D&D 4E Hints on Sandboxing with 4e?

[Rel]

So I'm really curious about something. And please understand that I'm not being critical or confrontational when I ask. I'm just asking to gain understanding because sandbox campaigns, at least the more pure forms of the type, are not something I run very much.

If true sandboxing means that there are monsters of levels 1, 5, 10 and 20 (just to pull some numbers out of thin air) scattered around the countryside, and the PC's aren't encouraged to encounter them in any particular order, won't that ultimately result in a somewhat linear progression anyway? If the PC's run smack into a level 10 encounter at first level then they'll probably die. If they run into a level 5 opponent at first level then they might well survive long enough to retreat and cautiously scout the area until they find the level 1 encounters.

So they'll do the level 1(ish) stuff until they gain a few levels. Then they'll go back to the level 5(ish) area that they couldn't handle before. And eventually they'll be strong enough to handle the level 10(ish) baddies and so forth.

Am I getting that right? I understand that the DM isn't coddling them and isn't pushing them toward specific encounters. But ultimately isn't that going to give the same net result as a more structured campaign only this way has more trial and error?

 

[mattcolville]

I have one problem with 4e though, experienced in my current limited-sandbox 4e game: un-balanced encounters suck. Worse, too-high-level opponents don't do lots of damage and force PCs to flee like in 3e, they stick around in endless grindy combat that lasts hours and bores everyone.

My concern is that running a sandbox, I won't be able to, and won't want to, rescale all the monsters to the PCs' level. So I thought I'd ask for hints/tips on making 4e work in a sandbox approach, or if you think I should use a different system?

If you think D&D4's combat is long and boring, then it doesn't matter if you're playing Open World/Sandbox or not. It's long and boring.

I currently think that D&D4 is exceptionally poorly suited to sandbox play, and that's primarily a result of two factors.

1: Magic Items are no longer a primary motivator. This is by design and while I agree with the design goals, I disagree with their implementation. In trying to make it so Items are only responsible for a small fraction of a character's ability, making sure magic items dispense regular bonuses at a predictable rate so people's characters are "portable" they've made items largely inconsequential.

2: The heroes are more heroic. A 1st level D&D4 character is not a talented peasant with his father's sword off to seek adventure, he's already a hero.

These are pretty substantive changes. Combined, they mean that characters need better reasons to go adventuring than "there's a holy sword down there, and I want it." Heroic characters, not out for loot, want to save the world.

Pre-D&D4, D&D was built on the Conan model, which was self-motivation, perfect for sandbox play. Heroes are active, which is necessary for sandbox play.

D&D4 focuses more on heroic characters, and heroic characters are reactive. Terrible for sandbox play.

You can run a sanbox game in D&D 4, I did it. Very ambitious game, at best a middling success because the players were constantly waiting for something to react to, rather than deciding what they wanted to do.

 

[JoeGKushner]

AD&D does not rely on "multiple balanced encounters per day".

.

But are you saying that the 15 miniute adventuring day is better suited for this type of play? If the party runs into something it can't handle and it runs after them, ain't no getting back them spells.

 

[JoeGKushner]

If you think D&D4's combat is long and boring, then it doesn't matter if you're playing Open World/Sandbox or not. It's long and boring.
.

Pretty much a ditto post.

If the length/excitement of combat is the problem and not that PC's can encounter creatures of a higher level, then 4e is probably a problem.

 

[nnms]

First of all, I think the thing that needs to be gotten rid of to making sand box gaming work in 4E is that the notion of level appropriate encounters is somehow bad or not appropriate.

Monsters can be scaled up and down in level so easily that it really should be a non issue. Just print yourself a handy reference from the DMG about leveling monsters and the new revised damage charts and go with it. If they're level 4 and they come across something that by the MM is a level 12 monster, just make it a lower level. If you DM with a laptop handy, it's so easy to use the monster builder, select the monster, edit it and just click it's level down.

In 4E, level is more about pacing than power increases. You may get additional powers to choose from, but the monster's defenses, hit points and damage output generally scale with your party. You may be rolling to-hit numbers that are 5 higher, but the monster's defenses are also 5 higher, so it's a wash.

You can still have monsters that are beyond them. Just start any encounter with such a create with a monster knowledge check. You tell the players how dangerous these creatures are. The first time in my games I did that, the players ignored it. Then in the monster's turn when I asked "does a 38 hit your will defense?" they got the clue, really, really quickly. Now if I say something like "You can't help feeling a bit of fear as you look upon the creature. You're pretty sure that if it gets a lucky bite, it can bit you in half in a single attack" they listen. Same with, "It's hide looks so thick and scaly that you doubt your best attack would ever even scratch it."

Just don't let the players commit to combat against superior creatures without first telling them how dangerous it looks. The only reason to have a three hour slog is if you didn't communicate to them the reality of the situation.

Also, there's nothing wrong with ending a combat a round or two into it. You inform them that combat is over, that they don't realistically have a chance to win and that it's time for a skill challenge to escape the creatures. Failure means that the creatures chase them somewhere they don't want to be. Success means they get away. I don't know of too many groups of players that are going to yell "we can take them!" after a couple of experience of huge to-hit rolls, monster knowledge checks telling them clearly they can't win and even the DM ending combat early and explicitly telling them that running is their only option.

