Do you run or play in a Sandbox or Linear game

[Gilladian]

If I were given a 1-10 scale, I'd have to say I'm a 5. I tend to present my players with a few options at a given point, let them choose one, and focus in on it. I will try to be flexible and improvisational in my responses to their choices during the adventure.

When they "finish" that plot, they get a couple more options (or get reminded of dangling options from earlier). I don't do a huge amount of "ramifications for failing to choose" something. I figure that if the PCs choose twice NOT to attend a performance of a play I've mentioned, they're not going to be interested in hearing that the theater burned and the lead actor was murdered. Instead, they might later witness a party at which one of the solvers of the murder is lauded.

I don't ever run "the world is going to end" plots. At most, they're "the kingdom's rulership changes" plots. I think they're boring, myself.

My players always have the option to "leave". They could pack up and depart from their home city tomorrow, and we'd be running a wilderness campaign... I don't know if that's sandbox, or what, but it is how I like to do things.

 

[Crothian]

Both; there are pre constructed paths but the PCs are free to go where they want.

 

[Remathilis]

Can the player characters say, "Yeah, not our problem. Let's go find a tomb to loot!" instead?

Well, my group tends towards the "save the world" heroic type of play by choice, but yes, they can (and have) ignored plots or even made up their own alternative ones. They then deal with the repercussions (such as the king declaring war on a neighboring ally or a sunless world, which usually leads them to go find the vampires and restore the sun anyway, except now it just got a wee bit harder to do...)

Part of the social contract is feedback. I try and give plots the players (though not necessarily the PCs) will enjoy. In return, they tend to take the bait more often than not. If things start to suck, we try to modify things to make them work, even it means the occasionally hastily-wrapped up plotline or forgotten hook ("Hey, wasn't there ogres attack Eastvale?" "Some other group of adventurers must've taken care of them.")

 

[Derulbaskul]

My players think they're in a sandbox and that is the illusion I always try to maintain.

From my side of the screen it is a railroad, more or less, but a railroad with the illusion of choice (plus the occasional real choice).

 

[Ariosto]

For several months, I have been playing in a very linear campaign.

Besides other considerations, it is pretty clear that AD&D was not designed with that in mind. The "house rules" and "DM specials" seem mainly to have made matters worse, although I guess that a more cunning DM might have done better.

Before that, I was playing RPGA (LFR) 4e. Not my cuppa, but at least designed for that.

My D&D campaigns are just "worlds" revisited. By analogy with computer games, think of Frontier: Elite II.

I also do one-off "plot line" series from time to time. Those tend to take up at most three or four sessions, though. (The UK module-duology "The Sentinel" and "The Gauntlet" stands out.)

 

[Beginning of the End]

In my experience, in the attempts at so-called sandbox games you usually end up with a lot of inconsistency. The GM often will forget some detail he made up on the fly (especially if it was months ago in real time) and at times directly contradict it.

What does that have to do with the sandbox? That's just poor notekeeping.

The other weakness is that very few GMs are 100% creative. When they are constantly put in situations where they have to completely improvise, they tend to fall back on the some of the same things.

(1) Prep your sandbox better. It's really not that hard to execute the broad prep, and 90% of the deep prep can be anticipated by asking your players a simple question, "What are you planning to do next session?"

(2) If you're truly open to the creative input of your players, then the problem solves itself. There's no better impetus for getting out of your rut than outside input.

A published example of this would be Monte Cook's Queen of Lies:

When people ask me about Ptolus, they often ask, “So did your all-elf PC group really raise an army to attack a dark elf stronghold?” And the answer, of course, is yes. The resulting set of sessions was so fun, so memorable, and so strikingly different, that I knew that the whole thing would have to be a product someday.

(...)

Even if your players play the adventure “straight,” without gathering a force of mercenaries like mine did, I think you’ll find that this slim volume can provide you with many sessions of game play. In many ways, it’s just a subterranean setting ready to explore. The actual course of the adventure is up to the PCs—there are many ways to approach the challenge before them, and a frontal assault is only one option. The DM has his work cut out for him, figuring out how the inhabitants of the main fortress react to the PCs’ actions. I hope DM and players alike find it all challenging and fun.

Cook wasn't anticipating his players assembling an army of mercenaries, but they did. Talk about knocking you out of your comfort zone!

 

[Wik]

I tried running a sandbox, but my group responded better to a linear mode. So, now it's a linear game, with various branches. For example, the PCs have been given numerous job offers, and which way they decide to go is completely up to them (meanwhile, I know what's going on behind the scenes).

 

[Ariosto]

"What are you planning to do next session?"

That, I think, is especially spot-on.

It used to be the question for "this" session, which otherwise was just not happening.

Yah yah, grandad, eh?

Well, it makes sense that you can try for yourself.

 

[Rechan]

I have a linear box.

I know that sounds odd, but: There are a few over-arching plots that the campaign's foundation is built on, going on in the background and effecfting all the PCS.

There are then localized plots going on in regions of the campaign world. To a degree they're isolated, but they filter back to the campaign plots.

I try my damndest to get the PCs involved with the over-arching campaign plots. But they can decide to adventure where they want to on the map and stumble across the things going on in that area. I asked them what part of the campaign world they wanted to start in, and they're welcome to leave and find a local plot.

 

[Snoweel]

I have a linear box.

Mine's a railbox (or a sandroad, I haven't decided yet).

The players are free to do as they please and ignore every plot hook, and I'll just come up with more (or at least, reskin old ones).

But I like epic stories so I tend to throw plot hooks at them that they can't ignore.

That said, my group recently decided to ignore Freeport's plight so I'm in the process of throwing Age of Worms at them. I still haven't decided if the King in Yellow is coming to Freeport anyway.