Search results

Where are you getting this? My next sandbox will most likely be setting the 1e Forgotten Realms Savage Frontier. There are plenty of monsters in that area. A wilderness area beyond civilisation is a pretty standard setting for a fantasy, exploration sandbox. Dark Sun has all sorts of monsters...

I am not going all the way back to square one to rehash the previous hundred-or-so pages of arguments about whether or not it is possible to run a sandbox with the intent of doing so in an impartial manner. Suffice to say, in my experience, it is possible (with the proviso, as I mentioned, that...

The sort @Paul Farquhar is familiar with, apparently.

Please see the disclaimer I included at the end of my post in the (clearly misguided) hope it would prevent exactly this kind of quibble: If they did not exist, I would not generally add wargs into my campaign world on the basis a PC had a hatred of wargs because, in discussion with that...

Probably they didn't even consider that someone might actually ask if the sandboxes we're talking about are literally filled with sand, and misinterpreted the question on the assumption it wasn't some attempt at a petty semantic gotcha.

I would posit that, if your interpretation of other opinions requires that others believe or claim things self-evidently impossible (eg, everything in the world already exists and is fully fleshed out), then perhaps you need to consider that maybe you've interpreted it incorrectly. To make a...

Well, for the record, I disagree with anyone claiming that every single part of the entire world must be fleshed out in detail prior to play starting. I haven't seen anyone claiming that and, given that no one has a gameworld with millions of independently statted NPCs, updated daily for...

I don't understand what you're saying. Who is advocating a living world sandbox where the world consists of three or four adventure sites and nothing else?

And yet, despite my last post, here I am again. If there are literally only three four things the PCs can do, you don't have a sandbox by any definition I'm aware of. Certainly not the type that people like @Bedrockgames or @robertsconley are talking about.

Edit: You know, never mind. The discussion is going absolutely nowhere and there is no point in me perpetuating it.

Who claimed there aren't other ways to created the feeling of objectivity, that work for some people? Several have claimed there aren't other ways that work for them. I don't think anyone has claimed it's not possible (if you hunt for it, you might find an isolated comment here or there...

You quoted me before I added in my next line: "Are you suggesting that it's not possible to be in the driver's seat unless the imaginary world has already been realised in every respect to the same degree of fidelity as the real world?" It seems like you are, which is pretty silly bar, I think.

Can you be in the driver's seat in the real world when the only positions on the map are those placed there by the cartographer? Are you suggesting that it's not possible to be in the driver's seat unless the imaginary world has already been realised in every respect to the same degree of...

My comments related to my style. I did not reject any other style, or the objectivity of other styles, because I wasn't referring to other styles at all. However, I will happily state that there absolutely are styles that do not aim to have GMs determining outcomes purely based on an attempt to...

So, do you genuinely have a problem with anything I actually said in the post of mine you quoted? Or do you just have some problem with the word "objective", regardless the context it's used in? As others have chimed in, we're not using the word to say our games are objectively better than...

Well, as stated, as far as I'm concerned, if anyone is actually claiming all sand boxes must be created and GMed with complete, 100% impartial objectivity at all times, they're flat out wrong. I haven't seen anyone claiming that but, if I missed it, I stand in opposition to such statements...

Well, my counterpoint remains similar. You say that "The point that was being made is that the DM must strive to be absolutely objective in setting creation. That the world should exist outside of the players and their characters. And that world should have nothing to do with the characters...

Who has said that sandboxes are (only) about exploration or only suitable for a very narrow range of play? If anyone has, I would disagree. Sandboxes can be about a lot of things; they certainly don't need to be about exploration unless exploration is being defined so broadly as to start losing...

Sure, travelling somewhere with the intent to explore that place when you get there, is travelling. That is the most tautological of tautologies and is not in dispute. But that doesn't seem to have anything to do with what was originally being discussed, which is whether or not exploration can...

Yes. If I am genuinely trying to be impartial and feel that I'm succeeding and the players who have participated in my games over the past couple of decades feel I am extremely fair and impartial, then I'm quite comfortable in asserting that I am, in fact, impartial, by any meaningful standard...