D&D General Let's Talk About How to "Fix" D&D

[fearsomepirate]

This discussion is being position as black and white. Any control points in an adventure is railroad. Only an adventure without any constraints is a sandbox. This is a false choice that doesn’t take account of how adventures have adopted the Sandbox format and improved adventure design with it. While still maintaining a fully fleshed out practical campaign product.

No, what makes it "not a sandbox" is when noodling about it in it and filling in blank spaces isn't particularly meaningful, because the optimal choice is always to hit objectives quickly and move on.

 

[R_J_K75]

No, what makes it "not a sandbox" is when noodling about it in it and filling in blank spaces isn't particularly meaningful, because the optimal choice is always to hit objectives quickly and move on.

Isn't it safe to say that even in a sandbox campaign that there is some plot going on in the background whether the players get involved in it or not is a different story? I think so and can say from the games I've run yes.

 

[TheSword]

No, what makes it "not a sandbox" is when noodling about it in it and filling in blank spaces isn't particularly meaningful, because the optimal choice is always to hit objectives quickly and move on.

How does that relate to the examples I gave or contradict any of the other examples I gave? Slumbering, Night Below, Curse of Strahd, Rime of the Frost Maiden?

Not sure what noodling about means... do you mean interacting with the stuff the GM has designated lives there? Not sure what you mean by hit objectives quickly. Have you played or read any of the examples I’ve given?

 

[fearsomepirate]

Isn't it safe to say that even in a sandbox campaign that there is some plot going on in the background whether the players get involved in it or not is a different story? I think so and can say from the games I've run yes.

Not necessarily. Maybe. Maybe not. Keep on the Borderlands doesn't give a background plot. The distinction I like to draw is less "railroad vs sandbox" (especially since people hear "railroad" as "bad") and more "story vs scenario." A story focuses mainly on the advance through time and how to get players through it, while a scenario mostly provides information about the space and how to fill it in. Neither approach is "right" or "wrong," and there is a spectrum between the two, not a bright line.

 

[Reynard]

Isn't it safe to say that even in a sandbox campaign that there is some plot going on in the background whether the players get involved in it or not is a different story? I think so and can say from the games I've run yes.

IMO this is exactly the way a sandbox should work: there are things in place and things happening completely independently of the PCs. The GM should have a good idea of what is where, who relates to who, and what would happen if the PCs never got involved. That way, when the PCs do get involved, their choices matter. Who they align with, what locations they visit, which monsters they defeat and treasures they loot all inform what happens next and how the world responds to the PCs' actions.

This of course requires a lot of prep on the GM's part, and a lot of self motivation on the players'. A lot of players don't like sandbox campaigns because they don't like being proactive. There's nothing wrong with that but if there isn't clear communication between GM and players on the subject it can be a bad experience.

 

[fearsomepirate]

How does that relate to the examples I gave or contradict any of the other examples I gave? Slumbering, Night Below, Curse of Strahd, Rime of the Frost Maiden?

The example you gave of Rime is of some number of objectives the players can complete before advancing the story. Strahd is more sandboxy from what I've heard, but as I haven't played it, I don't have an opinion. I'm entirely unfamiliar with the other two examples.

Not sure what noodling about means... do you mean interacting with the stuff the GM has designated lives there?

I mean doing whatever, the difference between playing through the latest Call of Duty campaign and playing with a box of GI Joes.

Not sure what you mean by hit objectives quickly. Have you played or read any of the examples I’ve given?

By "hit the objectives quickly," I mean, "get to the next waypoint with alacrity, not delaying, in a little time as possible and with minimal resource expenditure."

 

[R_J_K75]

There's nothing wrong with that but if there isn't clear communication between GM and players on the subject it can be a bad experience

I think theres also something to be said for the difference between a linear adventure, a sandbox adventure and a sandbox campaign. The former two usually have a predetermined objective as to where a sandbox campaign lets the players determine and pursue their own objective.

 

[TheSword]

The example you gave of Rime is of some number of objectives the players can complete before advancing the story. Strahd is more sandboxy from what I've heard, but as I haven't played it, I don't have an opinion. I'm entirely unfamiliar with the other two examples.

No, Rime doesn’t have to advance unless the DM/Players want it to. The events/locations seen as higher level are controlled by flow of information. However it is more than possible that PCs will have access to this info beforehand through player secrets. For instance the Dark Duchess is a icebound pirate ship, but one of the player secrets is that they came from this ship. Several of the later areas are accessed as a result of PCs discoveries in other areas. It’s still a sandbox if the PCs discover the key to the forgotten fortress in another area. Not every area has to be unlocked from Day 1. By the same token the book acknowledges that if the players want to settle in one of the starting towns and become its ruler they can do this.

I mean doing whatever, the difference between playing through the latest Call of Duty campaign and playing with a box of GI Joes.

Yeah. When you say ‘do whatever’, what you describe is actually interacting with pre-determined creatures and locations set by a DM. Please let’s not pretend there isn’t a certain amount of pre-planning with these areas.

By "hit the objectives quickly," I mean, "get to the next waypoint with alacrity, not delaying, in a little time as possible and with minimal resource expenditure."

You’re making the assumption that the whole area is linked with waypoints. In the example I gave of Night Below, there are two... one third and two thirds through. If players rush through, they won’t have the experience, or items needed to be successful in later areas.

This is the difficulty when people pass judgement on written campaigns without being familiar on written campaigns.

 

[TheSword]

What Rime actually does is advance the timeline independent of the PCs so that the first five quests the complete result in fame (and levelling up) and the incomplete quests result in resentment from their quest givers and the people in the remaining towns. Players make a choice as to which threats they want to deal with and which they leave... and pay the consequences. This seems perfectly acceptable in a sandbox to me.

 

[Reynard]

I think theres also something to be said for the difference between a linear adventure, a sandbox adventure and a sandbox campaign. The former two usually have a predetermined objective as to where a sandbox campaign lets the players determine and pursue their own objective.

I think it is important to note that you can include a linear adventure in a sandbox. It's actually a really good way to populate a sandbox: find some adventures you really like and put there in places throughout your sandbox. It's better, of course, if you make sure the elements in these disparate adventures tie together with the sandbox setting and its other elements, but it isn't strictly necessary. There is no reason not to place The Sunless Citadel (which is a fun but pretty linear dungeon crawl) in a sandbox, for example.