PDA

View Full Version : Curious about approaches to sandbox games



Kol Korran
2012-03-25, 12:08 PM
hi there folks. i'm in the middle of a process preparing for a D&D campaign for my group, which will have a loose "pirates and witch craft" theme, but i wish to make it different than my previous campaign, i wish to make it more of a sandbox. this may be a tad long, i hope you can bear with me.

i don't think i've been railroading in the past, as i let players come up with their own solutions and do their own thing and circumvent "the plot", but there was always some overall idea, overall major problem the players had to deal with. though they could bypass parts of "the plot", it was still always there and the major driving force of the campaign.

thoughts on advantages and disadvantages of sandbox games
i've seen sandbox play style mentioned here and there, and i'm curious. on one point letting the players have a significant say in the adventures they want to run and what they want to explore. it leads to more freedom in developing characters and pursuing personal goals, and thus it leads more to players' involvement, and players involvement is a great treasure to any game. i think this works well with players that like to invest in the game.

it makes the story more of a collaborative tale than a tale that The DM has mostly thought of and the players are it's main participants.

but on the other hand too much room to explore means that the players might seek stuff that the DM has no knowledge about, and though some Dms are excellent in improvising on the fly, some (myself included) are not, which leads to quite shabby world detail and quite disappointing explorations... if you wish to suddenly explore the island of the stone leaves, it kinda sucks that the Dm draws a map hastily and comes up with a bunch of monsters, when if he had the time to think and plan he'd create a great mystery, involved and believable NPCs and unique tailored challenges.

another possible problem is that too many options may lead to a great deal of frustration and a feeling of "sailing without a destination". this is especially true for players who are more casual players, who like the DM to show them the goal and let them figure out how to get there.

my approach to sandbox for my campaign
obviously i want to gain the advantages and avoid the disadvantages. i firmly believe that if you prepare well for the game, you can improvise better when the players (sooner or later) do the unexpected. i think this might be especially true for sandboxes, only there is a limit to how much you can prepare, so i thought to merge some aspects of "following the plot" with sandbox. more or likely on the following principals:

1) the world for the game should have sufficient detail to be interesting, intriguing and peek the interest of the players. attention should be given to mysteries and potential conflict zones, as nothing drives a game more than conflict. this should be done on various fields- current politics, adventure sites and rumors, past history, magic, planes and the like.

2) as the players build their characters learn of the things that interest them, and try and either incorporate them into your own ideas, or develop new ideas on their own. sort of "multiple plots". most of these you leave at a skeletal design level, keeping notes where they might interact with others and so on. a few will be "moving forces in the campaign" (usually due to main antagonists in them) and should be more detailed. (antagonist's goals, resources, plan and so on, basically by the Giant's villain building guide)

3) first adventure should focus on 3 things: bringing the party together, giving a bit more feel to the world and stereotypical figures, and most importantly- introduce conflicts, enemies, interesting NPCs, items, mysteries and such. there should be quite a few of these, each a potential for exploration and adventure. some of these of course should include points of interest of the players themselves, the rest are there to add options, and introduce ideas the players might not have thought of due to less knowledge of the setting.

4) explain the limits of the sandbox to the players, nearing the end of each adventure/ major part ask them what do they think they'd like to explore next. this enables you to prepare for that part of the adventure. that way that part could be fleshed out to the level it deserves. the players agree in a gentleman's agreement to give sufficient notice if they change their plans, and not to try to mess with you intentionally.

5) to avoid the feeling of detached stringed adventures there will be a few major plots moving in the back line. these stem from the more detailed ideas from stage 3, and may cross and interact with many side adventures to this level or another.

however, if some idea becomes more entertaining (or if some "moving plot" is boring) adjust accordingly. keep the focus on what the players are interested in.

6) every few sessions, or when a major leg of the campaign was set, send a simple questionnaire to the party, asking what themes, NPCs, opponents, mysteries, plots and the like they'd like more developed, and what they are sick off.

7) be ready to adjust, but request time to prepare (even 15 minutes within the session) to give a worthwhile product if needed.

The price
obviously this requires quite a bit of time and energy. i often quite like to prepare, and love it when my players mess things up, but i wonder if i'll have the time for this.

TL;DR

discussion
obviously you can discuss what you want, but i'd like to get your opinions on the following subjects:
- what are your opinions on sandbox? how do you run it? lessons? experiences?
- what do you think of my approach? anything that might hinder the group's fun? any tips on how to run it easier?
- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party?

thanks in advance for reading this,
Kol.

(search word: piratewitch)

Raum
2012-03-25, 12:38 PM
First thing you need to do is define what "sandbox" means to you. ;) Seriously, the term has been used and abused to mean so many different things I prefer to use other terms.

To answer some of your questions...
- what are your opinions on sandbox? how do you run it? lessons? experiences? I prefer to run games which rely heavily on player input. I don't want to just tell a story - the collaborative story created by the group interests me far more than what I come up with alone. The twists and turns I didn't expect keep me interested in the game.

- what do you think of my approach? anything that might hinder the group's fun? any tips on how to run it easier? Seems like you're planning a lot of work up front...if you're really wanting to adjust based on player input you'll waste a lot of pre-work. I try, not always successfully, to stay one session ahead of the players when it comes to detailed preparation. Don't misunderstand, I've got NPCs they may not see for months, if ever - but they're little more than a few sentences on goals and resources. I won't stat them up until / unless I think I'll need them next session.