There's just no reason to grind away for three hours.

 

[nightspaladin]

Just because you sandbox does not mean that you can't shelter your players from the higher level encounters until later. Sandbox doesn't mean that the characters are just dropped into the world next to epic level threats and you hope they don't run into them. Unless your players are starting next to Mordor or some other place of irrevocable doom, the story should still have a good narrative. The only difference in a sandbox is that you aren't dictating where that narrative goes so much as setting up options and letting the PCs stumble into a story.

A sandbox means that you build a world of locations and threats to the area. This often includes quest or story clues that are available for the PCs to follow.
The trick is that you don't know which ones they will follow, or how they will interact with the area at all.

So for example.... say there is a big scary ancient red dragon in your mountains to the east of your starting town. If you don't want your players trying to jump it at 4th level, don't include any info or hints about it until they are closer to the level. Their starting town, may have 50 plot hooks that you create and they should all be relatively low level. Once they start off playing in your sandbox, you will have time between adventures to start creating repercussions of their actions and opening more of the area up to them.

Or....
4e does a great job of restricting movement options, so that Red Dragon lair might just not be reachable without flight, a paragon or better sort of power.

For the 4e encounter model, what I would do is create sample encounters from the random monster tables you may be using. create 5-10 of them per area, and build them quickly with 4e monsters between party level n-1 to party level n +5. If you roll an encounter from the list that is a little higher than it should be, you can always drop the damage down on the fly or remove a mob or two.

A list of 10-15 pre built encounters they might stumble into, a good starting area where there is plenty to do and learn about, 30-50 hints, rumors, job offers, etc, that may take the players to these roughly fleshed out areas you have created nearby and the desire to roll with the punches and change the plots you made up as you go are all you need to start a kick ass sandbox game.

 

[Ruzak]

We remove the half level bonuses to everything, and adjust the monsters accordingly, as I believe many people do. We do this largely to simple character leveling, but it can also help to bring monsters to a more common level. Higher level monsters still have a lot of hp and hit hard, but it is at least possible to hit them (and be missed). This broadens the range of monster levels making a good challenge. Since everyone learns new powers and feats at most levels, the PCs still feel like they are improving each level.

This also helps with non-monster challenge DCs. Otherwise things like pits and traps that were once impossible become trivial at higher levels. Of course this discrepancy may be what you want, if you you want to force the party to do things one at a time, while giving the appearance of a sandbox (a la Zelda).

We also do this because we like the less level dependent nature of games like Savage Worlds (but really like 4e). I think it could also help a sandbox game.

 

[S'mon]

In 3e, if you don't have access to teleport or similar magic that lets you move really fast, you can pretty much only run away if the DM decides the monsters don't pursue; they're almost always faster than the PCs.

PCs can hide/evade, they can split up so the monster has to choose who to chase. Against some foes they can make a stand at a defensible choke point. They may flee before combat starts, giving them a head start. If they spot the monsters first they may retreat before the monsters even notice them.

Some examples I've seen:

3e Low level PCs, including mine, encounter a fort with Ogres on the battlements. PCs retreat, unnoticed by Ogres.

3e Mid-level PCs in the Lost City of Gaxmoor PCs encounter a large force of hobgoblins. They retreat to a defensible choke point and kill lots of hobgoblins until a stalemate ensues, then bug out.

3e Same PCs, in the process of retreating from the hobgoblins, encounter a high level but lazy Cambion, Heracules. In one round of combat Heracules carves up a tough barbarian NPC accompanying the group. The PCs flee into the ruins, Heracules, being lazy, doesn't pursue. Herac was CR 20, vs PCs around 7th level, so this was something like 13th level PCs being attacked by goblins, from his POV not worth pursuing - no XP and no loot worth having.

4e PCs in Vault of Larin Karr attack a large Orc tribe in their lair, and are defeated after a long fight. Most of the PCs die, but the Rogue grabs an incapacitated fellow PC and hides outside until she can sneak away. It's bright daylight outside so the Orc search beyond the lair is perfunctory.

4e Same PCs encounter a young red dragon under a town, fight a lengthy but losing battle. 2 PCs killed, survivors retreat outside where a bunch of town guard (4e Human Guard) ready at the exit to the dungeon with a forest of halberds. The young dragon is badly bloodied and gives up the chase, returning to its lair with the dead PCs and their gear. (This would have gone differently in a prior edition - in 1e-3e the dragon could have taken out a cellarfull of guards with 1 breath attack).

 

[S'mon]

So... end of round 1, one PC is down, 1 PC is blinded and bloodied, 1 PC is bloodied, 1 PC is close, and the other PC is already starting to run. The wizard maybe tosses a daily to slow the monsters down, cleric throws a heal, and you start running! How is that slow and grindy?

The biggest problems I've seen are with high level elites, their toughness greatly exceeds their damage output. Elite soldiers are the worst, eg ettins.

 

[Neonchameleon]

From what I'm finding, two things help a lot.

1: Use the MM3 damage expressions. That hill giant ambusher you sprang on us was scary. And switching my campaign to MM3 has done things.
2: There's a huge leap in nova performance between fourth and fifth level. That extra daily makes a massive difference. One house rule I'd consider implementing in a heroic tier sandbox is "Only one daily", with fifth level allowing you to upgrade it to a fifth level power.