D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Micah Sweet]

You insinuating that I don’t understand is offensive to me. I’m kidding; I’ve never been offended by anything.

My question really is simply(but probably not simple at all), at what point does a linear game with multiple possible lines become a sandbox? And also…if all of the encounters in the sandbox are somehow related is that really a sandbox?

Simply put…are the choices adventure path or sandbox? What if I want multiple APs in my sandbox?

Is the term “sandbox” a pretense to say that this style is better than that style or does it really mean something?

I’m not looking for who’s right or wrong; as a lifetime holder of minority opinions I won’t cry myself to sleep regardless of who answers in which way. I’m just enjoying the conversation. My job is pretty boring.

My job is also pretty boring. i hear you.

This is of course subjective, but IMO if all the encounters in the setting are all related to each other then no, it isn't a sandbox. My purpose in a sandbox campaign is to create a world which feels real, which has concerns that aren't necessarily associated with each other or the PCs (unless they choose to involve themselves), because that's how the real world operates. The PCs interact with the world, decide what avenues they want to pursue based on their criteria, and the encounters and whatnot associated with those choices are the ones I flesh out.

Sandbox campaigns are my preference over the adventure path model, but they are not objectively superior. If popularity matters to you, I think its clear the through narrative campaign has got that sewn up and has for some time now. I recently had to retool a campaign because my players apparently want to be led along a path (but be able to believe that they aren't being led). Still, on those occasions I get to run the game I prefer, I run sandbox.

 

[KYRON45]

My job is also pretty boring. i hear you.

This is of course subjective, but IMO if all the encounters in the setting are all related to each other then no, it isn't a sandbox. My purpose in a sandbox campaign is to create a world which feels real, which has concerns that aren't necessarily associated with each other or the PCs (unless they choose to involve themselves), because that's how the real world operates. The PCs interact with the world, decide what avenues they want to pursue based on their criteria, and the encounters and whatnot associated with those choices are the ones I flesh out.

Sandbox campaigns are my preference over the adventure path model, but they are not objectively superior. If popularity matters to you, I think its clear the through narrative campaign has got that sewn up and has for some time now. I recently had to retool a campaign because my players apparently want to be led along a path (but be able to believe that they aren't being led). Still, on those occasions I get to run the game I prefer, I run sandbox.

I’d be hard pressed to label my play style myself.
But as we all know; good fences make good neighbors so labels do have their value I suppose.

 

[Faolyn]

I get that the players have options.
My “argument” is that regardless of the order of encounters, the DM still has to prepare those encounters right?

So a sandbox is just an expression?
I don’t force players to do anything in any order; but I still have encounters prepared so we can…encounter them.

I’m just asking questions about the nature of the expression sandbox. I’m not in any way saying that style is less than. I’m just saying, it’s a myth. Eventually regardless of what the players decide to do….the end up doing something and the DM has to….DM….right?

Sandboxes are called that in contrast to the typically more linear style of adventure.

The map shows there's a town here, a mysterious forest there, and a cave-slash-dungeon over yonder. (For this example, the map only has these three things on it.) The GM knows at least roughly what's in all three of these locations.

Linear adventure: The PCs go to the town and hear rumors about monsters in the cave, but also how something living in the forest has information about the monsters in the cave. Then, the PCs go to the forest, find the Whatever that has the info, get it, and then go to the cave. Optionally, they don't go to forest but directly to the cave, since that's the ultimate goal of the adventure. When traveling to the forest from the town, and then from the forest to the cave, the GM can have random encounters or planned encounters, or just do a time skip.

Sandbox: The PCs can go to any of the town, forest, or cave first. If they go to the town first, they hear rumors. If they go to the forest first, they run into the Whatever first. If they go to the cave first, they don't hear the rumors or have the Whatever's information. Optionally, they go to none of these places and instead wander around the rest of the unmarked map. When traveling to the town, forest, cave, or wandering around the unmarked map, the GM can have random encounters or planned encounters, or just do a time skip. The GM can also have a pile of pre-built locations that can be plunked down as necessary, if the PCs decide to go in a completely random direction..

 

[KYRON45]

Sandboxes are called that in contrast to the typically more linear style of adventure.

The map shows there's a town here, a mysterious forest there, and a cave-slash-dungeon over yonder. (For this example, the map only has these three things on it.) The GM knows at least roughly what's in all three of these locations.

Linear adventure: The PCs go to the town and hear rumors about monsters in the cave, but also how something living in the forest has information about the monsters in the cave. Then, the PCs go to the forest, find the Whatever that has the info, get it, and then go to the cave. Optionally, they don't go to forest but directly to the cave, since that's the ultimate goal of the adventure. When traveling to the forest from the town, and then from the forest to the cave, the GM can have random encounters or planned encounters, or just do a time skip.

