Yesterday, +Aaron McLin said putting "This is … not a stupid dungeon crawl" into my house rules was a "cheap shot" and I started wondering about the legitimacy of calling a certain play style "stupid".

I have played and run sessions where the game is about moving from room to room, opening doors, finding traps and fighting monsters, but all activities happen on the simplest level where practically no thought is required.

Moving from room to room has a clear procedure:

1. write down walking order on a piece of paper
2. thief is checking for traps (rolls dice)

Opening doors has a clear procedure:

1. thief listens carefully (rolls dice)
2. thief checks whether it is locked
3. thief opens the lock if necessary (rolls dice)
4. alternatively, the fighter kicks in the door (rolls dice)

Finding traps is also a thoughtless process:

1. thief checks chest for traps (rolls dice)

Fighting monsters is also thoughtless:

1. roll for initiative (roll dice)
2. roll attack (roll dice)
3. roll damage (roll dice)
4. say your armor class when targeted
5. reduce hit-points when hit

The thoughtlessness is there because at one point we determined this to be our optimal procedure and we didn't want to keep restating it, and there was no reason to change it. There were no trade-offs to make, no decisions to make, only the motions to go through. Thus, while I wouldn't have called it "stupid" at the time, that's how I see it now.

I hope that I managed to turn the game around whenever I realized that we were descending into this routine. What I’m trying to tell new players at the table is that this is not how I want to play, except I want to use a few words as possible.

Is "stupid" the right word?
Shared publiclyView activity