Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Sandbox and the Railroad
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7470451" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Like [MENTION=6943731]dragoner[/MENTION] said, <em>neither railroad nor sandbox</em>. Not <em>both railroad and sandbox</em>.</p><p></p><p>Here's a rough account of what a <em>railroad</em> is:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Railroad</strong>: The main events of the shared fiction are determined by the GM, either in advance, or perhaps by improvisation in the course of play. By <em>determining and event</em> I mean deciding what fictional elements it will include (or at least the main ones) and deciding how it starts and what important consequences flow from it. (Speaking loosely, this is "the story".)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The function of player contributions to the fiction is largely to add colour (often by way of characterisation) and perhaps to determine some minor details of events, some matters of sequencing, and perhaps some minor events.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Examples of minor details: How exactly do the heroes beat the bandits? (The player often get to decide this, if even only through their choices about their PCs' capabilities.) Do the heroes get the clue by interrogating a bandit, or by having a friendly townsperson give it to them after they've killed all the bandits? (It's quite common for modules to have suggestions about how to supply necessary clues if the default way of supplying them fails for some reason connected to player decision-making.)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Examples of matters of sequencing: Do the heroes first fight the bandits and then meet the dryad, or vice versa? Which elemental node do the heroes explore first? (The Alexandrian's node-based design is a theory of this.)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Examples of minor events: Anything that ever got labelled a "side quest".</p><p></p><p>Here's a rough account of what a <em>sandbox</em> is:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Sandbox</strong>: The GM authors a (relatively) large number of fictional elements in advance of play. The GM establishes some starting event or starting situation which positions the PCs so that their players can, without too much trouble, declare actions that will engage one or more of those fictional elements. (The most stereotypical version of this: the heroes are in a tavern and here rumours of a nearby dungeon.) Play unfolds from there, with the players (via their PCs) learning about more and more of the fictional elements established in advance by the GM, and declaraing actions for their PCs that engage with those elements. (This is often described as "exploration".)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Note that the "in advance" needn't mean <em>before the first session</em>. But it does mean <em>prior to the players learning about them through the play of their PCs</em>. The limit case of "in advance" is rolling on a random table to supply the material needed for the GM to tell the players what it is that their PCs are learning about. But I think most people's experience is that a fully-randomised sandbox is likely to be a bit unsatisfactory from the excitement point of view! Clever design of the elements - eg in the sort of way [MENTION=6698278]Emerikol[/MENTION] has talked about upthread, and as [MENTION=6688858]Libramarian[/MENTION] has described in older threads - is better for producing engaging sandbox RPGing.</p><p></p><p>The main difference between a sandbox and a railroad is that in the latter the GM authors the main events (and the elements that constitute them), whereas in a sandbox the GM authors the main elements but the events (both <em>which events occur</em> and <em>what sequence they occur in</em>) are initiated by the players. In a sandbox there is no such thing as a "side quest" in the way that there is in a railroad.</p><p></p><p>In any event, we can now see what a RPG that is neither railroad nor sandbox might look like, because it's not as if those two things cover the field of ways in which fictional elements and fictional events might be generated.</p><p></p><p>For instance, we can imagine the players generating the elements but the GM establishing events. We can imagine players generating both elements and events, with the GM's role then being adjudication rather than authorship. And, because RPGs unfold over (real world) time, we can also imagine different ways of distributing the authorship of elements, and/or events, over that time of play. In both a railroad and a sandbox, the GM's authorship - of events in the first approach, of elements in the second - is to an important extent <em>independent</em> of actual play. But it is possible to author events and/or elements <em>in the process of play</em> or <em>in response to play</em>.</p><p></p><p>For instance, if a player makes a Navigation (or Orienteering, or Survival, or whatever) check to travel from A to B, and it fails, in some systems (eg Dungeon World) the GM is entitled to narrate that failure as "A storm comes up, the trail is washed out, and the river floods. What do you do?" That is not a sandbox - the element of the storm was not authored in advance of play, independetly of player action declarations for their PCs as something for them to "explore". Nor is it a railroad - the event of the hero being caught in a storm that makes the onward journey hard was not authored in advance, but rather was authored as a response to a failed check.</p><p></p><p>A game in which most events are initiated by the players, <em>and</em> in which many or even most elements of the shared fiction that are established by the GM are established in response to, or as part of the adjudicaiton of, the events that the players initiate, will be neither a railroad nor a sandbox. I think this is a reasonably fairly high-level description of how DW plays, if played in accordance with its rules.</p><p></p><p>Here's another example:</p><p></p><p>A game in which most events are initiated by the GM, <em>but</em> in which many or even most element of the shared fiction that makes up those events comes either from the players, <em>or</em> from the outcomes of the resolution of prior events, will be neither a railroad nor a sandbox. It's not a sandbox because it reverses the authorship roles: the GM rather than the player initiates events, but the elements of those events are not authored by the GM in advance but are established either by the players or by the actual outcomes of prior play. And it's not a railroad because you can't author this sort of series of events in advance, because you can't have elements that are generated from play until play actuallay happens. I think this is a reasonably fair high-level description of how "scene-framing" RPGs work (eg Burning Wheel, DitV, and one approach to 4e which has been widely discussed on these boards).