D&D General Lego Sandbox vs Open Sandbox (and other sandbox discussion)

[aco175]

It's not even limited to sandboxes. There's seemingly a fairly large minority of players who want RPGs to be life sims. Open a bagel shop and RP that. Run a trading consortium and RP that. Traveling merchants. Etc. A whole lot of people seemingly love the slice-of-life style of play. For the life of me I cannot fathom why. I get different people have different tastes. I just don't see the attraction to that at all. It's literally the opposite to everything I play these fantasy adventure games for.

My wagon merchant, Stroker Ace was into underground wagon races but that was more a backdrop for getting into problems that needed adventuring. The PCs were a bit like the A-Team traveling the circuit helping people out.

 

[DEFCON 1]

My wagon merchant, Stroker Ace was into underground wagon races but that was more a backdrop for getting into problems that needed adventuring. The PCs were a bit like the A-Team traveling the circuit helping people out.

How dare you namecheck Stroker Ace but then use a GIF of the Bandit! THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE CHARACTERS!!! I SUPPOSE YOUR PC HAD A COMPANION NAMED CAPTAIN CHAOS TOO, DIDN'T YOU?!?

SHAME!!! CROSS-CASTING YOUR BURT REYNOLDS MOVIES LIKE THAT!!! SHAME!!!

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I actually like the slice of life stuff interspersed with all sorts of dangers and adventures. It makes it feel like you are part of the setting. We do everything from epic heroic quests, to gold-motivated dungeon crawls, but we also might acquire a house/ship/base and decorate it, and enjoy role-playing things like ordering meals at a tavern.

I'd be pretty put off if the whole thing turned into "Merchant Quest", but I'd also feel a little rushed if it felt like chatting with the NPCs and role-playing walking around town and shopping wasn't welcome.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's not even limited to sandboxes. There's seemingly a fairly large minority of players who want RPGs to be life sims. Open a bagel shop and RP that. Run a trading consortium and RP that. Traveling merchants. Etc. A whole lot of people seemingly love the slice-of-life style of play. For the life of me I cannot fathom why. I get different people have different tastes. I just don't see the attraction to that at all. It's literally the opposite to everything I play these fantasy adventure games for.

I mean it would have been one thing if he had actually been roleplaying interactions with NPCs while running his business. Not my cup of tea, but an understandable play preference. But, this was mostly dry number crunching. It really felt like this guy would rather have been playing Rollercoaster Tycoon or some other management sim. While the rest of us were scratching our heads wondering where the actual game was, and if the GM was ever going to at least shift the spotlight. Or at least that’s what I was wondering. Maybe the others were used to this kind of thing from them, but I didn’t stick around to find out.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I mean it would have been one thing if he had actually been roleplaying interactions with NPCs while running his business. Not my cup of tea, but an understandable play preference. But, this was mostly dry number crunching. It really felt like this guy would rather have been playing Rollercoaster Tycoon or some other management sim. While the rest of us were scratching our heads wondering where the actual game was, and if the GM was ever going to at least shift the spotlight. Or at least that’s what I was wondering. Maybe the others were used to this kind of thing from them, but I didn’t stick around to find out.

This is just an example of different people enjoying different things.

To run a successful RPG it requires all the players (including the GM) to have a significant overlap on the kind of stuff they enjoy.

 

[GrimCo]

When it comes to running sandbox type game, my first thing is to asses what type of players i have, are they more proactive or reactive, both on individual and group level. For proactive players, bare bones are enough. They will do most of heavy lifting. For reactive players, those ones need more structure, more hooks, more guidance. Lego sandbox that branches off into linear adventures is better for the second group. For first group, drop some basic setting info and watch them build upon it.

 

[MichaelSomething]

It's not even limited to sandboxes. There's seemingly a fairly large minority of players who want RPGs to be life sims. Open a bagel shop and RP that. Run a trading consortium and RP that. Traveling merchants. Etc. A whole lot of people seemingly love the slice-of-life style of play. For the life of me I cannot fathom why. I get different people have different tastes. I just don't see the attraction to that at all. It's literally the opposite to everything I play these fantasy adventure games for.

Isn't it great? I'm glad D&D is flexible enough to accommodate those types of players.

 

[Theory of Games]

Not everyone plays RPGs because they want to push drama. I like to explore a fantasy world and see what happens. As a GM I like to create that world and let the players engage with it through their PCs. I make sure there are plenty of interesting things in that world they could choose to do, but it's up to them, and I'm fine with PCs establishing a business instead of dungeon-crawling.

This approach only works with a strong Session 0 to make sure everyone is on the same page. Otherwise it can turn into #rpghorrorstory where several players are all trying to have a different RP experience.

This is just an example of different people enjoying different things.

To run a successful RPG it requires all the players (including the GM) to have a significant overlap on the kind of stuff they enjoy.

Not necessarily. You can't force players to enjoy a playstyle they do not like. Better to create campaigns that focus on the playstyles of the people at the table. It's people playing a game, not the game playing people.

When it comes to running sandbox type game, my first thing is to asses what type of players i have, are they more proactive or reactive, both on individual and group level. For proactive players, bare bones are enough. They will do most of heavy lifting. For reactive players, those ones need more structure, more hooks, more guidance. Lego sandbox that branches off into linear adventures is better for the second group. For first group, drop some basic setting info and watch them build upon it.

Assessing your group and delivering the play experience they want is ideal

 

[Charlaquin]

This is just an example of different people enjoying different things.

To run a successful RPG it requires all the players (including the GM) to have a significant overlap on the kind of stuff they enjoy.

Well, yeah. Obviously if the rest of the group enjoyed playing this way, then more power to them. I’d only have been dragging the game down if I had stuck around. That wasn’t the impression I got, but I could have been wrong. The vibes were terrible all around, I probably wouldn’t have come back even if I’d enjoyed the game, but the game also being boring to me made it easier for sure.