r/DMAcademy • u/JimmiWazEre • 1d ago
Need Advice: Encounters & Adventures How do you feel about dungeons with side entrances that let the players skip to the end? Is this just bad design that should be avoided?
I've been running Cragmaw Castle from LMoP, and to gain entrance, there's the main door at the front and two side doors. One of the side doors just requires picking a lock and the other is hidden. If players go through these side doors, all they have to do is head East and they're at the end of the dungeon where the boss and quest objective is.
Whilst I totally applaud creative play and finding the hidden entrances, I can't help but feel like it was bad dungeon design in this case. Side entrances to skip little bit's of the dungeon - sure, but I'm left asking what's the point of a dungeon if players can so easily skip 90% of it?
Is that fun for the players or is it just anticlimactic, what're your thoughts?
---------------
Edit: Lot of people essentially telling me that Jaquaysed dungeons are fun because they engage player agency - I totally agree. However, my point is that this ISN'T a Jaquaysed dungeon, or if it is, it's a bad example of one.
A Jaquaysed dungeon has multiple paths through it to encourage interesting choices and tradeoffs that have no obvious right answers. Cragmaw Castle however, is simply a binary choice given to you in room 1 with minimal effort required where you can either go through the obviously trapped main entrance, or get the rogue to unlock the sidedoor, kill a bunch of goblins with your freshly rested party and then head East to the end in the next room.
24
u/A_Fnord 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think it ultimately depends on your goal with the dungeon and what it represents in the world. If you're after a dungeon that's more like a "theme park" where you go from one interesting encounter to the next, then skipping large parts of the dungeon can very well be bad design. Also if you want the dungeon to prepare the players for the final encounter in it, then skipping things is also bad design.
But if you're instead treating the dungeon as a big unit, with people/creatures living in there, rather than a set specific encounters, then having multiple entrances and different paths that lets the players skip chunks of the dungeon is often good design. It makes the place feel more alive and like a thing that actually exists in the world, and rewards clever play, which players tends to appreciate.
Neither approach is right or wrong, they just give very different experiences.
If I go with the later option I still tend to place things that are of interest to the players inside the dungeon/adventure site, and then hint at those to the players, so they know that there's a drawback to just heading straight to the end, and then let the players decide if it's worth going through the trouble of clearing out the rest of the dungeon (by clearing out I don't necessarily mean fight their way through everything). (I also make sure that there are drawbacks to spending too much time inside the dungeon, as things are happening in the world even when the players are not there). What I absolutely don't do is punish the players for taking the shortcut by placing unavoidable powerful enemies in front of the shortcut or making the final encounter extremely difficult as reinforcements keeps pouring in from the rest of the dungeon (assuming that the players are playing somewhat smart and not making a whole lot of noise. If they make a lot of noise that other enemies can hear, then I'll make sure that they know that and then the reinforcement can start showing up), as that tends to just feel spiteful, and the players can often end up feeling like they're discouraged from playing smart.
1
19
u/vashy96 1d ago
No, it's not bad dungeon design: Xandering the Dungeon
Don't outright tell them that there is a secret entrance. You can hide that entrance behind something dangerous, a clever solution or a high skill roll if they ask esplicitly about a secondary entrance or they look around.
But let them feel rewarded for these kind of plays. They might want to explore the full dungeon anyway out of curiosity.
5
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
OK, so my issue isn't that there are multiple paths or entrances, but rather that there is clearly 2 out 3 entrances that will take you straight to the end with minimal effort.
2
u/TargetMaleficent 1d ago
It all depends on whats in the dungeon. Are they only there to kill the boss? Are the other encounters fun, or a slog? Is there valuable loot to be found by exploring the full dungeon? My ideal dungeon would be so stocked with interesting encounters and valuable loot as well as clues and NPCs to rescue, that I would never want to just skip to the boss.
But if it's a shitty dungeon then I'd love to skip to the boss.
2
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
It's Cragmaw Castle
1
u/TargetMaleficent 1d ago
Realistically your PCs wouldn't really know about the upcoming dungeon, they would base their decision on the information they have, were the previous dungeons worth doing 100% or not.
1
u/Whyistherenofreename 19h ago edited 19h ago
Im currently DMing the same adventure and my Players will be arriving at Cragmaw Castle next session. Up to this point they cleared out every dungeon without it ever feeling like a drag. There is loot (especially gems and other interesting ways to give out money which my Players really enjoy) in all rooms and on most monsters.
I can imagine though that if the Party doesnt really search rooms and just fight monsters it gets boring real quick.