Too much preparation is actually detrimental to flexible play. An outline or a list of goals works pretty well but start adding lists of actions or events too early and it becomes difficult to work around them.

Regarding your #4, I have (and continue to) ask players outright to tell me their immediate plans if I can't figure it out from play.

- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party? From experience, never run more than three - usually one main plot, one in the background, and a third you can switch to when players surprise you. Include PC driven plot(s) in those three.

Three seems to be a max number though - I had one year-long campaign fall apart because I had too much going on. It simply became too much to track for players who don't have all the information. Too chaotic.

Doesn't mean you can't have seeds for more plots. Just don't drop clues to more than two or three and make sure one gets resolved before throwing in clues for another.

Ideally, one of your active plots should give you a reason to instigate action when things get slow. Essentially, "Ninjas Attack!" Just because the players are driving your plots doesn't mean you can't stick an oar in on occasion. :smallbiggrin:

valadil
2012-03-25, 12:55 PM
but on the other hand too much room to explore means that the players might seek stuff that the DM has no knowledge about, and though some Dms are excellent in improvising on the fly, some (myself included) are not, which leads to quite shabby world detail and quite disappointing explorations... if you wish to suddenly explore the island of the stone leaves, it kinda sucks that the Dm draws a map hastily and comes up with a bunch of monsters, when if he had the time to think and plan he'd create a great mystery, involved and believable NPCs and unique tailored challenges.

Two thoughts here. First off, if you don't know about a thing the players are interested, you can always delay their interaction with that thing. One of the reasons I like running multiple parallel plots at once is that each plot has less resolution time during game. If I run 4 plots at once in a 4 hour session, I only have to plan ahead 1 hour for each plot, but if I run a single plot I have to plan the whole 4 hours ahead. That applies here. If the players are off the the mysterious isle, have another plot run out and interrupt them as they're getting on the boat. For extra points, that interrupting plot should be one that the players created.

Secondly, if the players are headed somewhere it's probably toward something they're interested in. You are not responsible for all the details. If the players know more about their destination than you, have them spread that information amongst themselves. They can even draw the maps for you if they'd like.

Back to sandbox games in general, the games I've done could be described as sandboxy, but I'd never go all out sandbox.

First off, the players are not the only agents in the world. Yes you want the PCs to be movers and shakers, but there need to be others out there. If the players leave town, when they get back town will be in a different condition. IMO this helps create a more believable world.

I like to describe my games as sandboxes with roller coasters. Railroads do exist. If the players set something in motion, it will keep going until its logical conclusion. In most cases, the roller coasters are clearly marked and the players can choose to take a ride or ignore the roller coaster/quest entirely.

Talakeal
2012-03-25, 02:17 PM
I have never had a sandbox game work; in fact I find that as long as I give my players time to craft / train / research between adventures and don't set them on things they perceive as too difficult the narrower the rails the better.

Every time I have tried a sandbox I ran into one of three problems:

1: Very difficult to balance encounters versus rests. The "15 minute day" problem becomes very real when you don't have any sort of time constraints or reason why the PCs can't just go back to town and rest and restock after every minor encounter.

2: Bored players. They have trouble finding adventures or spotting the obvious hooks.

3: On the flip side, they get mad when something they don't know about interferes with their plans. If I give NPCs motivations and plots that don't necessarily revolve around the PCs the PCs accuse me of pulling a "grudge monster" out of my butt to ruin their fun.

Not saying you will have the same problems, but you should be aware that they can exist. If anyone knows how to get around them I am all ears.

Madeiner
2012-03-25, 02:36 PM
I am also organizing a sandbox modern-day zombie survival game, and i thought about advantages and disadvantages too.

I plan on running a very low-prep time adventure this time around, so here's what i did.

1- Use a setting you and your players know well. I have used our city.
2- Prepare some "hooks" ahead of time. I believie this is the most important thing because you can't improvise everything. My hooks are extremely general so that i can use them in a lot of situations.

Example:

- hook 1: train blocking the road, a survivor is on top. Define why the survivor is there and what are the obstacles. Use this the first time it is appropriate.

- hook 2: there's a damaged car in the fields, with a few zombies around it. Inside the trunk there's a person locked in. Story is, he had been kidnapped by some people, and those people are now the zombies trying to get to him. They probably have some weapons in the car, if the PCs think to search it.
Use this first time they leave the city.


Now i'd really like to have a table with ideas, but i couldn't find one.
I try to thinks of hooks by dividing them:

- people: anything involving people/survivors
- obstacles: anything that can impede the PCs advancement
- combat: anything involving special combat conditions or special enemies.
- boons: anything that can provide a boon (equipment or other) if stumbled upon.

I make a text file of everything and have a look while playing. If they get to a new place, i should select a few obstacles, maybe 1 person, a combat, and a boon.

I have no experience with sandboxes though :P I just hope this works

bloodtide
2012-03-26, 02:08 AM
- what are your opinions on sandbox? how do you run it? lessons? experiences?

My games always have been and always will be sandbox games...though I most often never tell the players this. I like the fluid, anything can happen game. And I'm a rocks fall, one roll die, random events and death, killer DM, so it works out fine.





- what do you think of my approach? anything that might hinder the group's fun? any tips on how to run it easier?

Your approach might think too much. The whole point is a sandbox is easy.

