New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 50 of 50
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Did they deliberately avoid ever returning to the prior systems? Having side quests that send them back there would solve thus problem if it wasn't an intentional choice on their parts.

    If it was, having the conSequences follow them would be another way to bring things to them. Have somebody come after them for revenge, for instance. Not for something they might expect, either. Those consequences they avoided dealing with fall on somebody else, and he or his loved ones come after the PCs for making that mess. That sort of thing.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2017

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Interesting read and I agree with almost all of it. Great pointers.

    The one comment I would have is on "plots". Many players aren't self-motivated enough to come up with goals for their characters that might create their own "plots". If the players ARE motivated enough and do create a character goal and "plot" then without any structure whatever goals they come up with likely conflict with the goals of other characters which generally leads to problems in and of itself.

    One character is looking for vengeance. One character wants to end slavery. One character wants to become the supreme leader of all space. One character wants enough loot to buy a planet and retire. One character wants to lead a mercenary company, fly around the galaxy causing chaos and destruction just because.

    Nope. Character created "plots" based on player developed goals for their characters often don't work though if the characters are created with a common backstory and interests then they might come up with something, usually it doesn't work like that.

    In my experience, a sandbox needs to provide "plot" seeds. Significant events, significant NPCs, significant interactions that can draw and hold the player attention and motivate the characters to become involved. Put a few of these "plotlines" into the sandbox with events progressing slowly but independent of the characters then give the characters enough information about what is going on that they can choose what to do. The difference between this and rumors is that several collections of rumors are connected behind the scenes to independent series of events and this can then lead to the larger ongoing story elements in the background where the characters can choose to become involved or not.

    So basically, every story has plots, every world has plot lines, a world is not just a collection of independent random events. Players/characters obtain information through interactions with the world but the DM is guiding those interactions and needs to feed information allowing the players to become more aware of some of the story currents in the world so that the characters can choose to dive in or make their own currents.

    Just something to think about - to me, a world always needs plot lines since there are always things happening ..

    e.g. a specific faction trying to dominate the drug trade between worlds, introducing a new, highly addictive chemical that they can both sell for high prices and use to create indentured slaves. The characters could encounter folks begging on street corners, people wearing collars declaring their status, looking sickly. Dealers selling the big new thing - "try a bit, I guarantee you'll like it".The characters might decide to get involved and they might not. These encounters lead to a star spanning cartel with political influence trying to bend the social fabric in their favor, convincing the government to declare that indentured servitude is legal since they are saving these folks from their addictions and giving them productive work.

    This could be one of half a dozen plot lines moving forward at local, planetary and inter-stellar scale.

    The world needs more than the factions, it needs the effects of what these factions are doing that could pull the characters into their plot lines. But, it is challenging to manage well without giving the players too much or too little information.

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

    P.S. I don't really understand the player reactions in anger to the player with the space ship asking for a fee at the beginning or the reaction of that player saying "just throw my character in the brig". That should have been a great role playing opportunity to let the players establish their characters but instead it sounds like it went sideways for real life personality reasons. To be honest, for me, that would have been a first red flag that there might be an issue of some sort.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    To be fair on you, I don't think it's entirely the DM's fault or the fault of not doing a session zero that the players don't care about each other. It's on the players to design characters who are motivated to be in the party. It should be written in the character sheet, be it a personal connection to the setting, or to the big bad, or having "adventurer" as a profession. Heck, I've played with a rogue who had been arrested and had to be in the party as part of his probation.

    I have also been in a sandbox where every PC was a brooding loner who did not like revealing information about their quest to the others and was perfectly fine with being alone. That was pretty miserable, because the four of us just kept randomly entering buildings and talking to npcs while we waited for the DM to "coincidentally" make us want to go to the same dungeon.

    Don't make a character whose goal is to be alone. Maybe it works for the character but at some point you need an excuse not to be alone.
    Last edited by Ninja Dragon; 2022-12-02 at 12:53 PM.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    I just wanted to say that I, too, am a recovering Army vet. 31 years an officer, retired in previous decade.