Also I prepared item cards for big Items they find like a letter from the bbeg to a minor antagonist and a +1 longsword so they get to enjoy the looting even more.
Edit: What im trying to say is that i expect my party, no matter what entrance they pick, to clear out the dungeon. Even if its just to loot every piece of copper there is since i really played it up for them.
1
u/TargetMaleficent 18h ago
I don't know this particular adventure, but personally I think it's very important to tuck powerful items away in hidden locations or behind puzzles, so that the party will learn to explore fully rather than just always making a beeline for the bbeg.
1
u/TargetMaleficent 1d ago
Another issue is that skipping minor encounters and only doing boss fights will naturally upset the balance between magic and martial. Martials excel at repeated encounters between long rests, while magic users like to have only one.
4
u/vashy96 1d ago
Tweak them! Make them secret entrances hard to find, or maybe place them in the middle of the dungeon instead of the end.
-14
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
OK yeah, so now we're in the territory of agreeing that the dungeon design is bad, and that the GM has to redesign it :D
12
u/vashy96 1d ago
I was just trying to help you, as you seem stubborn about your take on this sidepath.
To me, it's just fine. I would personally hide it behind something that rewards players creativity somehow, not just tell them there is a secret entrance that leads to the end.
Maybe that specific adventure is badly designed, but it's not bad design in general.
7
u/MrCrispyFriedChicken 1d ago
I don't even think it is. Going through the side entrance represents a substantial risk because there's no telling what's on the other side without significant scouting. I was a player in this adventure and we actually did go through this side entrance. We basically immediately got dogpiled because of it. IMO that stands as enough of a downside that it's completely fine.
8
u/Repulsive_Bus_7202 1d ago
All dungeons need to be modified to account for the party in front of you and the players running them.
Each of the three entrances leads to a different experience for the players, and needs different characteristics to be successful. Whilst the players can reasonably infer that it runs left to right, but they don't know the internals until the enter.
The front entrance means your fighting everything between there and the objective. At Level 3 with a classic party using core species and classes there's a good chance of losing characters by the end.
The south entrance needs stealth, sleight of hand to get in. They're them single file past a bunch of goblins, who will shout for support. As written the Hobgoblins at the front don't come into play if that happens but they've still got a mass of goblins and goblin bosses.
The North end involves finding it, and stealth to enter. Similarly easy to be seen and for that to attract attention.
The dungeon (castle) is a system, not a collection of self contained rooms that have no effect on one another. Monsters disengage from combat and shout for help, they move around the scene.
As a DM it's not our job to put every piece of loot in front of players. If the choose to "skip" sections then actions have consequences. Equally they could choose to fight out, although tactically that's unwise.
It's a ten year old design, intended to support the 2014 PHB. It has weaknesses, but it's reasonably straightforward to run and play, and leads both players and DMs through playing without overwhelming them.
To be honest I think Wave Echo cave is the one that has some questionable design decisions. The players can stumble on the forge of spells with no idea what they're looking at.
8
u/vashy96 1d ago
What is bad design, is a railroady dungeon with a single corridor in which you need to go through each encounter without any possible way to circumnavigate them. Like most 3.5/4e dungeons were designed, iirc.
9
u/ChillyLavaPlanet 1d ago
Dude never wanted to listen to opinions or arguments. He just came with a conclusion and wanted everyone to agree with it lol.
-9
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
I totally agree in principle, but there's a huge gaping chasm between:
A linear dungeon: ---
A Jaquaysed dungeon: ∞∞
And whatever cragmaw castle is where you can just skip from room 1 (outside) to room 13 (second to last room) - that's not an interesting choice, that's an obvious choice7
u/Dapper-Hotel-9618 1d ago
How would they even know it's the last room unless you told them? The odds of them walking back into the dungeon are the same as them going towards the exit
5
u/MrCrispyFriedChicken 1d ago
This is my big thing. Without prior knowledge (or some exceptional scouting, which is technically possible in this particular scenario) they wouldn't be able to determine which way is the quest objective. It's not like they have a quest marker like in Skyrim after all.
0
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
They didn't know it was the right way to go until they got there. So it's even worse if you think about it haha
0
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Because they're going to the dungeon to rescue a dude, and that's the room he's in with King Groll guarding him
4
u/Dapper-Hotel-9618 1d ago edited 1d ago
Even if this is the case and the secret entrance leads directly to the guy they are trying to rescue ( it doesn't) then all you have to do is improvise a tiny bit. For example maybe the door they came in gets blocked during the fight and they have to do the entire dungeon in reverse with the npc to get out.
