In my British RPG Dragon Warrior campaign, Goblins, elves, dwarves, etc are Fae so forests, burial mounds etc. are places where Fairyland or Otherworld overlap with this world.
I think this is why Veins of the Earth was so successful, it completely eschewed being naturalistic and embraced the underworld as a mythical place. It's mostly implicit throughout the book, but it makes it explicit with some of the races and creatures. IE the "dream" elves only exist in the dreamworld... yet they're deep underground. What does that say about being underground? I think the most underlooked thing about Veins of the Earth though, was that it gave DM's a clear dividing line between the naturalistic underworld (some ruins), and THE underworld. I feel like the pushback you get is because people want to keep their naturalistic dungeon ecologies AND they want a clear dividing line between where and when those end and the true underworld begins. There's also the thing where people like to feel like they're intruding onto something strange and weird. If you're always going to THE underworld, it stops feeling as mythic. If 90% of the time you're in a naturalistic dungeon, and then 10% of the time you find a door where it shouldn't be that oozes blood and slams shut behind you, suddenly the underworld feels a lot scarier and weirder. There's also the thing where DND has so many influences it draws from that sort of conflict. You have Catholic clerics, Vancian wizards, Greek gods, along with Fafhrd and Grey Mouser all in the same universe. Sometimes the mythic underworld feels just a little *too* Greek/Egyptian/Roman/Babylonian to run in a pulp Dying Earth world. Not saying it can't be done. I do it, and I love it, but I see why some people would struggle trying to make the two fit. TL;DR: I completely agree with you, but I think some people just need more resources showing **how** to make the underworld fit into their world. Hence Veins of the Earth's popularity. We just need something like VotE for more traditional grid based dungeons.
There’s a movie that I think fits this idea very well. It’s called As Above, So Below. It’s essentially a retelling of Dante’s Inferno. A group of researchers are lured into the catacombs of Paris and essentially travel through the “layers of hell”. They continue descending and facing the horrors within. Eventually climbing “so far down” that the sole survivor ends up climbing up through the ground.
For me dungeons have a purpose such as the ruined remains of a fort oe a catacomb used as a place of safety during an attack, etc. Yet to discover how they handled mundane stuff such as going to the toilet, disposing of garbage... Linking them to the underworld would be easy, but finding your way back afterwards?
I wish we could talk about the actual information and compare opinions and beliefs, but everywhere people can gain clout or customers, you will see more 🐂💩 than good faith discussions. God, I miss forums with mods. Is it too much to ask for mods who didn't tolerate identity politics OR bigots? Trolling and edgy stuff isn't ever as funny or cool as the troll edgelord thinks it is, that's why teens are unbearable when they discover sarcasm.
If you go with the idea that all dungeons are an underworld versus a ruin that physically exists in the world, and as a result all monsters are unnatural creatures so why they are there doesn't matter just that they ARE there, that's fine but it sets a specific tone of the campaign: One where the game is more important than the world. Which is also fine, but it's like the difference between a board game where monsters exist just to be fought versus a living, breathing world. Most people I think consider a dungeon to be a ruined part of the world, not the entrance to Tartarus like with Orpheus (which is one example of a dungeon, but not the ONLY example of a dungeon)
@@Nobleshield you keep strawmaning. This is my frustration. Why do you keep saying that I or anyone else is saying "all dungeons must be the underworld."? On X you were the one using phrases like, "the dungeon should..." or "the dungeon ought..." and then proceeded to explain naturalistic reasoning for a dungeon. If anything, I should be asking you why you think all dungeons should be naturalistic.
You are not arguing against any position I or anyone on the stream holds. We literally say on stream some dungeons are not the underworld. Some are just goblin lairs or regular caves or ruins. But the deeper you go, the greater potential there is to seeing strange underworld things. The random encounter tables in most TSR editions reflect this concept. It's undeniable.
@@TheBasicExpert Dungeons should be naturalistic because they naturally exist. They are caves, ruins, catacombs, abandoned cities (Moria springs to mind here). Why wouldn't those things be natural? The deeper you go thing you say only applies if you assume "at some point" all dungeons open up into what, the Underdark? That's ridiculous. Why should things get more supernatural as you go further, assuming the dungeon even does go further? For that matter, why should it go further? A catacomb might have a level or two but probably not a dozen that somehow has various creatures on each level. You seem to be arguing from a perspective that dungeons need to be these megadungeon things with progressively lower levels, where things get weirder as you go. I don't understand that mindset at all because it's completely nonsensical. Like that seems to be what I'm not understanding. The vast majority of people consider dungeons to be abandoned ruins and the like, not "Castle Greyhawk with 12 levels of weird monsters that exist just because".
@@NobleshieldI love that you both strawman, and can't comprehend that people would love to play something fantastic rather than run into buildings over and over.
@@Nobleshield "Dungeons should be naturalistic because they naturally exist." Just assuming your position is true and restating it isn't actually an argument but circular and a logical fallacy. You point to Moria. Which is hilarious because a literal demon (Balrog) lives deep within along with strange tentacle monsters and old things from long ago. The dwarves delved too greedily and too deep. They hit the mythical underworld. And if you don't think Tolkien, a man who loved myth, wasn't leaning into the idea of the mythical underworld, you are just illiterate and wrong if I'm honest. So can you argue for your position that all dungeons should be naturalistic without a circular argument and without just assuming your position is correct? Do you have justification for your argument? Mine is that this is what ancient myth and ancient people and ancient religion entails and fits with the milieu of a fantastic medieval setting as well as references rules within the game. You are just stating circular unjustified assertions. This is why you are objectively wrong.
In my British RPG Dragon Warrior campaign, Goblins, elves, dwarves, etc are Fae so forests, burial mounds etc. are places where Fairyland or Otherworld overlap with this world.
