Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How to ease players into a sandbox style?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5793348" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>I kind of appropriated Janx's CHOICES thing, but what I took him to mean, and certainly what I mean, is not only meaningful but outright juicy. Yeah, left or right door with no info is not meaningful. Let the players find out that left is fast and risky while right is relatively slow and safe, and it is meaningful but not much more. Let the players find out that fast gives them a good shot at the legendary artifact, but likely leaves a beloved NPC to a grisly fate--and you probably get passion. You'll especially get it if they need that artifact to do something relatively noble. </p><p> </p><p>On this I may diverge from Janx a bit on the opportunity versus problem thing. I mostly agree with opportunities being the main draw--more carrot than stick. But I like the way problems complicate the action and make the players care. So in Janx's terms, I see it as instead of giving the PCs a problem they must deal with (e.g. being shot), you give them several opportunities that each have associated problems. And when necessary, you telegraph the problems (or some of them). Now, the players are picking which opportunity they want <strong>and</strong> which problem set they want.</p><p> </p><p>So on how much information to give, it is not so much amount as what you give. People can handle large numbers of choices when they are structured somehow. So keep those opportunities down to a relatively small list (no more than seven, often around 3-4). Then use as many problems as the group can handle to complicate things. Now, it can get complicated when you tie the problems together, and the whole thing becomes impossible to graph. It sometimes works better with new sandbox players to have:</p><p> </p><p>1. Opportunity 1: Problem A, Problem B, etc.</p><p>2. Opportunity 2: Problem X, Problem Y, etc.</p><p> </p><p>Nor do you need to give them the whole list. They need the whole list of opportunities (explicitly or fairly clear in game). With the problems, you can, and probably should, be more circumspect. You tell them about the rabid undead crocodiles because you know two of the characters will be creeped out about it. You reserve the plane hopping goblin thief, because that is a nasty surprise. And one opportunity might even be explicitly listed as "Problem To Be Discovered Later, No Doubt At the Most Inconvenient Moment". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></p><p> </p><p>BTW, what really makes this sing for me is once the players get accustomed to it, the next step is to inform them that I will lie to them about the nature of the problems. I'll do that in background material. I'll do it via NPCs. I'll plant misleading clues (not mere red herrings). Not much, but just enough to keep things in doubt, no more than 1 in 20 clues. So now, just getting told about rabid undead crocodiles is the best of both worlds. Two players are creeped out now at the mere thought, <strong>and</strong> the party may be surprised to discover there was never such a threat. You have to be careful about bait and switch here, of course, but as long everyone knows that information is suspect until confirmed, it works great. </p><p> </p><p>The best thing about it is when analysis paralysis does set in (as it inevitably will with that much complication), all someone has to say is, "We don't know enough to decide. So the real choice right here is what to do to get more information so that we can decide." After I prompt that 10 or 15 times, some of the players catch on and start managing that aspect themselves. </p><p> </p><p>You might not prefer the lying bit if the players are wanting more action adventure than intrigue/skulking, as it definitely encourages the latter. But like anything else, if you want a mix, it is fairly easy to callibrate once the players get into the spirit of the thing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5793348, member: 54877"] I kind of appropriated Janx's CHOICES thing, but what I took him to mean, and certainly what I mean, is not only meaningful but outright juicy. Yeah, left or right door with no info is not meaningful. Let the players find out that left is fast and risky while right is relatively slow and safe, and it is meaningful but not much more. Let the players find out that fast gives them a good shot at the legendary artifact, but likely leaves a beloved NPC to a grisly fate--and you probably get passion. You'll especially get it if they need that artifact to do something relatively noble. On this I may diverge from Janx a bit on the opportunity versus problem thing. I mostly agree with opportunities being the main draw--more carrot than stick. But I like the way problems complicate the action and make the players care. So in Janx's terms, I see it as instead of giving the PCs a problem they must deal with (e.g. being shot), you give them several opportunities that each have associated problems. And when necessary, you telegraph the problems (or some of them). Now, the players are picking which opportunity they want [B]and[/B] which problem set they want. So on how much information to give, it is not so much amount as what you give. People can handle large numbers of choices when they are structured somehow. So keep those opportunities down to a relatively small list (no more than seven, often around 3-4). Then use as many problems as the group can handle to complicate things. Now, it can get complicated when you tie the problems together, and the whole thing becomes impossible to graph. It sometimes works better with new sandbox players to have: 1. Opportunity 1: Problem A, Problem B, etc. 2. Opportunity 2: Problem X, Problem Y, etc. Nor do you need to give them the whole list. They need the whole list of opportunities (explicitly or fairly clear in game). With the problems, you can, and probably should, be more circumspect. You tell them about the rabid undead crocodiles because you know two of the characters will be creeped out about it. You reserve the plane hopping goblin thief, because that is a nasty surprise. And one opportunity might even be explicitly listed as "Problem To Be Discovered Later, No Doubt At the Most Inconvenient Moment". :D BTW, what really makes this sing for me is once the players get accustomed to it, the next step is to inform them that I will lie to them about the nature of the problems. I'll do that in background material. I'll do it via NPCs. I'll plant misleading clues (not mere red herrings). Not much, but just enough to keep things in doubt, no more than 1 in 20 clues. So now, just getting told about rabid undead crocodiles is the best of both worlds. Two players are creeped out now at the mere thought, [B]and[/B] the party may be surprised to discover there was never such a threat. You have to be careful about bait and switch here, of course, but as long everyone knows that information is suspect until confirmed, it works great. The best thing about it is when analysis paralysis does set in (as it inevitably will with that much complication), all someone has to say is, "We don't know enough to decide. So the real choice right here is what to do to get more information so that we can decide." After I prompt that 10 or 15 times, some of the players catch on and start managing that aspect themselves. You might not prefer the lying bit if the players are wanting more action adventure than intrigue/skulking, as it definitely encourages the latter. But like anything else, if you want a mix, it is fairly easy to callibrate once the players get into the spirit of the thing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How to ease players into a sandbox style?
Top