Guiding players to more sandbox-y play?

[Quickleaf]

My group is made up of busy young professionals and graduate students, and right now there are 7 of us: 2 couples (one with a baby, the others expecting a baby in February), 2 single guys, and myself the DM. We are running 4e and just finished a megadungeon (Dragon Mountain). Because of time restrictions, the players tend to a more casual play style and can usually be counted on to forget all but the most critical plot details. Also they, like most parties, have moments of indecision.

Perhaps because of this, they seem to naturally slip into a more railroad-y mindset (think Dragonlance adventures rather than Keep on the Borderlands), and often times I've heard reference to "not wanting to mess up the DM's plans."

No, please, mess up my so-called plans!

My agenda is I want to get them more involved in the game and invested in making decisions, without worrying about jumping the supposed rails.

Despite my reiterating that there are no rails, and that I've designed this campaign to accomodate where they want to take it, this "railroad think" has continued to be the group's trend.

So...if it's even possible for me to do...how might I guide my group toward a more "sandbox-y" style of play? And how can I do that without overwhelming them with options or having them forget everything?

Thanks in advance

 

[the Jester]

Sorry, man, but I think the best thing is to overwhelm them with options. Give them so many plot hooks that they have to pick one.

I know you said that you've told them that you're not running this thing on rails, but have you explicitly told them to "Mess up my so-called plans"? You might try it (between sessions, of course).

 

[GX.Sigma]

Give them lots of adventure hooks and not enough time to do all of them. Emphasize the idea that adventure isn't going to find them; they have to go out and take it where they can get it.

Edit: Wait, if they were just playing a megadungeon, how are they not already in sandbox mode?

 

[Kinak]

That's a really good question. But, first things first, I'd suggest talking to your players about what they want out of the game.

There are definitely players, especially ones without a lot of energy to devote between sessions, who like riding the rails. And others who want to experience a story, offering their input, rather than forming that story on a more equal basis. Trying to push those styles of players towards sandbox play can actually be a fight, even if they don't realize why they're pushing back.

That said, I think there's a middle level, with branching plots rather than truly free sandbox play. Start off simple with two plots going on side-by-side and let the players decide if they want to follow the rumors of orc raiders or drakes burning farmlands. Don't throw them in the deep end.

As far as remembering, I can say that handouts only help so much, but cards with a small amount of information can be great. Depending on your group, video game style quest cards can actually be really cool. List who asked them (and where that person is), what they asked, and what they were promised. You can even have the players write them, which helps a lot of people remember better.

If quests are too videogamey, rumor cards can serve a similar purpose. You can even use them as rewards in skill challenges or just spending downtime in town. Encourage the players to keep the ones they're interested in and toss the rest. Seeing work literally tossed can be painful, but lets you know what sort of stuff they're not interested in. It also helps keep the stack small, because having more than a handful of cards defeats the point.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Storminator]

Did you ask this last year too?

PS

 

[Quickleaf]

Haha, yes it may have come up last year too since it has been on my mind.

I guess I see sandbox---railroad as a spectrum of extremes, and right now maybe my group is 70% railroad, 30% sandbox, and I'm wanting to shift us to more sandbox-y than railroad-y. In my view, my players show up and expect the DM to be the primary source of entertainment and generator of a main story that the players follow. I think part of it is that it's hard enough for us to schedule game time, that they don't want to "waste time" on stuff that's not driving the "main story" forward.

I recently started to make use of quest cards and I will definitely keep it up, since it seems to help some with forgetting plot points.

I guess I can also not hide my DM secrets as close to my chest, and come out and bluntly state choices they are facing, or make connections between two things for them when I sense they're forgetting stuff. :/ I believe in cultivating player skill and don't like depriving us the joy from the players figuring stuff on their own, so being so transparent/leading by the nose grates on me though.

 

[howandwhy99]

So...if it's even possible for me to do...how might I guide my group toward a more "sandbox-y" style of play? And how can I do that without overwhelming them with options or having them forget everything?

First, sandbox play is about a world full of options. However, that world begins very, very small. Exploration is almost the whole campaign, so the world will become larger for them as they explore.

The need to explore comes from desire. When they want to accomplish something they can look around to see how it is already being done by people or the world (a form of treasure) or get creative and do it themselves. This is the game's mix of enabling both exploratory problem solving and creative solutions. Remember though, any creation the Players create feeds back into the world altering it and informing the populace as well.

