PDA

View Full Version : Sandbox Campaigns!



Broccoli21
2010-05-13, 05:23 PM
So I was planning on running a sandbox type campaign soon Post apocalyptic :smallbiggrin:), and have been reading a good deal on the nuances of making them work. I was wondering if you guys in the playground had any advice on running sandboxes or experiences from playing in them.

some starters:
Are they primarily story or adventuring based? What can you do to draw players in without railroading? How to prepare? (I have so far just made a large map and tons of lore and places to visit). How much freedom is good? Is a small group better? Solo sessions? etc.

Johel
2010-05-13, 05:35 PM
Make sure your world's background is detailed. Players can really end up anywhere and since there will be little to no plot to contain/focus them, the world better makes sense.
Make sure you have at least 4 or 5 "Major Powers" ready to be tossed at your players if they make too much of a disturbance in the world. Sandbox means you don't have a planned scenario for them. It doesn't mean they are free to seed chaos without consequences.
Make sure you have minor plot hooks ready. Those shouldn't be adventures so much as side quests. If people can't make the world interesting, let's just say you are here for a reason.


DON'T :

Allow them to play high-level. This will end up with god-killing level of metagaming, along with you having to escalate the threat level far too quickly for the world to handle. challenges are fun when they have a purpose other than challenges.
Allow them to custom-create artifacts or something "harmless". If it breaks physics, you can be sure the player has a way to Rule The World in 80 days with it. Might be fun for him, not for the other players.
Allow them to get away with moraly dubious choices too easily. Sure, they are free to do what they want. But so are the NPC.

Thinker
2010-05-13, 05:36 PM
You can get by fine without much railroading, possibly needing some to get the group together to begin with (depending on if the characters already know each other and whatnot).

You can do both adventure and plot-based sandbox games. I like to have a list of hooks for the various environments in a game. If the characters are in a jungle area, I pull up that list and randomly pick a few that are available in that area. The characters are free to investigate or not. Even if they don't uncover the hooks, progress the game world as though some consequence of the events happened. It could impact them in a way so that they will have to deal with the situation eventually. Along this same idea, you can have an overarching plot, but don't force the PC's to intervene. Keep the plot progressing and eventually it may affect the group enough so that they have to deal with the ramifications of said plot (just don't blow up the world if the characters don't bite ;) )

Make sure that everyone knows the style of play ahead of time. Tell them that most of the time, Farmer Joe won't run up to the strangers asking for help. They may have to do something to get people's attention first (like shake down a local gang leader in a bar).

Group size shouldn't matter that much. If you're comfortable running a game for 6 people regularly, running it for 6 people in a sandbox environment can be done just as well. Again, be sure that everyone is aware of this and tries to have their character's goals lineup with the party's immediate goals.

Kaun
2010-05-13, 05:56 PM
A common one i hear and have experianced is a lot of players when put in a Sandbox will latch onto the first hook they stumble into and follow it till there is nothing left to be done.

It's hard to explain why this can be frustrating to a DM but when you have set up a sandbox it some times can. Especialy when the players bust up a local gang of thugs who have been herrasing travlers and are frustrated when there is no major ongoing plot building from that.

I am not sure what the point i am trying to make is but i will say this.

Try throwing a few dud hooks in too make the players think about what they want to get involved in or not. This can all so have some negative side affects but you have to try and get them out of a story based mindset some what.

Greenish
2010-05-13, 06:21 PM
Explain to your players before starting that the game will be sandbox and tell them what it means.

Don't try to be prepared for everything that could happen: you can't. Having the world somewhat fleshed up helps, but having it perfect is counterproductive since you could come up with better ideas on the fly as PCs do something you didn't expect.

nedz
2010-05-13, 07:11 PM
There are many types of Sandbox game. I tend to run a Simulation based game, but there are other styles.

In preparing the world, well thats a big topic. You only need to do detailed work on the parts of the world which they will encounter. You can control this, in fact I wouldn't know how to do it otherwise. You can start them in a village, town or city - whatever. The starting locale will need the most detail, and the larger the settlement the more work you will have.

I pay a lot of attention to character backgrounds. My aim is to tie them into the milueax. Clerics are easy: they have a temple and that gives some initial politics and plots. Other classes vary - again a big topic. I work out more milueaux detail based on the aspects that the players tell me their characters are linked to.

I start by railroading them into a plot just to get everyone together. This plot will be based off their backgrounds. Once they have a few contacts and have determined their direction you can start to pull up the tracks. At some point they will start to choose their own direction, or you won't be able to pull this off. You have to give them space to do this.

All campaigns need direction, if the players can't supply this then you have too. Being able to run this style of campaign requires having players (not neccesarily all of them) who can take the lead.

The worst kind of players are those who give you no character background, and then will not take the lead. You can survive with some of these in the group, but if they are all passive your campaign will drift. If this happens then your sandbox campaign will fail.

