Sandbox style: How to handle challenge levels

[Thornir Alekeg]

My one experience with a sandbox style game was a nightmare. To start the DM did not inform us this was the style of the game. We stumbled into something that was WAYYYY beyond our 2nd level characters (he started us out at 2nd level). We managed to flee, but soon discovered that everywhere we looked, things were more than we could handle. When we finally thought we found an adventure we could actually take on, we discovered that the information we got was wrong. It got very dull because we spent our time trying to find something that wouldn't kill us, and when we did, as Melan suggested, we had been beated into a level of caution that made play slow and dull.

 

[painandgreed]

How do you handle challenge level in a sandbox style game? I could see a possible hybrid style where the PCs have many choices but the opposition scales to become a level-appropriate challenge. For instance there are always bugbears on Clover Hill, but if the PCs are 10th level, then they're bugbears with 5 class levels each. Another possibility would be to make them normal bugbears but not play out the fight in detail - "The bugbears are easily defeated, but the loot is meagre."

Autoscaling typically goes against why i like to run and play in sandbox type games. I think you'll usually find the the PCs will opt for suitable challanges. Typically, they want the most treasure and experience they can get, so they'll take the biggest threat they can reasonably take on. Occationally, they'll go for a cake walk, and you just play it however you feel they want to. If they really want to clean out that 1st level dungeon they had to abandon back in the day now that they're 8th level, let them walk through it roll by roll. If they happen to be in a village plagued of some low level monsters and want to clean them out quickly without issue, handwave it. I find that sandbox games require much more effort by the DM to keep the game moving and require some changes in styles to do so.

Certain areas wil be more dangerous that others. Certain monsters are more dangerous than others. Where these creatures are is probably common knowledge to those in the area. If the PCs Gather Information, use some tracking, of just sneak around and hide and observe a bit, they should be able to pick and choose their adversaries. Keep in mind that NPCs should be thinking the same way the PCs are. A group of bandits that is fairly low level might not know what level the PCs are and may not attack them, or just try to exact a simple toll from them rather than out and out fight because they don't want to bite off more than they can chew either.

 

[Ourph]

I'm thinking of running a more sandbox style game next time. But I don't know if I'd enjoy running fights where the PCs easily outmatch the opposition.

Having fights where you outright dominate the opposition is one of the benefits of sandbox style play for the players. I would suggest giving a few of these fights a try once in a while. In all likelihood the fights will go so quickly it won't matter a great deal to you and it will give the players some fun they wouldn't get in a more scripted, "level appropriate" game.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Having fights where you outright dominate the opposition is one of the benefits of sandbox style play for the players. I would suggest giving a few of these fights a try once in a while. In all likelihood the fights will go so quickly it won't matter a great deal to you and it will give the players some fun they wouldn't get in a more scripted, "level appropriate" game.

Absolutely.

If the players never get a chance to totally wipe the floor with some badguys, how will they ever feel like total badasses?

 

[robertsconley]

That's all fine and dandy, but on the other side of the coin do you let the tribe of giants clean the clocks of the 2nd level PCs because they've wandered into the wrong area in the overworld? .

Err Yes.

Of course you have the choice of making the result of the combat more interesting than SPLAT! your dead. Sell them into slavery is a possibility among others.

Having GMed a freeform game for 20 some years it took a while to learn how to managed hooks, leads, and information so that that players have the information needed to accomplish their goals.

Also it is far easier to this style of play if you use a setting with some foundation in our history. It doesn't have be an earth setting. But rather you say ok my campaign is going to have the following dozen or so fantastic elements. Then extrapolate the implications for your world. For example are the gods personally involved in their worshipers lives or are they distant figures.

By keeping as many detail realistic you get the benifit of how people of different experience interact in real-life. For example the PCs wouldn't go dragon slaying off the bat they may assisst the local noble in clearing out bandits and orcs from his demense. Then later get a job guarding a scholar in exploring a ruins. Then get to the point where they have enough contacts and experience to start perusing their own leads in more dangerous areas.

Remember if the tribe of giant is there for 2nd level PCs to wander into, why hasn't anybody else wander into them and had the same problem. The answer to that question or its negative before starting play may help the GM avoid the problem.

Enjoy
Rob Conley

 

[robertsconley]

But the DM must excercise care as well. It is not ethical to slaughter the party by a proverbial lightning bolt from the sky. He should provide clues to draw attention to the fact that danger may be present (although, of course, some places may be innately dangerous: weird temples, very ancient ruins, swampland and mountains, for example, are always hazardous in my campaign). He should also handle encounters with a certain amount of flexibility, and usually allow a way out if there could concievably be one, and the players are willing to take it.

I want to support Melan in saying that in real-life stuff just doesn't happen in a vacuum. And the fact that even a 1st level character has some measure of skill over the rank and file of a campaign world. The DM should consider these two factor when role-playing the journey and interaction of the PCs.

"Hold! I see signs of Giants!"

or

The village beadle seeing the party head to the trail

"Well now, you shouldn't be going up that trail there. I stick to the main road. That trail leads to the high country where the giants live. If they be see the lot of you, you will be the meat for their stew."