I think this is why Veins of the Earth was so successful, it completely eschewed being naturalistic and embraced the underworld as a mythical place. It's mostly implicit throughout the book, but it makes it explicit with some of the races and creatures. IE the "dream" elves only exist in the dreamworld... yet they're deep underground. What does that say about being underground?
I think the most underlooked thing about Veins of the Earth though, was that it gave DM's a clear dividing line between the naturalistic underworld (some ruins), and THE underworld. I feel like the pushback you get is because people want to keep their naturalistic dungeon ecologies AND they want a clear dividing line between where and when those end and the true underworld begins.
There's also the thing where people like to feel like they're intruding onto something strange and weird. If you're always going to THE underworld, it stops feeling as mythic. If 90% of the time you're in a naturalistic dungeon, and then 10% of the time you find a door where it shouldn't be that oozes blood and slams shut behind you, suddenly the underworld feels a lot scarier and weirder.
There's also the thing where DND has so many influences it draws from that sort of conflict. You have Catholic clerics, Vancian wizards, Greek gods, along with Fafhrd and Grey Mouser all in the same universe. Sometimes the mythic underworld feels just a little *too* Greek/Egyptian/Roman/Babylonian to run in a pulp Dying Earth world. Not saying it can't be done. I do it, and I love it, but I see why some people would struggle trying to make the two fit.
TL;DR: I completely agree with you, but I think some people just need more resources showing **how** to make the underworld fit into their world. Hence Veins of the Earth's popularity. We just need something like VotE for more traditional grid based dungeons.
Glad I found this channel. Its a breath of fresh air.
There’s a movie that I think fits this idea very well. It’s called As Above, So Below. It’s essentially a retelling of Dante’s Inferno. A group of researchers are lured into the catacombs of Paris and essentially travel through the “layers of hell”. They continue descending and facing the horrors within. Eventually climbing “so far down” that the sole survivor ends up climbing up through the ground.
For me dungeons have a purpose such as the ruined remains of a fort oe a catacomb used as a place of safety during an attack, etc.
Yet to discover how they handled mundane stuff such as going to the toilet, disposing of garbage...
Linking them to the underworld would be easy, but finding your way back afterwards?
Good video!
Very interesting take. Big on mythologies, but never put D&D in there. Cool.
WELL SAID
I wish we could talk about the actual information and compare opinions and beliefs, but everywhere people can gain clout or customers, you will see more 🐂💩 than good faith discussions. God, I miss forums with mods. Is it too much to ask for mods who didn't tolerate identity politics OR bigots?
Trolling and edgy stuff isn't ever as funny or cool as the troll edgelord thinks it is, that's why teens are unbearable when they discover sarcasm.
If you go with the idea that all dungeons are an underworld versus a ruin that physically exists in the world, and as a result all monsters are unnatural creatures so why they are there doesn't matter just that they ARE there, that's fine but it sets a specific tone of the campaign: One where the game is more important than the world. Which is also fine, but it's like the difference between a board game where monsters exist just to be fought versus a living, breathing world.
Most people I think consider a dungeon to be a ruined part of the world, not the entrance to Tartarus like with Orpheus (which is one example of a dungeon, but not the ONLY example of a dungeon)
@@Nobleshield you keep strawmaning. This is my frustration. Why do you keep saying that I or anyone else is saying "all dungeons must be the underworld."?
On X you were the one using phrases like, "the dungeon should..." or "the dungeon ought..." and then proceeded to explain naturalistic reasoning for a dungeon.
If anything, I should be asking you why you think all dungeons should be naturalistic.
You are not arguing against any position I or anyone on the stream holds. We literally say on stream some dungeons are not the underworld. Some are just goblin lairs or regular caves or ruins.
But the deeper you go, the greater potential there is to seeing strange underworld things. The random encounter tables in most TSR editions reflect this concept. It's undeniable.
@@TheBasicExpert Dungeons should be naturalistic because they naturally exist. They are caves, ruins, catacombs, abandoned cities (Moria springs to mind here). Why wouldn't those things be natural? The deeper you go thing you say only applies if you assume "at some point" all dungeons open up into what, the Underdark? That's ridiculous. Why should things get more supernatural as you go further, assuming the dungeon even does go further? For that matter, why should it go further? A catacomb might have a level or two but probably not a dozen that somehow has various creatures on each level.
You seem to be arguing from a perspective that dungeons need to be these megadungeon things with progressively lower levels, where things get weirder as you go. I don't understand that mindset at all because it's completely nonsensical. Like that seems to be what I'm not understanding. The vast majority of people consider dungeons to be abandoned ruins and the like, not "Castle Greyhawk with 12 levels of weird monsters that exist just because".
@@NobleshieldI love that you both strawman, and can't comprehend that people would love to play something fantastic rather than run into buildings over and over.
@@Nobleshield "Dungeons should be naturalistic because they naturally exist."
Just assuming your position is true and restating it isn't actually an argument but circular and a logical fallacy.
You point to Moria. Which is hilarious because a literal demon (Balrog) lives deep within along with strange tentacle monsters and old things from long ago. The dwarves delved too greedily and too deep. They hit the mythical underworld. And if you don't think Tolkien, a man who loved myth, wasn't leaning into the idea of the mythical underworld, you are just illiterate and wrong if I'm honest.
So can you argue for your position that all dungeons should be naturalistic without a circular argument and without just assuming your position is correct? Do you have justification for your argument?
Mine is that this is what ancient myth and ancient people and ancient religion entails and fits with the milieu of a fantastic medieval setting as well as references rules within the game. You are just stating circular unjustified assertions.
This is why you are objectively wrong.