a sea of whiners who just want to see how hard they hit skeletons.
No traps. Nothing they can fall off/into? No dangerous terrain at all. Kay.
No puzzles. No antagonists. No surprises whatsoever. Why are you even asking this question. You're pitching a parking lot simulator.
Well traditionally a dungeon wouldn't have monsters so much as prisoners or people getting tortured or a sex thing I guess, so as long as they aren't the captives I guess it wouldn't be dangerous.
I don't find that particularly interesting myself though
>>45667938
>>45667943
This type of stuff is what I had in mind.
>>45667953
this so much. I want a dungeon exploring game that focuses on the exploring part. Give me shit like the rope arrow from Dark Messiah, make me choose how many torches to bring, how much chalk, paper and charcoal for mapping, and all that other stuff that gets forgotten about in DnD because DnD is about combat. I would love a hardcore rogue-lite dungeon EXPLORER where your goal is archaeological investigation.
>>45668029
I'm not saying that. All I meant was that it wouldn't be a trap gauntlet funhouse dungeon. There would be plenty of obstacles, mostly terrain based I imagine. And sure there could be antagonists. Maybe the party is being stalked by a single, way too powerful enemy as they explore.
>>45668127
Absolutely. IMO the most fun parts of D&D are the resource managing bits. What do you need to bring in order to have a profitable expedition. I heard Dungeon World (or maybe it was Torchbearer) had some really cool systems for this sort of thing, can anyone confirm?
>>45667953
>Players in tabletops are designed purely around combat with maybe some skills at tricking strangers
Well, that's D&D for you.
OTOH, it's perfectly possible to build a lawyer in Burning Wheel and have a great time doing fantasy debate club with him. Duel of Wits is a fun system.
>>45667582
If you had a group of players who had a vested interest in the history and contents of the dungeon, and their beliefs about that dungeon brought them into conflict as they explored it, leading to arguments about who built it or why, or what it all means, you could do that in Burning Wheel.
>>45667582
You all meet in a tavern... Also you're all archaeologists. You heard rumors of a new unexplored cavern complex in the wastes south of Acre. Academia suspects it might be related to the crusades based upon the first discovery: a European sword hilt.
How many yoke do you want to buy?
lsd required
>>45667582
The essential appeal you need comes from problem-solving. That means on-location obstacles/problems to overcome, probably some resource management too. There's also appeal from RP. Together that's enough draw for some players.
Players who only want to murderhobo won't like it though. And unfortunately these shitters are commonplace. I've never had a single Shadowrun group where I didn't have to reeducate at least one player who'd go in with just a hammer and treat every problem as a nail.
>>45668282
>Well, that's D&D for you.
This. The "have you tried not playing DnD" needs to be in the sticky.
>>45667582
You mean no physical combat, or no combat at all?
Doing without puzzles is also a bit difficult depending on your meaning. You mean puzzles to get through the dungeon, but what about "what the fuck does this mean" puzzles?
Archaeologist game. Botanist game. Dinotopia Game.
You'd need a special group to do it. But it's doable.
>>45668634
What is non-physical combat? Magical combat, social "combat"?
I mean Legend of Zelda style puzzles where you have to be clever and do a series of actions in sequence (or something like that) in order to access a thing. I would like lots of "What the fuck does this mean" puzzles.
>>45668127
God, I would play the hell out of this if it happened in my group.
>>45668192
I'm pretty sure you're thinking of Torchbearer. If Dungeon World has it (I forget, it's been a while) it's very abstract and there's no nitty gritty resource management.
>>45667582
Yes, but they'd have to have an active force in this world. once Iet a bunch of players basically play civilization in D&D, no killing, just resource management. They still love it to this day. but it's only because they took the world into their own hands.
>>45669098
Have you read/played Torchbearer? Would you mind elaborating on how these aspects of the game work?
>>45669150
So in the context of this situation, do you mean that the expedition planning and execution should be done by the players alone without any GM intrusion? That all their delves should be based on a goal that they, themselves established?
