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

[Maxperson]

There is no such guild, but the North Road is plagued by bandits said to be deserters and mercenaries without work.

Where is the constable located? It's best if I get the official okay before I go splitting heads. Sometimes the law can be touchy about things like this.

 

[Reynard]

Where is the constable located? It's best if I get the official okay before I go splitting heads. Sometimes the law can be touchy about things like this.

The innkeeper shakes his head, part sadness, part anger. "Drunk, as like, with that foreign snake of an alchemist who has been whispering in his ear of late."

 

[Bedrockgames]

A couple things are clear: 1) there are a lot of different definitions of "sandbox" in this thread, and 2) you are certain that yours is the only correct one.

The idea that the only real sandbox is one in which EVERYTHING is predefined is too silly to bother arguing with.

I can't imagine running one where everything is predefined. Not only does that seem far too exhaustive, but it seems like you would have a very static sandbox as well.

I do appreciate the idea of 'pinning things down' during play. For example I may not know where all the teahouses are in a region because I didn't flesh that out. But if the players start talking about contacting them all: I will try to create some details on the spot and write them down in my notes so I have a bunch of relevant information (who operates what tea houses, what types of illegal activity might be going on here, if any are under the auspices of a protection racket or have imperial ties, location, what they are known for, etc). You can't think of everything in advance. Some of the setting details you will need to flesh out as the players explore. And I do like pinning down these details so there is a sense that they are exploring an objective place rather than one that bends and warps around them.

 

[Reynard]

I can't imagine running one where everything is predefined. Not only does that seem far too exhaustive, but it seems like you would have a very static sandbox as well.

I do appreciate the idea of 'pinning things down' during play. For example I may not know where all the teahouses are in a region because I didn't flesh that out. But if the players start talking about contacting them all: I will try to create some details on the spot and write them down in my notes so I have a bunch of relevant information (who operates what tea houses, what types of illegal activity might be going on here, if any are under the auspices of a protection racket or have imperial ties, location, what they are known for, etc). You can't think of everything in advance. Some of the setting details you will need to flesh out as the players explore. And I do like pinning down these details so there is a sense that they are exploring an objective place rather than one that bends and warps around them.

Note taking when coming up with random crap on the fly is the hardest part for me. Index cards are the best option but even then organizing them is a challenge.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Note taking when coming up with random crap on the fly is the hardest part for me. Index cards are the best option but even then organizing them is a challenge.

I usually keep a heavy notebook and just jot down details. For me it was something that improved with practice. I found after a while I trained my brain to come up with details quickly and as soon as I start writing it, it is like my brain is programed to start doing that. I also do this for really quick NPC stat blocks and entries, organizations, etc. After the session this stuff needs to be organized but I find it is a very effective way for me to adapt to what the players are doing in a way where things feel like they are rooted.

 

[Reynard]

I usually keep a heavy notebook and just jot down details.

I used to do that but it was too hard to reorder them in a way I liked. I might randomly say the name of an ogre chief in the tavern and won't want that info recorded on the tavern page.

 

[Remathilis]

The real question here is who decides what these threats are? What if there is a dragon heading to the village. There is also a plague surfacing from the Underdark? A band of hill giants heading to the village? A dire purple worm coming in from the sea? And githyanki space pirates about to attack? Could the DM create a scenario where the PCs are unable to stop the disaster from eventually happening? Who decides how many?
Once that question is answered, then step back and strip away lines like railroad and sandbox.

I assume the DM. Things happen all the time that people are forced to react to. Sometimes a piece faces multiple problems at one that it neither sought out nor wanted: just look at the last few years of our own history for that.

Ideally, a campaign is a mix of things PCs choose to get involved with and a mix of things that they have no say in but must deal with anyway. You might be interested in solving the bandit problem near the woods, but when a necromancer starts attacking the town with its own dead, you might have to put those plans on hold to address the crisis.

Which was the crux of my original question: if the PCs say "screw the town, let's go hunt bandits" I wanted to know what happens to the necromancer. Does he gather a massive army of the dead unchecked, destroying town after town until the PCs finally intervene? Does another force (other adventurers, the royal army, or Eliminster himself) stop the invasion? Does that necromancer just go away? What happens to the plot hooks not bitten?

So I'll ask you the same question: what happens when a plot hook isn't taken up. Is it forgotten, solved by another force, or does it build and fester in the background until the problem becomes too big to ignore?

 

[Remathilis]

I used to do that but it was too hard to reorder them in a way I liked. I might randomly say the name of an ogre chief in the tavern and won't want that info recorded on the tavern page.

Not sure what your take on technology at the table is, but MS OneNote is great for keeping notes on via a tablet or laptop. And you can copy and paste things to organize them as you like between sessions.

 

[Scott Christian]

A couple things are clear: 1) there are a lot of different definitions of "sandbox" in this thread, and 2) you are certain that yours is the only correct one.

The idea that the only real sandbox is one in which EVERYTHING is predefined is too silly to bother arguing with.

I argue that there is no definition. That others and yours are just made up. There is "defining" sandbox - because it has no definition.

My claim is simply there is only two types of play - make it up as you go along or prep. That's it.

 

[Scott Christian]

I don't give them a bunch of quests to start off with if I am running a sandbox. I drop them into setting and let them explore. There are no predetermined quests. There are people, places and things all with their own goals and motivations and the players are free to interact with those however they wish and set whatever goals they want. If they decide to go to Mai Cun and start an apothecary empire, I won't try to stop them. And what happens if they do go there isn't going to be linear at all.

Also defining an adventure as linear retroactively makes zero sense. Saying stuff happened, and now you have a story arc you can describe, so therefore it was a linear adventure doesn't seem like a valid argument to me.

And what happens when these PCs start interacting with these people and place and things that have their own objectives (that you created by the way)? They can interact however they wish? Guess what? In a railroad they can to.

When these interactions happen how is the consequences/rewards determined? By you? You're creating the story of what happens - a story that happens to have a beginning, middle, and end. It is linear not because you are applying it retroactively, but because you (the DM) are applying it as you play.