Mike Mearls Games
patreon
OD&D Meets 5e: Dungeon Exploration
🕑 Added 2025-10-03 16:50:30 +0000 UTCMany years ago when I first launched the D&D 5e project, the design team took the time to play every edition of D&D. Our big takeaway from the process was that the core game play of D&D remained largely the same across every edition. The DM described a scene, the players argued about what to do, they did stuff, and the DM described what happened next.
However, the games diverged in the details. Running OD&D and AD&D for the team, along with my subsequent experiences with both games, drove home one major shift - exploration felt far more dangerous in earlier editions.
Random encounters aren't distractions when you are always one or two unlucky rolls away from disaster. Once you lose one character, my experience is that the party hits a downward spiral that pushes you to get out of the dungeon as quickly as possible.
I really enjoyed that sense of dread, both as a player and as a DM.
Reading over OD&D's rules for dungeon exploration, I was inspired to take a swing at creating a framework for exploration that does a few things.
Lean into Danger. I wanted the dungeon to feel dangerous. However, modern TTRPGs tend to make the characters a bit more durable in combat. I decided to make random encounters less random. In this approach, there is always an encounter bearing down on you. The question is whether you figure out the threat before it appears. I liked the idea of adding a little more certain to wandering monsters to put the players on edge.
Mysterious Die Rolls. I hate passive Perception. It forces the DM to decide if the party finds a trap or spots a monster. Since you know the characters' check result, and the DM picks the DC, you are really just deciding ahead of time whether the check succeeds or fails.
Passive checks were created to avoid this situation: the characters walk buy a secret door. The DM asks for a check. The check fails. The players, knowing that they needed to make a check, might now metagame and start searching.
That approach makes sense in a world where there is no time pressure. The players can make as many checks as they want without fear. However, if we add more teeth to wandering monsters now the players have a real choice. If they stay in place and keep looking for stuff, they risk getting attacked. Is it worth it, especially since they don't know what they might find?
This system embraces the roll with no result. It creates a real choice point for the PC with the implementation of inevitably wandering monsters.
Organize to Streamline. I've always loved how players organize their characters into a marching order in a dungeon. It makes the game feel like an expedition to the unknown and prompts some simple but interesting discussions about tactics. In this system, players pick activities that reflect what their character focuses on as they travel. The goal is to make the players feel like their approach to exploration has a significant and important effect on how a dungeon expedition plays out. Do you focus on preparing for combat, searching for traps, or trying to use diplomacy?
The DM can then take note of the group's activities and resolve actions without slowing down the game.
Comments
Mike Mearls Games
It definitely reads like a lot. What I've found in testing so far is that it makes things flow pretty well as long as the group isn't constantly changing their activities.
Michael Sixel
Going to have to read these a few times to see how I feel. Some good ideas, but I have no idea how I feel about the details at this point.