    The AAR you described is a hot wash. At the battalion+ level these get turned in to the Center for Army Lessons Learned or CALL in a particular format. That format is "Issue, Discussion, and Recommendation."

    I say this all to say how right you are about how the military makes mistakes. To murder a previous recruiting slogan, "There's dumb, and there's Army dumb." Where we go really wrong and stay wrong is not enough decision makers actually read the formal AARs written by dwids like me and you.

    And this is why this forum is so freakin' valuable to running better games.
    Pssst! Hey, buddy! Ya wanna buy a full color Tarokka Deck?
    (Only one left)

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Ninja Dragon View Post
    To be fair on you, I don't think it's entirely the DM's fault or the fault of not doing a session zero that the players don't care about each other. It's on the players to design characters who are motivated to be in the party. It should be written in the character sheet, be it a personal connection to the setting, or to the big bad, or having "adventurer" as a profession. Heck, I've played with a rogue who had been arrested and had to be in the party as part of his probation.

    I have also been in a sandbox where every PC was a brooding loner who did not like revealing information about their quest to the others and was perfectly fine with being alone. That was pretty miserable, because the four of us just kept randomly entering buildings and talking to npcs while we waited for the DM to "coincidentally" make us want to go to the same dungeon.

    Don't make a character whose goal is to be alone. Maybe it works for the character but at some point you need an excuse not to be alone.
    Yes, but unfortunately DMs do need to stress they won't allow lone wolf/the only important character is mine type of players before the game starts. If they wait until after that spot is taken by the player instead of someone else who would have played better then there's the confrontation. If the player agrees to stop and cooperate, great. If he rage quits with or without calling you and everyone else names/bad players/whiny babies, still great he has left but now you need to find another player unless you're ok with the one less party member.

    However, there are also unfortunately DMs who allow the behavior because they accept the player is "roleplaying his character" and/or he takes the "high road" of being neutral it's for the players to deal with. With these DMs the selfish player wins. Everyone else suffers or they quit.

    The DM isn't to blame for a player choosing to be a donkey cavity, but it is his responsibility to keep it out of the game.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    The big difference between a sandbox game's plots and a more linear game's plot is that plurality. A sandbox game has things going on that have interested parties, of whom either the player characters already are or who view the player characters as possible agents, tools, or otherwise elements of their own plans for the things they're itnerested in.

    In the game I reference most often, Jathaan's seafaring game, we started off as a newly-formed company within a mercenary organization, and we had a few jobs we could take at our option. The one we did take was a task to secretly investigate what had happened to a missing ship that rumors or reports its owner had just gotten placed in a particular area. Our captain (of the company) also got some cargo and some "special cargo" to deliver en route, both as a cover for the trip and for extra profits. The "extra cargo" was carried by a mysterious woman who stayed in her quarters on the ship the whole time she was with us, and turned out to be a fey fleeing the pursuit of another fey who wanted an artifact she had. When she absconded with our help under the watchful eye of said fey, she left our payment...not the gems we had expected, but the artifact itself. Which we later parlayed into both help in restoring the lost ship and learning its secrets, and also into some major trades in faerie bargains.

    One task we did not pursue that came up a few times was something to do with a sorcerer taking over some isolated area. I understand that plot has progressed to a point that it may become an issue we have to deal with.

    Nothing about how we dealt with the fey interrupt was pre-planned plotting by the DM. Only the fact of the interrupt and the nature of the cargo, placing us in the proximity of further plot hooks, some of which we bit on. These, too, were things that were happening with or without our intervention, and our intervention changed how they resolved, got is loot and acclaim, and generally served to make our actions meaningful.

    Again, it's not that the GAME had a plot planned out. There were events going on, and the DM had some idea of how they might go if we didn't involve ourselves. Our involvement changed what happened where we were involved, and had ripple effects, possibly, to other events. And where we weren't involved, things progressed either as the DM knew they would, or determined they would as he advanced the timeline of everything.

