D&D (2024) DMG 2024: Is The Sandbox Campaign Dead?

[Bae'zel]

I didn’t get the impression that the 2024 DMG discouraged or ignored sandbox style campaigns. The Greyhawk section was mostly to illustrate how you do world building (next to the advice on world building). Examples help.

Then again, I’m biased as I’ve been running games for 25 years. It would be great to get some user feedback from novice DMs.

 

[Reynard]

I was just reading the Greyhawk setting example and it's literally the opposite of what you're saying? It's almost all sandbox. Adventure hints of areas out there, with no prepared adventure. Wildnerness areas, notes on types of monsters you might find in those areas, random table suggestions, a giant fold out hex map, all the normal sandbox stuff. Felt like they were hitting me over the head with SANDBOX. I just don't see how that spawns a "sandbox dead" thread?

The Greyhawk section is a good small setting guide. They make good use of the limited page count. But I think it is way overstating it to call it a sandbox guide.

First and most obvious: it literally starts off with giving the GM a few options for a typical throughline based campaign in Greyhawk. Just like the rest of the book.

Second, there are none of the support materials that one needs for a sanbox, from encounter tables to faction relationship maps to explanations of what travel and exploration in Greyhawk actually looks and feels like and what mechanics support it.

So, no, the Greyhawk section is not a set of sandbox rules.

 

[Reynard]

Then again, I’m biased as I’ve been running games for 25 years. It would be great to get some user feedback from novice DMs.

I would really like that as well. I am curious what folks coming to D&D RIGHT NOW think of the new DMG, since it was obviously designed for them in mind.

 

[Bae'zel]

Second, there are none of the support materials that one needs for a sanbox, from encounter tables to faction relationship maps to explanations of what travel and exploration in Greyhawk actually looks and feels like and what mechanics support it.

Christ almighty would TTRPG writers please take note of this bolded part? It would REALLY help literally everyone understand a setting better.

 

[Minigiant]

I am not sure I agree with this assessment. The nature and expanse of the sandbox is impacted by "power level" but power level doesn't obviate a sandbox. I also don't buy that low power eliminates agency in play.

On the subject of "sandboxes are so easy you don't need an explanation": that coming from folks who already know that playstyle

I'm not saying that sandbox is require low power.

I'm saying that sandboxes are easier to run whelevelsbase system is low power and the DM is able to adjust the power level to match what the players desire. When you fighter is just a hit die and armor and your wizard is just a smaller hit die with a couple spells and it's like that for several levels, The DM can give you a experience of Scrappy upstarts with no magic items and wandering stone age orcs or the experience of world eaters with Monty Hail and roaning Kaijus.

Because the strength and long-term popularity of a sandbox campaign is about matching the players desired power level.

4E and 5e is default heroic starting place omits 1 of 3 distinct types of sandpox play by default. And it limits a 2nd.

 

[Kromanjon]

On the subject of "sandboxes are so easy you don't need an explanation": that coming from folks who already know that playstyle.

That was maybe a joke. A more serious answer would be that I consider sandbox campaigns to be about processes. It´s about time- and record keeping. It´s about events following their own timelines that characters might stumble over. It´s about random encounters in a setting prepared just enough that it seems plausible but is still open to improvised changes.

Is it easy to run a sandbox. A well written sandbox is easy to run I would say. The players make the choices, set the pace and the GM can easily fall back on the processes to keep the game in order. A poorly written sandbox will lack these processes and so leave the GM scrambling for answers to the players sudden whims.

So why didn´t the author of the new DMG include more about sandboxes? I don´t know. Perhaps it was just a lack of space and a focus on, what has become, the de facto way of playing D&D - pre-written campaigns with, more or less, linear storys. This is just a wild theory though.

 

[Reynard]

I'm not saying that sandbox is require low power.

I'm saying that sandboxes are easier to run whelevelsbase system is low power and the DM is able to adjust the power level to match what the players desire. When you fighter is just a hit die and armor and your wizard is just a smaller hit die with a couple spells and it's like that for several levels, The DM can give you a experience of Scrappy upstarts with no magic items and wandering stone age orcs or the experience of world eaters with Monty Hail and roaning Kaijus.

Because the strength and long-term popularity of a sandbox campaign is about matching the players desired power level.

4E and 5e is default heroic starting place omits 1 of 3 distinct types of sandpox play by default. And it limits a 2nd.

Thanks for explaining, but I still don't really agree.

I think the capabilities of the PCs certainly impact how you run and play a sandbox. If the PCs have access to "fast travel" magic, for example, the travel and exploration element is going to be downplayed, obviously. But in general, how badass the PCs are and how many widgets they have access to is going to impact "desired power level" no matter what style of campaign you go for.

I got into a discussion on reddit not long ago when I hoped that Crawford's next game would be "Capes Without Number" for superheroes and folks said that you could not do superhero games as a sandbox. Nonsense. Same with high fantasy.

 

[Reynard]

Is it easy to run a sandbox. A well written sandbox is easy to run I would say.

I don't actually think sandboxes are easier to run than plotted campaigns. they require more effort on the part of the players and the GM. They certainly require players to actually use their agency more.

 

[Kromanjon]

I don't actually think sandboxes are easier to run than plotted campaigns. they require more effort on the part of the players and the GM. They certainly require players to actually use their agency more.

Maybe so but then it would be a matter of subjective opinion based on the group playing and that would of course be true for any kind of campaign. My personal, subjective opinion is that a sandbox (pre-written in this case and written well at that) is easy to run to the GM. As for the players I think an addition of open ended hooks to get them going will be all that´s needed and them using their agency will come naturally.

 

[Reynard]

Maybe so but then it would be a matter of subjective opinion based on the group playing and that would of course be true for any kind of campaign. My personal, subjective opinion is that a sandbox (pre-written in this case and written well at that) is easy to run to the GM. As for the players I think an addition of open ended hooks to get them going will be all that´s needed and them using their agency will come naturally.

In my experience, most players prefer a railroad.