Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7058941" data-attributes="member: 16814">RE:  the naming conventionYes, a bit tongue in cheek, but only because I began thinking in terms of transportation.  I'm an engineer by trade, and work with communications, and often end up using highway analogies to explain various types of shared bandwidth usages because everyone immediately understands and gets a general understanding.My preferred D&D playstyle is best described as linked mini-sandboxes.  There's a plot thread that the players move along, and this tends to jump players between encounter areas.  That's a loose term, as it fits both an area to be explored and a political situation that needs to be resolved.  The basics are that the encounter area is a sandbox where the party has a goal - decided by them or offered by the plot - but no defined pathway to the plot.  For exploration, I build out an area using terrain types, features, NPCs, and critters.  I then come up with a few sets of motivations for the groups in the area.  Some are tied to the goal, for or against.  Some are entirely separate and deal only with local concerns.  Some have nothing to do with the local, but are passing through and might be interacted with (these I use to augment campaign themes, frex, if there's a war going on, there may be a group of deserters or a unit moving through or a conscription party).  Then the party is turned loose to accomplish (or not) their goal.  They decide how/when/where to strive and the obstacles and NPCs come into play.  Not everything is used, and some things are used often, depending on how I think they best fit what the party is trying to accomplish.Example:  The party is looking for more information on the main plotline, which involves manifestations of a strange rocklike substance that warps and perverts the surrounding area/creatures.  They're looking for any mention or story that fits this description.  At this point, we're at an exit, and I provide a few choices to the party -- they hear a story about something that may fit the bill (odd happenings nearby), a previous research effort returns a new tidbit not related to the plot but of interest to a character (a magic item, for instance); and the party is approached by a friendly NPC they have history with with a request to help a friend.  All of these choices are valid, and each gives up something offered by the others.  In this specific case, the story of odd happenings isn't related to the plot, but could gain a powerful ally for later, the magic item is a magic item, and the request from a friend is directly related to the plot.  The party opts to aid their friend and travels to a distant land to provide assistance.  The information provided there from their questions immediately tells them this is main plot related, and the agree to assist wholeheartedly.So, this is an example of interstating.  There are only a few choices, and each will move the party down the plot in a big jump, and once they pick their exit, that's their exit.  Now, if they really wanted to not go that way, I allow it, but the style of play follows this convention.  Now we enter the mini-sandbox, though.The encounter area is an elemental confluence deep in the desert.  They're guided there but the guides refuse to enter.  In the confluence, I've set up five distinct terrains, and 2 special features for each:  the high plain, which is neutral ground and features a massive set of ruins and a smaller set of ruins, the water domain, which features a mineral spring and a bitter, poisonous lake, the fire domain, which features a burning lake of oil and a massive flame jet, the earth domain which is a trackless sea of dunes that features a dome of stone somewhere deep inside, and the wind domain which is a barren, windswept rock hills with large stone spires (heavily wind etched) and a permanent cyclone that wanders the area.  Some of these features are crossovers (the hot springs, the sandstorm cyclone, the sea of burn oil, the poisonous lake).  The idea here is that they cement this as an area of elemental confluence.  The ruins tie in the ancient dwarven empire that's a campaign theme.  The main NPCs are four elemental genies, one each, in charge of their domains.  Each is vying for power in different ways.  Earth has become corrupted by the strange stone and is attempting to corrupt Air.  Fire is worried, but not much.  Water is very concerned and will ally with outsiders that offer help.  In addition, there is a group of cultists in the area that venerate the strange stone and it's corrupting effects.  They're camped in the Air domain and are working to destablize Water so Water can't prevent the turning of Air.  There's also a pack of gnolls that have moved into the smaller ruins and are currently starving but can't escape because of the pair of mated blue adult dragons that have moved into the area, sensing that they can steal the power here away from the distracted elemental lords.  Finally, there's a dungeon under the large ruins that still holds knowledge of the ancient dwarves that would be useful to the party if they discover it.  And a smattering of elemental themed critters fills the rest of the area for encounters while exploring.The party's goal is to identify a possible corruption by the strange stone and eradicate it while learning more about the corruption to better combat future updates.  They also have a ongoing goal of gathering more information from dwarven ruins, because the last time the strange stone appears was just prior to the falling of the dwarven empire in a great cataclysm (which is popularly blamed on the dwarves themselves).  At this point, I don't script anything.  I know the area, the motivations of the groups, and what will happen absent player involvement.  I have a rough timetable of what will happen (which is usually set to 'players screw around doing nothing for too long').  After this, it's what the players do and how they interact with the surroundings that determines the game.  They are now Baha-ing.So, I find mixing up some styles works best for me.  The interstating works to keep a game moving (I had full buy in from the players for a Big Plot game) towards the plot points (which overall were tightly scripted in the first few levels to establish themes but towards the end are written as 'here the players fight the BBEG' because I'm not entirely sure what form the BBEG will take -- it'll be fluid based on where the game leads and because I want the player choices to have big impacts at the end).  But I prefer allowing a lot of leeway to interact with an area, to give the players agency to make meaningful choices in how they accomplish their goal (which they had less agency in picking, yes).  I carry those choices forward.  If the players destroy Earth, for instance, that's a way to solve the problem, but that's a closed end. If they, instead, find a way to cleanse him (which I didn't pick a method ahead of time, preferring to see how things work out), then they gain a powerful ally for later.  Which will be useful.This works for me, as a DM.  As a player, though, I'm much more open to styles.  I'll play in just about anything, so long as the dynamic is good and not toxic, and have enjoyed a bunch of different games and game styles over the years.  One of my all time favorite games was a much more improv style game, as a matter of fact.</blockquote>

Verification