Gygaxian Sandbox Campaign - Good Advice?

[S'mon]

Coming out of the "Guards at the Gate Quote" thread, there was a bit of a tangent on Gygax's 1e PHB & DMG playstyle advice.

I'm currently running an online AD&D sandbox in EGG's Yggsburgh setting, and I'm planning to also use the setting for a Pathfinder Beginner Box game starting next month. Like Gygax's Greyhawk games, I'm DMing for a large number of relative strangers with a variety of play preferences, attention spans, et al. I thought I'd start a thread to discuss useful and less useful advice as pertains to this style of play.

Making the players work hard, as per 1e PHB - should players be expected to map? Take notes? Know what's in their spellbooks?

Creating the world, running the game - what bits of advice from the 1e DMG do you find particularly good? What doesn't work?

Player discipline - perhaps the most controversial part of the Gygaxian style from our commie pinko liberal postmodernist (edit) 2012 perspective. Blue bolts from the heavens? Ethereal mummies? Is there ever value in the Gygaxian approach to punishing 'bad' player behaviour?

Rewards - it's very noticeable running Yggsburgh that, like Keep on the Borderlands, there is a lot of treasure - +5 this, +5 that all over the place (it's written for 4th-9th C&C PCs). I've been typically halving the '+' mods and reducing treasure as I also halve NPC levels. Gygax's advice on 'limited' treasure should be read with this in mind - his default is still a very high reward (& high risk) game by modern standards. How do you feel about treasure placement in a sandbox? Is 2,000gp in the ogre cave stingy or excessive?
Personally I think I tend to over-stingy and struggle with placing decent treasure, which I think is not good for a sandbox game where you want pro-active PCs. Having a pre-done sandbox with generous treasure helps me, I think.

 

[steeldragons]

Like Gygax's Greyhawk games, I'm DMing for a large number of relative strangers with a variety of play preferences, attention spans, et al. I thought I'd start a thread to discuss useful and less useful advice as pertains to this style of play.

Cool. Let's discuss.

Making the players work hard, as per 1e PHB - should players be expected to map?

Yes. Designating one or two of the players to keep track of where the PCs are and have been is, to my mind, certianly not making the players "work hard". The characters should have a basic knowledge of their surroundings. Not to mention, it might be a good activity for those with a lower attention span...keep them focused.

Take notes?

That's up to the individual players. I would certainly mention it as something they might want to do. Then each player can decide what/how much they think is relavent to record for their PCs to know/remember.

Know what's in their spellbooks?

Absolutely! That's not the DMs job!

Creating the world, running the game - what bits of advice from the 1e DMG do you find particularly good? What doesn't work?

I think, for a DM's own sanity, one of the best bits of advice for this is to not detail everywhere/anywhere too far out of region the PCs are in from the start. This leaves the sandbox...sandboxy and allows you, the DM, to generate additional plot devices (neighboring kingdoms -be they allies or enemies, areas where bandits might have a hideout, where the local dragon lairs, where the legendary treasure of X is hidden, the biggest city, dwarven mines, etc. etc. etc.) as needed.

It also heightens the "exploration" element of the game, which might be useful for keeping players interested and questioning "what's next? what's over that ridge? where's that castle the NPC mentioned?" etc.

Player discipline - perhaps the most controversial part of the Gygaxian style from our commie pinko liberal postmodernist (edit) 2012 perspective. Blue bolts from the heavens? Ethereal mummies? Is there ever value in the Gygaxian approach to punishing 'bad' player behaviour?

I find teleporting in a half dozen ice devils tends to lend some...focus for a distracted, aimlessly rambling, arguing or just plain dragging their heels group. Ok, so I really only ever did that once...and I was a young DM at the time.

Seriously, I do not think these sorts of "DM fiat punishments" (even if used rarely/reservedly for extreme situations) add to anyone's fun. If the players are complaining about a lack of action or seem bored, sure "DM up" an encounter you hadn't planned or something to take the party by surprise.

But lightning bolts form the sky as a "player punishment", I really don't think it is useful and basically just sows descent and hard feelings toward the DM...which then lends itself to enforcing the "DM vs/against the Players" (not the PC's! The Players!) mode of play which I, personally, do not find enjoyable.

If you really need some kind of "punishment" system in place to keep your players in line, then they simply should not be playing. Repeated bad player behavior, with adequate warnings given, should result in the player getting booted...until they are mature enough to not be "bad" at the table.