    I don't know how accurate my understanding of the behind-the-scenes stuff here is, but that's my best guess how he ran it. I know for a fact he didn't plan out a plotted arc for us, though, only set up challenges and obstacles and provided motivations and goals in the form of problems to solve or things other NPCs wanted us to do.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Part of this remind me of parts of a recent campaign I played. Too many hooks.

    We were based in a town, and there were defined bad guys, but there were too many things we could choose to do at any given moment. It's not that we couldn't choose something, it was more that there were so many things we could do that we felt that whatever we chose would have so little effect overall.

    What's worse is that with so many hooks presented, we felt like we could handle a new one every session or two, but when all was said and done, it became clear that the only way to succeed on many of the paths was to stay on them. Which meant abandoning all the other story elements (people and causes), which made me feel like a failure.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurt Kurageous View Post
    I just wanted to say that I, too, am a recovering Army vet. 31 years an officer, retired in previous decade.

    The AAR you described is a hot wash. At the battalion+ level these get turned in to the Center for Army Lessons Learned or CALL in a particular format. That format is "Issue, Discussion, and Recommendation."

    I say this all to say how right you are about how the military makes mistakes. To murder a previous recruiting slogan, "There's dumb, and there's Army dumb." Where we go really wrong and stay wrong is not enough decision makers actually read the formal AARs written by dwids like me and you.

    And this is why this forum is so freakin' valuable to running better games.
    Well, d@mn! Congrats on making it 31 years, sir! I'm glad people are finding value in this thread; I honestly wasn't sure if I should even post it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    The DM isn't to blame for a player choosing to be a donkey cavity, but it is his responsibility to keep it out of the game.
    Your point about not blaming but taking responsibility is, I think, the major thrust of DMing. Yeah, you're not to blame, but you sure didn't do your job, y'know?

    Quote Originally Posted by Samayu View Post
    Part of this remind me of parts of a recent campaign I played. Too many hooks.

    We were based in a town, and there were defined bad guys, but there were too many things we could choose to do at any given moment. It's not that we couldn't choose something, it was more that there were so many things we could do that we felt that whatever we chose would have so little effect overall.

    What's worse is that with so many hooks presented, we felt like we could handle a new one every session or two, but when all was said and done, it became clear that the only way to succeed on many of the paths was to stay on them. Which meant abandoning all the other story elements (people and causes), which made me feel like a failure.
    This is excellent feedback! Thank you for sharing, because this is exactly what I want prospective DMs to see before they try this kind of game.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Samayu View Post
    Part of this remind me of parts of a recent campaign I played. Too many hooks.

    We were based in a town, and there were defined bad guys, but there were too many things we could choose to do at any given moment. It's not that we couldn't choose something, it was more that there were so many things we could do that we felt that whatever we chose would have so little effect overall.

    What's worse is that with so many hooks presented, we felt like we could handle a new one every session or two, but when all was said and done, it became clear that the only way to succeed on many of the paths was to stay on them. Which meant abandoning all the other story elements (people and causes), which made me feel like a failure.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky McDibben View Post
    This is excellent feedback! Thank you for sharing, because this is exactly what I want prospective DMs to see before they try this kind of game.
    This seems like almost the opposite problem that is described in the opening post, though. One of the reported issues was that the players felt that, because they could tackle anything in any order and the world would wait for them to get around to it, they "had" to "do everything," and thus were slogging through busywork side quests to the point that they just wanted to get the game over with. Or were overpowered for the last fight or something? I wasn't clear on what the problem was. But the fact that they could do everything meant they "had" to, and this was a problem.