I see the DMs role as being a non-navigator. You may have to intervene to stop the drift, but if you intervene too much its not a sandbox.

There is so much more I could add, but it is a huge topic.

An as I said in the beginning there are many ways to do this.

Broccoli21
2010-05-13, 07:56 PM
Should I create a situation in the world that "forces" the players to explore and adventure (or at least not just stay in the same town, protected by guards)?
ex. I am running a post apocalyptic campaign in which the world has frozen over (its a bit in the future as well). Should I make it so the players have to explore to find uranium (for heat production)?

Another question: Is it a good idea to have the player allied with various large factions in the start, and should I give them a lot of info on the world in the start?

Thanks for all your help guys.

Kaun
2010-05-13, 08:11 PM
Broc can i ask the System/Tech lvl out of interest?

Broccoli21
2010-05-13, 09:00 PM
no prob man.
Here's some basic info on the setting:

GURPS-about 100 years into the future
Humanity has spent majority of this time feuding over resources, and a utopia was set up on another system, named Oracle. After a bit, the world started freezing over for no apparent reason (alien terraforming :smallbiggrin:) and civil war broke. A few factions came from the chaos: the imperium (cliche republic of man), the brotherhood of the waning sun (quasi religious super-tech terrorist group, now fractured into sects), the PDA (freedom fighters), and the blood-blade clan (nomadic raiders). The world is now a fractured dying shell of what it once was. In the main city, the old imperium still tries to hold on to control as rioters and anarchists cripple the utopia further and blah blah blah...the pcs enter at different points (via solo sessions), and will have to fight for survival. One pc has already stated that he wants to be secret agent, so i think Ill make him a agent of the brotherhood. Another wants to be an engineer (maybe imperium)

All in all, I think that im not going to worry too much about intra-party conflict, as we'll be communicating via skype for lots of solo shnazz.

types of tech: lasers, railguns, liquid body armor, long duration spaceflight (no hyperspace) prototype particle beams and invisibility

Kaun
2010-05-13, 09:09 PM
Wow sounds awesome,

By main city are you talking mad max style barter town or a sort of monolithinc Archology whith enviro systems that where hastly convertered in an attempt to survive the onset of the big freeze?

Thinker
2010-05-13, 09:11 PM
Should I create a situation in the world that "forces" the players to explore and adventure (or at least not just stay in the same town, protected by guards)?
ex. I am running a post apocalyptic campaign in which the world has frozen over (its a bit in the future as well). Should I make it so the players have to explore to find uranium (for heat production)?

Another question: Is it a good idea to have the player allied with various large factions in the start, and should I give them a lot of info on the world in the start?

Thanks for all your help guys.

You don't necessarily have to force the players to explore and adventure, but in that setting, doing dangerous tasks would be a way of life. The group is obviously from some community (loners might have a hard time surviving in the cold regions). You could have any number of afflictions hinder their community. They won't have to be the ones to deal with it, but doing so could improve their social standing. Another alternative is that they are outsiders, having had their own community destroyed and are trying to build some credibility. I don't know how social structures work in your world, but connections seem like they are necessary just to survive in post apocalyptic society (I think of it sort of like the Old West, but without the Army periodically lending a hand).

Broccoli21
2010-05-13, 09:18 PM
Wow sounds awesome,

By main city are you talking mad max style barter town or a sort of monolithinc Archology whith enviro systems that where hastly convertered in an attempt to survive the onset of the big freeze?
The latter is spot on.

Thinker-I think your idea about connections is great. If they need to survive they will have to unite or join other groups. I was thinking that maybe nuclear power cells from abandoned tanks and reactors could be used by nomadic bands as a source of life. As for the main city (Oracle city), outsiders are not allowed, and citizens cannot leave (former wealthy citizens have been genetically engineered and their genes are of value to keeping society functioning). To make it more interesting, should I drop the players in and have them fend for themselves, or is it wise to give them a bit of support in the start to avoid grief and/or death?

Kaun
2010-05-13, 09:48 PM
You could say that this Oracle city was built slightly diffrent from other Archologies around because rather then its primary power source being 75% + solar generated it was built on a natural geo thermal vent which was harvested to drive the major generators in the structure.

The one common task that i could see poping up over and over again is getting replacement components for the archologies enviromental systems.
You can have some crash hot technichans working for you but when things like an intergrated circuit die they can bring vital equipment too its knees and are next to impossible to repair and require replacement.

So your Oracle city council would likely often be looking for volenteers to head to other know hab site's to raid the ruins looking for usable parts to keep there systems running.