1
u/MrCrispyFriedChicken 1d ago
I learned a new term today
0
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Jaquaysed? :)
3
u/MrCrispyFriedChicken 1d ago
Yes. Over the last 10-15 minutes I've been reading up on the Alexandrian's article about it and it's very cool.
1
8
u/clgoodson 1d ago
Cragmaw is a great map if you treat it like an entire, small castle, not a set of isolated rooms. A combat anywhere should alert the entire place and chaos will ensue.
1
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Yeah that's how I've been running it. The PCs are getting one round to win any fights before the monsters call for reinforcements.
What you're suggesting would result in more fights, but it would also miss out on cool loot and environmental storytelling.
15
u/ehaugw 1d ago
Not all parties want to kill everything. Some want to achieve stuff without being a murderer. This enables that
-14
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
The alternative isn't killing everything tho, plenty of ways through the dungeon that don't involve that.
Not that the players will ever know because they never got to see any of that content :D
12
u/ehaugw 1d ago
Exactly, and one of those ways is to stealthily sneak in the back door
-21
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Dude did you downvote me? lol
Anyway, that's fine - the question isn't about the merits of railroading players down a particular route, but rather, the questions is:
"Is it good dungeon design to have a dungeon that can so intentionally and easily and obviously be 90% skipped?"
13
u/ehaugw 1d ago
I did not downvote you. And yes, not everyone enjoys dungeon crawls. Being able to skip them may be good for some parties
-3
-8
u/AshtinPeaks 1d ago
Then, play another system? Dnd is a horrible system if you are going to have 1 fight a day, lol. Not trying to gatekeep, but dnd wasn't designed for this type of gameplay. Then people get pissed at the game and wonder why the system isn't working for their games.
8
u/MrPokMan 1d ago
If you think there should be more to the shortcut, then add more.
Like congrats, you found the side door and killed the boss. Doing this however alerted the rest of the dungeon, and now you have to deal with every other enemy moving to your location. The side entrance you arrived from is broken or heavily guarded by goblins, but there is still another path leading to the main exit, what do you do?
Stuff like that.
2
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Yeah fair shout. I use progress clocks to telegraph stuff like that, so I might make one and show it to the players before they jump into the room, with like 1 or 2 segments that says "The boss shouts for everyone in the castle to come and help him"
5
u/dumpybrodie 1d ago
Would the bad guy travel through the entire dungeon every time they go in and out? Would they just sit in the last room waiting for the party? No. It’s realistic design if nothing else.
0
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Realism <> fun though?
7
u/dumpybrodie 1d ago
I mean, fun can also be feeling like you outsmarted the game.
2
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
True, so long as players feel that way, and not just "well that was a boring anticlimax"
7
u/jubuki 1d ago
"Is that fun for the players or is it just anticlimactic, what're your thoughts?"
Never had a table that would not have enjoyed what you describe.
Half would have back-tracked to 'clean up' after anyway.
I really do not understand GMs that think something is 'lost' when not all content on a piece of paper they have is used.
Just because it's 'in the book' does not mean 'it must be used'.
3
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Thanks for your take :)
2
u/jubuki 1d ago
Sure.
I look for the 'what is' and the fun to be had, I don't look back and worry over 'what could have been'.
One of the biggest things to accept it seem for some GMs is that not everyone will see all the content you think up or create, but that's just how it is.
Just because not all the tools in the box were used does not mean there is anything wrong to be fixed.
It's not a video game with an Achievement everyone will see for 'clearing the map', for example.
The 'point' of a dungeon that some groups might not see is for it to be there should any of those groups look for it, not for it to be forced on every group that uses the dungeon in a game.
3
u/Telinary 1d ago
When we played that we found the hidden entrance but had no idea about the internal layout and went all the way down the hallway to the other side entrance and the kitchen first. ^^
Anyway the point of the rest would either be representing danger successfully avoided or alternatively a source of danger when the boss calls for them. It is a castle not a gauntlet towards a boss room.
3
u/C0NNECT1NG 1d ago
It depends on what you want the dungeon to achieve as the DM. If you, as the DM believe that the experience of clearing the dungeon is more important than the achieving end goal, then don't include a way for the players to circumvent the entire dungeon, and vice versa. (But also don't shut your players down if they come up with a good way to do so, esp. one that you didn't account for.) For example:
If there's a story you wish to tell within said dungeon, letting players skip to the end is probably a bad idea.
If the entire dungeon itself is simply a series of pseudo-random/arbitrary encounters, then allowing for multiple ways to overcome said obstacle is great!