Easy tip 1: Should the group do a 180 and suddenly decide to go south to the Darklands, a place you have nothing on....stall them! This is simple enough, throw anything at them to stop them form going to a place until you are ready.

Easy tip 2:Make up a couple of generic people/places/things. Just enough detail to use. Then if the group suddenly heads to the isle of doom, just use one of them.

East tip 3:Go find yourself books, magazines or even web pages of people places and things. Then if you suddenly need a 'dark tavern', use one of them.




- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party?

The tricky part is making all the plots matter to the PCs. If they are looking for the seven lost rods of wonder, then a plot about someone stealing the chickens will get over looked(even if Sage Doom is stealing them to feed his army of Deadly Beasts, the players won't know that...and seaching chicken coops feels like a waste of time when they need to find the rod parts.).

Yora
2012-03-26, 02:18 AM
Even in a sandbox game, you need long-term goals before the game starts, or better even before characters are made. The difference to a more regular game is, that the goal may be defined by the PCs and is not just a reaction to a villains activity.

"You are all in a tavern, now do whatever you want" does not work. You need a long term goal and then the PCs are free to make descisions how they want to achieve that goal and where to go to get the resources they need.

dsmiles
2012-03-26, 05:01 AM
- what are your opinions on sandbox? how do you run it? lessons? experiences? Sometimes sandbox games are okay, but I prefer to have an overall story arc that the characters are following. How they get from point A to point B to point Z is up to them, but I prefer to have a point A and point Z.

- what do you think of my approach? anything that might hinder the group's fun? any tips on how to run it easier? Your approach seems good. My approach is to have a bunch of stuff pre-planned for the world, and throw out a ton of plot hooks. See which ones they bite on, and expand on those. I also like to have character backstories for a sandbox game, so that I have something to really get the players interested in the world. There's always something in a backstory that the GM can work with to make a plot hook more personal. You could make them include how they met and already know two of the other characters (minimum) to cut down on the inevitable "You look like a trustworthy fellow, come join us" bit.

- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party? I always have plots working in the background. I don't run a static campaign world. Plots don't wait for the characters to find them, they all have timelines. The world marches on, with or without the characters. If the characters come in during a "plot in progress," everything that should have happened up to that time, will have happened. The characters are part of a living, breathing world, and while they're the main focus of the campaign, they're not the only adventurers out there.

Siegel
2012-03-26, 05:47 AM
Start with a situation. Something like "The king is dead and everyone want's power now". Then get input by the players, see who they want to play in this. The merchant swept away in the struggle of the guilds? The kings son that now has to rule? The captain of the kings guard that poisoned the king to save his wife from kidnapping?
From there you should have a basis of the themes your players want to explore.

Then let everyone of them write you 2-4 flags about the situation. Use this flags to anticipate where they will likely go and prepare mostly that.
Review the flags every session. Give them awards for going after those flags. Some kind of FATE-Points or Action points or whatever. Something they can spend for a +3 or a reroll or something like that.
This should give you tools to be prepared enough and still let the players drive the story.

WookieFurRug
2012-03-26, 09:25 AM
Most games I run end up being sandbox when I throw my PC's a plot hook and they say "No thanks!" Haha. I think If I were actively preparing for it to be Sandbox, I'd have a pretty set area map (Big, but not unlimited) so I could flesh out places and points on it. I wouldn't be outside PC's going other places in the world, but I'd try to keep it set in the area I put the most prep in. Also, I'd be prepared to improvise my but off. In a sandbox environment, you never know WHAT craziness the PC's will try, and the possibilities can be unlimited. Sandbox play is also one of the few places I'd use random encounters. I don't generally use them in a linear campaign, but they could totally be done in a sandbox game. Make sure to have defined plot hooks wherever the PC's go though, to keep them somewhat into it, and to avoid them becoming disinterested. Just my thoughts!

Kol Korran
2012-03-26, 12:19 PM
Sooooo.... the general feel i get from reading is "have some overall plot/s non the less" which is kind of what i was referring to in my OP, but oh well. I think the main difference between my approach and the traditional "villain has a dastardly plan! try and stop it!" can be summarized in 3 main points as i see it, thus trying to make it more "sandboxish":
1) a greater concern for the players' interests and desires, building their adventures more geared around them.

2) having multiple ongoing major plots so that they can jump from one to another as their interests see fit (but come to think of it tight might go with a "traditional" game as well)

3) willingness to not stick to a preplanned campaign path and instead create new paths according to player interest.

in short i think all of this will create a lot of work, but mostly in the initial stages, which are sort of samplign stages to see what hook the players bite on. from then on i think it might resolve more to a more regular campaign (or mini campaigns as interest shift)

Since you have been so kind to answer me, i'd like to answer some points in return

Raum


- what do you think of my approach? anything that might hinder the group's fun? any tips on how to run it easier? Seems like you're planning a lot of work up front...if you're really wanting to adjust based on player input you'll waste a lot of pre-work.
i don't think much prework get wasted. being the never-throw-away guy that i am, i keep most ideas kept, and use them somehow in a different fashion with a twist.


Too much preparation is actually detrimental to flexible play. An outline or a list of goals works pretty well but start adding lists of actions or events too early and it becomes difficult to work around them.
i agree with you on that, which is why i try to keep things in their skeletal planning stages until i need to flesh them out more.

i design situations, opponents, obstacles and goals, not solutions. i let the players take it from there.


- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party? From experience, never run more than three - usually one main plot, one in the background, and a third you can switch to when players surprise you. Include PC driven plot(s) in those three.