>>45669153
I started to read Torchbearer once but didn't finish and don't have it anymore, unfortunately, but I do remember coming away with an impression that Torchbearer cares a lot about resource management. Not just items, but also of when the party rests and how safe they are when they do. If I remember right, it breaks up adventuring into segments based on rests and mechanically treats any dangerous place where materials aren't readily available as a "dungeon", so the bad end of a fantasy megalopolis would count.
Its starting state for player characters emphasizes that regardless of your backstory, your motivation to start with is that you are absolutely dirt poor and desperate right now with nothing to your name but what's on your back and in your bag, so you'd better make with the lucrative adventuring.
It has some of Burning Wheel's character motivation/relationship mechanics going on as well, which depends on how you feel about those to begin with.
>>45669434
Thanks. That approach seems like it would lend itself pretty well to the proposed dungeon.
>>45669545
It's like... It's the Burning Wheel guy's answer to the OSR. It's Burning Wheel trying to do gritty dungeon crawling.
We played a game like that, two player no less. There were a few traps but no real combat or enemies, and most of the game was oriented around exploration and platforming, and logic/problem solving of platforming. Definitely one of the more interesting games I've been in.
>>45667582
Allegedly so, but I've never experienced it.
I've had like 3 GMs who've tried it, but they always drag it the fuck out, it never provides anything of worth, it's boring as hell, and it seems like a gigantic waste of fucking time.
>>45670752
This. Unless there's something actually interesting to do besides unlock more walls of text while the GM describes things, it's boring as all fuck.
What makes a game fun is making decisions that have a definite and often risky outcome on what happens next. The nice thing about combat is that what you're doing has very clearly defined consequences for success and failure. Almost anyone can run a combat. It takes a bit more skill to do freer exploration without it being dull.
I think you'd have to have pressing reasons for the pcs to be exploring for exploration's sake, and gamify that process somehow. Like you're lost in a deep forest and need to locate X amount of food and resources to not die of exposure for Y number of days, how do?
As someone who actually has tried this before:
>>45667953 this.
OP, it doesn't work.
>>45667953
>Players in tabletops are designed purely around combat
>>45668419
>I've never had a single Shadowrun group where I didn't have to reeducate at least one player who'd go in with just a hammer and treat every problem as a nail.
At least the setting actually has a place for runners who aren't any better then dumb thugs. Admittedly it's usually being shot at and killed by more competent or heroic runners they meet in a mission, but there you go; thuggery only gets you so far in life, and generally it means you are trusted to beat people but not do anything important or actually useful.
Riddles, math puzzles and tile-movement games and other intellectual games too difficult for most people. Perhaps each room has a powerful golem that will let you pass if you play their game.
>>45667582
RPGs aren't a visual experience. Something like this might work in a video game - but even then I'd expect most people to grow bored pretty quickly unless they were given at least a couple of puzzles to solve - but certainly not in a tabletop game.
>>45672959
What if you're, like, REALLY good at describing things?
>>45672992
People don't play tabletop RPGs to listen to the GM describe things.
Also depends on your players. Some players cannot be satisfied without action some don't need action at all.
In my group I have a player who needs an action scene from time to time or he'll get bored. This player would be absolutely fine with exploring a dungeon without traps or enemies as long as he has an action scene before or after.
If you have a player like this some of my ideas would be having a cave in, players flee inside the dungeon and wait for some monster to lose interest, someone tries to snatch something they got out of the dungeon afterwards and they got to flee, haggle or fight...
Sometimes his girlfriend comes along. She needs about 10 times more action and is often a real pain in the ass only interested in game sex and fighting. I couldn't do a dungeon like that with her.
All my other players would play that without any extras.
Allways make sure to put interesting stuff in it, lore revealings, connections to characters, advancement options or make the inside something shocking and let the players feel in danger.
>>45673086
I do.
