Adventures v. Situations (Forked from: Why the World Exists)

[The Ghost]

So an adventure is putting a mouse in a maze and following him as he seeks a piece of cheese.

A situation is dumping a mouse in a field and watching what he does next.

Right?

That's a pretty simplified way of looking at it. But, I would agree. It also illustrates the main strengths and weaknesses of these ideas. Dumping the mouse in a maze limits his ability to choose his own direction. He can go forward, backward, left or right. However, he has motivation - the cheese. Dropping the mouse in a field allows him to go in any direction he chooses, however, he may not have any motivation to move. In my case, the people I play with already have motivation, so dropping them in the field works best for us. Others may find that they need to motivate their players by placing the cheese. Some may also find that their players experience paralysis of choice. They have too many options and therefore cannot determine which is the best option to take. Any way you do it needs to work best for your individual group and how you enjoy playing.

Couple more questions.

Are modules then Taboo? By the definition, modules have plots and an assumption of what the PCs will do, which is anathema to sandbox DMing. Even paper-thin "go in this dungeon, kill everything and get rich" plots are still plots and thus limit PC choice. So no modules?

For some, yes. I use mine modules for ideas to place on the map. If the PCs go in, this is what they find. If not, no big deal.

How do you handle "larger" repercussions? Cadfan's example of the necromancer's horde. If player choice is king and they don't feel like dealing with it (they'd rather explore the Goblin Warrens to deal with the bandits), is it fair to have the zombie horde sack their village, or aren't you in essence punishing them for not following the lead?

There is a lot of "it depends" in my answer to this. In some cases I would say it is fair to allow the attack to come. Say, if the PCs learned said necromancer is building a large horde to conquer the valley. If they choose to ignore that then, yes, I do think it would be fair to sack the city. On the other hand, if the only thing the PCs hear is that a necromancer exists, then no, it would not be fair. In the first instance, the PCs learned something that is true. The necromancer is going to attack. In the second, the PCs heard a rumor. I don't have to do anything with the rumor, I can leave it as that.

 

[Ydars]

How to handle major repercussions in a sandbox game is simple? Only create situations that are completely catastrophic or world changing if you are interested in exploring both (or all possible) outcomes of such an event. The design rule 0 with sandbox/situation is simple: if you find yourself wanting A to happen in situation Z, think of ways to make outcome B, C and D just as interesting, or dump the situation all together.

You have to do this anyway, because part of a true sandbox is that play is not "level appropriate" or balanced anyway, so the PCs may attempt many things that they will simply fail at.

Of course, you have build in stuff to let the PCs know they are in over their heads and there are a number of ways to do this. One is to have other adventurers, of roughly known power levels, talk about certain areas and how "we got our asses kicked" there etc.

Another is that big monster's lairs tend to be surrounded with zones of devastation miles wide. If the Players see an area 10 miles across where the soil is all burned and every tree is toast and they decide to cross it then they cannot really complain when they meet Smorgasborg the Ancient Red Dragon and get flamed.

The aim of the DM is always to provide things for the PCs to interact with and get information from but the DM NEVER sets the agenda for play. This is why, the DM has to understand a little about his players before creating the sandbox area and populating it.

 

[Imaro]

Are modules then Taboo? By the definition, modules have plots and an assumption of what the PCs will do, which is anathema to sandbox DMing. Even paper-thin "go in this dungeon, kill everything and get rich" plots are still plots and thus limit PC choice. So no modules?

You can use modules, it may take a little modification, or it may just be bits and pieces. In fact I would say one could easily use location based modules quite easily if they are made a part of the setting in the beginning or as the PC's explore more.

How do you handle "larger" repercussions? Cadfan's example of the necromancer's horde. If player choice is king and they don't feel like dealing with it (they'd rather explore the Goblin Warrens to deal with the bandits), is it fair to have the zombie horde sack their village, or aren't you in essence punishing them for not following the lead?

My first question would be... is this why the necromancer was creating his horde? If not then why would he attack the village? In other words I don't think the necromancer is sitting in his tower creating undead because he's EEEVVILLL!! He has a goal a reason and most likely a plan for expending the effort and energy to create his horde. If that plan involves sacking the village then yes, he should if the PC's choose to do nothing about it.