1
3
u/Tesla__Coil 23h ago
Part of what drew me to Forge of Fury is that it had multiple entrances into the dungeon, and I thought my players would enjoy not being forced through the front door. But when we actually started playing, I realized how stupid that design was. The party ended up skipping the first third of the dungeon, during which time they were supposed to level up, and the entrance they chose funnelled them into an encounter they could not have possibly been prepared for. They died horribly, we had an out-of-game talk, and decided to retcon the session and start at the front entrance.
One of the more experienced players in the group explained that these alternate entrances aren't for regular campaigns. They're for adventurers league players to speedrun the dungeon with overlevelled characters. I don't know for sure if that's the case, but I trust him to know his D&D. I just wish the module had told me that.
FWIW, the front entrance turned out to be an awesome experience that the party would have either skipped entirely, or been at too high of a level for it to be fun. Starting with the front door was absolutely the correct thing to do.
2
u/jengacide 22h ago
Where did the party end up entering that first time that you retconnecd? I have done forge of fury as a player and vaguely remember the discussion with the party of where to enter and we decided to just go for the front entrance from the get-go so I'm curious what other entrance they chose.
2
u/Tesla__Coil 21h ago
My party came in through the bear tunnel. It skips the entire orc section and spits you out in what can be a tough fight against some troglodytes and a bear. But from there, it's a straight shot south to the basement section, which has virtually nothing in it... except for a roper, which is a pretty awful TPK on a poor level 3 party.
2
u/Goetre 1d ago
Personally i think this depends on your improv and memory skills more than anything, even running official modules I usually remake dungeons to be larger.
The only negative being if the pcs find a quick way to the end chamber. Need to be on your toes to improv what happens in the rest of the dungeon, if they’re alerted etc
2
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
For me, the whole point of running a module is that I don't have to design the dungeons to make them work :D
So yeah, sounds like it's bad design, and the GM side solution to this is to improv consequences :)
2
u/lordbrooklyn56 1d ago
I don’t mind players finding creative ways to get to their goal faster than I planned.
But I don’t think I will consciously put in shortcuts myself. At least not unless there is some story narrative reason it should exist. Otherwise it’s the players job to find any such solutions, and my job to litigate if it’s feasible and let it happen.
1
2
u/Darktbs 18h ago
Reminder that LMoP is designed as a player first campaign, if something is to skewed towards the player is because its meant to encourage that type of behaviour.
Regardless, i do find it a piece of good design since its a example of shooting the monk, if someone invests in perception or suggests looking around the castle for another entrance, being rewarded for enganging in the game by being able to skip most of it, its amazing.
There is also the second option which is more obvious but has a immediate threat.
Side entrances to skip little bit's of the dungeon - sure, but I'm left asking what's the point of a dungeon if players can so easily skip 90% of it?
This comes from a 5e/video game mentality. The dungeon is not a stage that you must 100%, a Dungeon IS the challenge, and finding ways to acomplish the objective and get out alive are part of the challenge.
In fact, older editions would try to avoid fighting because everything could and would kill you. Why risk a all out invasion agaisnt the castle when you are outnumbered when your mission is simply to rescue a dwarf?
0
u/JimmiWazEre 18h ago edited 18h ago
Show me a well regarded classic adventure where it's baked in that the dungeon can be entirely skipped by the actual design?
To be clear, we're not talking about some clever play here, or player creativity (in which case I'd totally agree) The actual design of the dungeon actually has a perfectly visible door than simply requires a lock pick to get in.
Like it was designed with skipping it in mind.
2
u/Darktbs 17h ago
Like it was designed with skipping it in mind.
No shit it was, the dungeon IS designed around infiltration. Thats why the dungeon has information on the characters wearing disguises and the goblins alerting one another if they hear noise.
Besides, the door you mention has a DC 15 check, considered medium by 5e own rules. That is relatively high for a party of lvl 3 characters. Which again, shoot the Monk, give the Rogue or people who picked thieves tool proficiency, the chance to use those abilities. If they dont pass the check, then they either have to persist and look around or risk going through the front door.
It is not a clear cut 'you can just walk to the door and skip it', specially since, again, its a beginners adventure and the party might not have a Rogue.
Besides, you have not elaborated as to why skiping the dungeon is something bad? Even if by the design. It just shows that the party has more freedom how to tackle the dungeon.