Sandbox: The PCs can go to any of the town, forest, or cave first. If they go to the town first, they hear rumors. If they go to the forest first, they run into the Whatever first. If they go to the cave first, they don't hear the rumors or have the Whatever's information. Optionally, they go to none of these places and instead wander around the rest of the unmarked map. When traveling to the town, forest, cave, or wandering around the unmarked map, the GM can have random encounters or planned encounters, or just do a time skip. The GM can also have a pile of pre-built locations that can be plunked down as necessary, if the PCs decide to go in a completely random direction..

So regardless of what you call it; sandbox or linear…both are just different ways of allowing the illusion of player agency as it pertains to what direction they are going in.

Regardless of what we call it; in the end…the players rely on the DM to engage them in the encounters that are run to make up the game.

So I stand by my original statement. A sandbox is just a disjointed linear campaign.

Regardless of what it’s called as long as you’re having fun; it’s fun.

 

[The Firebird]

So regardless of what you call it; sandbox or linear…both are just different ways of allowing the illusion of player agency as it pertains to what direction they are going in.

Regardless of what we call it; in the end…the players rely on the DM to engage them in the encounters that are run to make up the game.

So I stand by my original statement. A sandbox is just a disjointed linear campaign.

Regardless of what it’s called as long as you’re having fun; it’s fun.

Your definition of sandbox requires that the DM does not engage the players in encounters? Is that an RPG?

 

[AlViking]

So regardless of what you call it; sandbox or linear…both are just different ways of allowing the illusion of player agency as it pertains to what direction they are going in.

Regardless of what we call it; in the end…the players rely on the DM to engage them in the encounters that are run to make up the game.

So I stand by my original statement. A sandbox is just a disjointed linear campaign.

Regardless of what it’s called as long as you’re having fun; it’s fun.

How is sandbox an illusion of player agency? They literally choose the what they want to pursue. Do they pursue A, B or C? If they choose A, B and C may or may not be available later depending on circumstances. When I run a game I have 0 long term goals even if I do know what is going on in the region and world that could lead to interesting challenges.

 

[KYRON45]

Your definition of sandbox requires that the DM does not engage the players in encounters? Is that an RPG?

If we must use the term “definition”. No. This is wrong.

Sandbox requires the DM to run encounters in no particular order. Allowing the PCs to roam the country side at will. Or…what do you guys want to do today?

Linear requires the PCs to follow some kind of prescribed order. Or…mom gave us a to-do list.

Both require a DM to run encounters.
I’m not debating definitions. I’m asking….if a sandbox allows for the eventuality of anything happening at any time….and we start doing “anything” and one anything leads to the next anything (assuming even the slightest narrative)….instant possible for a sandbox to have linear narratives?

And if a sandbox allows for linear play any any point….do we need the term sandbox?

I’m not saying I’m right on any level. I’m asking for people’s thoughts on the matter.

 

[KYRON45]

How is sandbox an illusion of player agency? They literally choose the what they want to pursue. Do they pursue A, B or C? If they choose A, B and C may or may not be available later depending on circumstances. When I run a game I have 0 long term goals even if I do know what is going on in the region and world that could lead to interesting challenges.

Players eventually have to do something that the DM has planned. 3 choices or 100 choices….in the long run…DMs provide an encounter.

I don’t know….are there games out there where the DM just lets the players roll on random tables for what comes next?

For the players to have a choice in what comes next with no predefined path….doesnt there need to be choices available? Who put those choices there?

 

[The Firebird]

If we must use the term “definition”. No. This is wrong.

Sandbox requires the DM to run encounters in no particular order. Allowing the PCs to roam the country side at will. Or…what do you guys want to do today?

Linear requires the PCs to follow some kind of prescribed order. Or…mom gave us a to-do list.

Both require a DM to run encounters.
I’m not debating definitions. I’m asking….if a sandbox allows for the eventuality of anything happening at any time….and we start doing “anything” and one anything leads to the next anything (assuming even the slightest narrative)….instant possible for a sandbox to have linear narratives?

And if a sandbox allows for linear play any any point….do we need the term sandbox?

I’m not saying I’m right on any level. I’m asking for people’s thoughts on the matter.

Of course you can have linear narratives in a sandbox. The important statement is in your post...a sandbox does not require the PCs to follow some kind of prescribed order.

 

[AlViking]

Players eventually have to do something that the DM has planned. 3 choices or 100 choices….in the long run…DMs provide an encounter.

I don’t know….are there games out there where the DM just lets the players roll on random tables for what comes next?

For the players to have a choice in what comes next with no predefined path….doesnt there need to be choices available? Who put those choices there?

Since no answer is ever going to satisfy your endless questions "just to understand" when we've explained I'm done.