Rewards - it's very noticeable running Yggsburgh that, like Keep on the Borderlands, there is a lot of treasure - +5 this, +5 that all over the place (it's written for 4th-9th C&C PCs). I've been typically halving the '+' mods and reducing treasure as I also halve NPC levels. Gygax's advice on 'limited' treasure should be read with this in mind - his default is still a very high reward (& high risk) game by modern standards. How do you feel about treasure placement in a sandbox?

Your system sounds very reasonable. I also tend to keep magic items, while available, pretty much anything over a +3 is some kind of legendary/mythic device or weapon. When finding a +1 shield or a +2 dagger is a big deal...I think you have a great game. The oft commented about around here "making magic items feel magical." That's the kind of game I love.

Is 2,000gp in the ogre cave stingy or excessive?

Woah. Well...at first glance I immediately think 'yes.' But then, I suppose it depends. Has this ogre been lairing there for years and years? Raiding caravans and merchants on the road or repeated terrorizing a local town n' taking their stuff? No, I wouldn't say it was excessive in that case.

If this is just an ogre in one chamber of a dungeon or cave out in the wilderness/middle of nowhere...then...yeah. I'd say it's excessive.

IOW, where's that 2,000 gp coming from? If it makes sense the gre would have it, then great. If it doesn't then cut the treasure back.

Which basically goes to my opinions on "treasure placement" in general. Does it make sense? Should that warren of kobolds have a trove of 200 platinum pieces, 1,500 gp, a staff of the magi and a +4 battle axe? Mmmmm prrrrobably not. But if you can make it make sense in the game setting/world...go for it!

Very rarely do I have treasure resulting from every encounter. I generally make sure the PCs have/find dribs and drabs, enough to keep themselves going (basic operating costs, if you would- meals, a room at the inn, mounts, if necessary, etc..) and throw in a nice big "pay off" every now and again after a particularly big moment/battle/conclusion or just a complete random surprise (though these are particularly rare and usually entail whatever owned the surprise coming after the party, .

That said:
1) Unless it's a coin purse on their person or weapons/items they are carrying and using, if you don't encounter a creature in their home/lair you are probably not getting their treasure.

B) If you do catch a creature in the home, you must take into account how intelligent or crafty the creature is. Is there just a piles of coins and gems sitting in the middle of the room? Is there a locked chest in the corner? A secret hiding space behind a shelf or tattered tapestry? Do they bury their treasure under their feet or keep it stuffed in their bedding? Just defeating a creature in their living quarters does not automatically mean you are going to find their cache. [Not wanting to "bog down" the game pace with overly detailed/time-consuming searches, but the hunt for a creature's treasure should allow for some fun for certain of the PCs - thieves, elves, dwarves, etc. all have various "detecting/noticing" special abilities that might give their character a moment to shine.]

And third) just to reiterate what I said before and reinforce its application to 1 & B, Placement and amount of treasure for any particular encounter should "make sense."

Personally I think I tend to over-stingy and struggle with placing decent treasure, which I think is not good for a sandbox game where you want pro-active PCs. Having a pre-done sandbox with generous treasure helps me, I think.

If it helps you, then by all means use it. Like I said, I think your system for paring back the power of found magic weapons is a good one. So if taking the treasure pre-placed in a module helps you, then adjust as per your system (and makes sense and go with it.

Have fun and happy "bringin' back ye olde skool" gaming
--SD

 

[Luce]

Regarding the treasure.

I just wanted to point out that some of the early modules were written as intended for tournament. Having powerful magic in a high risk high reward one shot is one thing, placing powerful items in your regular weekly game another.
Unfortunately a some of the DMs in the early days did not realize the distinction and gave rise to the rumored killer DM and Monty hauls from previous editions. I mean if every adventure you (as a DM) run is trying to emulate the S series...

Well just wanted to trow this out there for consideration.

 

[Mallus]

I'm currently running an online AD&D sandbox in EGG's Yggsburgh setting...

I'm currently running a face-to-face AD&D semi-sandbox set in the early days of our group's 4e homebrew, now with added Zak S.'s Vornheim & OSR influences!

Making the players work hard, as per 1e PHB - should players be expected to map? Take notes? Know what's in their spellbooks?

I'm in the "the challenging bits still have to be fun" camp. My players aren't too keen on amateur cartography, so I've been doing the (crude) mapping during the dungeon exploration bits. If nothing else, its faster, and we're all about upping the speed of play (after years of 3e & 4e campaigns).

I also remind the players of things they should remember -- or at the very least allow for INT/WIS checks to recall. We're all busy professionals, half with young children, it's simply not feasible to ask my group to fixate on the details of the campaign like we did when we were in high school.

Creating the world, running the game - what bits of advice from the 1e DMG do you find particularly good? What doesn't work?