>>45673559
Then have him read his fantasy novel aloud to you. That's clearly what you really want.
>>45673591
Maybe I'm interested in aspects not directly involving shoving a sword into something else. I'm here to be entertained and immersed, not just play out my pathetic wish fulfillment power fantasies.
>>45673665
Your argument falls flat. Combat is my least favorite part of any game, but listening to the GM describe what you see as you move from room to room is not the only alternative.
>>45673730
Sure. Offer another one.
>>45673763
Puzzle solving. Political intrigue.
>>45667582
Van's dungeon is what you're thinking of.
I think your going to need traps or puzzles at a minimum. The high stakes (death) combined with decision points are are crucial part of the game aspect. Do you just want to listen to an interesting story or do you want to participate in the story?
>>45667582
It's not something you shove into your D&D because that's not what the players came in for.
If you run a game specifically for this premise? Then sure it'll work.
>>45667582
Eyecandy visual porn, secret rooms, treasure chests, springers, ancient cool artefact, good atmospheric music mstched with good lore.
Good environmental secrets.
Follow the spiders, turn the ancient pedestal to face the raylight of the moon.
Some Harry Potter and other exploration games managed this well, but not at the level it could have been.
I also had in mind something like this for video games and cartoons, but it's a very uncharted territory which requires an immense amount of arhitecture, directing, writing, imagination, creativity. And you have to get it juuuuuust right so it gives you that nice comfy yet exciting feeling for exploring an ancient castle ruin. Like when sitting in the middle of a spring rain without getting a cold.
I feel like you guys are missing the point.
What OP is describing, along with many of you here, is basically a third-person action video game where your character has various traversal options for navigating terrain, and the challenge comes from using those options and tools in the correct order, with the correct reactions, to overcome a room consisting of terrain obstacles and/or enemies. Basically, Prince of Persia.
The problem is, this works for VIDEO GAMES, because in those, your progress is rapid, you have an actual command of the camera and thus adequate spacial awareness and understanding of the terrain you need to navigate, and the option to try things over and over in different ways until you succeed.
In a TABELTOP GAME, this makes no sense. Say you try and leap across a ledge, and grab the hand-hold on the other side. Oh, you rolled badly. Your character is dead. Game over.
Not to mention that even if you remove the element of complete failure via death from the puzzles/traversal, you still lack adequate spacial awareness and 3-dimensional understanding of the area around you to do anything other than spend 20-30 minutes probing the DM with questions about exactly what every room looks like and what features are there to interact with. In a video game you can easily see "Ok, this pillar I can jump to and climb on, and I can leap to this ledge and wall-run to the railing." In a TTRPG, you can't acquire that knowledge without a half-hour Q&A session with the DM, so you can ascertain what there actually is to interact with so you don't just roll to leap to a ledge that isn't close enough and die instantly.
It can't be done. Not well, at least. And if it is done competently, mechanics-wise, it certainly won't be fun.
>>45674805
Now, let me expand on this a bit:
There ARE types of dungeons you can do, in theory.
I started work a long-ass time ago on a mega-dungeon style complex that was basically a rip-off of the Legend of Grimrock game/system, where every floor was a maze of dungeon corridors, none of them particularly vertical or requiring any sort of complex traversal, but all with some sort of puzzle or puzzles that usually spanned the entirety of the floor (whether they be flipping a lever here to open a window on the other side of the floor, or finding the keys hidden across the level in order to open the door to the next floor down, etc.) with traps, combat, etc.
I stopped because, frankly, I wasn't a very good or creative level designer and couldn't complete the 12 levels I planned on having.
But also I know that his type of dungeon crawl would absolutely NOT be for everyone. I've run Tomb of Horrors a few times, I've run other dungeon delves, and most are not for...most. They're slow-paced as hell, they tend to be very boring, and unless your players are all on board with outside-the-box thinking, puzzle solving, and frustration, they won't have any fun. Halfway through Tomb of Horrors, most groups have given up any enthusiasm they have for dungeons. Less novelty, overly-deadly dungeons will be faster to lose their interest.
