D&D General Sandbox and/or/vs Linear campaigns

[Reynard]

Why? It is how Linear Games work.

Like I said, a Pure Sandbox is just chaos. The players simply do random things as the DM-player says "yes" can creates the world right in front of the characters.

That is why few sandbox games are pure. As soon as a play sets a goal and detail is added to the game...it becomes more Linear.

The treasure is at location Q2, so the characters must go to location Q2 to get the treasure....that is a Linear Action.

What if they hire some NPCs to go get it? What if they convince the King that the treasure is a Royal heirloom and the Kong sends an army to retrieve it? What if the PCs just sell that information to the highest bidder?

My point is that the fact of the treasure at the location has no bearing on linearity vs openness. If the campaign ground rules allow the PCs to engage that fact however they want (including ignoring it) then it's a sandbox.

 

[Lanefan]

Why? It is how Linear Games work.

Like I said, a Pure Sandbox is just chaos. The players simply do random things as the DM-player says "yes" can creates the world right in front of the characters.

The bolded is unrelated to what comes after it. The DM can have created the world long ahead of time; as long as the players can bash around in it however they want it's still full sandbox.

The treasure is at location Q2, so the characters must go to location Q2 to get the treasure....that is a Linear Action.

No, that's the DM introducing a setting element and the players choosing how they react to that element. That's how this works.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The bolded is unrelated to what comes after it. The DM can have created the world long ahead of time; as long as the players can bash around in it however they want it's still full sandbox.

No, that's the DM introducing a setting element and the players choosing how they react to that element. That's how this works.

Yeah. In a sandbox, players don't feel compelled to go after something just because it exists. You would be surprised how often players hear about something important and valuable and don't go after it, because it isn't relevant to what the party is interested in. What makes it is sandbox is they are in the driver seat over what goals to pursue, what adventures to pursue, what treasure to seek, etc. And sandbox can take many different forms. There isn't one right way to do it

 

[Bedrockgames]

What if they hire some NPCs to go get it?

I've seen parties do this a lot in sandbox campaigns. The players are deciding how to engage these things, and I think a key feature of this style of play is the players don't have this expectation that they have to go on an adventure the GM has planned in order to achieve a given goal. Hiring out the job to someone else is entirely feasible, often a very smart solution if they have the resources.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah. In a sandbox, players don't feel compelled to go after something just because it exists. You would be surprised how often players hear about something important and valuable and don't go after it, because it isn't relevant to what the party is interested in. What makes it is sandbox is they are in the driver seat over what goals to pursue, what adventures to pursue, what treasure to seek, etc. And sandbox can take many different forms. There isn't one right way to do it

I've seen parties do this a lot in sandbox campaigns. The players are deciding how to engage these things, and I think a key feature of this style of play is the players don't have this expectation that they have to go on an adventure the GM has planned in order to achieve a given goal. Hiring out the job to someone else is entirely feasible, often a very smart solution if they have the resources.

Exactly.

There are no Quantum Ogres in a Sandbox. That lair is where it is. It is there if the PCs stumble across it at 1st level, or if they ignore it, of if they decide they want to obliterate something at 15th level. This isn't to say that things are necessarily static, but in a Sandbox you don't force the PCs to do stuff. You facilitate them doing stuff, and you treat the world like it is real for the benefit of play.

 

[TiQuinn]

I think of sandbox not as not having a goal but that the order of things is undetermined. I think most campaigns flit in and out of being sandbox and linear, sandbox and linear, back and forth.

I may start a campaign in a tavern having created 5 to 10 simple plot books that could lead to other things. The seeding of the hooks is predetermined but the players can choose whichever interests them. And then once they’ve committed to a hook, my preparation is based on the idea that they’re going to follow the hook. At the end of the session, I may check in with the players and see if they’re committed to continuing or if there’s a choice they have to make, I want to know how to prep. A previous hook that was ignored may still be there, or maybe I’ve created new hooks.

To me, that’s a cycle of sandbox choices combined with stretches of linear play. More importantly, I’m not sure if I care, either as a DM or a player how closely the overall game falls to one side or the other.

 

[Reynard]

I think of sandbox not as not having a goal but that the order of things is undetermined. I think most campaigns flit in and out of being sandbox and linear, sandbox and linear, back and forth.

I may start a campaign in a tavern having created 5 to 10 simple plot books that could lead to other things. The seeding of the hooks is predetermined but the players can choose whichever interests them. And then once they’ve committed to a hook, my preparation is based on the idea that they’re going to follow the hook. At the end of the session, I may check in with the players and see if they’re committed to continuing or if there’s a choice they have to make, I want to know how to prep. A previous hook that was ignored may still be there, or maybe I’ve created new hooks.

To me, that’s a cycle of sandbox choices combined with stretches of linear play. More importantly, I’m not sure if I care, either as a DM or a player how closely the overall game falls to one side or the other.

Yea. You have to check in with them, if for no other reason than to stay sane trying to prep. Assuming we aren't in the middle of a specific event or location, in my current game I ask them at the end of the session where they are going ro what they are doing so i can be sure to be ready. I have neither the time nor the inclination to make a 1000 keyed location sandbox ahead of time.