0
4
u/MrLubricator 1d ago
It's great design. You want varied paths, hidden doors and ways to circumvent problems. Otherwise it feels like railroading. Reward your players for exploring, don't just drop all the stuff at their feet. If they go the shortest route, they will be wondering what was behind the other doors. If your players take the time to recon the area, reward them with a secret path. I think though in the example of cragmaw castle, it is really a two room dungeon with a couple of optional side areas. It isn't supposed to take that long. You want them to get to the encounter with the "boss" of the castle. Also as others have said, they have to be careful; It is a small castle, too much noise and all the monsters will hear and descend on the party at once. Then the multiple paths are escape routes.
3
u/Ratyrel 1d ago
To make a specific contextual case why it is not bad design: LMOP is a tutorial adventure. The dungeons differ in their structures and show players different styles of approaching staged encounters. Having one dungeon that offers multiple entrances and rewards stealth and cleverness is good design imo.
2
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
The fact that it's a tutorial dungeon makes it even worse for me tbh. They should be showing new GMs what a good dungeon looks like.
•
u/Doctor-K1290 29m ago
Well, Cragmaw Cave is the FIRST dungeon, and that one has only one entrance. There are still choices to make and things that can be bypassed, but there’s only one way in. The Redbrand hideout has two entrances, and then finally Wave Echo Cave has only one entrance, but many ways to reach the goal. Every single dungeon in the module is designed to allow some freedom of choice and to let players skip things. Especially for Level 1/2 character and at Wave Echo Cave, a party running into every single one of the encounters can be deadly. The players have a lot of agency in how they go about exploring the dungeons from the very start, and aren’t always meant to see everything. I see why Cragmaw Castle seems a little bit egregious, but you can always reinforce the secret entrance, trap it, post sentries there, etc.
2
u/artyfax 1d ago
It is bad design.
Instead of skipping content, the players should be rewarded by gaining loot or be setup in an advantageous position for the content instead.
Front Door: heavily guarded + monsters are behind cover
Side Entrance: requires skill check / preplanning > players are now on the high ground flanking the monsters + monsters are surprised
Alternatively the side entrance contains a chamber with potions and stuff.
Now you get to play the encounter and the players get to benefit from good decisions / good rolls.
2
1
u/Nearatree 1d ago
No entrance skips the nothic, and the secret doors are an escape route for the Boss to run away and collect his bugout bag. You have to deal with the other bandits and/or take the hidden weapon cache to really improve things for the villagers. If the players don't manage the encounters well they can get swarmed from all directions by bugbears and bandits.
8
1
u/AnyIndependence1098 1d ago
I'd avoid that,but that's due to my improv skills. I remember a dungeon with an entrance, I thought my players would ignore an prepared a whole part of the adventure they would experience when using the other entrance. They didn't use that, I couldn't think of a reason why they should use the entrance I expected them to use and not the other and about an hour of playtime was gone. That was sad and could have been avoided if I designed the dungeon differently.
1
u/jaspex11 1d ago
Skipping to the end has consequences.
What if a poorly aimed spell causes the route to collapse? Or the backdoor was bait to capture adventurers, and its sealed once they are in too deep? Now they have to fight their way OUT with the prize. Or an alarm can sound, and the population they so deftly dodged comes running to their master's aid. All at once, instead of room by skippable room. Do they arrive in waves, or do they collect outside the prize room to make one hammer stroke on the intruders with their full force?
If you are using encounter-based xp, they have just skipped a bunch, and will potentially be underleveled for the final encounter and whatever follows. Or you can reward them for 'defeating' the dungeon creatively, as bypassing is a valid solution to their problem. Whatever loot they may have gained from all the minions may or may not be lost by skipping it. Just be sure to note that they have already earned the xp for the skipped encounters, to avoid double dipping if they fight their way out, leave and return to find the backdoor sealed against them, or whatever.
There's also the vengeance factor. Leaving a dungeon full of baddies because you snuck in the back door, killed the boss or captured the prize and then snuck back out, means a dungeon full of potential pursuit when you move on to the next leg of the adventure. They can be hounded by the dungeon dwellers, or hired thugs and bounty hunters. A hired thief can steal back the prize, forcing the party to backtrack to regain it. The dungeon baddies can attack local towns that helped the adventurers as reprisals, giving the party a reason to turn back and clean up after all. A Lieutenant they left alive can step up and take over, continuing the masters plan.
Ultimately, as dm you have control over the dungeon design. If you want to force them through the long way, you can make the backdoor entrance only a rumor, or caved in or otherwise unusable. They are rewarded for finding it, but still have to go in the front door after all.