    There's probably a middle ground, here, but I worry that it's a mindset, thing, too. With Samayu's group, it sounds like they would feel that even two options is too many if they can't do both of them without one advancing in time and stages of whatever villain's plan it represents. This isn't necessarily a criticism of Samayu's group: some groups may simply dislike non-linear games with more than one major path to follow, because they don't like the notion that they're "missing out" by not doing everything. Or, if not "missing out," then "failing" because anything the PCs don't do is a failed quest, to them.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    This seems like almost the opposite problem that is described in the opening post, though. One of the reported issues was that the players felt that, because they could tackle anything in any order and the world would wait for them to get around to it, they "had" to "do everything," and thus were slogging through busywork side quests to the point that they just wanted to get the game over with. Or were overpowered for the last fight or something? I wasn't clear on what the problem was. But the fact that they could do everything meant they "had" to, and this was a problem.
    Well, that is the way videogame RPGs work. :P
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    This seems like almost the opposite problem that is described in the opening post, though. One of the reported issues was that the players felt that, because they could tackle anything in any order and the world would wait for them to get around to it, they "had" to "do everything," and thus were slogging through busywork side quests to the point that they just wanted to get the game over with. Or were overpowered for the last fight or something? I wasn't clear on what the problem was. But the fact that they could do everything meant they "had" to, and this was a problem.
    Not quite. The problem was that I had given them too many hooks, but this was compounded by my mistake in removing time pressure. By doing so, I removed a key prioritization metric, and that made their decisions feel inconsequential. Samayu's feedback is superb in party because of their viewpoint: we've seen plenty of DM advice, but the player's side is crucial for DM's to understand.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    On lesson 4, it reminds me of the quote : "The death of a man is a tragedy, the death of a million is a statistic". Especially in a sci-fi setting, many of the things you do may affect millions, but those are all statistical people with whom you have no real connection. You need individual cases to be affected that you can see and interact with and be glad that that person is now doing better.

    Or, in a more Oots vein, only named characters matter.
    A neat custom class for 3.5 system
    http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94616

    A good set of benchmarks for PF/3.5
    https://rpgwillikers.wordpress.com/2...y-the-numbers/

    An alternate craft point system I made for 3.5
    http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...t-Point-system

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Yakk's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    In the west marches sandbox, there was a meta-goal set up; you where exploring the territory to expand civilization and bring back loot.

    The PCs where all part of an organization that did this, and there was a collective map (carved into a table).

    ...

    So, maybe having the PCs have some allegiance to some organization with in-universe goals as part of the character building, and offering support from them, might help?

    I see you did have the "didn't care about" problem however. The old "you like people you help more than you like people who help you" maybe. (People convert "I helped them" to "I must like them").

    ...

    Too many rumors is an interesting problem. They also appeared to be very cheap. Maybe of rumors "cost" more? Then players won't accumulate as many.

    The lack of clock means that there is no universal currency. Also, as noted, without gritty rests there your unit of adventure is the single encounter.

    I'd be tempted for gritty rests, and calibrate travel based on it. An uneventful trip between close "systems" takes a long rest's time (a week?). Short cuts can take less time.

    And yes, I think you need a clock. Having your ship have even abstract "supplies" stat that ticks down every day or week. To make it less of a hard deadline:

    Scrap: Not enough food or repairs on gear. All ability checks have a -2. Ship has a higher chance of malfunction. Uses 1 supply point per day.
    Tramp: Baseline. Enough food (but it sucks), materials to jury rig most parts, fuel that is good enough to work. Uses 4 supply points per day.
    Naval: Non-expired rations, clean fuel, spare parts. Uses 10 supply points per day. After 1 month at this level, d20 checks have +1.
    Lux: Non-printed food, enhanced fuel, OEM parts still in original packaging. Uses 25 supply points per day. After 1 month at this level, d20 checks have +2.

    Limit how much the ship can hold in supply points.

    As what you need to resupply can vary, the price of buying supply points also varies. Sometimes you need a phase coil inhibitor, other times you need to replace the baseline strain if your food paste bioreactor. Both might be 50 supply points, but the price could vary by orders of magnitude depending on where you need to buy it and what broke down.

    This lets you keep the ship hungry. ;) Or not if you don't want to.

    Getting a base where you can pick up cheap, reliable supply points becomes awesome.

