D&D 4E Hints on Sandboxing with 4e?

[Charwoman Gene]

Basically, it means sandboxing is an older-school type of campaign.

So, "obviously" you have to use old school games to do it.

Hogwash. You no more need AD&D to sandbox as you need 4e to run a series of level appropriate encounters arranged in a linear order.

As long as everyone understands that all "encounter expectations" are tossed out the window, proper sandbox warning is easily handle in flavor text.

 

[keterys]

As long as the players and DM have an agreement on what is happening, 4e will work just as well as 1e. Which is to say, 1e has the same issues, people just didn't talk about them as loudly back then

Technically, you could _really_ slap them upside the head with how out of their league they are by just turning too high level combats into skill challenges. 'The dragon stretches slowly as it wakens, the ground shaking as its scales rub against the walls. Its yawn reveals a glowing furnace full of brimstone. What do you do?'
'Charge!'
'Okay, it casually breathes over you as your weapon bounces off it - lose two surges, and everyone else in the party make an Acrobatics check or lose a surge.'
Etc.

 

[S'mon]

Eh? this is not a sandbox issue.

Of course you know what monsters the players will be encountering. You're the GM.

What do I mean?

Look at the first series of adventurers by WoTC. It's set in a sandbox setting but level appropriate encounters are not an issue.

Er, I don't think we're on the same page as to what a sandbox campaign comprises. Something like my current City State of the Invincible Overlord campaign where the PCs go anywhere in the city, meet anyone, potentially do dozens of different dungeons and other adventures. I offer hooks but I don't determine that the PCs will do Keep on the Borderlands before they do Against the Giants. There's nothing sandbox about the Nentir Vale adventure path.

 

[S'mon]

If this is to be 4e specific, it should not be in General. Shuffling it over...

I don't know, part of my question was whether I shouldn't use 4e, if I should go with 1e/OSRIC or 3.5e/Pathfinder.

 

[S'mon]

Worrying about the PCs attacking something way outside their leauge? At some point they all gotta learn.

I'm worried that while in 1e and 3e it causes swift PC death and/or flight, in 4e it causes boredom.

Edit: I am actually running a (smallish) 4e sandbox campaign currently, Vault of Larin Karr converted, and this is what I've seen - the environment is largely unscaled and when the PCs encounter a tough monster, the game goes slow and grindy.

 

[S'mon]

but how is OSRIC different in terms of fighting an overhwelming foe? They get killed sooner?

Yes, although IME not as quickly as in 3e. In 3e the PCs often die before they can flee, in 1e they can often survive long enough to run away. In 4e they have a 3 hour fight, and may or may not win in the end.

 

[drothgery]

Yes, although IME not as quickly as in 3e. In 3e the PCs often die before they can flee, in 1e they can often survive long enough to run away. In 4e they have a 3 hour fight, and may or may not win in the end.

In 3e, if you don't have access to teleport or similar magic that lets you move really fast, you can pretty much only run away if the DM decides the monsters don't pursue; they're almost always faster than the PCs.

 

[keterys]

Let's assume a group of 5th level PCs stumble into a level 11 group of ogres* - which is just a bit outside the range of stuff they should fight.

* Ogre Dreadnought (L14), Ogre Storm Shaman (L11), 3 Ogre Ironclads (L9) - 2800xp, 200xp shy of the 3000 for a L11 encounter

PC avg hp 48:
Monster Avg Damage: 18 per hit, hitting pretty darn often, sometimes twice a round (and hopefully the DM lets the Dreadnought be lumbering up more slowly to the battlefield, since then they'll start dying)

So... end of round 1, one PC is down, 1 PC is blinded and bloodied, 1 PC is bloodied, 1 PC is close, and the other PC is already starting to run. The wizard maybe tosses a daily to slow the monsters down, cleric throws a heal, and you start running! How is that slow and grindy?

 

[Doug McCrae]

In AD&D, a low-level group that walks up to a cavern entrance with suspiciously reptilian footprints leading to it that are bigger than the halfling in the group, with heaps of charred bones and bits of melted armor may realize this is the game world's way of saying "Here you shall go, and no further." It is not generally presumed that the DM has set a dragon with minimal HD/HP in said cave.

The expectation of play as outlined in the other game is that yes, it is a balanced encounter, and the dragon in the cave is precisely at the level that can be overcome. I'm not suggesting it'd be easy - indeed, it might be very difficult and cost the players many characters to do so.

I think there's a stronger expectation of balanced encounters in AD&D than in 3e.

In AD&D monster power corresponds with dungeon level. They get tougher gradually. In the 1e DMG Gary recommends that tougher monsters should be located in faraway, exotic places.

The general idea is to develop a dungeon of multiple levels, and the
deeper adventurers go, the more difficult the challenges become -
fiercer monsters, more deadly traps, more confusing mazes, and so forth.
This same concept applies to areas outdoors as well, with more ond
terrible monsters occurring more frequently the further one goes away
from civilization.

- 1e DMG pg 87

The old modules all had recommended levels and party sizes. I can't think of any low level classic modules where there is something like a huge ancient dragon. The encounters are a lot more balanced than that. The owlbear in Keep on the Borderlands is much like 4e's concept of the 'boss fight' where dailies are expended, party level + 4.

3e otoh talks about tailored versus staus quo encounters. Status quo = traditional sandbox concept.

Bugbears live on Clover Hill, and if the PCs go there, they encounter bugbears, whether bugbears are an appropriate encounter for them or not.

- 3.5 DMG pg 48

3e also recommends that 5% of encounters be 'overpowering' ie EL 5+ higher than the party. Of such encounters it is said:

The PCs should run. If they don't they will almost certainly lose.

- pg 50

 

[thedungeondelver]

I don't know, part of my question was whether I shouldn't use 4e, if I should go with 1e/OSRIC or 3.5e/Pathfinder.

Indeed; I'm really not sure why this was moved. There's 3.5, AD&D and other games talk rife in the thread.

And it's staying civil.