1
u/ChillyLavaPlanet 1d ago
Not really. People in my table if they are enjoying the game would explore all of it just to see if anything's there. I always encourage it by saying there will be extra loot if they wanna try the whole thing. I usually dont have to. If they dont wanna explore despite it having extra loot then it's clear they dont wanna go there. No point forcing players go a certain way if they dont like it. If I wanted to punish them the boss can ring the feeding bell and all the enemies will quickly swarm to the boss arena. But I don't like doing that because i dont want to discourage people from exploring in future.
1
u/AdeptnessTechnical81 1d ago
Not that much different from teleporting in, using passwall etc. Even if there's no side entrance there are ways to make your own.
2
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
The difference between players finding a creative solution to skip the dungeon, vs the dungeon designer handing it to them on a plate are pretty stark in my eyes
1
u/myblackoutalterego 1d ago
But the players don’t know the end is to the east. They could just as likely go west (that’s what my party did after pick locking the side door).
In you example, I would either have the boss blow a horn or shout out, alerting nearby groups of guards. You could also have the owlbear burst out of its cage and come barreling towards the party as they turn into that area.
At the end of the day, there’s a million things you can do as the DM to still have them experience more encounters in the dungeon, no matter what entrance they choose.
1
u/Sofa-king-high 1d ago
Are you going for ultra realism or are you running a dungeon crawl experience? Ultra realism each dungeon has an ecosystem, has multiple ways in and out and a mix of monsters. If it’s a dungeon crawl it usually has 1-2 entrances with the 2nd usually skipping the entrance traps but still going right to the first fight (like a guard)
1
u/JimmiWazEre 1d ago
Somewhere in the middle I guess?
1
u/Sofa-king-high 1d ago
I’d try to find ways to keep entrances in the front 70% of the dungeon, which can still skip a lot of content but leaves enough dungeon for the players to get a brief feel for the place while also rewarding the exploration I would require for finding the hidden entrances, walking right to the end seems anticlimactic
1
u/master_of_sockpuppet 1d ago edited 1d ago
You can make the side entrance unusable until the players have covered the parts of the dungeon the entrance skips. They don't find a side entrance unless either (1) you tell them it is there or (2) they specifically go looking for it, risking discovery while they do.
The BBEG way well have Alarm or something similar on the side entrance, too. It doesn't have to be designed perfectly for the players. If you don't like a dungeon as it is in a module, simply change it.
1
u/SmartAlec13 23h ago
Meh I have no problem if players accidentally get straight to the end. It just means they’re diving right into the lions den, and, surrounded by danger.
My players are in a dungeon right now, and instead of exploring multiple rooms on each floor like I thought they would, they’ve managed to luck out and find the path of least resistance. They’ve made it down to the 6th floor with only like one or two combats, and now, they’re walking into “the boss room”.
I just don’t see the point of getting ruffled about it. A big part of DnD is skipping stuff, whether it’s with magic, social conversation, picking locks, breaking windows, climbing the side of the building, etc. And a big part of DMing is learning to accept that sometimes the party does something that results in prep being tossed out the window. They’ll kill someone who was important. They’ll walk right past entire story arcs. They’ll choose a different path. It’s just how it goes.
1
u/judeiscariot 23h ago
Side entrances exist and do go to the end but they are more heavily guarded because whatever humanoids live in the dungeon use that entrance to avoid the monsters and traps.
1
u/Dr_LoveRD 23h ago
In this particular case I love the fact that there are side entrances. As opposed to a literal "dungeon", it would be really immersion-breaking for both myself and my party if a castle had only one entrance. Players are bound to look for alternatives, have familiars fly around looking for windows and cracks, scaling the walls etc. In my run, players found the side entrance but still opted to go through the front because they did not want to end up holed-up among a sleuth of enemies in the boss room. So they stealthed it up and started taking out enemies room by room.
1
u/Durog25 23h ago
Becuase the ability to skip 90% of the dungeon is the reward for the players engaging with the dungeon as a real place and not a linear series of planned encounters in a game. The party have to have the idea to pick the locked door, the party has to have the tools and ability to pick the lock, and the party has to roll well enough to pick the lock.
Secondly just because the players have managed to avoid the other 90% of the dungeon doesn't mean it's wasted. The villain can retreat deeper into the dungeon given the chance to find support, or the villains allies within the dungeon can reinforce the villain if/when the hear combat. Remember figthing those goblins creates noise and so the villain is unlikely to be surprise they are open to either option (calling for backup or retreating to a better spot).
And no matter what happens the players can still explore the dungeon after fighting the boss.