In concept? I guess, it's possible. In practice? I doubt it.
>>45667582
No.
It will just be you talking for the entire session and since there's no combat or traps and you have full control over where every path leads, you can basically swap the entire session out for just sending your players an email describing how things unfold.
Players can still have a fun session by focusing on dialogue, role-playing and party dynamics etc, but having the dungeon as the focus and source of enjoyment while not including any dangers or challenges is not a great idea.
It's one of those things that would work in a videogame, movie, and maybe even a book, but where ultimately you are using the wrong medium for that kind of experience.
>You guys come upon another dark and creepy room.
Gets old really fast.
>>45667582
This one really depends on your party, but could be part of a mistery the players seek to uncover, maybe an abandoned mansion or site where there's a lot of information spread around in the form of texts, enviromnent and objects laying around.
You'll have to change your approach a lot though, you'd probably need a lt of planning beforehand to work out something that's likely completly different from the rest of the campaign n the dungeon.
>>45667582
The core experience for role-playing is using your resources and abilities to overcome obstacles. It doesn't matter if it's combat or social intrigue or role-playing a trial or sporting event, the point is that players role-playing their characters and reacting to events and challenges in a way that helps everyone get immersed is pretty much the strength of the medium.
If you're just doing a scenic exploration dungeon there's literally 0 reason why you can't just write a story about it and send your players, It's not like you were going to kill any of them off or have anyone totally surprise you and go off the reservation in that kind of scenario anyway.
Unless there's any tension, drama or important reason for them to be there, or potential for stuff like conflicts between characters being resolved or breaking out, it's not really a good use of time for anyone.
What did you imagine the players would get their fun from? Just you describing how cool the dungeon is or having to make a lot of meaningless choices?
>We go left.
Okay you come to another room, blablabalblabla
>>45667582
>I want to remove all the things that might be interesting about a dungeon, and have it still be interesting.
Please think about what you just said.
If that doesn't do it for you, the reason that would be boring is because you're ripping out most of the player interaction and leaving them with nothing to do but putter about and find things for you to describe in flowery terms.
At that point you'd all be better off with a book.
The only exception I can think if would be if it was VERY short, maybe 1-2 rooms, where if it's two, the first one is foreshadowing for the big reveal just a short way beyond. If you then do some reveal about the campaign you've been building up to for a while, maybe with some extra loot or nest lore for the players to find via skill checks, yeah that could be neat.
All that stuff you precluded though is what keeps shitty track less miles of dungeon from being shitty track less miles of dungeon.
>>45667582
>all these "No"s
>pic related exists in english
It's [current year], I hope people aren't still on the "D&D or nothing" train.
>>45667953
*D&D is designed for these things. I've gone through entire campaigns without combat. Not every system is D&D.
>>45673665
>>45673730 - This anon is right if you don't enjoy the interaction part of rpgs you are just looking for a book on tape.
>>45673805
Mutual world creation, character building (no not the kind with levels), and different systems for narrative manipulation are some more.
>>45675500
It's a curse sadly.
People will stick to their poorly designed, combat oriented, rpg's so long as it makes them feel like they're the jocks now and the whole setting is full of nerds and busty sluts.
>>45667582
Yes, but it won't be easy.
To keep the interest of the players, they need to be actually playing a game. It would be very possible to be exploring ancient ruins, doing something more like archaeology than adventuring, piecing together the story of those who have been before from what is left behind. You can extend it longer if there's challenge in exploring the ruins: finding passages or coming up with actual plans to bridge gaps or access rooms that aren't trivial. The important part is that it isn't just "You walk a direction, the DM Narrates." because no matter how good your narration is, your players want to play a game and will get bored of it. Ultimatley, "puzzle" elements creep in in the form of having obsticles that need creative solutions, as I have stated. All in all, this isn't something you should do a ton, or for long, but you could run a session that's mostly interacting with a interesting place and its relatively natural obstacles.
