D&D General Sandbox Campaigns should have a Default Action.

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't know. How long do you sit there? My guess, is that those PCs have been sitting in that bar talking about going on adventures for a while. Years even. The session starts the day they decide to stop talking and go do something. That is why PCs need motivations.

they have motivations, they even have fully fleshed out ideas and personalities... the game SHOULD start the day they decide to stop talking and go... they just need some options. "is there something we can do for an adventure?" and hoopefully in a sandbox there are multi options.

edit: these are taken from 2 real games... the 3 human PCs are from my first time playing in a sandbox in 2e back in 98, the only thing I removed was I had spellfire back then, and the other two are from a end of 4e campagin I ran sandbox... so each of these are viable characters that made it to high level (for there editions) in sandboxes.

 

[Reynard]

they have motivations, they even have fully fleshed out ideas and personalities... the game SHOULD start the day they decide to stop talking and go... they just need some options. "is there something we can do for an adventure?" and hoopefully in a sandbox there are multi options.

edit: these are taken from 2 real games... the 3 human PCs are from my first time playing in a sandbox in 2e back in 98, the only thing I removed was I had spellfire back then, and the other two are from a end of 4e campagin I ran sandbox... so each of these are viable characters that made it to high level (for there editions) in sandboxes.

Yet your description still had them sitting in a bar waiting to be handed an adventure. Again, that's a perfectly fine way to go about it but it isn't the only or best way. The only actual motivation you gave was wanting to "see what is out there." Fine. Great, even! So go "out there" and find it. (Which sounds like a hexcrawl to me but YMMV.) Want something more specific? Fine. The PCs need to DO SOMETHING to find out what there is to do.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yet your description still had them sitting in a bar waiting to be handed an adventure.

yeah... cause they are waiting for the hook. (hopefully multi to choose from).

Again, that's a perfectly fine way to go about it but it isn't the only or best way.

take the best way out of your mind and this discussion... that is an argument that isn't worth it

but again, in YOUR world how long before something of intrest happens?

The only actual motivation you gave was wanting to "see what is out there."

no that was 1 PC motivation (and even then she said be the hero too), 2 others are traveling with her one trying to overcome the horrors of war the other trying to find a place in the world... but the stupid go no where love triangle (agreed to at the start by all3 as a funny joke) keeps them togather. 1 player even has a long term goal but is waiting to find an oppertunity to work on it... aka something happens. 1 player does in fact have nothing.

Fine. Great, even! So go "out there" and find it.

go where? there is no story hook. no rumor off an enemy or ruins or what ever to explore

(Which sounds like a hexcrawl to me but YMMV.)

it can be a hexcrawl (i find that it mixes well with sandbox but isn't needed)

Want something more specific? Fine. The PCs need to DO SOMETHING to find out what there is to do.

what do they need to do? is there anything of interest here? YOU started us here, why, what is going on today here now that makes this the start?

 

[Remathilis]

I take offence a little (only reason it is only a little is the example you are siteing and use below are not my style)

this DOES seem rails to me... if the PCs are not interested once I may escalate a little to see if they bite a second time (but I would let them do at least 2-3 things inbetween) but if they choose not to take the 2nd one I will assume they are not interested and have that plot hook eaten by either other adventures or a different plot.

So at what point does the "living world" part come in?

On the next new moon, the cultists of Orcus summon a demon. There is a warband of orcs razing towns in a path toward the capital. A young dragon is demanding a maiden a month. If the PCs don't intervene, at least one of these things are going to bite their butt later. A home village gets destroyed. A person the PCs know gets her lottery drawn. Etc. Plot hooks don't just fade into the ether because the PCs say "nah". And if there is enough "other" adventurers to stop the cult, slay the dragon, and halt the horde, then the PCs are damn near useless.

I mean, I /guess/ you can just never use adventures with those kinds of stakes. PCs could just be conquistadors looking for treasure from creatures otherwise minding their own business. But I assume "evil" is an active force at least some of the time and the PCs don't always get to pick the form of the destroyer.

 

[Reynard]

go where? there is no story hook. no rumor off an enemy or ruins or what ever to explore

There's a name for creating an imaginary example designed specifically to prove your point and claim a victory, but I am blanking on it right now.

