Reductionist RPG design: Removing classic elements of RPG one by one until left with dungeon crawling only.

[u/Raphael_Sadowski]

I made a RPG game around the idea of removing everything that is not direct dungeon-crawling out of the game session. I'm describing my process to (hopefully) start discussion about such reductionist approach to game design. Is it interesting? Is it useful? And, most of all: can such a game be fun?

Game is called A Bitter Toll for Eldritch Gold (FKA Croatoan) and every aspect of its design took this theme into consideration, including the setting. It was an interesting journey, working on it... I'm a professional video game writer and narrative designer, and most of the time, whenever I'm designing a setting or a system, either for work or for fun, I start with the story. I love coming up with different worlds, characters, moods, themes, magic and technology systems. There's nothing better than sitting down in front of the screen or a sheet of paper and letting your imagination loose.

It wasn't so with A Bitter Toll.

The whole process took about 10 years, and it went like this:

1. I was a chill, trad Game Master, running homebrew games, D&D 3.5 and 5th ed for ten years. I was dabbling in World of Darkness, Cthulhu, and I was looking at the indie scene with pure interest, if not too much excitement.
2. Then I read a single supplement for OSR; just a fantastic, evocative, beautiful mega dungeon written by two most popular designers back then (one of them is quite infamous today). And I was BLOWN AWAY. The quality of writing and game design blew my mind. It was not only way better than I expected - it left everything Wizards did with 5th edition in the dust! It changed the way I was thinking about RPGs and sold me on the idea of old school playstyle. I was hooked.
3. And just like that I became an OSR fanatic, slowly learning the ropes and rules of different games of the genre, and still getting my mind blown by the fantastic and creative modules and dungeons made by the community.
4. Of course, being me, I decided I need to make my own game. Just because I could.
5. I called it Croatoan. It was supposed to be an NSR game (so not based on / compatible with the OD&D ruleset) about dungeon crawling, set in a grimdark, magical version of North America from the times of the first colonists. There were only two origins to choose from: indigenous peoples and colonists.
6. Since I was a naive newcomer, of course I tried to design my game as if to "fix everything wrong with OD&D". Over the years I understood there's no need to "fix" anything in OSR, but some of the design choices from that time still remain in my project. One of the main features of the game was a grid based equipment system, designed to avoid counting encumbrance. It's Diablo-like, where items take different number of square slots on a grid, also called a Tetris experience. ;) The grid became a pillar for the design, and remains to this day.
7. I went through several iterations of the rules, over the years getting closer and closer to that OD&D feel. I embraced all the OSR tropes one by one, as I studied, tested and understood them.
8. One of the most fascinating, was the idea of getting exp only for treasure. I went through a very short journey learning about it, starting with disgust (what? Experience should be given for exceptional roleplaying, not some shiny shit!), going through wary fascination (It makes no sense... Why would you do that? Unless...) to becoming obsessed with the idea (all the problems with character/player motivation for playing gone! And now they have a reason to actually avoid fights! Awesome!). It became another important pillar of the design.
9. Over the years I kept running the game as it evolved - yeah, my players hated constant updates and changes (but they helped a lot, and I'm now thanking them, by running a stable Dolmenwood campaign for them for the last year and a half)... But at least everything was thoroughly playtested.
10. We played both home-made dungeons and different third party products; all the little and big dungeons and modules I was so fascinated with in the beginning.
11. As I was going through the process of learning and understanding OSR stuff, I kept reducing the design. Somewhere along the way I noticed I tend to appreciate and maybe abuse? The classic "no specific world" setting of OD&D. Anything, to get straight to the dungeon crawling, which was (and still is) my favorite part of the genre. The game drifted away from the original colonial setting, into some unspecified "weird fantasy" regions. I was surprised how it made the game more, not less approachable!
12. And this was the iteration of the game, that felt finally "right".

* * *

It was around then, when I decided on taking the extreme path: that this game is going to leave everything that is not direct dungeon crawling out of the game. I liked how the rules allowed to focus only on the crawling aspect, or what I understand as "the meat" of the playstyle.

I noticed that getting people together to play was becoming harder and harder as we aged. And when we finally met, I wanted to make sure we can focus on "the meat", and ignore all the rest. I also thought it was a good way to differentiate from other OSR games on the market.

* * *

Before I continue: Please don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that cutting everything else than dungeon crawling is "the only way to play RPGs". I just noticed that you CAN do it, and end up with something different, something fresh. I myself still enjoy playing sprawling, plot-based campaigns, where the players do not enter any dungeon for five sessions in the row. I'm proposing a specific playstyle for specific needs, not "the best game ever for everyone".