Three seems to be a max number though - I had one year-long campaign fall apart because I had too much going on. It simply became too much to track for players who don't have all the information. Too chaotic.
that is good advice. i'll keep it in mind. 3 it is. :smallwink:

thanks!

valadil

[QUOTE]If I run 4 plots at once in a 4 hour session, I only have to plan ahead 1 hour for each plot, but if I run a single plot I have to plan the whole 4 hours ahead. That applies here. If the players are off the the mysterious isle, have another plot run out and interrupt them as they're getting on the boat.
i disagree with you here. first of all 4 hours of play are 4 hours of play, but since you can't fully gauge how far the players might get in one plot, whether they will choose to circumvent some of your obstacles, and whether or not they will choose to play all 4 plots, you end up working much much harder (unless you actively force them to play all the plots).

also, interupting the players might work once, twice, but any more they will feel cheated, and it wastes valuable play time. (which for my group is rare)


You are not responsible for all the details. If the players know more about their destination than you, have them spread that information amongst themselves. They can even draw the maps for you if they'd like.
I am the DM, it's in my job description to know the details. besides, if they want to explore some destination, the entire idea is that it will be unknown and that i will show them new and intriguing things.


I like to describe my games as sandboxes with roller coasters. Railroads do exist. If the players set something in motion, it will keep going until its logical conclusion. In most cases, the roller coasters are clearly marked and the players can choose to take a ride or ignore the roller coaster/quest entirely.

that is a good way of putting it, which i might embrace. thanks.

Talakeal


[QUOTE]1: Very difficult to balance encounters versus rests. The "15 minute day" problem becomes very real when you don't have any sort of time constraints or reason why the PCs can't just go back to town and rest and restock after every minor encounter.

hmmmm... i understand if this is utterly a sandbox where the world just sits and waits for the party to act. but i intend to have several plots moving and shaking things up. these will put some sort of a time constraint on things. but i understand where you're coming from.


2: Bored players. They have trouble finding adventures or spotting the obvious hooks.
i worry about this too. especially one of my players who is much more of a casual player who likes to wait for the adventure come to him. but the rest are quite active and searching, i hope :smalleek: that they will leads things on better.


Not saying you will have the same problems, but you should be aware that they can exist. If anyone knows how to get around them I am all ears.

thanks for your input, if my little experiment goes well i'll let you know :smallwink:


Madeiner


- people: anything involving people/survivors
- obstacles: anything that can impede the PCs advancement
- combat: anything involving special combat conditions or special enemies.
- boons: anything that can provide a boon (equipment or other) if stumbled upon.
i arrange things similarily, in people, places, trouble and reward. :smallbiggrin:


I have no experience with sandboxes though :P I just hope this works me neither, i hope to learn with this little experiment. i'll probably keep a DM's log, for those interested.

bloodtide


[QUOTE]Your approach might think too much. The whole point is a sandbox is easy.
the idea as i get is is free choice, not being easy. i think sandboxes are in fact quite quite more hard. at least if you want to do them with any kind of quality that more "limited scope" games might get too.


Easy tip 1: Should the group do a 180 and suddenly decide to go south to the Darklands, a place you have nothing on....stall them! This is simple enough, throw anything at them to stop them form going to a place until you are ready.
our group doesn't meet often, and the play time is quite precious. wasting it with random interuptions who's only role is to stall them seems like bad time management to me. besides- it may work once, twice, perhaps even three times but then the players get damned fed up with it.


Easy tip 2:Make up a couple of generic people/places/things. Just enough detail to use. Then if the group suddenly heads to the isle of doom, just use one of them.
that is a good advice. thanks!


Yora

Even in a sandbox game, you need long-term goals before the game starts, or better even before characters are made. The difference to a more regular game is, that the goal may be defined by the PCs and is not just a reaction to a villains activity.
i agree with you on this, but as i explained at the start of this post, i want to use a few approaches to give the players more freedom.

a long term goal is needed for any long lasting endeavor, be it a more limited scope game or a sandbox. i just think that in a sandbox such a goal might shift more at first till the players settle on one, and it might even change later.

thanks for your reply!:smallsmile:


dsmiles

- what are your opinions on sandbox? how do you run it? lessons? experiences? How they get from point A to point B to point Z is up to them, but I prefer to have a point A and point Z.
i had such a campiagn that lasted nearly a year and a half that was fun, but the players felt somewhat compelled to play in the villain's game, not quite their own. so i'm trying this. who knows, it might even work. :smalltongue:


- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party? I always have plots working in the background. I don't run a static campaign world. Plots don't wait for the characters to find them, they all have timelines. The world marches on, with or without the characters. If the characters come in during a "plot in progress," everything that should have happened up to that time, will have happened. The characters are part of a living, breathing world, and while they're the main focus of the campaign, they're not the only adventurers out there.
i also used active moving plots, but usually just one at a time. this is the first time i'll be trying to run multiple plot lines at once.
thanks for your input! :smallamused:


Siegel

Start with a situation. Something like "The king is dead and everyone want's power now". Then get input by the players, see who they want to play in this. The merchant swept away in the struggle of the guilds? The kings son that now has to rule? The captain of the kings guard that poisoned the king to save his wife from kidnapping?
From there you should have a basis of the themes your players want to explore.

