Pathfinder 1E Sandboxes? Forked from Paizo reinvents hexcrawling

[Raven Crowking]

intenionally misinterpreting each others posts

I used to think that this was the case, now I am not so sure.

I begin to think that this is actually a function of "reader bias", and would not occur (or at least not to the same degree) if the same people were having a conversation in a pub. And, I think the descent into minutia is based, to a large degree, on that misinterpretation.....A roundabout attempt to clarify that is misinterpreted as bad faith by both sides, on the part of the other side.

Take, for example, the OP in this thread.

Hobo suggested that the sandbox endpoint was probably unobtainable and undesireable. If one reads that to mean a campaign world in which the DM has prepped everything, and knows everything, so that the PCs can do anything without catching the DM unprepared, then he is right. That is neither possible nor (IMHO at least) desireable.

If one reads this as a sandbox (i.e., the game that you are playing) is both impossible and undesireable, then not only is one likely to take offense, but it would seem that Hobo was calling you a liar.

Hence the desire to talk about real games, as opposed to hypothetical endpoints.

We are, perhaps, all of us a little too quick to take offense, and a little less charitable in our reading of others' posts than we should be.


RC

 

[The Shaman]

Hobo's entirely correct, though. I've seen it in pretty much every thread that at some point entered the territory of 'classic' vs. 'modern', 'sandbox' vs. 'railroading', or 'simulationist' vs. 'gamist'.

Holding up one sentence of one post as 'proof' that fans of sandbox-style play call badwrongfun on other gamers is what a friend of mine called, "Picking the fly[poop] out of the pepper."

You can do the same for any extreme as well as from the radical middle in any argument. I read a hyperbole-laced rant on Big Purple the other day which basically said that the purpose of gaming is to create a collaborative story and anyone who disagrees is a lazy, uncreative idiot. Unlike Hobo, however, I don't take that as representative of an entire segment of the hobby.

 

[The Shaman]

I've countered this by supplying a future timeline for events that potentially affect areas of context. If the players do not get involved here then these changes will occur over this timeframe. If the players do not affect this then these event wil occur.

The is no particular plot or expectation for any interaction, but I work out thee effect non-interaction will have. After each session, I spend 10-20 minutes walking the list, adding new event chains and adjusting affected ones.

Same here.

 

[The Shaman]

I've been following this rather long and partisan thread, and I'm bound to concur that it's a thinly-veiled edition war.

Considering that I don't play D&D of any edition regularly, then I'd have to call bollocks on that.

I played 1e and 3e, but I never played 2e or 4e and I'm only passing familiar with Basic, so I wouldn't make much of an edition warrior in any case.

Plus, sandbox play isn't just a style of D&D; it's a style of gaming generally, one that cuts across genres and systems, including games as diverse as Traveller, Metamorphosis Alpha, and Boot Hill.

So let's let the 'edition war' canard die, hmm?

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Edition War?

I don't see how this can possibly be an edition war.

If anything, seems 4E is more suited for sandbox play than Pathfinder, because of the ease of building 4E encounters on the fly , and the 'monsters use different rules than players' paradigm. In fact, when I first heard about the whole 'points of light' setting that was supposed to be in 4E, I though they'd be embracing sandbox style adventures.

The fact that WoTC hasn't currently chosen to support a sandbox play style doesn't mean that they couldn't, or that doing so would go badly for them.

Ken

 

[coyote6]

You don't need a plot (or as Ariosto says, the plot), you just need some NPCs who are doing things. NPCs with goals who are able to act on those goals.

You need 3 things so far as I can tell. A setting, PCs with goals, and NPCs with goals. Maybe 4 - there needs to be some source of tension between these elements.

All you need for a sandbox is setting, protagonists, antagonists, and conflict? I think the DragonLance modules fit that description.

 

[The Shaman]

All you need for a sandbox is setting, protagonists, antagonists, and conflict? I think the DragonLance modules fit that description.

Right here I have a cake, and over there I have bowls of flour, sugar, milk, and egg whites.

Same thing, right?

 

[Raven Crowking]

All you need for a sandbox is setting, protagonists, antagonists, and conflict? I think the DragonLance modules fit that description.

I would actually agree here.....the DragonLance modules have everything required for a sandbox. It is not what they lack that makes them non-sandboxy, but rather what they add (in terms of play expectations).

Any AP or linear scenario can be broken down, and contains material usable for a sandbox. All that must be done is remove those pesky expectations about what the story will be, and what the PCs will do.

Any sandbox can be turned into an AP or linear scenario by adding those same expectations.

AFAICT, that is the crux of the difference. The stronger the expectations, the more linear and less sandbox a game is.


RC

 

[coyote6]

Right here I have a cake, and over there I have bowls of flour, sugar, milk, and egg whites.

Same thing, right?

That was basically my reaction about the "ingredients list" I quoted. It seemed to include more sorts of games (i.e., pretty almost all but the solely player vs. player or GM-less RPGs) than previous descriptions of sandboxes.

If you need to mix the ingredients and apply heat in a particular manner, then flour, sugar, milk & egg whites isn't actually all you need to be a cake.

 

[Reynard]

All you need for a sandbox is setting, protagonists, antagonists, and conflict? I think the DragonLance modules fit that description.

Now I know you are being intentionally obtuse, but I'll play along anyway:

The DragonLance modules are not a sandbox. You are correct in assessing that they contain the same elements as a sandbox. Therefore, what do you think it is about the DragonLance modules that make it not a sandbox?