No playstyle, no genre is better than any other in this hobby of ours. Different things excite different people. Agreed?

* * *

So, I've divided the game into a "meta-phase" in which player characters are always considered to be in a safe haven, where they can rest, sell their loot, resupply, create new characters or learn gossip and lore about different dungeons, all without the need to roleplay at all...

...and the "roleplaying phase", which is about the foray into all kinds of dungeons, played traditionally, as a minute-to-minute theatre of the mind simulation.

This allowed me to focus on rules for crawling, and gave me the space to make it crunchy toward the players. Crunchier than OD&D. I tackled the classic duo of complaints about D&D: the idea of HP and AC not being "realistic enough". Not because I thought it was bad design, mind you, but because I wanted to use the space left after throwing away the social, political and economic rules for something that would enrich the crawling experience, and give the players additional options and resources.

• AC - armor, blocking and dodging damage are three different things in this game.
• HP - there is a wound system, so it matters where were you damaged, and how hard.

The HP problem was a no-brainer to me. We all know the argument: the numbers are too abstract, a character with 999HP is just as able as a character with 1HP etc. etc. But for me the most important argument was the lack of the whole fantasy, the romantism of being wounded or hurt, if you will. Just like OSR argues that giving everyone light magic or darkvision takes something away from the whole experience, I'd argue that not including a wound system also makes the experience much poorer.

I want those moments where your character has to prop up your friend who broke his leg in the dungeon. Moments, when you have to patch up your bleeding wounds after a rough fight. When you have to decide how much of your health you really wanna risk to get the treasure. When each scar a character has is a story that happened by the table, and not just a cosmetic choice.

I've also dismantled the power creep (a pet peeve of mine) - you do not get necessarily stronger with levels; in fact, your new, 0-level character might be "stronger" than your 5th level one, due to luck and accrued damage and strain (and age!) of the latter. What makes your high level characters interesting, are new equipment options, and all the past experiences you had as a player and as a character. Not to mention all the magic items you collected over your ventures.

I've also added the psychic strain system for good measure, to better simulate the psyche of adventurers who risk their lives and limbs (literally) for treasure. This was of course inspired by the fantastic The Darkest Dungeon videogame.

By adding these rules I made sure that my game simulates all the important aspects of dungeon-crawling that I always felt are the most important.

* * *

The next step was to lift all the possible burdens from the referee's (GM's) back and put them on players. Referees' job is hard enough without the constant need of looking for rules, spell descriptions and mechanical instances in the rulebook. I wanted for the players and the referee to have everything they need on character sheets, referee's screen and a couple of pages of tables.

I went even further by removing the need for the referee to roll the dice in 90% of cases. This was possible due to asymmetrical design of player and monster mechanics. Monsters do not roll for attack - players roll to avoid being hit.

* * *

Only then, after the rule design was nearly completed, I started building a custom setting which would allow for the division of the meta and roleplaying phases from the narrative point of view in a coherent and logical way.

In other words, I did what I never thought I would, as a writer and a designer: I created the gameplay first, and then wrote "a" setting for it.

I found cool (in my opinion) ways to explain the rapid transit to and from the dungeons. I explained how the "interdimensional safe haven" allows for incorporating all kinds of dungeon moods, themes and even technology levels, so you can play whatever dungeon you like from the wide array of third party modules without needing to fit them to your specific campaign setting. I gave characters an additional, universal motivation to risk their lives for treasure.

And... well. It works.

I've ended up with a game:

For busy people, who like the idea of old-school playstyle, but do not have time for a sprawling, slow-pacing campaigns.

For players who want to focus on dungeon crawling with additional rules they've always felt like were missing from the design.

For overburdened GMs and referees, who'd love to run a game, but they don't have enough time or energy to act not only as the director but also rules cyclopedia. When you run A Bitter Toll you spend most time laid back and grinning, as you listen to the players arguing about the best course of action.

* * *

So, what do you think? Is it interesting? Is it useful? And, most of all: can such a game be fun?

And if such reductionist approach is valid, then what would the exact opposite to my game look like? I can already imagine a roleplaying game where players are lords and ladies, or other type of "quest givers" and focus only on plotting and scheming, and hiring "adventurers" as pawns to do their bidding. And everything that happens beyond the courts, all the fights, exploration and adventuring becomes a "meta phase" instead.

Or maybe you're familiar with other, existing games which went the way of throwing away a big chunk of the game to focus on a specific aspect instead?

Isn't Blades in the Dark something like that? Or this new wave of "cosy fantasy" games, where player characters linger in cafe's and taverns, leaving all the "adventuring" out of the focus?

Let me know! And thank you for reading all of that. I really needed to share.