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7470451, member: 42582"] Like [MENTION=6943731]dragoner[/MENTION] said, [I]neither railroad nor sandbox[/I]. Not [I]both railroad and sandbox[/I]. Here's a rough account of what a [I]railroad[/I] is: [indent][b]Railroad[/b]: The main events of the shared fiction are determined by the GM, either in advance, or perhaps by improvisation in the course of play. By [I]determining and event[/I] I mean deciding what fictional elements it will include (or at least the main ones) and deciding how it starts and what important consequences flow from it. (Speaking loosely, this is "the story".) The function of player contributions to the fiction is largely to add colour (often by way of characterisation) and perhaps to determine some minor details of events, some matters of sequencing, and perhaps some minor events. Examples of minor details: How exactly do the heroes beat the bandits? (The player often get to decide this, if even only through their choices about their PCs' capabilities.) Do the heroes get the clue by interrogating a bandit, or by having a friendly townsperson give it to them after they've killed all the bandits? (It's quite common for modules to have suggestions about how to supply necessary clues if the default way of supplying them fails for some reason connected to player decision-making.) Examples of matters of sequencing: Do the heroes first fight the bandits and then meet the dryad, or vice versa? Which elemental node do the heroes explore first? (The Alexandrian's node-based design is a theory of this.) Examples of minor events: Anything that ever got labelled a "side quest".[/indent] Here's a rough account of what a [I]sandbox[/I] is: [indent][b]Sandbox[/b]: The GM authors a (relatively) large number of fictional elements in advance of play. The GM establishes some starting event or starting situation which positions the PCs so that their players can, without too much trouble, declare actions that will engage one or more of those fictional elements. (The most stereotypical version of this: the heroes are in a tavern and here rumours of a nearby dungeon.) Play unfolds from there, with the players (via their PCs) learning about more and more of the fictional elements established in advance by the GM, and declaraing actions for their PCs that engage with those elements. (This is often described as "exploration".) Note that the "in advance" needn't mean [I]before the first session[/I]. But it does mean [I]prior to the players learning about them through the play of their PCs[/I]. The limit case of "in advance" is rolling on a random table to supply the material needed for the GM to tell the players what it is that their PCs are learning about. But I think most people's experience is that a fully-randomised sandbox is likely to be a bit unsatisfactory from the excitement point of view! Clever design of the elements - eg in the sort of way [MENTION=6698278]Emerikol[/MENTION] has talked about upthread, and as [MENTION=6688858]Libramarian[/MENTION] has described in older threads - is better for producing engaging sandbox RPGing.[/indent] The main difference between a sandbox and a railroad is that in the latter the GM authors the main events (and the elements that constitute them), whereas in a sandbox the GM authors the main elements but the events (both [I]which events occur[/I] and [I]what sequence they occur in[/I]) are initiated by the players. In a sandbox there is no such thing as a "side quest" in the way that there is in a railroad. In any event, we can now see what a RPG that is neither railroad nor sandbox might look like, because it's not as if those two things cover the field of ways in which fictional elements and fictional events might be generated. For instance, we can imagine the players generating the elements but the GM establishing events. We can imagine players generating both elements and events, with the GM's role then being adjudication rather than authorship. And, because RPGs unfold over (real world) time, we can also imagine different ways of distributing the authorship of elements, and/or events, over that time of play. In both a railroad and a sandbox, the GM's authorship - of events in the first approach, of elements in the second - is to an important extent [I]independent[/I] of actual play. But it is possible to author events and/or elements [I]in the process of play[/I] or [I]in response to play[/I]. For instance, if a player makes a Navigation (or Orienteering, or Survival, or whatever) check to travel from A to B, and it fails, in some systems (eg Dungeon World) the GM is entitled to narrate that failure as "A storm comes up, the trail is washed out, and the river floods. What do you do?" That is not a sandbox - the element of the storm was not authored in advance of play, independetly of player action declarations for their PCs as something for them to "explore". Nor is it a railroad - the event of the hero being caught in a storm that makes the onward journey hard was not authored in advance, but rather was authored as a response to a failed check. A game in which most events are initiated by the players, [I]and[/I] in which many or even most elements of the shared fiction that are established by the GM are established in response to, or as part of the adjudicaiton of, the events that the players initiate, will be neither a railroad nor a sandbox. I think this is a reasonably fairly high-level description of how DW plays, if played in accordance with its rules. Here's another example: A game in which most events are initiated by the GM, [I]but[/I] in which many or even most element of the shared fiction that makes up those events comes either from the players, [I]or[/I] from the outcomes of the resolution of prior events, will be neither a railroad nor a sandbox. It's not a sandbox because it reverses the authorship roles: the GM rather than the player initiates events, but the elements of those events are not authored by the GM in advance but are established either by the players or by the actual outcomes of prior play. And it's not a railroad because you can't author this sort of series of events in advance, because you can't have elements that are generated from play until play actuallay happens. I think this is a reasonably fair high-level description of how "scene-framing" RPGs work (eg Burning Wheel, DitV, and one approach to 4e which has been widely discussed on these boards). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Sandbox and the Railroad
Top