Use of random encounters/tables works. Let a good part of the game environment emerge from the dice. I was resistant to this at first, since I'm an inveterate world-builder (plus I love the setting wank I invent). But there's really no substitute for the thrill of surprise -- not just in terms of how the players react, but what they're reacting to.

Is there ever value in the Gygaxian approach to punishing 'bad' player behaviour?

There's definite value to having opponents "kick the doors in" when the action starts to flag, but outright in-game punishments for bad player behavior -- there's never a call for that, and I have to think advice along those lines are an example of EGG's rather sly sense of humor...

How do you feel about treasure placement in a sandbox? Is 2,000gp in the ogre cave stingy or excessive?
Personally I think I tend to over-stingy and struggle with placing decent treasure, which I think is not good for a sandbox game where you want pro-active PCs.

Big danger, big rewards, less overt rewards structure. In a game where a stroll outside could mean a run-in with a chicken that can turn you to stone, common insects poison grown men to death, and so on, I have no problem with a plenitude of ancient treasures in every nook and cranny.

Put another way, the traditional D&D experience is built on excess. I like that tradition.

In the last session of my AD&D campaign, the 4th/5th level PCs got their hands on +2 elven chain mail, a +2 short sword, and a pouch of Dust of Disappearance (my own fault for importing two NPC's from the Village of Hommlet!). The did this by drunkenly, and in their underwear, exploring a secret passage in the inn they were staying in and surprising the assassin coming to murder/loot them.

The thief PC now has an AC of -2. At level 5. Of course, the party will need all the help they can get -- they're trying to take out a whole thieves' guild. C'est le guerre.

 

[the Jester]

All IMHO:

Making the players work hard, as per 1e PHB - should players be expected to map? Take notes? Know what's in their spellbooks?

Only if they expect to have a map, keep what's going on straight or use their spells effectively.

Creating the world, running the game - what bits of advice from the 1e DMG do you find particularly good? What doesn't work?

I still use the 1e DMG as a font of inspiration; it's got a wealth of detail and interesting bits. Specifically, I couldn't call out the good and bad bits without looking through it.

Player discipline - perhaps the most controversial part of the Gygaxian style from our commie pinko liberal postmodernist (edit) 2012 perspective. Blue bolts from the heavens? Ethereal mummies? Is there ever value in the Gygaxian approach to punishing 'bad' player behaviour?

Is there a reason for the bolt to come from the blue in game? Does the ethereal mummy's presence make sense in context?

If so, sure. If not, no.

Rewards - it's very noticeable running Yggsburgh that, like Keep on the Borderlands, there is a lot of treasure - +5 this, +5 that all over the place (it's written for 4th-9th C&C PCs). I've been typically halving the '+' mods and reducing treasure as I also halve NPC levels. Gygax's advice on 'limited' treasure should be read with this in mind - his default is still a very high reward (& high risk) game by modern standards. How do you feel about treasure placement in a sandbox? Is 2,000gp in the ogre cave stingy or excessive?
Personally I think I tend to over-stingy and struggle with placing decent treasure, which I think is not good for a sandbox game where you want pro-active PCs. Having a pre-done sandbox with generous treasure helps me, I think.

One key element of a sandbox, to me, is the ability of the pcs to influence the level of the rewards they get by seeking out tougher challenges.

I have no problem with parties with vastly more or less wealth than is typical if they also face more or less dangerous challenges to get it. Maybe the 10th level guys prefer fighting goblins because they are easy, but maybe that's also why their best magic items are a shield +2 and a sword +1, +3 vs. women and children.

 

[S'mon]

One key element of a sandbox, to me, is the ability of the pcs to influence the level of the rewards they get by seeking out tougher challenges.

I have no problem with parties with vastly more or less wealth than is typical if they also face more or less dangerous challenges to get it. Maybe the 10th level guys prefer fighting goblins because they are easy, but maybe that's also why their best magic items are a shield +2 and a sword +1, +3 vs. women and children.

The party in my Yggsburgh game has decided that hunting brigands and highwaymen is the path to easy lucre:

1. They have lots of treasure looted from prior victims.
2. If you kill or capture them, you get a reward from the Sheriff.
3. Often they have captives who reward you too.
4. Killing/Capturing them is actually good for your reputation, unlike most forms of wreaking havoc.

So far there have been 5 fights in 6 sessions, 3 of those with bandit gangs. The only downside is that successful bandit gangs are also smart & tough! Their solution has been to hunt the lower-ranking gangs on "Yggsburgh's Most Wanted" list, ca #5, rather than go for the really big cheeses yet. It has worked so far, though the last game's fight between 14 bandits & 6 PCs was a whisker away from TPK.

