First, thanks, @LaramieWall, for continuing down this rabbit hole. While actually listening to the podcast, I, too, found myself “agreeing with Brett.” In fact, it soon became difficult to see what, exactly, was at issue. Was it
- That “the boys” spent an extraneous amount of time pointing to all the locations that can be considered “dungeons?”
- That (primarily) Brett did this at all, being too casual or reductive with his designations?
- Or (later) that he was “grumpy?” (I think I would be too.)
Here’s why I agree with Brett: sure, denotatively a house or a spaceship or a jungle is not a dungeon. Sure, those are thematically and evocatively and definitionally different things. But, through a game perspective, they can have identical functions.
Now, if a “dungeon” becomes a place in which to harbor prisoners, with not a trap or monster in sight, from a gamist perspective, it no longer is a “dungeon,” simply a location.
Now, if a spaceship is full of tricks and traps and monsters (no matter how they are “skinned”), it is (functionally) a “dungeon.”
But, if a spaceship is a collection of rooms for PCs to inhabit while they go to another planet, then, in this case, it is a vehicle, not a “dungeon.” It has the purpose of conveyance, not:
A dungeon is an isolated, defined space consisting of interconnecting areas containing tricks, traps, NPCs, and monsters with which to challenge PCs and excite players.