>>45668127
gpoy
it would be great if you could have this in a narratively involved group setting ofc but it'd be pretty rare to get those kinds of players and DMs together. it'd be beautiful if it ever happened tho.
exploring games don't work
faction simulators are repetitive and stupid
a purely desolate environ is extremely hard to pitch as difficult because as the DM you can't readily invent interesting worlds purely based on what is normally considered background noise, and even if you do the players normally just have to ROLL FOR X to overcome and the challenge is not there
need food? ROLL TO FORAGE. Need to cross a river? ROLL DEX FOR FOOTING. And of course time is limitless so the players can take 10 every time a hazard shows up
it'd be neat, but I have had bad bad luck with this sort of game. A lot of tabletop gaming movement decisions are basically just for one player only, and the others are included only in combat or skill-based dungeons
>>45675656
No, d&d isnt. Historically d&d was as much about exploring and finding treasure as it was about combat. It was often more advantageous to circumvent combat than it was to take non-rich monsters head on and end up losing resources and party members for little to no gain.
>>45667582
the trouble with taking all the combat and traps or puzzles out of a location is that there's nothing for the players to really interact with, and nothing to punctuate the lore they might learn.
it's fine to fill a location with lore and game world information, but there has to be other stuff to punctuate or shake things up, or it will get boring for the players. they have all those things they can do, it's best to challenge their characters in multiple different ways to give them all a chance to shine in what they are good at.
That's hard to do with a group of people.
If you want that sort of game, you play things like Myst, Riven, Dark Seed, and other mindfuck noncombat games.
>>45677542
dark seed was NOT good
puzzle games aren't great with multiple protagonists either
>>45667582
You'd have to be an incredible GM to be able to sell them on it, and if you have to ask /tg/ about it, you probably aren't a good enough GM.
>>45668755
Samefag.
Social combat, mostly. Which can get realy big. There's rap battles, and then there's spreading rumours about someone, planting evidence, etc. It's a conflict.
Hmn, look up Ryutama. It doesn't have much physcal combat and should be up your alley.
You can toque it, instead of just a journey you're trying to find a place to settle or something-goals are important
>>45675500
Explain. What does this do? What mechanics does it have?
You mean like Harry Potter?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAg0qmyYEOI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlH5k0Rqfek
>>45667953
I've been to the place in OP's picture. It's nowhere near as isolated and mysterious as the photographs make it look.
>>45668127
>make me choose how many torches to bring, how much chalk, paper and charcoal for mapping, and all that other stuff that gets forgotten about
>>45668192
>IMO the most fun parts of D&D are the resource managing bits
Where do I find players like this? Whenever I give my players a chance to stock up, they just say "I spend whatever gold is needed for the trip."
When they decide to explore a centuries-old crypt, no-one thinks to bring a lantern or candles. When they set out to bury the body of a dead friend, nobody brings a shovel. They're all too busy deciding whether they want to bring the greatsword or the greataxe to bother with things like rations and maps. When they do get to the dungeon, they pack their inventories with every weapon they find, then throw a tantrum when I say they're too encumbered to sprint.
I'm always torn between GMing the adventure the way I want to, and maintaining the fun and interest of my players.
>>45667582
Yes if you make it a Indiana Jones style, trap filled hellhole with huge treasure cache at the end.
>>45680117
Get in on the OSR, at least half of us are into that sort of stuff.
>>45680117
You nab rpers out of some MMO. I just had the most satisfying session. And it was the first time I was DMing too. Even the oddball guy who doesn't rp got into it. They arrived in town and took their time to look for shops, barter about prices, try to get good stuff, etc. Was great.
>>45667582
That does not sound fun at all. As you know, to write a story you must have a conflict. Where is the conflict for your story?
>not doing that shit for a living
I get paid to walk around abandoned buildings looking for asbestos and shit. It's great.