 

[Jack7]

Some good advice so far. My take and my experience below.

Making the players work hard, as per 1e PHB - should players be expected to map? Take notes? Know what's in their spellbooks?

We did all that stuff way back when. Still do.

Player discipline - perhaps the most controversial part of the Gygaxian style from our commie pinko liberal postmodernist (edit) 2012 perspective. Blue bolts from the heavens? Ethereal mummies? Is there ever value in the Gygaxian approach to punishing 'bad' player behaviour?

We didn't do that much, not by the obvious ways anyways. We played it more subtly, but then again most players tried their bets to play well, and so it almost never happened and if it did it was in such a way as to make the player question, "was this punishment, or coincidence?" And personally I think that's a better incentive, because it makes the player think about their own behavior in context (did I do something that put the party in danger, or was this just happenstance), rather than just try and have them "fight or protest the unfairness of the punishment." A lot of AD&D was far more group and unit and team conscious than later editions which to me became to me more and more progressively "individual superman conscious." Team work should really be an art in AD&D because powers and abilities are so limited it encourages the team to operate collectively and coherently and responsibly, fostering group cooperation and morale. Instead of saying "I am the invincible Iron-Man!" the AD&D team should say, "We are the Fellowship." I prefer that outlook in group play to the "every man or woman should power up to be a bad-ass mo-fo." But part of group cooperation and cohesion means you're also very responsible for your own behavior and not only the advantages you bring to the group, but what you might cost them by irresponsible and foolish behavior. Personally I'd stress Team Cohesion and Cooperation, and real Reliance upon each other.

I got nothing against the Superman in a super-hero game. I though don't think fantasy games should spawn Superheroes, they should spawn Heroes who overcome opposite not through super-powers but through a whole host of lesser abilities, and by operating cunningly and shrewdly in cooperation with one another. Including in cooperation with other characters. Later editions became more super-heroey, but AD&D was more a "working heroes, everyman kinda game."

To me fantasy is not about Superheroes becoming the cosmic legends of the universe (never really thought I'd ever use that line, but there ya go, it fits), it's about ordinary men and women becoming Heroes and truly heroic. And that's a very different kind of thing. A Superhero can afford a certain hubris. Heroes cannot.

Rewards - it's very noticeable running Yggsburgh that, like Keep on the Borderlands, there is a lot of treasure - +5 this, +5 that all over the place (it's written for 4th-9th C&C PCs). I've been typically halving the '+' mods and reducing treasure as I also halve NPC levels. Gygax's advice on 'limited' treasure should be read with this in mind - his default is still a very high reward (& high risk) game by modern standards. How do you feel about treasure placement in a sandbox? Is 2,000gp in the ogre cave stingy or excessive?
Personally I think I tend to over-stingy and struggle with placing decent treasure, which I think is not good for a sandbox game where you want pro-active PCs. Having a pre-done sandbox with generous treasure helps me, I think.

Personally, as a DM I was never big on +5 this or that either. I thought there were much better ways to make items valuable magically so eventually I dropped all magic number bonuses in favor of other capabilities.

We also campaigned more than sandboxed, but when we did I designed items with histories that would be of specific value to certain characters (like a Thief) and then placed them in dungeons for the players to run across.

I would also create items that could be of much use to more than one character. For instance a pen that would allow a Thief (but not another class) to forge anyone's signature, and to double his chances of reading magical writing by tracing over the text in a scroll. But it would also allow a Magic-user to write spells in the air, or to rewrite them in their traveling spellbooks once they were exhausted.

Also I would not tell the players what magical items did: they would either have to figure it out by trial and error, research the item, or use spells or pay Sages to analyze items.

That, combined with making the players undergo actual training under masters (paying expenses, paying for training between level advancement, that kind of thing, and giving away magical items that might be of use to one or more classes, led to some really excellent post-adventuring debates and fun between the players.

Master-teacher relationships often led to great networking opportunities as well. As did relationships with Sages and NPCs the players actually needed to conduct their business.

Training, treasure allocation, dividing loot, it was all tremendously important to the players and great fun for me to watch. I still do this kinda thing, but AD&D is particularly good at it if you do these things right.

Also it makes treasure much easier to carry and leads to much more interesting post-game exchanges if the party finds a small bag of rubies and sapphires, and tiaras and tapestries, than if you just give away coins. Use jewelry, gemstones, rare books, documents, maps, clothing, sacks of golddust and other valuable items, useful minerals, furniture, personal items, magic component items, fine weaponry, and a whole host of other things as hoard valuables. An occasional casket of rare coins (maybe from a long dead Empire) makes for much more valuable coins than just normal exchange coins. My players once found a small casket of 100 silver alloy coins minted in the final years of the destroyed centuries ago Kingdom of Pesh. Each single coin of that stash was worth 500 normal gold coins. It wasn't much to carry yet they netted, after exchanges and haggling and taxes, an almost 44,000 gold piece return on those long vanished 100 silver coins.

