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

[Remathilis]

From the DM side, perhaps.

From the player side, I'd find a hard-line AP constraining as all hell after a while; even more so if it was known ahead of time that the campaign would end when the AP was complete and that we couldn't go on and do other things in the same setting with the same cast o' characters.

That's like saying you wouldn't watch a movie unless it's part of a Cinematic Universe. Sometimes the best stories are self-contained.

That said, nothing stops you from having multiple APs all set in the same world (like Paizo has all APs set on Golarion) or reference prior adventures. I mean, plenty of adventuring parties have also moved on from one AP to the next, depending on the end level.

Nothing you have referenced is unique to sandbox play.

 

[Bedrockgames]

That's like saying you wouldn't watch a movie unless it's part of a Cinematic Universe. Sometimes the best stories are self-contained.

But this is a big difference in play style. Adventure paths do provide something of a contained story. But sandbox players often don't want contained stories.

That said, nothing stops you from having multiple APs all set in the same world (like Paizo has all APs set on Golarion) or reference prior adventures. I mean, plenty of adventuring parties have also moved on from one AP to the next, depending on the end level.

This is true. I don't think there is an assumption in adventure paths that you have to stop playing your characters when it is over. Perhaps it has evolved to a point where that is more common. But back when I was running adventures more in that style the expectation was you would play adventure after adventure (are paths today more inclined to take you from level 1 to 20; is that the reason?)

Nothing you have referenced is unique to sandbox play.

I wouldn't say unique but it is distinct. If someone tells me they are going to run us in a sandbox campaign, I have one set of expectation, if they tell me they are going to run adventure paths, I have another. It is largely useful for setting expectations on both sides of the screen

 

[Remathilis]

But this is a big difference in play style. Adventure paths do provide something of a contained story. But sandbox players often don't want contained stories.

I'm just saying not every game needs to be an interconnected web of prior events to be good.

This is true. I don't think there is an assumption in adventure paths that you have to stop playing your characters when it is over. Perhaps it has evolved to a point where that is more common. But back when I was running adventures more in that style the expectation was you would play adventure after adventure (are paths today more inclined to take you from level 1 to 20; is that the reason?)

Paizo runs theirs into the mid and high levels. D&D's varies, but most run about 5-8 levels on average. Anthologies can run a wider range. Not a lot of them run to epic levels, but that's usually where D&D or any stripe tends to lose steam.

I wouldn't say unique but it is distinct. If someone tells me they are going to run us in a sandbox campaign, I have one set of expectation, if they tell me they are going to run adventure paths, I have another. It is largely useful for setting expectations on both sides of the screen

And that's fine. But I took umbrage to the idea that APs cannot have have reoccurring characters, settings, or interconnected plots. None of that is unique to any play style.

 

[Hussar]

Your controversial statement was more that traditional sandboxes aren’t sandboxes at all but linear instead

Sigh. One more time.

My controversial statement is that, in play, there is less difference between a sandbox and linear play than people like to admit.

 

[AlViking]

Sigh. One more time.

My controversial statement is that, in play, there is less difference between a sandbox and linear play than people like to admit.

What do you want people to admit? That games are on a spectrum from sandbox to linear and even if we run a sandbox game for the most part there are linear elements? Well, sure. That doesn't mean that I run what I would consider a linear game. It also doesn't mean my game is "better" than a linear game. To me a linear game has clearly defined plot points and an end goal, I don't have those. I provide plot hooks for people because I think it works better for most groups and to a certain degree it's a cosmetic difference anyway. I follow traditional D&D structure for my D&D games and don't do much if any collaborative world building. Yet the people still only pursue options they want to pursue even if it's not on my list, I never have a predetermined outcome for any encounter whether it's a combat, exploration or social encounter.

But if someone tells me that I'm running a linear game I'll tell them that I disagree. What else am I supposed to say?

 

[Hussar]

Coming up with non-prepped material to oppose PCs and provoke players on the fly may seem daunting, but it becomes pretty rote after a time.

/snip (Very excellent stuff, I'm just snipping for brevity)

Some games (not all) have processes that bring the players into the structure above via an overt meta conversation or structured development of building out opposition. That can be excellent, but it isn’t mandatory and the technique shouldn’t be smuggled in where it doesn’t belong. The above should work for most games. Focus on the local, the intimate, and provocative, consequential decision-points to onscreen right NOW.

Wash/rinse/repeat. Over time you’ll rewire your mental bandwidth and cognitive orientation if need be. And you’ll get good at it.

And interesting setting will accumulate for you to leverage in the future.

Again, though, that's great to say but, when the rubber meets the road, system matters. Say your group has chosen to enter the "Simple Dungeon of 6 encounters". Bog standard dungeon crawl. It's nicely non-linear - multiple paths are possible and there is no "end goal" other than whatever the players want to achieve. Nicely sandbox right?

But, here's the thing. Most people can't do that on the fly. You have six D&D encounters. That's probably around 10 different stat blocks, each of which is very detailed. You can't do that on the fly. It needs to be prepared. And that takes time. Often, quite a lot of time depending on the level of the PC's.

