What's wrong with megadungeons?

I ran across a megadungeon article from last July. I know, I am a little behind, as I was dealing with my cancer when it came out.

In the blog, DM David lists 5 reasons why megadungeons don't work for most players.  I have replicated his list here:
1. Players never saw any examples.
2. The ecology and rational of megadungeons seemed ridiculous.
3. Play styles expanded.
4. Megadungons can feel monotonous.
5. Computers do megadungeons better.

Now, I think all of his premises are wrong. Let's start at the beginning:

1. Players never saw any examples.
A few examples were printed through Judges Guild early. Bill Webb and others contend that Tegel Manor is the first printed megadungeon. I lean towards Jennel Jaquays' Caverns of Thracia. There are other examples that people cite too (City-State of the Invincible Overlord's dungeons, the First Fantasy Campaign and probably others too).
The earliest TSR megadungeons didn't come out until the early-mid eighties: Temple of Elemental Evil, and the Lost City (B4).

If you argue that Greyhawk Ruins (first published in 1990) is the first true megadungeon, you could make David's point, but I have listed several examples from the first ten years of D&D that qualify in my expert opinion.

2. The ecology and rational of megadungeons seemed ridiculous.
If any of David's arguments hold weight, it is this one. But, holding to good standards of megadungeon design removes the gravitas. If only 1/3 of the rooms in a dungeon hold combatable creatures, that leaves 2/3 of the space to hold food/resources/restrooms etc. 
In Mord Mar, nearly every dwelling had a mushroom cellar. Rats run amok through the refuse and detritus strewn about by humanoids. They make tasty snacks for goblins. Bats find ways in and out of subterranean structures all the time. 
Rivers dot my megadungeons and when it rains, that water often drips through several levels. It doesn't take much creativity to add a room with a lot of buckets and some dripping water. (We will come back to this idea in #4).

3. Play styles expanded.
I really hate David's exposition on this one. Early D&D was filled with adventures and stories. It wasn't all just "stab the monster and take its stuff." The players used intrigue on each other. They had motivations and ideals and wanted more than David infers. 
I don't think play styles expanded at all. I think most people don't know how to craft a story within a megadungeon. The DM can't handle the possibility that the players may side with orcs, goblins, gnolls or attempt to eradicate all three. 

4. Megadungons can feel monotonous.
Sure, megadungeons can feel monotonous. So can a forest, or a jungle or the miles and miles of desert sand. Any locale will feel boring and stale if the DM can't create excitement in their tone and their words. 
Have your characters ever stood beside an orc raiding party attempting to take control of the water room as the rains started to fall? Maybe they are the diplomatic type and hammer out a solution that each group has a representative doling out water to their compatriots. Maybe the rapscallions seized control of the room and are auctioning water to the highest bidder? Putting good plot hooks in an adventure makes it feel dynamic. Don't blame bad DMing on the megadungeon, 'k?

5. Computers do megadungeons better.
Computers don't do any RPG better, full stop. The computer has certain parameters that need to be followed. That by definition makes them closed-loop games. Unlike D&D and megadungeons, where possibilities are endless. 

And David's concluding line:
"Although good design can yield a megadungeon that proves fun to play, ordinary dungeons can bring the same advantages. Today’s gamers tend to create megadungeons to foster nostalgia or to enable episodic play."

I don't think a smaller dungeon can bring the advantages I look for in a megadungeon. Out of the three tentposts of RPGs (role-play, combat, exploration), exploration is by far my favorite. Sure, I can also explore a forest or a jungle (both of which become repetitive and monotonous quickly) but a megadungeon adds so much more. It adds factions, and hidden rooms and secrets and a history to unearth. 

When you play a well crafted megadungeon, you peel back the layers like an onion, learning new things about the environment. And yes, I also like the episodic play aspect, as I have literally hundreds of friends that play D&D and are all welcome at my table.

