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

[AlViking]

We agree.
Here’s what happened. In the mystical before times a DM would buy a module/adventure and run it. Which was nice until players got smart and realized they could give the DM a hard time.

“Go left you say…why I’ve got agency so I’m going to go right since I don’t really respect how much work goes into DMing.”

And thus the “sandbox” myth was born. A term that gave the DM agency to not feel like they just got railroaded by their own players.

Wow…I just created the origin story of the sandbox.

This is all just a conversation about having a conversation. No hurtful intentions went into it. To anyone who was offended, insulted or bothered by my discrediting of the term “sandbox” just ignore me and continue doing what you do.

Next week…verisimilitude: legitimate way of looking at things or multi syllabic nonsense.

So how do you describe different types of games? Gameplay is a spectrum from a game where the entire group makes up lore and goals as they go along to a game where the GM has everything plotted out and the players have no real choice in what happens if they want to proceed. Are there any terms you would use to describe the difference?

IMHO if all games are defined as "linear" because something is decided by the GM there's no reason to even use the term. Which is pointless. Might as well say there's no such thing as "color" because we can't be certain we perceive the same thing.

 

[ezo]

Conclusion: you are no.2 pretending to be no.1 to fashion a gotcha. Goodbye forever.

Ahh. The reply and ignore gambit. Well played.

Nice knowing you.

 

[ezo]

IMHO if all games are defined as "linear" because something is decided by the GM there's no reason to even use the term. Which is pointless. Might as well say there's no such thing as "color" because we can't be certain we perceive the same thing.

It also means nothing is a sandbox unless you create it entirely yourself, have no rules other than what you decide, etc. because as soon as you're involved with anyone else on any level your agency is compromised to one degree or another, and thus your sandbox is ruined.

 

[ezo]

Next week…verisimilitude: legitimate way of looking at things or multi syllabic nonsense.

You are an odd person (in a good way!), and I really enjoy your posts.

 

[Bedrockgames]

IME - what people call "sandbox" is just a bunch of DM created scenarios strung together by whatever hooks the players choose to bite on. Which is to say, because everything comes from the DM and the players simply react to whatever the DM makes available, I reject the description of "sandbox".

That isn't how most sandboxes operate. But even if they did, giving the players a choice between 9 hooks versus 1, is a pretty notable difference in play. This sounds a lot like the Kitty Box argument that sandboxes aren't real.

But most sandboxes are a combination of prepped locations, factions, ongoing situations, etc, and are expected to be very fluid and organic in response to players taking actions. The basic idea is to respect the freedom of the players to explore and seek out what they want to do.

Now you might not like sandboxes. And you might find them challenging to have as a functional structure, but plenty of people meet with success with them. They aren't the best, or the only approach to play. But they are an approach in the same way that monster hunts, adventure paths, situational adventures, investigation based adventures etc are viable approaches.

 

[KYRON45]

So how do you describe different types of games? Gameplay is a spectrum from a game where the entire group makes up lore and goals as they go along to a game where the GM has everything plotted out and the players have no real choice in what happens if they want to proceed. Are there any terms you would use to describe the difference?

IMHO if all games are defined as "linear" because something is decided by the GM there's no reason to even use the term. Which is pointless. Might as well say there's no such thing as "color" because we can't be certain we perceive the same thing.

I’m not a labels person. A game is just a game. Labels create division.

 

[KYRON45]

You are an odd person (in a good way!), and I really enjoy your posts.

I appreciate your appreciation.

 

[AlViking]

I’m not a labels person. A game is just a game. Labels create division.

Then why ask people to explain their labels? That's the annoying thing - you insist we discuss something that we find value in with apparently the sole goal of telling us that we're wrong. I don't believe in astronomy but I don't ask people what it means to be a Leo only to tell them that they're wrong and that astronomy is total BS.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Then why ask people to explain their labels? That's the annoying thing - you insist we discuss something that we find value in with apparently the sole goal of telling us that we're wrong. I don't believe in astronomy but I don't ask people what it means to be a Leo only to tell them that they're wrong and that astronomy is total BS.

You sound like like a Virgo

 

[KYRON45]

When other people use labels it helps to know what it is that they mean.
I didn't wont, and can't insist any one do anything. Were all volunteers here. We choose to enter these discussions.
I don't tell people they are wrong. I disagree with them. You are welcome to disagree with me...i encourage it as I'm usually wrong.
I have in no way disparaged anyone's point of view. This is a conversation, not a fight. It helps to know the difference.
You are welcome to your viewpoint.

All of these things you are saying are telling me that you want to argue with someone and that's fine. But i have 8 siblings. I learned many years ago to let others argue and then stand over the burning wreckage of that battle and walk away with the cookies.

I digress. There are no cookies here. Just people talking.