NM020110
2010-05-13, 09:53 PM
Just adding in a bit of input from a simulation that I'm preparing to run, which may come in handy if you plan to run a higher level game:

1.) Your players can, and probably will, try to rule the world. This could happen in as few as 80 days, as was stated. Remember that there is always a bigger fish. In my game, players are starting at near epic, and will likely be more than fifty when it dies out/they kill the most powerful enemy. To keep them from doing this easily, don't give them time to enact their plan. Don't give them four hours, let alone eighty days. As an example, my players will , every 3-8 hours, be given a nine round notice to get into a shelter (10 rounds with a good spot check). Failing to do so will result in a rather brutal mindrape, dealing 10d6+12 temporary wisdom damage (DC 35 to avoid 2d8 permanent wisdom damage), and cause a CR 42-68 encounter to come in about a day.

2.) Give them incentive to move. This will naturally reduce the chances of them creating walls of iron to sell, or some other exploit. Furthermore, try to simulate an economy. This will cause players to generate their own adventures without any input from you in most cases. If they want that +5 vorpal sword of poison, they'd better find someone selling it.

3.) Split The Party. If necessary, lead the groups to oppose each other. This will likely lead to vigorous participation as the players struggle against equal opponents, or at the very least stop someone from taking over the world. Don't be shy about this either. The game I have planned out has 18 players, and I've stated that I'm perfectly willing to have them all be in parties of one, if they wish.

4.) Don't impose arbitrary limits. If they want to join the ranks of the Evil Empire, go ahead and let them do it.

I hope that this will help you in running your campaign.

Broccoli21
2010-05-14, 01:11 AM
NM020110-
Great advice, ill try to give players a motivation to get off their butts.:smalltongue: Most of the treasure in my campaign is in the form of technology or guns/ammo. It'll primarily be survival, so I don't really need to worry about them doing too much ridiculous crap, except for when they might get a hovertank or something...:smalleek:

the party is already split...one of the players might actually attempt to kill everyone later when they meet up.

One question: Ive really never done any party conflict before (im a noob DM)-so I was wondering how you guys run a situation in which there are two parties, and neither should know what the other is doing (ex. a player assassinating another a person another player is guarding). Do you switch back and forth? How does time flow? How do you prevent metagame?

Lapak
2010-05-14, 01:34 AM
There was a thread about sandbox campaigns (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126479) a while back; it was fantasy-ish rather than post-apocalyptic but much of the advice still applies.

I have some advice about prepping so that you're ready regardless of which plot hook players decide to follow up on in that thread in this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7017030&postcount=8); the method has served me pretty well in the past.

Thinker
2010-05-15, 12:42 AM
NM020110-
Great advice, ill try to give players a motivation to get off their butts.:smalltongue: Most of the treasure in my campaign is in the form of technology or guns/ammo. It'll primarily be survival, so I don't really need to worry about them doing too much ridiculous crap, except for when they might get a hovertank or something...:smalleek:

the party is already split...one of the players might actually attempt to kill everyone later when they meet up.

One question: Ive really never done any party conflict before (im a noob DM)-so I was wondering how you guys run a situation in which there are two parties, and neither should know what the other is doing (ex. a player assassinating another a person another player is guarding). Do you switch back and forth? How does time flow? How do you prevent metagame?

I hope the group can handle intra-party conflict. It can completely destroy the game if the group can't function as a group. If you can, try to get the players to at least point their personal goals in the same direction. It is very hard to manage without fairly mature players who are willing to forgo any out of character knowledge. Party communication and bonds can help drive the game:

"Yeah, we totally found that reactor core and got laid and paid. You're pretty good with a gun, I'd like to hang around someone like you. I might live longer. Didn't you say your sister was being held captive by some metal-heads out in the boonies? Well if I help you go rescue her, maybe you could help me with my problem..."

Lord Loss
2010-05-15, 06:37 AM
I'm running a post-apocalyptic semi-sandbox game at the moment.

The players are in a world inhabited for the most part by abberrations of nearly endless power. The players can go anywhere, but Travel is insanely dangerous. a CR 25 Abberration can pop out of the sky and eat you. A swarm of Psurlons can hunt you down. You are never Safe.

Right now, they're trying to stop a cult in the town. This cult will eventually call an armada of Kythons to eradicate the town. Based on the PC succeses/failures, the condition of the town will go anywhere from Somewhat Damaged to Completely Destroyed. During the invasion the PCs can escape the town through use of a Dirigible. If they choose to, they can go almost anywhere they want (I'll give a multitude of known locations they can choose from, or they can explore an unknown region). Each location links to the backstory of one (or more) PCs.

NM020110
2010-05-16, 07:43 PM
If you're worried about the players using metagame and they will look at other posts to know what is going on, then for that section you can revert to playing by private message. If they don't know it, they can't use it.

Another option is to come right out and say that this is another player who is opposed to you. This should leave any advantages they can get from metagaming moot, as the opponent has those same advantages.

As for a hovertank causing shenanigans...wouldn't the machinery inherent in that break down every once in a while? Who would they get to fix it, and how could they trust that person?