Then let everyone of them write you 2-4 flags about the situation. Use this flags to anticipate where they will likely go and prepare mostly that.
Review the flags every session. Give them awards for going after those flags. Some kind of FATE-Points or Action points or whatever. Something they can spend for a +3 or a reroll or something like that.
This should give you tools to be prepared enough and still let the players drive the story.

this sounds quite an interesting idea, but i don't understand it completley. what do you mean by "flags"? objectives? goals? and what if they might change in the campaign? what if some goals are short temr and some are long term? can you explain a bit about this?

WookieFurRug

Most games I run end up being sandbox when I throw my PC's a plot hook and they say "No thanks!" Haha. I think If I were actively preparing for it to be Sandbox, I'd have a pretty set area map (Big, but not unlimited) so I could flesh out places and points on it. I wouldn't be outside PC's going other places in the world, but I'd try to keep it set in the area I put the most prep in. Also, I'd be prepared to improvise my but off. In a sandbox environment, you never know WHAT craziness the PC's will try, and the possibilities can be unlimited. Sandbox play is also one of the few places I'd use random encounters. I don't generally use them in a linear campaign, but they could totally be done in a sandbox game. Make sure to have defined plot hooks wherever the PC's go though, to keep them somewhat into it, and to avoid them becoming disinterested. Just my thoughts!

I do intend to use a general map, but since this is a pirate game this is a fairly BIG map. i though pirating will be excellent for a sandbox.

I'm not such a good improviser, which i try to compensate for by preparing quite a bit. but i guess this campaign will have some practice coming up my way.

i intend to have plenty of plot hooks at first, but once the players are settled more or less into one "major plot" to lessen them and focus on the main tale.
thanks for your thoughts! :smallsmile:

thank you everyone.

Siegel
2012-03-26, 01:05 PM
Flags should contain goals and the motivation behind them, something like

To obtain back the control of my house i will show everyone my prowers by searching out the traitor that gave away our secret to the Trombels

*PC D* saved my life, i will help him in his quest and protect him with my life

To further secure my power base i will look for a merchant that will sponsor me and pay him a favour of his choosing


The flags SHOULD be changing every session, at least a bit. You should have a long term goal in mind with them but break them up into smaller chunks.
(By the way, in Burning Wheel, we call those things Beliefs)

Do you have more questions? Feel free to ask

-----------------------

by the way, you don't NEED to have a plot in the background - the PCs can give you well enough plot and ideas to manage your game. You can however still have plans and actions from your NPCs/Villians take place - just don't expect your players to really react to this. Also, be really open about everything that is happening, when NPCs are doing stuff that is meaningfull to the players/characters than tell them and give them a chance to react.
Still the game can be completly driven by the players - a good sandbox doesn't need a "preplanned" Story.

kyoryu
2012-03-26, 04:41 PM
I almost think of it as proactive vs. reactive games.

Sandbox means that hte players are proactive - in many if not most situations, they *initiate* the action, rather than *react* to what is happening in the world.

The biggest thing about sandbox is having the *right* types of preparation. As Siegel has pointed out, these kind of "flags" or whatever you want to call them are a good way of having that conversation. It lets the players tell you what paths they are likely to take, and that in turn tells you how to prepare. Doing this can make unexpected 180s more rare, as the players want those bonuses/rewards.

High-improvisation planning is different as well. You tend to come up with a list of things that *could* happen, and work on applying them to different scenarios. Make some taverns, and when you need one, pop one out of your list, and say "okay, you've run into the Blue Goose Tavern." Often the detailing will be less specific, so you still have to do some improvisation, but not as much as you might think.

To put it another way - a large city may have 100 taverns. You might think this means you need to design 100 taverns for hte players to go to. This is madness. It's unlikely that the players will go into more than 3 or 4 taverns in a session - so just write up maybe 5, and then when they get to that tavern, use one of the ones you have detailed up already.

Random generation can help with a lot of things, too. Just keep it really generic. Ask yourself a question, and let the dice answer - and then use your creativity to tie it all together. Think of it as Iron Chef DMing. You can get some surprisingly interesting stuff this way! You don't even need anything as detailed as a chart.

One of more memorable incidents of this was a group that was going to try to infiltrate a thieves' guild. I decided to have the guild send them on a somewhat morally despicable mission - shaking down an elderly couple for protection money - assuming that any "goody two shoes" wouldn't be able to go through with it.

Originally I was going to play it straight. But then I asked, "hey, might these folks be in on it?" Rolled the dice - 00 on a d100. Totally changed the session after that.

The other thing that's required for "sandbox" play is general outlines of the major players in your area, and what they do and don't want. This will help let you determine what might happen in response to player activity. As I've said, I think of sandboxes as being "player proactive" - which means that as a DM, you have to be *reactive*. And what that means is that you have to have enough of a handle on your world, *in the large*, to be able to make reasonable decisions as to how the world will react to what your players do. Again - dice help. If you get down to a couple of likely choices, roll the dice and go with one.

Other pre-planning bits that help include a list of names. Random personalities can help too - I often use the NPC generator at the back of the 1st ed DMG, which I *believe* is also reproduced in OSRIC.