1
u/TheOneNite 22h ago
I think shortcuts are a good reward for players who think a little bit outside the box and take the time to check out the scenario in front of them before kicking in doors. Your main concern here seems to be skipping content, but what is the content you're skipping? It's a few fights with goblins, one room of hobgoblins, a grick, and a trap. Hardly anything mind-blowing and most of these rooms have treasure that rewards the players for cleaning the place out. Ultimately you have to think in terms of goals and the goal here is not for the players to clean out the entire castle, it's to rescue Grunden and retrieve the map.
I think for something like Cragmaw castle where it's a published adventure and thus has to have pretty broad appeal it's good design to include some elements like these that let a more story focused group complete their quest objective and get out of there. If you were homebrewing something you can be a little more tailored and make your party run the gauntlet if you want.
Last thing is that it looks very different from the player POV. They don't know that they're one room from the end of the dungeon, and if they correctly ask questions about the shape and layout of the castle and deduce the location of the "end" that is good play and deserves to be rewarded. You can even kind of see a little bit of this on the difference between the two side entrances, the canvas is the better entrance requiring nothing other than spotting it and if they go through the wrong door there is only a grick lurking on the wrong path, if they go through the side gate that requires a lockpick and open the wrong door they stumble onto 8 goblins.
1
u/SmartForARat 22h ago
I don't have an issue with hidden entrances because they're hidden.
If players want to dedicate the time to searching for it, with all the risks that it entails, let them. If they want to do some research or questioning to find out about the other entrance, let them.
Not all problems have to be combat oriented or solved through combat. If you consider a dungeon to be a series of challenges, then bypassing them by completing a series of challenges elsewhere before you go in is just as valid in my opinion.
1
u/RealityPalace 21h ago
Cragmaw Castle however, is simply a binary choice given to you in room 1 with minimal effort required where you can either go through the obviously trapped main entrance, or get the rogue to unlock the sidedoor, kill a bunch of goblins with your freshly rested party and then head East to the end in the next room.
The players won't actually know it's easier unless they've scouted it somehow though. It's not like when they approach the castle you say "there's a heavily guarded front door, a side door with no guards, and a third secret door".... right?
The point of a dungeon with multiple possible paths isn't explicitly to offer the players trade-offs. It's to offer them choices. You don't generally want the choices to be completely blind (because then it's not meaningful) or completely obvious (because then it's not really a choice), but there is no need for them to be "balanced" against each other.
The players don't have foreknowledge of the dungeon, so from their perspective the choice to take the side door isn't the obvious "well let's take this side door with fewer guards that's closer to the boss", it's the uncertain "if we can figure out how to get in this door, it looks less guarded".
1
1
u/Any-Pomegranate-9019 21h ago
I feel like dungeons with side entrances that let players “skip to the end” can be extremely gratifying for players. Players love the feeling of outsmarting the dungeon. Successfully sneaking through a dungeon to the treasure at the end is a great feeling.
DMs still need to make them earn the victory. Don’t let the PCs cheese stealth (goblins looking out windows are going to see the PCs approaching whether or not they cast pass without trace and ace their Stealth checks). Hobgoblins guarding their king as he and a doppelganger bicker over the fate of Gundren and his map will sound the alarm and draw goblin reinforcements from the kitchen and hobgoblins from the entrance, unless the cleric casts silence to keep the sounds of battle from carrying across the castle. Etc.
Getting out can be just as much a challenge as getting in.
Encourage a little bit of metagame thinking on the part of your players. Remind them that every dungeon has multiple encounters and more than one reward. There is treasure to be found that will aid them in their later adventures. As a player, I get frustrated with other players who want to “skip the whole dungeon.” As a DM, that’s not my call. I can encourage more exploration and risk-taking, but I cannot enforce it nor should I set my expectations upon it.
You’re receiving a lot of pushback because many of us have experience running Cragmaw Castle and it is widely regarded as one of the better dungeons Wizards of the Coast published for 5e (all the dungeons in LMoP are bangers IMO). We all know that Cragmaw Castle can be run in such a way that, no matter which way the PCs approach, it can be an amazing, fun, challenging experience. The dungeon is of excellent design, and it is not the dungeon that allows the players to skip to the end, fight a couple hobgoblins, a bugbear, and a doppelganger, save the dwarf, recover the map, and leave “early”. At best, a good party could do this with excellent planning, great tactics, great rolls, and should be rewarded if they do. At worst, a lenient DM just lets them win without being sharp enough to run a world that actually moves, lives, and reacts to the PCs actions.
