Pages

Monday, August 19, 2024

The Mythic Underworld "controversy" and other X/Twitter debates

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong, THAT FITS IN A TWEET.
- Eric Diaz, paraphrasing H. L. Mencken and probably repeating someone else.

If you don't use Twitter/X, you might have missed this (count yourself lucky), but there has been a Mythic Underworld "controversy" lately, with people pointing out that whoever doesn't understand the concept is a fool, lacks imagination or worse.

Conversely, there might have been people who claimed the opposite - dungeons that make no sense are dumb and people are dumb to use them - although I haven't seem many.

Obliviously, I disagree with both viewpoints.


But what is "The Mythic Underworld"?

I talked briefly about this when I was discussing Darkest Dungeon:
Since the beginning of RPGs, dungeons have been built in two different (and somewhat antagonistic) structures. 

In the first, the dungeon is a dreamlike and almost inexplicable place, containing dragons bigger than the tunnels would allow and creatures that have no obvious ways to feed themselves - as if they came from a nightmare. [This is what people call "The Mythic Underworld"] 
In the second structure, the dungeon was created for a reason, and the creatures that live there are part of a (somewhat) coherent ecosystem ("Gygaxian naturalism").

In DD, the dungeons fit into the first model, but the game makes some concessions to the second, with aquatic creatures in the most flooded environments and mushroom-men living in the caverns. 

The lesson here is that even in the unexplained environments of a nightmare, having some thread of rationality is useful in giving players some chance to prepare themselves adequately to face the challenges that lie ahead. If there was no predictability, a huge part of the "preparation of resources" phase would be lost, since there is no way to choose the best tools if there is no clue as to what is to come.
As you can see, despite the tension between two ideas, both can be used in most campaigns, and there is even some middle ground to be found (maybe we could call this "thematic dungeons").

The problem with some of these X posts is people tend to repeat talking points without explanation, reflection or nuance. Sometimes I see the same user say the same thing (with different phrasing, memes, etc.) ten times in the same day rather than addressing any issues, questions or nuance.

The same reasoning applies to other twitter "controversies", BTW: Tolkien x Howard, Overprep x Zero prep, Homebrew x RAW, 1:1 time, etc. I might address some in the future, but "you can have both" or "it has pros and cons" would suit most "debates".

I believe the algorithm encourages this behavior. 

In addition, X is sub-optimal for long conversations. Any blog, forum or chat allows for more back and forth with fewer clicks.

The Mythic Underworld is not a black and white issue. It is an interesting concept/tool to build your dungeons.

One big problem nobody addresses is that many people in X use the "mythic underworld" as a justification for nonsensical dungeons that are randomly generated.

And, while there is nothing wrong with that, in my own experience I have found that random rooms with skeletons then goblins then giant bats are not "mythic" but boring and cliched. It is fine if you like them, but I don't think my preference for things a that make a little more sense - ecologically, architecturally, or at least thematically - signifies a lack of imagination.

In fact, randomly generated dungeons are a SEPARATE issue. You can certainly have "mythic underworld" dungeons that aren't generate randomly. 

In other words: why it's such a hotly debated topic lately? Only because people like to debate over X. 

My opinion? 

There are no "sides" of this issue, one can have either or both, and it is ultimately a matter of taste.

There are lot of other interesting aspects BOTH to mythic underworld and dungeon ecologies (probably deserving a much longer post in each case), and most D&D campaigns need both the explained and the unexplained to function.

6 comments:

  1. Twitter is only a machine for ego which is designed to create polarization and destroy constructive thought. Any kind of creative endeavors are best left outside of it.

    I, myself, tend to the naturalist view. I spend lots of time thinking on how one thing implies this other, and such. I also think that even the Mythic Underworld has an implicit ecology, that even if follows nightmare logic, has some logic

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice! I think some ecology might enhance the mythic feel.

      Delete
  2. I think the idea that randomly generated content with no rhyme or reason is mythic misses two important factors: (1) even dreams have their own logic, and even the most strange myth definitely does (2) the best procedurally generated content tries to be sophisticated enough to have *some* verisimilitude.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Definitely! The Mythic Underworld has its own rules.

      Delete
  3. These conversations are where I greatly miss Google+. I lean to the dungeon as an internally consistent place where the rules of the above don't apply or are twisted.

    I do enjoy thoughtful conversations are it though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I greatly Google+ too!

      Yes, the Mythic Underworld has its own rules.

      Delete