If it makes no sense for him to go out of his way to attack this village, then no he shouldn't, of course if he attacks another nearby town there may still be reprecussions... perhaps friends of the PC in that town are murdered, perhaps refugees and bandits appear as displaced locals are forced from their homes and the resources of the PC's village are taxed even more, etc.

 

[Ydars]

For me situations are exactly that, situations. They may not even have any real purpose per se or plus gain in 'dealing' with them. In fact the players may not even realize they are there.


Situations have no known outcome. They are completely left open to how (an even if) the characters deal with them. A situation would be something like: Students march on starport. Pirates operate in the asteroid belt. Rebels transport illegal weapons to Greenville.

I am totally with you on this: a situation has NOTHING to do with the PCs, until they choose that it has.

 

[LostSoul]

In situation-based design, player choice is king. In adventure based design, story/plot is king.

This doesn't invalidate your point, but I did want to say: you can prioritize story and player choice at the same time.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I have a problem with this entire discussion.

During a session, I drop plot hooks, references, and generally give the PCs tons of leeway to choose where to go next, what to do, and how to do it. However, I ask at the end of the session what their plans are for the next one. They might choose one thing, another, something totally random that I didn't expect. But, I write around it for the next session, based totally on what they want to do. This way, I don't have to make up too much on the fly, I can plan out crazy plots and weave things together in my spare time instead of during the game, and the game gets a lot more detail put into it than otherwise it would.

The PCs recently went after a plot hook in my game that was in a table of Streetwise checks something along the lines of "Priest of Ioun needs help investigating ruins" and it turned into a crazy exploration of a buried city of the old Sorcerer-king including burial grounds for his apprentices, research gone awry, a cult of ghoul worshipping grimlocks, and a portal to the Shadowfell deep underground. And they had to leave before they finished looking through the whole thing! I couldn't have made such an interesting dungeon on the fly for them if it had been purely "situation" and the adventure would never have been written if the PCs didn't have the chance to jump at one of twenty or thirty plot hooks that I created on whims.

I wouldn't call my game what people describe as "adventure" or "situation" driven. I get to make the most of my limited time while still giving the players the freedom to act as they see fit. Win-win.

 

[Ourph]

A DM who comes to the table to run an adventure (you know like a published adventure) has already made the choice for the PC's on what situation(s) they will be exploring, of course they still have choice in how to approach and accomplish it.

A DM who comes to the table with 10 "situations" to present to the PCs has also made a choice for the PCs as to what situations they will be exploring. A good adventure is just a collection of associated "situations" and doesn't imply any lack of player control over their character's choices. The distinctions people are drawing between "situations" and "adventures" are meaningless for any reasonable definition of those terms.

 

[Ydars]

I totally agree LostSoul: in fact I think the fusion of the two styles is the ideal. I was just being extreme to illustrate the point.

 

[Scribble]

Scribble: You seem rather arbitrarily to have dismissed the widely accepted meanings of the terms in this context. That suggests the question:

Widely accepted by whom?

How do you define them?

What do you consider the difference between an "adventure" and a "situation" in this regard?

A semantic quibble does not seem likely to me to further the discussion of referents at hand, but I am prepared to be enlightened.

I don't really have one, because I don't really think it's a thing as I said.

But maybe this:

Adventure- Stuff prepared that the PCs might interact with.

Situation- Adventure where the DM is ad-hocing everything.

Seems to me that "situations" are nothing more then adventure plots/hooks. But my real issue isn't whatever you want to call the difference between unprepared and prepaired adventure, it's with the idea that adventures = railroads. That's not true, and I'm calling it. A bad DM can railroad a "situation" just as easily as an adventure.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I have a problem with this entire discussion.

If it makes any difference to you, that sounds like a sandbox to me. Or at least, a semi-sandbox, depending upon how the area is fleshed out when the PCs show interest. If it is fleshed out using level guidelines, semi-sandbox. If it is fleshed out based on general notes of what is there from the "throwing the hooks out" stage, and some of those hooks are below-level guidelines, and some above, then sandbox.


RC