    ...

    Once there is a supply point clock, there can be other clocks. Events can tick tock.

    And if the PCs are connected to organizations that have goals (or are opposed to organizations that have goals), that provides some proxy goals for the PCs. "Explore this area" in the west marches was a goal provided by the PCs organization in west marches, as an example.

    An initial task for the party to do "you have been paid to carry chocolate ants to X, then bring an ore sample back, by day Y" also reduces analysis paralysis. The rumors no on that path can be put off for later. With a bit of fudge time, they can maybe hit an other spot along the route, but only one. So there is a constraint.

    I've seen this in sandbox-ish video games. Starting off with a somewhat vague "quest" that gives you something to do. Then collecting more things to do as you do that first quest. Just to keep things moving at the start. In SC2, it was "get fuel for the station". It was a vague exploration quest, and as you did it you ran into more quests, and could even complete some. When you finally refueled the base, you'd have a bunch of stuff on your todo list, and maybe 1 or 2 solid leads.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Keravath View Post
    P.S. I don't really understand the player reactions in anger to the player with the space ship asking for a fee at the beginning or the reaction of that player saying "just throw my character in the brig". That should have been a great role playing opportunity to let the players establish their characters but instead it sounds like it went sideways for real life personality reasons. To be honest, for me, that would have been a first red flag that there might be an issue of some sort.
    The problem is that the players aren't in a position to refuse, because the core premise of the game is that they have to band together on this ship. This player was taking advantage of the meta-context to take the resources that were allotted to the other players in character creation, with no potential recourse other than exiting or breaking the campaign.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky McDibben View Post
    She talked about saving an entire planet (something they managed to do by the skin of their teeth!), but said that it really didn't resonate with her. Because she didn't care at all about the planet itself. Like, yeah, they saved a planet. Cool. But...they don't really care about the planet, despite just saving the people who lived there from an awful AI-created tyranny.

    Now, I could have countered by saying that in a player-driven exploration campaign, the players are supposed to tell the DM what they care the most about, and then spend as much time as they want to dealing with that.
    I'm surprised that no one has said this yet, as far as I can tell. Part of the issue here is that massive-scale events like these are not realistically optional. Any faintly good-aligned character is morally obligated to engage with a preventable danger that threatens millions or billions of people. A counterpoint is that if they don't want to be morally obligated to do things, they should have made a hardline selfish character, but that's just not a reasonable expectation. If you want players to play actual characters, you have to accept that what the player cares about and what the character cares about will not automatically align, and that it's inevitably the DM's responsibility to make what the character cares about not boring to the player.

    In fact, you say you don’t run plots, but I’m confused about what you think a plot is, because this kind of important event that is difficult to justify not participating in is exactly what I would call a plot.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Lalliman View Post
    The problem is that the players aren't in a position to refuse, because the core premise of the game is that they have to band together on this ship. This player was taking advantage of the meta-context to take the resources that were allotted to the other players in character creation, with no potential recourse other than exiting or breaking the campaign.
    Yep!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lalliman View Post
    I'm surprised that no one has said this yet, as far as I can tell. Part of the issue here is that massive-scale events like these are not realistically optional. Any faintly good-aligned character is morally obligated to engage with a preventable danger that threatens millions or billions of people. A counterpoint is that if they don't want to be morally obligated to do things, they should have made a hardline selfish character, but that's just not a reasonable expectation. If you want players to play actual characters, you have to accept that what the player cares about and what the character cares about will not automatically align, and that it's inevitably the DM's responsibility to make what the character cares about not boring to the player.
    Well, that's an interesting point. I disagree with most of what you said, notably because the planet was only in peril because of the PCs' actions. This evolved out of their meddling in a dynamic situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lalliman View Post
    In fact, you say you don’t run plots, but I’m confused about what you think a plot is, because this kind of important event that is difficult to justify not participating in is exactly what I would call a plot.
    A plot is defined as, "The plan, scheme, or main story of a literary or dramatic work, as a play, novel, or short story." (Source: dictionary.com).