 

[Korgoth]

There are a lot of fine comments in this thread. Excellent advice! My thoughts:

The lack of "autoscaling" is indeed a benefit of sandbox play. What if all the players had a bad day at work? OK, take your 8th level PCs to "Kobold Hill", which you have ignored to this point. I'm not going to say that the kobolds all became Barbarian/Monks overnight. They're kobolds, and kobolds are supposed to be physically weak (though crafty, of course). The fight will probably be a cake-walk. Why not, if that's what the PCs want to do? The silver coins won't amount to much, but everybody got to show what a bad boy they are... which they wouldn't get to do if all the monsters autoscaled to the PCs. When you're 8th level (or whatever) you should get to kick a little gratuitous bootay now and again, if that's your pleasure.

The tougher areas ought to be further away from civilization, or otherwise reasonably marked off from incursion by lower level PCs. The most voracious monsters don't live next door to the starting town or village... otherwise that would have "come to a head" long ago. Rather, the worst critters live out in the "here there be dragons" districts... the Outlands, the Forbidden Wastes, the Plague Lands, etc. Even if something is discovered near the town, if it's a more challenging site it should be called "Tomb of the Lich King" or somesuch, or there should at least be available rumors which allude to its toughness.

Sandbox play requires the players to do their homework. They should seek to gain information about locales they intend to visit, or which their expedition will pass near. If they don't, shame on them. Likewise, if a 3rd level party insists on trekking all the way out to the Crag of the Gargantuan Lich-Dragon, the DM should happily serve up the entree they've just ordered.

Sandbox is all about player choice. But with increased freedom comes increased responsibility, as they say. So the old line "Well, it wouldn't be here if we couldn't beat it" doesn't hold. The players are responsible for knowing when to retreat, to regroup, to hire mercenaries, to abandon the expedition, etc. They're also responsible for setting goals and being proactive. Perhaps it appears that the Lord Chancellor is trying to take over the kingdom. They could help him, oppose him, or ignore the situation. All three will have different consequences. Maybe they ignore the situation, the Chancellor tries a coup and the coup fails (I'd make it a percentile roll, when the time came). So nothing really changes. Or maybe there is a major change. But the players can do as they will. Maybe they helped the Chancellor, then found out he was a jerk, then skipped town as his plot went down the tubes. So they'll be avoiding the Capital City for a while. It's all up to them.

To me, this style of play is very attractive. But of course it puts a burden on the DM to actually cook up a decent realm and have interesting things therein. Though if you buy a published setting (like Mr. Gygax' Castle Yggsburgh) much of the work is done for you.

 

[robertsconley]

I would never 'hate' the idea, but the reality of my gaming table is that when PC's start rising in levels, they want to start fighting new, interesting, really deadly and challenging critters. Now that's not to say that a 15th level kobold sorcerer wouldn't be a challenge... but it's still a kobold, and still just a sorcerer. There's (soon to be) five monster manuals worth of beasties to choose from... why pick a kobold?

Well one choice in DMing a setting you could go wide and use all of the monster manuals or go deep and developed a few really interesting monsters.

For example in terms of background which are the more interesting creature the original Vampire from the AD&D 1st edition Monster Manual, or the Vampires from White Wolf's VtM. VtM has more depth and a VTM Vampire isn't always what you expect it to be because it part of a whole culture of vampires.

The same thing can be done for any of the creatures of D&D. If they are sentient it is easier still as they have culture as well as physical characteristics.

People forget that back in the 70s we didn't have 15 different monster manuals to choose from. Many DMs made their own. Some, like myself, made the existing ones more interesting. Vile Rune orcs are not the same as Purple Claw orcs who are not the same as Bloody hand. It can be deeper things than just cosmetic difference. Maybe Bloody Hand uses Net and Javelins, while Vile Runes use a polearms and a lot of potions. Tactical variety for combat doesn't have to be province of a different monster. Cultures can be very different from one another for the same creature.

 

[robertsconley]

Beyond a certain level, though, it is sometimes more economic to say "You have mopped the floor with them. Joe, you take ... roll roll ... 3 points of damage. Now, Tom, ..."

And of course, if the PCs can surrender, so can the enemies.

"Hey Bob"

"Yes?"

"What are we going to do with 50 kobolds?"

 

[robertsconley]

There are a lot of fine comments in this thread. Excellent advice! My thoughts:

The tougher areas ought to be further away from civilization, or otherwise reasonably marked off from incursion by lower level PCs. The most voracious monsters don't live next door to the starting town or village... otherwise that would have "come to a head" long ago. Rather, the worst critters live out in the "here there be dragons" districts... the Outlands, the Forbidden Wastes, the Plague Lands, etc. Even if something is discovered near the town, if it's a more challenging site it should be called "Tomb of the Lich King" or somesuch, or there should at least be available rumors which allude to its toughness.

There are disadvantage to the MMORPG approach of zones. I found it better to mix it up like in real-life. The reason it is better because I found that player intuitively understand that type of arrangement when presented to them. They understand that somewhere in that Orc Warren there is a high level group that rules them. But this little outpost is likely just going to have a sergeant type and couple regular soldiers. The robed guys down by the riverside are going to be the apprentices or adept gathering herbs to use back at the coven.

To me, this style of play is very attractive. But of course it puts a burden on the DM to actually cook up a decent realm and have interesting things therein. Though if you buy a published setting (like Mr. Gygax' Castle Yggsburgh) much of the work is done for you.

The basic set of just about most published setting can be adapted for this style of play. Throw all the supplements and books for a setting then your milegage will vary.

The real challenge for a DM is presenting the world. He not only has to play the NPCs but keep track, in a broad sense, of what they are doing particulary when the PCs have an impact on their actions.