That kinda thing makes for great player interactions and market haggling. In addition I gave away rare items that the players never wished to part with or sell but rather kept in their own strongholds or treasure hoards for personal reasons or to influence the local populations.


Personally I think that the Training and level advancement systems, treasure allocations (done right), social advancement: titles, nobility, and unusual magical items (though they all could also be improved upon) were big advantages of the AD&D system, and were mostly superior to later editions.

Also I let my PCs build keeps, strongholds and eventually castles, establish libraries, accumulate riches, gain influence, etc. That's a very good, even great part of the AD&D experience.

To me though the weapon and fight and armor systems are very clunky and unrealistic. But since it is a game you can modify anything you wish as long as the players accept it.

We also multi-classed a lot. I changed that over time to offer more options than the regular classes or even multi-classes, but it was fun for some of my players to dual or multi-class. Depending on party size I sometimes encouraged it.

Don't know if that helped ya any or not, but it's what I/we did. Also I'd go back and re-read the Dungeon Masters Guide. It had a lot of great advice on how to build a functioning fantasy world.

 

[S'mon]

Thanks Jack7! Lots of very useful stuff there.

Re:

A lot of AD&D was far more group and unit and team conscious than later editions which to me became to me more and more progressively "individual superman conscious." Team work should really be an art in AD&D because powers and abilities are so limited it encourages the team to operate collectively and coherently and responsibly, fostering group cooperation and morale. Instead of saying "I am the invincible Iron-Man!" the AD&D team should say, "We are the Fellowship." I prefer that outlook in group play to the "every man or woman should power up to be a bad-ass mo-fo." But part of group cooperation and cohesion means you're also very responsible for your own behavior and not only the advantages you bring to the group, but what you might cost them by irresponsible and foolish behavior. Personally I'd stress Team Cohesion and Cooperation, and real Reliance upon each other.

Thanks for this - this is a particularly important point for the Pathfinder Beginners game I'm planning, because 3e/PF can lead to the 'solo' mentality more, I think. Once when I was running 3.5e for strangers, but using the Basic D&D module 'Rahasia', there was a very bad player of a half-orc barbarian who refused to go out of Rage when the fight ended and kept blundering on looking for another encounter. Another weak and psychologically fragile player had his 4 hit point Wizard run after the half-orc, they blundered into the Bone Golem and the Wizard got chopped to pieces. This left the Wizard player traumatised and angry - angry at me the GM, so much so I eventually had to boot him from the table, which I hate doing. Later on in that adventure the half-orc PC went traipsing off on his own again, he got lucky and killed a BBEG solo, which only made him even more smug. He also took great relish in slaughtering the innocent-but-charmed-by-BBEG Elven acolytes, and was otherwise so bad (to the other players, not just me) I had to eventually boot him, too.

I've not seen that kind of behaviour with either pre-3e or 4e, and I'm hoping it will not be an issue with PF Beginners, but again I'm a bit nervous.

 

[Jack7]

Glad to help S'mon, if I did.

I'll tell ya something else we used to do a lot that I kinda saw disappear from later versions of the game. Hirelings and animal use, both of which are extremely useful for good teams.

A team of wilderness adventurers with good dogs, or maybe even falcons, is a big help. Fighters with good and well trained steeds, an excellent advantage.

Animals and hirelings with magical properties not only provide unique advantages to the owner, but to the whole team and can be arranged in such a way as to be gained as Treasure or as a Quest Reward.

A Wizard's familiar, a Paladin's warhorse, a Thief's pet boa, a Druid's wolf, a Ranger's mastiff, etc. All can provide valuable help not just to the owner but to the whole group.

Good hirelings, well treated and rewarded also make loyal friends and back-up and can even be played as back-up when visitors want to try out your group.

One of my teams had a very loyal Fighter/Thief hireling NPC (an orphan) who regularly adventured with the party and I played him sometimes (as DM) and the party played sometimes. After the team's theif was kileld in an ambush that NPC became the party's new Thief. He was already broken in, experienced, well trained, and the group liked and trusted him.

If the party starts to think of themselves as a real Team, instead of just a group of individuals who happen to be doing the same thing at the same time, then anyone and everything in the team can be a real and useful asset. Animals, hirelings, allies, advisers, etc.

But the players have to think and act like a Team.

Good luck.