    This generally aligns with my own definition, which can be roughly stated as, "The events that play out in a story, deriving from the interactions of the characters and the environment."

    Now, let's break down some of the assumptions you're using:

    1) The planet being in peril was planned by the DM

    2) The PCs could not realistically avoid participating, or could only avoid participating with great difficulty

    As stated above, the planet was only in peril because the PCs had interfered in a particularly nasty corporate scheme with an insane AI. The corpos decided to glass the planet after the PCs interfered to avoid witnesses (they figured the PCs could be bought off, silenced, or discredited). So I didn't plan anything - my notes never mention the possibility the planet could get ganked. I set up the dominoes, and the PCs kicked them over.

    As for assumption 2, the PCs could have bugged out, no problem. And half of them wanted to do just that! Only one player decided to force the issue and intervene. But they didn't have to shoot it down. They could have jammed the bird's tracking, pushed something else in the missile's way, evacuated some of the populace, etc. So they could have very easily avoided participating, even accounting for the one character with a strong moral compass. Hell, they could have just left the system alone, too.

    If you're curious about my philosophy on plotting in RPGs, let me know and we'll start a new thread on that. God knows those never blow up in insane wrangling debates.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    First, I think save the world stories are bad gaming. I just don't find them compelling or worthwhile to participate in.

    Second, before something like that can have impact, they have to have spent enough time on that planet and with the people there to be fighting for something if you do decide to do that. As an example, my grandpa who had fought in ww2 said it wasn't the country that motivated him. And certainly not other people's countries, but defending people he knew and cared about. Most of the time he was fighting so the guy next to him could go home.
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    GitP, obviously
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    First, I think save the world stories are bad gaming. I just don't find them compelling or worthwhile to participate in.
    I don’t necessarily think it’s bad, but the larger scale can make it a bit more difficult for me to invest personally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky McDibben View Post
    If you're curious about my philosophy on plotting in RPGs, let me know and we'll start a new thread on that. God knows those never blow up in insane wrangling debates.
    I will never not be on board with one of your ideas (within reason). Though your other recent thread, I haven’t had ideas to contribute just for lack of recent experience with Dragon Age.
    Something Borrowed - Submission Thread (5e subclass contest)

    TeamWork Makes the Dream Work 5e Base Class Submission Thread




  18. - Top - End - #48
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    First, I think save the world stories are bad gaming. I just don't find them compelling or worthwhile to participate in.

    Second, before something like that can have impact, they have to have spent enough time on that planet and with the people there to be fighting for something if you do decide to do that. As an example, my grandpa who had fought in ww2 said it wasn't the country that motivated him. And certainly not other people's countries, but defending people he knew and cared about. Most of the time he was fighting so the guy next to him could go home.
    To your first point, I agree and well-said.

    To your second, they'd spent like two sessions on this planet mixing it up with the various NPCs. Your granddad was completely right - a cause will get you to the battlefield, but it won't keep you there. That was why I was trying to build investment with funny and interesting NPCs and a neat dynamic situation that was rapidly evolving, including backstory elements from one of the PCs. For some reason I just failed. I actually think these ongoing comments are really valuable; they help me clarify exactly what went wrong and how.

    Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by animorte View Post
    I don’t necessarily think it’s bad, but the larger scale can make it a bit more difficult for me to invest personally.
    Yep! That's a matter of taste, but it's good for all of us to remember that there are a lot of folks who don't like large-scale conflicts. Good call!


    Quote Originally Posted by animorte View Post
    I will never not be on board with one of your ideas (within reason). Though your other recent thread, I haven’t had ideas to contribute just for lack of recent experience with Dragon Age.
    *Quietly removes animorte's name from the "Help Rob the Federal Reserve" list*

    Your ideas are always welcome, my friend. Hell, if I'd had any recent DA experience, I wouldn't have had to post the thread.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2017

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    The big difference between a sandbox game's plots and a more linear game's plot is that plurality. A sandbox game has things going on that have interested parties, of whom either the player characters already are or who view the player characters as possible agents, tools, or otherwise elements of their own plans for the things they're itnerested in.