Generational Campaigns

Early D&D was dotted by long campaigns. Both Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson had sprawling campaigns with many moving parts. Ernie Gygax later had the Hobby Shop Dungeon. My own Mord Mar campaign has run for many years, in many iterations. But, each builds off the previous. Others too have run campaigns for years.

Found on SocietalMarketing.Org

This is one of the true joys of Dungeons and Dragons, and is often lacking in games today. In the beginning, the multi-generational campaign was hard-wired into the rules. As an example, I quote Blackmoor: "The Order is structured in such a way that there is only one man at each level above the 6th (Grand Master). At such time as a 6th-level character gains sufficient experience points to rank as 7th level he temporarily gains the appropriate attributes. He must then seek out the Grand Master of Dragons, and defeat him in a fair fight. There will always be a higher level to fight, even if there is no player character in the role." (Page 4, referring to monks).

Arneson's rule allowed the return to the spotlight for long retired characters. It created adventures. It made previous adventures seem important. These things are not possible in a series of disparate campaigns. 

Even Wizards of the Coast jumped on the verisimilitude bandwagon. They released products like Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. The Expedition series followed in much the same vein. WotC counted on these products to draw in older gamers. They did.

5th Edition is using the nostalgia in a completely different way. Curse of Strahd, and Tales of the Yawning Portal are almost the original modules re-written for 5th edition. They do not pull history of players into the books. Instead, they push the books' histories into the players.

This has been an important strategy to bring new players into the game. And it has worked. D&D and the RPG industry is as strong as it has ever been. But, its been built on the history that came before today. Even the rules set is primarily built from the previous rules iterations. 

With this in mind, how does a modern DM incorporate the past into the future? That's the crux of this blog. Here's some strategies to help with both published adventures and home-brew campaigns.

1. Tie-in early. Add a Tarroka reader into the Rise of Tiamat. Use words like "lineage" and "bloodline." Don't give information on the current adventure. Let the players wonder which adventure is actually being run. 

2. Use the "Masters' Rule" from Arneson where appropriate. Druids and Monks both have a tradition of seeking out their betters. Both can have supernaturally long lives. Even paladins and warlocks may have a similar system. Return the PCs to the game if you can. 

3. Start and end your games in the same world and region. In your epilogue session, mention who has settled down, and who had kids. Try to tie these into previous characters. If Bill played a Dragonborn last adventure and is playing a human this adventure, maybe Karen is playing Bill's Dragonborn's daughter.

4. Cross-contaminate artifacts. If the players have the Sunsword after Strahd's defeat, have Acererak send his undead minions to claim it at the beginning of the Tomb of Annihilation campaign. If a character sees that weapon as their birthright, they will be in high gear to track it down.

5. If old PCs are still alive, have them show up. Maybe a chance meeting at a marketplace. "I knew your mother, she saved my life many times. I hope your group is as tight as we were." "You're adventuring with a Bucklebeer? Watch that one. His father once stabbed me for a magic ring." Let the old stories seep into the new game.

6. Have re-occurring villains. Not in just one adventure, but many campaigns. Strahd, Tiamat, Acererak and others are basically immortal. They have powerful minions that can show back up too. "Your grandparents thwarted our destruction of this realm. I only have vengeance for you now!"

7. Keep the retired adventurers who became queens or emperors on their thrones. Give the PCs some latitude when dealing with them. "Your uncle helped me gain this throne, and I shall repay the favor." Just make sure not to give too much.

8. Have a location that shows up in every campaign. One that is affected by the adventurers. Maybe they broke a hole in a wall. Let them know they've been there before. 

9. Have a construct that shows up again and again. Maybe it was a stone golem that the fighter removed the head of. The next generation runs across the same golem, now with a bronze head, and a club that has its previous head at the top. A subsequent generation finds the same golem, now with a mithril arm too.

10. Keep notes of the changes your players force upon the world. There are several websites available for this, and I use Obsidian Portal. Find one you like and keep extra notes. Review them before the next story, and re-use interesting elements.

-Rocky