Raum
2012-03-26, 05:42 PM
To put it another way - a large city may have 100 taverns. You might think this means you need to design 100 taverns for hte players to go to. This is madness. It's unlikely that the players will go into more than 3 or 4 taverns in a session - so just write up maybe 5, and then when they get to that tavern, use one of the ones you have detailed up already.I tend to approach it from a more minimalist point of view. Taking your example, I'd write notes on one tavern and have a list of different attributes for others. I do the same with generic NPCs (not significant NPCs) - use the same basic writeup with some different tweaks for personality, resources, and goals.

bokodasu
2012-03-27, 11:39 AM
Don't get too hung up on "plot" - think more in terms of "stuff that is happening". Worlds are big. There is a lot going on in them - nobody can do everything. And they don't just sit still until the PCs show up to set things in motion.

If you think in terms of "things that are happening", your *players* will create the plot, which is generally more satisfying from a player viewpoint. So say you've got smugglers - they can be just a thing that is happening in the background, they can be useful fencers of stolen goods, or they can be an entry into a larger storyline involving organized crime that is secretly plotting to overthrow the kingdom. Which one it is depends on what your players (and you) are interested in playing - if they get really into it, flesh it out, find the hooks to your other Plots, and work it in. If they don't and you don't care, don't waste your time. If they don't but you think it's a really cool idea, go ahead and develop it, and give them other entries into it. If they never care, let the crimelords take over the kingdom. Mostly it just changes who the PCs are paying taxes to, right?

Leave lots of loose ends, dangling temptingly within the PCs' reach - and resist the temptation to figure out what they all "mean". If the PCs grab for one you haven't fleshed out yet, throw in a random encounter or two to round out the session and sketch it out for the next one. As they follow the threads, fill in the blanks as you go. You'll be surprised how often those blanks turn out to be a key point or clue for something else you've already worked out.

As an example, my PCs just rescued one evil group from the clutches of another evil group. They can try to investigate where the magic's gone (a big thing that is happening in the world), or clear out an abandoned temple full of undead (a place they've found), or go back and get rid of the third evil group that was going to be involved in the war (and oops, is heading towards the humans' town as we speak! - a thing that is going to happen whether they do anything about it or not), or go home and sell loot (which will lead them back to the invading army), or try to find out why the one evil group was acting the way they were, or what happened to the other evil group that seems to have mysteriously disappeared, or go off and explore some more. Some of these things will have consequences (ignoring the war between the various evil entities) and some won't (that temple's been ruined for decades, another ten years isn't going to make a difference). But whatever they choose is going to further THEIR story, regardless.

Re: the 15-minute day. Sometimes they're ok; seriously, haven't you ever knocked off early after finishing a big project at work? Mostly the other things going on in the world should have something to say about them. If you rest after fighting each skirmish group, that army's going to reach the town. If you rest after fighting the advance scouts, whatever they were scouting for is going to come get you. If you rest after the first room in the abandoned temple, horrible things from beyond space and time are going to suck your soul out through your eyeballs. Or possibly just send for reinforcements and set up ambushes/traps/etc. Depends on their mood.

The big thing sandbox games need is a little maturity from everyone involved - you all have to agree going in that you're playing a cooperative game together. But that's really it, I think.

kyoryu
2012-03-27, 01:15 PM
I tend to approach it from a more minimalist point of view. Taking your example, I'd write notes on one tavern and have a list of different attributes for others. I do the same with generic NPCs (not significant NPCs) - use the same basic writeup with some different tweaks for personality, resources, and goals.

Sure, and that gets close to pure random generation, which I'm also not opposed to.

The thing about the pre-gen taverns is you probably *won't* use them, so you've got them available for the next session (or afterwards) when you do need them.

Realistically, what I do is somewhere in the middle - usually come up with a list of possible traits, and then randomize them in advance. It seems to work reasonably well.

At any rate, I think we're agreeing on the major points, and pretty much use the same overall approach.

Raum
2012-03-27, 09:07 PM
Sure, and that gets close to pure random generation, which I'm also not opposed to.Huh? Think we have differing definitions of 'random'. :smallconfused:

I'm not randomizing attributes, I'm choosing the ones I want to use. One tavern is "small, dark, and dirty with peanut shells and worse detritus on the floor" while another has "mirrors on every wall with techno music you feel as much as hear". The same tavern mechanics/statistics become two very different places. (Current campaign is modern urban fantasy - it's not some ork created techno. :smallwink: )

Traab
2012-03-28, 10:32 AM
My personal, theoretical setting for a sandbox style campaign would be to come up with say, a half dozen generic questlines and dungeons, and just leave the names blank until the players choose to activate them. Fluff is something easy to come up with on the fly, its the crunch you want to be careful with. So as an example, have a single crypt style undead based dungeon ready to go, a forested city ruins style dungeon, an underground dungeon, and a wizards lair style dungeon setup and ready for use. then when they finally take that quest line you can fill in the blanks with the appropriate names.

Then include plans for random stuff like, say they want to be as difficult as possible and not want to accept any plot hooks and go off roaming, be prepared for a standard bandit army style campaign. They go off wandering the roads, have them be attacked by wild animals or something, then during the night as they rest, they get jumped by bandits or just robbed of something they want back but dont require to survive. Then they get to work on taking out bandit camps until they find the main stronghold and have to fight off that force.

Just be prepared to adjust the details to fit whatever they decide to do. Its a lot of front loaded prep time, but once they get started you can start focusing on that direction, while still having your backups in place in case they suddenly change their minds or do something crazy.

TheThan
2012-03-28, 04:53 PM
The best advice I can give you is to simple, don’t create a campaign, create a world.
So here’s TheThan’s 7 step guide to making campaign worlds.