Options, sooner or later, are going to become too big for them to handle them all. Superman can't solve every crisis in the world, so you might suggest not every challenge is up to them and them alone. In terms of world design, think: balanced array of Alignment creatures. Cities and dungeons and lots of neutral territory as well. That's the standard, sort of Points of Light design.

The players are going to forget things. Part of the game is enabling them to succeed through memory and note taking. The character sheet was originally called a log after all. It's their campaign, so it's their chance to build a wiki kind of. Only as much or as little as they desire and however they wish to design it. Remember, this isn't the DM's copy of the maps though. Back in the early 80's there were articles on this strange new game where players seemed to engaged in duplicate tax accounting or whatever the phrase is. That's in part due to players logging exploration.

Besides building a world around the real and proverbial edges for the PCs to roam in I'd also suggest a starter campaign adventure that asks them to be in charge of themselves right away. One very good way of doing this that I've learned is putting them in charge. Give the PCs authority over a location, property, and even people/NPCs. They are looking to them on what to do.

Of course putting them at the entrance to the dungeon doesn't hurt either. The standard design of dungeon delving is copied by plenty of videogames. Delve down deeper and more deadly, but judge when to try and get back out. And have a town or allied portion of the world accessible to be safe, heal up, buy and sell necesssities, hire or earn allies, and so on. Caves of Chaos / Keep on the Borderlands with wilds in between is the original design for this.

Lastly, think of the whole as a intermix of situations, but each adventure module largely starting in its own web. Yes, NPCs, locations, and everything else will get mixed in with the others in the area. One NPC may learn from the PCs where a cleared out dungeon is and go and secretly inhabit it if run out of their own. Two enemies might learn of each other and possibly, according to alignment, team up. Not necessarily against the PCs or PCs alone, but any who may oppose them.

 

[dd.stevenson]

So...if it's even possible for me to do...how might I guide my group toward a more "sandbox-y" style of play? And how can I do that without overwhelming them with options or having them forget everything?

Thanks in advance

I had a similiar experience with my group not so very long ago.

For me, the most important thing was to open new lines of communication. They think they're working with you by not messing up your plans--so dispel this illusion. Periodically show them behind the screen so to speak: tell them after a particular session what level of planning you had and how they could have done anything they wanted without messing up your planning. Habitually ask them what they're planning on doing at the end of your sessions, so they can't possibly think that you don't expect them to devise their own plans. It took me about three to six months of this behavior to fully transform my pathfinder adventure path group into a pretty open ended sandbox group.

EDIT: this has nothing to do with players remembering or forgetting stuff between sessions. This will not change: the same ones will still remember the same things, and the same ones will still forget the same things. What will change is their willingness to improvise without fear of screwing up your pathy adventure.

EDIT 2: Also, don't forget to routinely ask for feedback if you aren't doing this already. This is a playstyle change that you're exploring together with your group, and it needs to be 100% clear that their input will be treated with consideration and respect.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

The rule of three.

Begin every session by reminding them of three options. Even if they are doing something else when the session starts, remind them of three other options. I start by reminding them of where they are now and what they are doing but I mention that three or so other things that are still "in the back of their minds".

When they return to town (or the equivalent) let them hear three rumours that relate to three different plot hooks. These could be a simple monster attack or a whole new adventure. You may also want them to hear three rumours about how the three rumours they heard the previous session were either resolved by others or have blown up to become worse than before. This also makes the players feel that there is a world beyond what their PCs are doing which could, in fact, be a major key to prompting and promoting sandbox play.

Anyway, three seems to be a good number for this. I basically design everything in my games around the rule of three. There's no superstition involved: it's just a good number in terms of offering choices, neither too many or too few. James Wyatt wrote a surprisingly good article a few years ago about designing adventures around three different encounters just like those in Dungeon Delve. It's amazing how well that works too. (And, yes, you can always add more.)

 

[Gilladian]

Ask them questions - leading questions for sure, but ASK, and then USE their input.

For example, they get back to the village after being in the dungeon for two weeks; ask the rogue "What seems different in the town's mood today?". Ask the cleric "What holy celebration or season is coming up next?"; tell the wizard he's smelling an odd, sharp smell every time he goes over to one side of town. Ask him "what does the smell remind you of? Where do you think it is coming from?", etc... You can connect these questions to adventures you're offering to run, or you can make them free-standing questions that you know nothing about. Just be prepared to improvise when they bite!