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

[AlViking]

My argument is that what people claim as sandbox play is just regular play with a thin veneer of pretend choice. The players can choose A or B or C, only so long as the DM approves of those choices of course, and, if the players choose something, the DM then prepares that something, develops that scenario, the players then play through that scenario and then choose the next scenario.

Typically the DM has various events and whatnot going on in the setting to provide hooks that lead the players to one or another story.

The players are simply driving down whatever roads the DM provides. At no point do they get to make new roads.

Why are you assuming they're pretend choices? Players make all sorts of choices in my games that completely change what I was expecting. That's half the fun of playing a TTRPG instead of a CRPG.

I may ask what direction they're taking so I can figure out what to plan for the next session, but I only ever have an outline of what will be there. Back to the car analogy the roads there are but they regularly ignore the roads, head straight into the ditch and continue going across the field. That's all in addition to the fact that if they have a choice of going to new York instead of Boston but then somehow end up in Philadelphia.

Just because they can't suddenly decide their car can fly it doesn't mean they can't choose the direction to go.

 

[mamba]

Any Dm that I would play with would present options that have some connection to the party in some way. So picking one would be no problem.
Even if this weren’t the case; I agreed to join this DMs game and as such I’ll role with what he’s got in mind.

my point was more that if the DM says 'the villagers hired you to drive the bandits from the castle ruins' that is fundamentally different from presenting you with a handful of rumors / hooks and letting you decide which one you like, not that you would have a problem choosing one if there were more than one

 

[Eric V]

There is a difference between being "good at combat" and being "meh at combat" and being actually "bad at combat."


Oh, it isn't hard. My DMPC is pretty losy at combat, because he is a utility / support bard. Not a "buff" caster, or focused on anything in particular. Sure, he has good control spells, but slots are limited so it isn't like he can use them all the time.

Here's a screen shot from my excel file:
View attachment 402869

As you can see, no combat cantrips so he has to rely on his shortbow +1, to which he is ok but with only one attack per round not great. His spells offer some buffs (bless, aid), only direct damage is lightning bolt and somewhat through hex.

He can help in combat generally, he isn't useless of course, but hardly great. He real value is with many skills and his big spells, which can turn the tide possibly, but because slots are limited he can't rely on them all the time at all.

Generally, IME, if a PC is mediocre or even bad in combat, they make up for it in other ways, and skills is one common way.

Ok, so it IS on purpose then...you deliberately chose not to give him just one offensive cantrip to take advantage of his high CHA. A perfectly legitimate choice, for sure, but it supports my thesis that the only way in 5e to make a character lousy at combat is to do so deliberately.

 

[Hussar]

There isn’t enough information in this example to know that. We don’t like if the sham planned on a safe being an avenue for learning the location. As long as the players are free to engage this question how they want, I think it isn’t linear.z I mean they could probably find the answer to this question with a spell of their own


What you are describing does not seem to be a linear adventure. It appears to be the players choosing to go to a sage, then choosing to go somewhere based on the information the sage gives

Umm, sorry @Bedrockgames, I cannot parse the bolded part. I think your autocorrect was working overtime there.

But, "Players choose to go to a sage and then go somewhere based on the information the sage gives" is a linear adventure. That's linear by definition. There's no choice involved. But, if you believe that a trail of breadcrumbs dealt out by the DM is non-linear, we really aren't going to be able to have a meaningful conversation here.

 

[Hussar]

To me it's a spectrum. Most games aren't true sanboxes, not even Minecraft by some people's definition. But we can still have games that are very close to sandboxes, it just won't fit the "purest" of definitions.

Totally agreed.

 

[Hussar]

I may ask what direction they're taking so I can figure out what to plan for the next session, but I only ever have an outline of what will be there.

And thus, the thin veneer. The players say, based on the information you have given them, we choose A from the menu. You then cook A. After that, they choose B from the menu, and you cook B. So on and so forth. There's no real sandbox here since the only difference is the number of choices on the menu. At no point is there not a menu. The fact that you "plan for the next session" pretty much means that any choice the players had was only in reaction to whatever roads you choose to lay down.

 

[Hussar]

my point was more that if the DM says 'the villagers hired you to drive the bandits from the castle ruins' that is fundamentally different from presenting you with a handful of rumors / hooks and letting you decide which one you like, not that you would have a problem choosing one if there were more than one

That's my point of disagreement. The only difference between the two is the number of choices on the menu. The fact that the menu is 100% derived by the DM and the players can only react based on whatever choices the DM hands them means that it's not really any different. Since, frankly in most sandboxes, most choices won't actually be on the table because of the level system - that vampire in the castle is off limits for that 1st level party, even if it is technically a choice.

At the end of the day, it's just the players doing whatever the DM decides the players will be doing today.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Umm, sorry @Bedrockgames, I cannot parse the bolded part. I think your autocorrect was working overtime there.

I will go back and try to fix that one

But, "Players choose to go to a sage and then go somewhere based on the information the sage gives" is a linear adventure. That's linear by definition. There's no choice involved. But, if you believe that a trail of breadcrumbs dealt out by the DM is non-linear, we really aren't going to be able to have a meaningful conversation here.

No, that is linear motion, not a linear adventure. A linear adventure is about the adventure structure being planned by the GM in a linear fashion with a clear path and planned events (i.e. Players go to A, B, C, D happens, then D). Players choosing to go somewhere of their own free will then going somewhere else because of that of their own free will, just means the players made a series of decisions

 

[Hussar]

No, that is linear motion, not a linear adventure. A linear adventure is about the adventure structure being planned by the GM in a linear fashion with a clear path and planned events (i.e. Players go to A, B, C, D happens, then D). Players choosing to go somewhere of their own free will then going somewhere else because of that of their own free will, just means the players made a series of decisions

Sorry. Not buying it. They are only going to A because they cannot get to D without going to A first. Going to A then allows them to proceed to B. Once they reach B they can now proceed to C. At no point can they achieve D without going through A-C in order.

That is linear by definition.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Sorry. Not buying it. They are only going to A because they cannot get to D without going to A first. Going to A then allows them to proceed to B. Once they reach B they can now proceed to C. At no point can they achieve D without going through A-C in order.

Then you would be wrong. This usually the case in a sandbox. Typically in a sandbox there are going to be all kinds of ways players can get to D, and the GM might not even know this is what they are intending to do. You are just wrong. This isn't linear. Linear is a planned out path. Sandboxes aren't about having planned out paths for the PCs to follow. You can have them in a sandbox if you want. But most GMs try to avoid doing that.

And again, super importantly, if the players are making choices to go to places on their own, and these just happen to provide information so they choose to go somewhere else: that is not a linear adventure by any reasonable definition

That is linear by definition.

See above