Why in the world would you yourself assume there were no rumors, interesting NPCs or other angaging aspects and then turn around and claim I created that scenario. YOU created the example of a bunch of characters sitting in the bar waiting for the hook to be thrown at them and then called it proof that player driven games don't work. I am at a loss for what exactly you are trying to accomplish with such rhetorical tactics.

But, let me be clear: if the players in this situation asked, "Are there any rumors of adventures we could go on?" I would provide them some. i might pull from a prepared list. I might roll them randomly. I might come up with them on the spot. But the fact that they created characters with backgrounds and motivations means it should never have been necessary in the first place.

GM: Where are we starting?
Players: We want to find out if Bill's soul really is owned by the evil wizard.
GM: how?
Players: I guess we could talk to a priest or something.
And so on.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So at what point does the "living world" part come in?

I'm not sure what you mean... if my necromancer comes in and kills and animates the orcs that is a living world (one he wants to make undead)
if another adventuring group beats the orcs tthat too is a living world

On the next new moon, the cultists of Orcus summon a demon. There is a warband of orcs razing towns in a path toward the capital. A young dragon is demanding a maiden a month. If the PCs don't intervene, at least one of these things are going to bite their butt later.

maybe maybe not... I mean I can pick what ones have dire consequences and what ones get handled off page/off screen by others.
the cultist summon a demon and kill some people you didn't even know there names... the warband was stopped by the guards but now the two or three towns around the capital have 1/10 the guards... the young dragon didn't get the maiden or maybe he did...

A home village gets destroyed. A person the PCs know gets her lottery drawn. Etc. Plot hooks don't just fade into the ether because the PCs say "nah". And if there is enough "other" adventurers to stop the cult, slay the dragon, and halt the horde, then the PCs are damn near useless.

they don't have to but they can... every one of those can be a foot note or a major turning point... just read the room when makeing choice (and nobody is perrfect at reading the room)

I mean, I /guess/ you can just never use adventures with those kinds of stakes. PCs could just be conquistadors looking for treasure from creatures otherwise minding their own business. But I assume "evil" is an active force at least some of the time and the PCs don't always get to pick the form of the destroyer.

Evil is ALWAYS afoot in my games (sometimes but rarely the PCs are that evil) but not every evil has to be a major thing... some can be, and when done my way I try to make sure they one the PCs choose to care about is that one that MUST be stopped... no matter the cost

 

[GMforPowergamers]

There's a name for creating an imaginary example designed specifically to prove your point and claim a victory, but I am blanking on it right now.

knock it off
I am trying to ask you a very simple qustion you want more details and as such I have to pull from my experence... what else could I do you are giving me nothing (much like the DM in my example)

Why in the world would you yourself assume there were no rumors, interesting NPCs or other angaging aspects and then turn around and claim I created that scenario.

okay, we are in the bar that YOU start us in... what happens while we talk among ourselves?

YOU created the example of a bunch of characters sitting in the bar waiting for the hook to be thrown at them and then called it proof that player driven games don't work.

take those 5 characters (that again have been played to a high level for there editions in a sandbox) and put them in YOUR starting place and tell me what happens... I used the bar cause it is the cliche start.

I am at a loss for what exactly you are trying to accomplish with such rhetorical tactics.

it isn't rhetorical... 5 players sit at your game, where by your own word the DM is not providing plot.. so what happens? YOU try this. YOU tell me how you handle it...

But, let me be clear: if the players in this situation asked, "Are there any rumors of adventures we could go on?" I would provide them some.

great so we have to 'pixle hunt' at least tell me that wording isn't needed that I can just get the idea across...

i might pull from a prepared list. I might roll them randomly.

how is any of that diffrent then what I did? I had multi hooks, rumors, intresting NPCs, events... and the Players choose what to do and what to follow

But the fact that they created characters with backgrounds and motivations means it should never have been necessary in the first place.

this is what I disagree on... 'it should never' first is a weird thing to say when we are talking about a game with so many diffrent ways to play... but I just showed how 5 motives still needed those rumors or npcs or events and only 1 didn't have a motivation or through arch

GM: Where are we starting?
Players: We want to find out if Bill's soul really is owned by the evil wizard.
GM: how?
Players: I guess we could talk to a priest or something.
And so on.

and if they say "WE they don't know, what is interesting in your world to do?

in my example "i want to be a hero" and "I want to destroy civilization" are both goals but with no short term ideas until teh DM poppulates the world for them,

 

[Reynard]

knock it off
I am trying to ask you a very simple qustion you want more details and as such I have to pull from my experence... what else could I do you are giving me nothing (much like the DM in my example)

okay, we are in the bar that YOU start us in... what happens while we talk among ourselves?

take those 5 characters (that again have been played to a high level for there editions in a sandbox) and put them in YOUR starting place and tell me what happens... I used the bar cause it is the cliche start.

it isn't rhetorical... 5 players sit at your game, where by your own word the DM is not providing plot.. so what happens? YOU try this. YOU tell me how you handle it...