Also, a sandbox can have a "plot" -- or, rather, the game can have a goal. My current campaign is set in a place where the evil wizard "vizier" has usurped the throne, and the agreed upon conceit of the players is that their characters were severely wronged by this figure. So they are adventuring to acquire the power and resources necessary to take the usurper down. But what they do, where they go, and what sort of "power and resources" they gather is all up to them.

 

[aco175]

To me a sandbox means more than "you can do it in any order." Instead, characters having a meaningful in-game influence on the direction of their adventures within limits set by the DM which can be relatively narrow but also potentially global/planar.

Yes, you can use pre-published or other prepped material in sandbox and it still be a sandbox. I might say, when I first prep an area, "The Crypts of Istaris (which are detailed in the adventure of the same name in Dungeon #9) can be found outside the city of X in the kingdom of Y." If the PCs ever go there, I can drop some potential hooks, but I don't have to prep it or even do more than a skim to judge potential usefulness in order to place it there. Once they express their plans to go there, I begin to prep. But I don't feel like I have wasted time if they don't, because I haven't.

Then again, today the PCs just flatly refused a hook for something I did take a lot of time prepping (even painted a mini!), but I am not mad. Their choice made sense. . . and I have to respect that. And that material will still be useful (if different with the passage of time) should the PCs end up going there later on.

If you prep something and the PCs do not go there, and then several levels later they choose to go there, should it be the same dungeon? Or, should it now be swapped out with bigger monsters to be challenging to the higher level PCs?

There is a couple ideas I would have if this happens. I might make a set of NPCs that already went there and cleared it out. I might have it remain the same and the PCs have not problem and just overpower the monsters. I might replace the monsters with something since the game evolves along with the PCs. Maybe the goblins, or whatever, were taken over by trolls who now live there.

This is true, but goes way beyond just Linear or Sandbox.

The Classic Traditional DM creates Encounters for the players to have. Quite often ones with very specific flavors. A spooky encounter, for example.

The Modern Player-DM wants to sit back and do as little as possible while the players lead the game and do most of the work, only doing what the players tell them to do.


It starts the slope. Details drain away the sand.

If the detail is player provided, the sandbox illusion will cover its negative effects....but a DM detail is the slippery slope to a Linear game.

The players are looking for a magic sword and in a Sandbox game it can be anywhere. The DM-player has not put the sword anywhere to find. So the players are free to do whatever random things they want to do to find the sword. And in the sandbox, whatever they do is on the path to find the sword. The DM-player simply creates the path to the sword right in front of the characters, as per the players wishes.

Once the DM says "the sword is in the Dark Tower", this drains away some sand. Now the characters HAVE to go to the dark tower...they are Forced into a Linear Action. And they loose more freedom with every detail.

This style of play seems odd to me. Would the DM just answer back the players with questions themselves. The player asks where the sword is and the DM says you tell me? Do we know what is guarding the sword- You tell me? What kind of sword- you tell me? The DM is not creating anything and just letting the players tell the story?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

My long-running D&D campaign is rather sandboxy. The setting even has a massive desert in middle of it! What I wanted from this campaign was pulpy sword and sorcery adventures, instead of one long fantasy epic with overarching plot, so this lead to more sandboxy approach. There are of course stuff going on in various places, and sometimes this stuff takes form of more traditional adventure, though I think better situations are more open ended ones without and obvious and predictable outcome. But there is no "main plot" that that contorts everything to be about it. Similarly, whilst characters have goals, and they greatly shape direction of the game, none of these goals are super specific and singular in way that it would force the whole campaign to be about that.

 

[aco175]

Yea. You have to check in with them, if for no other reason than to stay sane trying to prep. Assuming we aren't in the middle of a specific event or location, in my current game I ask them at the end of the session where they are going ro what they are doing so i can be sure to be ready. I have neither the time nor the inclination to make a 1000 keyed location sandbox ahead of time.

Also, a sandbox can have a "plot" -- or, rather, the game can have a goal. My current campaign is set in a place where the evil wizard "vizier" has usurped the throne, and the agreed upon conceit of the players is that their characters were severely wronged by this figure. So they are adventuring to acquire the power and resources necessary to take the usurper down. But what they do, where they go, and what sort of "power and resources" they gather is all up to them.

I can also see where one style of play has the world having its own plot and story going on and the PCs are free to interact with it. The vizier has taken over the throne and burned the PCs' village down and beat their dog in front of them and kidnapped their sister, and... But, the players might be cool with that and decide to investigate the rats in the cellar instead of anything the DM presents. So, the DM lets the PCs go anywhere they want, but the plot of the campaign keeps going on and now the little bad guy of the Vizier is not killed at level 3ish so he become something more powerful and burns down more villages and creates a lot of refugees who plead with the PCs to help. The players can take this on or now at this point. If not, the vizier begins his ritual to summon the ultimate big bad. Rinse repeat and destroy the world if the PCs/heroes do nothing.

The players might still have fun in a game like this. The PCs might come in and out of the background plot as they wish and react to things changing.