Sandbox-style: What's your opinion?

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Based upon this ENWorld blog entry I'm left wondering some things about sandbox-style gaming that I'd like to ask those DMs who have used it:
1) I've been told adventure writing is an art, but if you are simply following the direction of PCs does it require even more skill to pull off?
2) Does it dramatically increase the preparation time needed? (You may take this question however you feel.)
3) Would you recommend it to new DMs? And why or why not?

 

[Crothian]

Sandbox does not mean you need to write your own adventures. It is more about presenting a world for the PCs and letting them choose where to go. You can say this is White Plume Mountain or this way leads to the Steading of the Hill Giants if you want to. Just let them decide what they are going to do. And it is not hard to alter the plots of most modules and the goals to fit what the PCs do.

It is more work for me at the beginning as I lay the ground work and come up with ideas for where they might go. But once the campaign gets going the PCs start making choices that build on past choices. Unless your PCs are ADD or something I've found that it becomes easier to predict what the PCs will do.

No, I wouldn't. A new DM will have problwems when the Pcs want to goto a place they haven't thought they would.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Thanks, that's a lot of help.

 

[Umbran]

1) I've been told adventure writing is an art, but if you are simply following the direction of PCs does it require even more skill to pull off?

Not more skill - different skills.

2) Does it dramatically increase the preparation time needed? (You may take this question however you feel.)

Doing this correctly, in my opinion, takes a whole lot more time communicating with the players, learning what they like and don't like, what they want and don't want. If you lump that into what you call "preparation time", then yes.

3) Would you recommend it to new DMs? And why or why not?

No, I would not. Every GM, regardless of their plot/adventure design style, ought to develop the base skills of running individual sessions in an entertaining manner first. Your design philosophy won't mean a thing if you don't know how to pace a session, interpret rules well, and generally keep people happy at runtime.

I also think that, in general, we tend to get hung up on terminology and theory a bit much - folks talk as if either you are sandbox style, or you are not, and that equates to you sucking or not. This is, imho, balderdash.

Theory is important to keep in mind when you are considering the design of your game, campaign, and session. But in the end, a really good GM eschews no tool on the basis of theory - the practical matter of showing your friends a good time should be paramount, and the really good GMs will use tools from any theory to get the job done. Do not pigeonhole yourself with terms.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

The campaign design articles on the Wizards site are pretty good for laying this stuff out. That series is worth checking out. You can see there where the designer lays out lots of cool ideas that he wants to go with eventually -- then draws back and figures out one solid starting town and dungeon, and focuses on that. The idea being that there's no need to develop too far ahead, since you'll want to see how things play out and what elements of your campaign the players really dig on.

So yeah, writing your own campaign is significantly more work than "one town, one dungeon" -- but that's all you need to start having a good time.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Sandbox style also relies heavily on players who are comfortable/interested in taking the initiative. Early on in my DMing career, I once planned an entire encounter on one player's backstory, not realizing that the player in question had absolutely no personal initiative. We spent the entire session plodding along with little to no action or progress, because the player that I'd counted on to drive the action had no interest in doing so.

Know your players. Know whether they're the kind of players who like to drive the action, or the kind of players who'd rather follow a more pre-set path. This will save you a lot of pain.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Mostly; what Crothian & Umbran said. I do have a point or two to add:

1) I've been told adventure writing is an art, but if you are simply following the direction of PCs does it require even more skill to pull off?

As Umbran said, "Different skills." Not more or less. However, one thing no one* mentioned above is player skill. Running in sandbox mode means the players have to raise their game and decide on a course of action (not wait for you to provide one). They need to show initiative and communicate what they want to do to the DM. That requires using some mental muscles on their parts that pre-written adventures don't really develop.

Running in sandbox mode is harder for players. Ultimately I believe it's more fun and more rewarding (that's been my experience, FWIW), but you can't just drop this mode of playing on them without warning. Also, it can be tough sometimes for new players or players who have only experienced pre-written adventures. They have to learn how to play this game too.

My take away is that DMs cannot switch from pre-written to sandbox without the players being fully engaged and on-board. Make sure they understand the benefits of this kind of play and also what is expected of them. More games have collapsed for lack of communication and un-met (unrealistic) expectations than out of any legitimate "bad experiences."

2) Does it dramatically increase the preparation time needed? (You may take this question however you feel.)

I think one of the best tools you can have is a series of random generators. Not just encounters, but cities, NPCs, thieves guilds, churches, cults, etc. Have lists of names handy organized by culture/race. That sort of thing. There are lots of resources already out there, plus you can make your own. Collecting all the generators and organizing them so you can find them in-game is some work, but once set up using them is easy. They embody the potential for a lifetime of gaming. It's an up-front cost that pays long dividends.

3) Would you recommend it to new DMs? And why or why not?

No. There are several skills needed for DM-ing. Running your sessions in "sandbox mode" is definitely the "no training wheels" version of being a DM. I think it's better and leads to much deeper PC immersion and fun (IMO), but it's definitely a system where you (the DM) are doing a lot of work adventure writers normally do for you (and often, you're doing it in real time while players are watching you). Once you can run a pre-written adventure well you can "graduate" to running sandbox.

*I didn't see Lord Pendragon's post until after I wrote this.

 

[Obryn]

Sandbox style also relies heavily on players who are comfortable/interested in taking the initiative....
Know your players. Know whether they're the kind of players who like to drive the action, or the kind of players who'd rather follow a more pre-set path. This will save you a lot of pain.

Yep, this was what I ran into. I was gung-ho to try a completely sandbox campaign, set in the Wilderlands. You know, random rumors and adventure seeds scattered here and there. Random encounter tables. And, the keyed Wilderlands hexes, of course.

I found out pretty quickly, though, that my players (who are mostly casual gamers to one degree or another) would rather have a general plotline and/or specific quests to follow. Not a railroad, mind you - just some fairly clear options to choose among, including the option to ignore them all if they wanted to.

It was a lesson learned.

As for prep work, I'd have to say that it's a very different kind of preparation. I spent a lot more time learning about the world - including places they may never go. Whereas, running most adventures, you might spend a lot of time learning them inside and out; when I was doing sandbox-style stuff, I spent a lot of time making up random encounter tables, reading about nearby cities, and the like. And then, riffing off those in-game, making up most everything on the fly.

-O

 

[Reynard]

I think one of the best tools you can have is a series of random generators. Not just encounters, but cities, NPCs, thieves guilds, churches, cults, etc. Have lists of names handy organized by culture/race. That sort of thing. There are lots of resources already out there, plus you can make your own. Collecting all the generators and organizing them so you can find them in-game is some work, but once set up using them is easy. They embody the potential for a lifetime of gaming. It's an up-front cost that pays long dividends.

I'm about halfway through my follow-up to the sandbox blog entry, which is all about encounter generators. What's funny is that I was inspired to write the sandbox entry after writing the "1 Million Swords" post -- I'd forgotten how awesome random generators could be and how integral they were to sandbox DMing (obviously my preferred style).

 

[Reynard]

Sandbox style also relies heavily on players who are comfortable/interested in taking the initiative. Early on in my DMing career, I once planned an entire encounter on one player's backstory, not realizing that the player in question had absolutely no personal initiative. We spent the entire session plodding along with little to no action or progress, because the player that I'd counted on to drive the action had no interest in doing so.

Ninjas. Ninjas always get the action moving. they are also good for CYA when you failed to prepare adequately.