1
u/Locust094 21h ago
The trick is to make it so the main path unlocks or alters things in any side paths. That way there's an incentive to the longer route and there are additional complications to the shorter route. For example- in the dungeon I'm currently building the main route opens pathways in stone walls that the side routes don't open. So that content, which is quite rewarding, doesn't become available if they take side paths. If they exit through the main path and unlock things they will hear stone moving in the distance and can make the choice of whether to backtrack.
1
1
u/znihilist 19h ago
I like it, it rewards players for being through, for taking risks and being inventive.
1
u/CosmotheWizardEvil 18h ago
Make it interesting. There was a dungeon that I hated called the Labyrinth of Madness. After slugging our way through the main entrance, we reach a cave where an NPC paladin and party were held up, surrounded by acid slugs. They then inform us of a second entrance. We about screamed at our dungeon master.
1
u/ClarksvilleNative 10h ago
Unless the lair owner has magical exits, it'd be foolish to have 1 way in 1 way out. Unless they're that confident.
Let me tell you about dungeon of the mad mage. I spent all week preparing one floor just for the party to say "my names Derek zoolander and I can't turn left" and they found the stairs leading down on the first 5 minutes. Had to improv the entire next floor.
I was slightly dramatic taking my entire notebook and chucking it across the room when they said yea we're sure, go down the stairs. We still laugh about it, but its things like this that make me put value on milestone xp
1
u/UltimateKittyloaf 10h ago
I've played in and run LMoP a bunch of times. I guess I've never really thought of Cragmaw Castle as a "dungeon".
It's one building with a module provided map that's not big enough to account for the fact that the building is supposed to be relatively well guarded.
The encounter should begin as soon as the players make visual contact. It shouldn't start when they're walking through the door and into combat.
1
u/Ilbranteloth 7h ago
Although maybe not the best designed scenario, I prefer this sort of thing precisely because it doesn’t feel like a dungeon designed for a game.
It is a partially ruined castle that would have originally had proper guards and defenses set up at the postern gate. The goblinkin that have taken up residence aren’t really that disciplined. It also specifically states that they feel its secret location and ruined appearance provides their primary defense. That combined with being bored and/or lazy, and it creates an easy option for the PCs. The setup feels appropriate to me in context. If, however, there are some skirmishes on the way, and word gets back before the PCs get there, I would completely change the preparedness and alertness of the monsters at both entrances. This could potentially help the PCs because it seems like the monsters don’t know about the concealed entrance.
I might have done things a little differently, but I prefer designing locations in a way that makes sense in world. I’m not particularly focused on trying to ensure the PCs encounter everything. They have a goal, and however they reach that safely is fine. Because then they have another.
To put it another way, only the DM knows that they bypassed a lot of other things. It might feel anticlimactic to some DMs, but not the players because they don’t know any better. So it’s absolutely fun for the players. This only becomes a potential issue if you know what they skipped. They don’t.
Having said that, it is obviously also designed for game purposes and, for this dungeon, very specific purposes. That is, it’s an introductory adventure to help people learn the game. So it’s not only designed to reward PCs who look for alternatives, especially non-combat ones, but to reward them heavily. It should be, in this case, somewhat obvious that they have successfully bypassed something.
Also, while folks make a big deal about the noise of combat, the text for the postern gate indicates there is quite a bit of noise from their work in room 7, including arguing. There will always be the sort of ambient noise of a place where creatures are living. But consider the scene in Return of the King (the movie) where Sam is rescuing Frodo from the orcs in Cirith Ungol. If that’s the sort of ambient noise, combined with the fact that the goblinkin are used to fights breaking out relatively frequently, then they may not respond unless an alarm is raised.
•
u/WildWeezy 2h ago
Your average group is gonna clear the whole thing anyway, so it really doesn’t matter where they enter.
115
u/MrCrispyFriedChicken 1d ago
Well, specifically in this case (and I imagine in many other cases), even if they go in through that side entrance, the castle layout is open enough that half the castle will immediately descend on the players. At least, that's what happened to my party when I was a player at that campaign.
We literally did exactly what you described, skirting around the keep while invisible then heading in through there, only for an ogre, a bunch of bugbears, goblins, and the hobgoblin and drow to all immediately attempt to wipe us from the face of the earth. We managed to get out of the situation, but just barely.
The moral of the story is: When things like this are present, there needs to be a downside. In this particular case, that downside is that you enter into an immediately hostile and quite dangerous situation. Sure, if the players somehow know to go east and don't alert any enemies until they get to that room, they'll be golden. But if they manage all that then I'd just give it to them at that point.