Step 1:
I prefer to start with geography. Draw a map, and then make a copy or two of it. The first map is your geographic map, detail geographic features (forests, rivers, mountain ranges, plains, swamps etc) onto it. You can make this as random or as specific as you like. There are some key things to remember: Mountains tend to form chains. Rivers tend to flow downhill. Swamps tend to be found near water sources. Follow these basic guidelines and your map will seem a bit more realistic. Personally I like starting out with a randomly generated map (i can tell you how i do that later if you're interested).

Step 2:
The second map is your social/political map. This is where you get to decide who goes where. Do the dwarves live in the mountains? If they do, draw up where their above ground territory begins and ends. How about the elves and the humans? Do they have multiple kingdoms? If so, map them out. Draw up boarders and label them (I prefer color coding, doesn’t really matter though).

Step 3:
After you’re done with the second map, then you go back to the first map and work out where cities, towns and other places of interest are. If you decide to make a change, don’t be afraid to go back and make them.

Step 4:
Now that we have two maps; it’s time to start writing. Pick one of your maps and start writing about it. Choose a continent and start detailing it. Write out the geography, the native species of plant, animal, magical beast and humanoid life. Detail events from the past. How did the ironwoods become a petrified forest? Why is the black rock black? Think these things out, detail them.

Step 5:
Now detail the history of the continent, was it settled by humanoids, or was it always settled? What about previous civilizations? What were they like? Write out the history of every major sentient race that is going to inhabit this area. If trolls aren’t going to be seen often, don’t write about them (You might want to scratch down some ideas in your notes though). This is where you get to be creative. If you don’t want say, gnomes, then don’t include gnomes.

Step 6:
Now you get to write about the current world, what are the current countries? What are their capitols? What sort of governments do they use? Who are their rulers? What sort of militaries do they run? What is the status of their economics? What do they import/export? What are their relationships with their neighbors?

Step 7:
Now you get to write out more details. Detail out cities, towns, and other places of interest, much like you did for step six. What’s so important about black rock? Why was that druid’s grove recently abandoned? That sort of stuff. This makes the world come alive, it fleshes it out, makes things more interesting. It also provides natural plot hooks for players.

Now that you’ve created a world, you can sit down and start creating plot hooks and campaign paths for your players.

kyoryu
2012-03-28, 06:50 PM
So as an example, have a single crypt style undead based dungeon ready to go, a forested city ruins style dungeon, an underground dungeon, and a wizards lair style dungeon setup and ready for use. then when they finally take that quest line you can fill in the blanks with the appropriate names.

Then include plans for random stuff like, say they want to be as difficult as possible and not want to accept any plot hooks and go off roaming, be prepared for a standard bandit army style campaign.

That's not really a sandbox campaign. It's more of what I call an "amusement park" campaign. There are a number of different rides, and you can go on any of them, but ultimately the rides are set experiences that drag you along.

A good sandbox should have the players be proactive in terms of achieving their goals. The *DM* needs to be the one reacting.

(That's a slight oversimplification, of course. Events will happen in the world beyond what the PCs instigate, but even those shouldn't "pull" the players towards a preset destination)

Kol Korran
2012-03-30, 05:37 AM
hhmmm... i left this Thread for a little ibt and it seems to have gained some interesting opinions, quite different from the first part. interesting opinions indeed. :smallamused:




by the way, you don't NEED to have a plot in the background - the PCs can give you well enough plot and ideas to manage your game. You can however still have plans and actions from your NPCs/Villians take place - just don't expect your players to really react to this. Also, be really open about everything that is happening, when NPCs are doing stuff that is meaningful to the players/characters than tell them and give them a chance to react.
Still the game can be completly driven by the players - a good sandbox doesn't need a "preplanned" Story.


I almost think of it as proactive vs. reactive games.

Sandbox means that hte players are proactive - in many if not most situations, they *initiate* the action, rather than *react* to what is happening in the world.

The other thing that's required for "sandbox" play is general outlines of the major players in your area, and what they do and don't want. This will help let you determine what might happen in response to player activity. As I've said, I think of sandboxes as being "player proactive" - which means that as a DM, you have to be *reactive*. And what that means is that you have to have enough of a handle on your world, *in the large*, to be able to make reasonable decisions as to how the world will react to what your players do. Again - dice help. If you get down to a couple of likely choices, roll the dice and go with one.



Don't get too hung up on "plot" - think more in terms of "stuff that is happening". Worlds are big. There is a lot going on in them - nobody can do everything. And they don't just sit still until the PCs show up to set things in motion.

If you think in terms of "things that are happening", your *players* will create the plot, which is generally more satisfying from a player viewpoint.
though i didn't quote all you're advice (for the sake of space) i've indeed taken it in.

"Proactive vs. Reactive" and "Stuff is happening" are probably the best descripttions of the elements i want to include in my game. the thing is none of us players are accustomed to it. we all come from groups in which the DM had some neferious plot of the villain, and the party got "recruited" to stop it, and that outlined the rest of the campaign. it was defined by the villain's plan, which indeed made the players feel more "reactive" than "active", and only with one "plot" to pursue.

So though i have players who are active and imaginative, i'm worried whether they'll extend this to fully initiating adventures, campaigns and so on... i'm not that sure all want to. at least one player is the "tell me what the goal is and lets kill some monsters" type. i guess we'll see.

the general idea is to set up a starting situation (which will be built partly according to player's interests) then in it throw a bunch of hooks, and see what will bite. there will be several major forces acting in the world (with consequences of interacting or not interacting with them) but my hope is to have the players choose their own stuff.