    In the game I reference most often, Jathaan's seafaring game, we started off as a newly-formed company within a mercenary organization, and we had a few jobs we could take at our option. The one we did take was a task to secretly investigate what had happened to a missing ship that rumors or reports its owner had just gotten placed in a particular area. Our captain (of the company) also got some cargo and some "special cargo" to deliver en route, both as a cover for the trip and for extra profits. The "extra cargo" was carried by a mysterious woman who stayed in her quarters on the ship the whole time she was with us, and turned out to be a fey fleeing the pursuit of another fey who wanted an artifact she had. When she absconded with our help under the watchful eye of said fey, she left our payment...not the gems we had expected, but the artifact itself. Which we later parlayed into both help in restoring the lost ship and learning its secrets, and also into some major trades in faerie bargains.

    One task we did not pursue that came up a few times was something to do with a sorcerer taking over some isolated area. I understand that plot has progressed to a point that it may become an issue we have to deal with.

    Nothing about how we dealt with the fey interrupt was pre-planned plotting by the DM. Only the fact of the interrupt and the nature of the cargo, placing us in the proximity of further plot hooks, some of which we bit on. These, too, were things that were happening with or without our intervention, and our intervention changed how they resolved, got is loot and acclaim, and generally served to make our actions meaningful.

    Again, it's not that the GAME had a plot planned out. There were events going on, and the DM had some idea of how they might go if we didn't involve ourselves. Our involvement changed what happened where we were involved, and had ripple effects, possibly, to other events. And where we weren't involved, things progressed either as the DM knew they would, or determined they would as he advanced the timeline of everything.

    I don't know how accurate my understanding of the behind-the-scenes stuff here is, but that's my best guess how he ran it. I know for a fact he didn't plan out a plotted arc for us, though, only set up challenges and obstacles and provided motivations and goals in the form of problems to solve or things other NPCs wanted us to do.
    In my opinion, all of those events going on in the game world ARE plot lines. The DM has things happening and can work out how the players interaction will affect those plot lines. The players then build THEIR plot line out of the stories going on in the world and how they choose to interact with them. In addition, how these events turn out often result in the characters deciding to pursue a specific course of action which then creates their own plot line and the DM can play into that development by enhancing the details of the story available in the direction the players choose to go.

    In my experience, it is a waste of DM time to flesh out an entire world - there are too many details, too much information, too much going on - it is almost a fractal design - you can take any element and expand on the details to whatever extent you like but if the players aren't going that way, it is a waste of a precious resource.

    So what can happen is that the DM creates the broad strokes with small patches filled in where these plot lines may intersect with the characters. If the characters choose to follow up one of these interactions, the DM expands the details in the direction the players are moving while still tracking parallel events at a high level so that those other plot lines may interact with the players at a later point.

    It is pretty much as Segev describes but the world is full of plot lines which, depending on the party decisions, may become side quests or the main plot of their adventure. The bottom line in my opinion is that there should always be plot lines even if the players aren't involved.

    The alternative is the equivalent of randomly generated side quests in an MMORPG. The characters may gain experience and loot but the side quests are ultimately meaningless, unrelated to any sort of story, and basically a set of disconnected one shots involving the same characters. That works fine for some tables but I have found that most players prefer to have more meaning and more reasons for the actions their characters take. Players get invested in seeing what comes next in THEIR story which motivates them to keep playing.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Lessons Learned: Experiences in a Sandbox Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky McDibben View Post
    Well, that's an interesting point. I disagree with most of what you said, notably because the planet was only in peril because of the PCs' actions. This evolved out of their meddling in a dynamic situation.
    Yeah, alright, that changes everything. You can scratch what I said.
    Last edited by Lalliman; 2022-12-07 at 04:28 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •