Search results

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.

It's always funny to see how different people react to different things. I absolutely adored and still adore the WLD. It was seriously one of my proudest campaigns. The group had an absolute blast with it and gave us some of our best group memories. From the player who went through something...

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...

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...

Totally agreed.

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...

Doctor Who goes full on meta. That was tons of fun. Nice bit of social commentary. The chemistry between the Doctor and Belinda Chandra is really spot on. It's so nice to see an "unwilling" companion. Granted, she seems pretty on board with things by the end of the episode, but, it does...

Yes, this gets brought up all the time, but, honestly? How often do the players get half way through achieving a goal then completely abandon it? They've already reached Nexus, they've got the next step, but, suddenly they jump ship and do something else? :erm: I really don't think a lot of...

In what way is this not linear? The players have zero choice here if they want to progress. They must progress in a proscibed order dictated by the DM. If you don't see this as linear, no wonder we don't agree what sandbox is.

I disagree. There really are roads. The DM provides hooks, the DM makes the NPC's, the DM creates any conflict within the setting between those NPC's and groups, the power groups in the setting are created by the DM, every single element, outside of the PC's is 100% authored by the DM and the...

Sorry, no. It absolutely does make things linear. If you have to proceed through A->B->C, that's, by definition linear. That's what linear means. So, in our Spelljammer example, the players go to a Sage, find out where the portal to Nexus is, go to Nexus, find out where the Spelljammer is...

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...

I totally agree with this. And that's generally my point. When people claim "My game is a sandbox", I tend to read it as more of a "feeling" than an actual fact. Mostly because IME, it's mostly likely that a sandbox is more "You have more options for doing stuff" than in a linear game. It's...

It's kinda like how strong is Batman? Depends on what comic book he happens to be in. In Justice League, Batman is absolutely superhuman. In the Batman comic books, sometimes he's just a really strong guy, sometimes he's superhuman. Comic book logic.

But it’s not a feature. I can’t only only “do what I want” so long as what I want is filtered through what the dm creates. If I choose to do X, I’m now pretty much locked into whatever story the DM creates around X. Sandbox is just a series of dm generated linear adventures. The players might...

And every single option is created, controlled and made available by you the dm. I can’t get a Spelljammer because you haven’t added it. I can’t only have a chance of finding a spelljammer if I explore the setting you have created in a manner that you find acceptable. Iow, it’s pretty much no...

But here’s the thing. All those things you list are 100% dm generated. The players have only as much freedom as the dm allows. If the dm decides that something isn’t there, then it’s not there. The only real difference is that instead of a single unifying story as in a linear campaign, you...

I mean hey, the guy who gave you the 5e stealth rules started this thread to complain about not having explicit stealth rules. 🤷 I gave you my interpretation of the stealth rules. For me, they are explicit. Heck, IME, stealth pretty much only comes up with ranged rogue builds and once in a...

Which is exactly what I said. Invisible means you cannot be seen. It does not mean you cannot be found at all. If you are invisible for whatever reason, the baddies know where you are. Taking the Stealth Action allows you to hide your actual location. Again, this is the most rational ruling...

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".