Now multiply that by a hundred in order to be able to allow enough player choices to count as a sandbox. At the high level of simply describing things, that's easy. But, in actual play? That's a MOUNTAIN of work.

 

[darkbard]

Again, though, that's great to say but, when the rubber meets the road, system matters. Say your group has chosen to enter the "Simple Dungeon of 6 encounters". Bog standard dungeon crawl. It's nicely non-linear - multiple paths are possible and there is no "end goal" other than whatever the players want to achieve. Nicely sandbox right?

But, here's the thing. Most people can't do that on the fly. You have six D&D encounters. That's probably around 10 different stat blocks, each of which is very detailed. You can't do that on the fly. It needs to be prepared. And that takes time. Often, quite a lot of time depending on the level of the PC's.

Now multiply that by a hundred in order to be able to allow enough player choices to count as a sandbox. At the high level of simply describing things, that's easy. But, in actual play? That's a MOUNTAIN of work.

In 4E D&D, especially with the digital tools and reskinning, one can very easily do this on the fly. Hmm ... maybe that's another reason 4E is disdained by many trad players: it doesn't require such frontoaded work!

 

[Bedrockgames]

Again, though, that's great to say but, when the rubber meets the road, system matters. Say your group has chosen to enter the "Simple Dungeon of 6 encounters". Bog standard dungeon crawl. It's nicely non-linear - multiple paths are possible and there is no "end goal" other than whatever the players want to achieve. Nicely sandbox right?

But, here's the thing. Most people can't do that on the fly. You have six D&D encounters. That's probably around 10 different stat blocks, each of which is very detailed. You can't do that on the fly. It needs to be prepared. And that takes time. Often, quite a lot of time depending on the level of the PC's.

Now multiply that by a hundred in order to be able to allow enough player choices to count as a sandbox. At the high level of simply describing things, that's easy. But, in actual play? That's a MOUNTAIN of work.

There is all kinds of shortcuts for this though. From random generators to stock stat blocks, to quickly sketching key stats for foes. I used to do this in different versions of D&D. Between DMG entries, stock stat blocks in the DMGs MM, and ones you make yourself. This isn't insurmountable. In the system I used currently I do something I call NPCs on the fly, where I quickly has out the major abilities of an NPC in moments in my notebook. I have two methods: condensed and very condensed

A standard Stat block for an NPC might look something like this:

A character that detailed I would either need to prep in advance or use my random generator for (my random generator can give me everything but the description of the character).

A condensed Stat Block looks more like this. And I can come up with this in play as needed. It takes a few moments to put together but not long once you get used to it. And you can make similar stat blocks for groups of henchmen (though I usually have plenty of blocks like that on hand). In this system characters have kung fu techniques (a standard character could have as many as a D&D wizard has spells for a sense crunch). I have taken to making up techniques on the fly for characters that I improv. Again, I use shorthands in written notes on descriptions but because of the genre I find improvised NPCs like this often really hit the spot because you are very quickly trying to make a stark NPC where their weapon, technique and personality opportunities in combat):

Written out by hand in my notes, I am going to use a lot of shorthand for the descriptions.

If these NPCs survive or prove to be important, I'll flesh them out later. And they don't even need long descriptions like this you could literally just have notes saying things like "Cruel official". And a written note for a technique might look more like "5d10 v. Parry. 5d10 damage. Cathartic: 5d10 Open plus -1 Hardiness."

 

[Bedrockgames]

But, here's the thing. Most people can't do that on the fly. You have six D&D encounters. That's probably around 10 different stat blocks, each of which is very detailed. You can't do that on the fly. It needs to be prepared. And that takes time. Often, quite a lot of time depending on the level of the PC's.

See my example above, but the thing here is there is it is going to depend on how creative you feel in that moment. But this is one of the reasons why things like dungeon generators can be handy. However, what I tend to do is sketch this stuff out in my notes as the players say that is where they want to go. If I need time, I might even say, give me a moment guys so I can figure this out. I mean if you need ten minutes, you need ten minutes. But I also do think it is true the longer you run campaigns like this, the easier this stuff gets. Also it doesnt have to be solid gold. If I am improving stuff, I just need something for that moment. But I am often struck by how taking the filter roff and just going with things, sometimes leads to much more gameable and exciting situations than when I have more time to think and edit the ideas a bit.

 

[Hussar]

When the imaginary world of the game brings a real breadth and depth, when there truly is something over the next hill and the hill after that and the hill after that, new dimensions of play emerge. Many campaigns and books claim to be a sandbox, but unless the world proves rich and detailed across the board, can players truly explore and do what they like?

Wow.

When I said this, I was pilloried for saying that you need to do massive amounts of legwork in order to actually have a sandbox. Yet, you say exactly the same thing, and no one bats an eye. I mean, you are flat out saying that unless you've done all this legwork, it's not really a sandbox campaign, in direct contradiction to quite a number of posters here who claim to run sandboxes.