BUT, i do aim for it to fill like a Campaign, with mostly a singular uniting story, and not just a mesh of "so we went there and did that, then went there and did the other thing" kind of stringed adventures. this still baffles me somewhat on how to achieve it.

i am worried about the crunch preparation-


Originally by kyoryu
Random generation can help with a lot of things, too. Just keep it really generic.

Generic is a bit of a problem. not in creating it, but in the experience it provides. in the campaign i ran the places they visited for example were quite unique and complex, and that added a lot to the experience. Generic can often lead to too bland. it's ok for "quick filler ins" but not for the main objects of their adventuring. for this i thought to rely each session on what their desires in the session before hand. and have at least the most expected or major sites mapped out, monsters and NPCs and so on.


Ask yourself a question, and let the dice answer - and then use your creativity to tie it all together. Think of it as Iron Chef DMing. You can get some surprisingly interesting stuff this way! You don't even need anything as detailed as a chart.

Lol! i'm glad to see someone who relies on randomality as much as i do. i think it adds a lot to play. i often use it in planning adventures and elements of the campaign, forcing an element on me and then i have to deal with it. it indeed leads to the best stuff. i often do use simple charts though. i wonder what charts might i need for such a game.

i do wonder as to how complicated the random generation of "filler ins" should be. NPCs? ships? (pirate campaign)? maps? treasures? settlements? hmmmm... :smallconfused:


My personal, theoretical setting for a sandbox style campaign would be to come up with say, a half dozen generic questlines and dungeons, and just leave the names blank until the players choose to activate them. Fluff is something easy to come up with on the fly, its the crunch you want to be careful with.

Just be prepared to adjust the details to fit whatever they decide to do. Its a lot of front loaded prep time, but once they get started you can start focusing on that direction, while still having your backups in place in case they suddenly change their minds or do something crazy.

Hmmm.. i only partly agree with you. i like to run specific detailed settings, and i rarely have a "generic ruin/ generic wizard's tower" and the like. my players expect from me that most locations will be quite unique (also, i nearly never use dungeons... way too limiting). generic locations lead to a fairly... bland experience. the cool strange places, of which you can feel their history, signature features and the like is what the players remember.

but i do think you're right about perhaps preparing major locations in the campaign before hand, and possibly some of their ideas (with a few heavy changes of course) to other ideas if the need arises.


The best advice I can give you is to simple, don’t create a campaign, create a world.
So here’s TheThan’s 7 step guide to making campaign worlds.

Now that you’ve created a world, you can sit down and start creating plot hooks and campaign paths for your players.

i'm already creating the world for this specific reason. and the players will have quite a bit of variety to choose from. however, my time is limited, and i won't be able to detail every nook and cranny in the world to use immediately whatever the party chooses. and having a world still does not a campaign make. not even a sandbox campaign. it's just one (albeit important) element of it.

-------------------------------------------

i'm still a bit worried about a few stuff:
1) how to get it across to the players and motivate them to initiate their own adventures, or "be proactive" as kyoryu so elegantly put it.

2) i need to decide how much i'll spend preparing major potential adventure sites, NPCs, locations and so on, enough to have special and detailed places in the campaign world. and how much preparation should i give for random (or less random) "filler ups"

3) how to make this into a campaign with 1-3 major themes giving it more texture than just disconnected adventures, and still keep it sandboxish.

thanks you all for your advice! it helps refines my concept of sandbox and how to achieve it.

Mastikator
2012-03-30, 06:18 AM
TL;DR

discussion
obviously you can discuss what you want, but i'd like to get your opinions on the following subjects:
- what are your opinions on sandbox? how do you run it? lessons? experiences?
- what do you think of my approach? anything that might hinder the group's fun? any tips on how to run it easier?
- any thoughts/ experiences from running multiple plots (also a first one) at the party?

Sandboxes are fun, but they require players that take the initiative and have the ability to make characters with goals. Some players just like to sit back and kill monsters, these players will not do well in sandbox games imo.
It's important that the players know that it's a sandbox game and they need to take the initiative. You can train them by throwing obstacles at them with no obvious way to deal with, (this can be hard with D&D 3.5e magic at level higher than 1)

Putting "what do you think of my approach" in the TLDR section, but keeping the approach in the long section is confusing to me. But I'm sure it's good.

I always run multiple plots, even if I don't do sandbox, especially when I don't do sandbox, (in some sandbox games I've run no plots at all)
Most people have plots, schemes and ulterior motives, usually benign or benevolent, but still plots. NPCs need to seem like they had lives before the PCs. In sandbox games the NPCs need to be very real, this is super important. Many people will tell you to spend time describing the scenery, don't, you should obviously describe it, but ultimately people are more interested in other people than they are in the shape of hills and color of flowers, and your NPC need to feel like they're real people. The NPC needs to have a few things to feel believable. First, it needs to have a behavior, a specific tone, way of speaking, tics, opinions, wants, desires, preconceived judgments, vices and virtues.
In my honest opinion, do voice acting, if the NPC is grumpy, be grumpy, if he's rude, say rude things. Don't be afraid of overdoing it, that would only make it more fun and more convincing. If someone in the group laughs at you, go killer DM on them. Everyone should be fostering a RPG friendly atmosphere, not poisoning it.