Nothing. Nothing happens. Again, assuming we sat down at a session 0 and talked about how this was a sandbox game where the PCs were going to drive the campaign, I am not going to undermine that in the first session by throwing a handful of potential plots at you. That is a perfectly fine way to play but it is NOT the (hypothetical) game we agreed upon. The game we agreed upon depended on active PCs seeking their won goals and adventures.

great so we have to 'pixle hunt'

NO. There is no pixel. I am not asking you to hunt anything. There isn't a hidden adventure. YOU tell ME what you are doing. That's all.

but I just showed how 5 motives still needed those rumors or npcs or events and only 1 didn't have a motivation or through arch

No, you didn't. You showed how YOU need some plots thrown at you in order to play. Other players who agreed with the starting premise likely wouldn't, otherwise they would not have signed up in the first place.

 

[Bedrockgames]

it isn't rhetorical... 5 players sit at your game, where by your own word the DM is not providing plot.. so what happens? YOU try this. YOU tell me how you handle it...

Every sandbox and group is a bit different. A sandbox does have a conversational element that is important for figuring out where things might go. But if I have 5 players, and I am not trying to provide a plot, I simply ask them what do they do? Now there ought to be things in the setting, conflicts, NPCs acting on their goals, threats of various kinds, legends, rumors, etc. But ultimately it often boils down to the players responding by saying something like "well are there any X in town?". If there are they might say "Great I am going to go there and ask about doing Y". As a GM running a sandbox I do try to keep things alive. Sometimes there will be proactive elements that intersect with them, sometimes there will be things rolled on tables, but the players should be free to totally ignore those things if they want, or interact with them in very unexpected ways if they want (for instance a bully rolls into town with his minions and starts taking over casinos: maybe instead of trying to stop him, the players ask to join his organization. In a sandbox you never really know and you are expected to go more with the flow when players reject things, when they initiate things, when they put things together in the setting in ways you didn't expect.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Nothing. Nothing happens. Again, assuming we sat down at a session 0 and talked about how this was a sandbox game where the PCs were going to drive the campaign, I am not going to undermine that in the first session by throwing a handful of potential plots at you. That is a perfectly fine way to play but it is NOT the (hypothetical) game we agreed upon. The game we agreed upon depended on active PCs seeking their won goals and adventures.

see there we go... that is not any sandbox but something that you agreed would be 0 DM plot, and even then I don't get it.. like would a PC say "My character heard about orcs amassing in the woods" and then you make up an orc encounter?

NO. There is no pixel. I am not asking you to hunt anything. There isn't a hidden adventure. YOU tell ME what you are doing. That's all.

No, you didn't. You showed how YOU need some plots thrown at you in order to play. Other players who agreed with the starting premise likely wouldn't, otherwise they would not have signed up in the first place.

except YOUR rumors are the same ones I prep and give out... so what is the diffrence...

for point of clairity here is what I would have done (assuming a sesson 0 happened and I know what everyones motives were)

I would tell kari that she has heard of the wizard that made kurt... infact she trained under someone who trained under him... he had many dark scary stories of the man. One included a weird test in a cave full of necrotic energy,
I would tell Ken of a battle he fought in the war near old ruins
I would tell me about goblins thhat have hit the farms in this area
I would tell Kurt about a mystic convergence he knows about,, but it is in the underdark and hard to get to.
I would tell matt 'daddy wants you to grow up and do something with your life...' with daddy then being up to him if he thinks his father by birth or the patron of his hexblade powers...

I would THEN let them pick. If 10 to 15 minutes pass and nothing grabs any of them I would have an injured man come in from a caravan that was attacked by kobolds.

if none of that grabed them the next morning I would have a stranger come into town on a weird mechanical horse...

they get to do what ever they want, and the more inovative the more pushing forward they are with there ploot the better, but I know the world... I made the world (normally with there help) so I tell them what is of intrest