Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 5041041" data-attributes="member: 14506">I personally think that sandboxing works best when you have smaller sites / areas of interest / dungeons that collectively become the greater. So where as I don't like long and deep dungeons mostly because they take so long in game. I would rather get the point of that dungeon across and that can be done in a few rooms as opposed to tedium infitium (mapping and the whole nine yards).I also think that the world is a more integral part of the campaign and what happens around off stage can be as important as in the flow of the game. Foreshadowing future events and letting the players add their own thoughts to the process is a key difference in this style of play too. As you offer clues, threads, tangents and arcs players contemplate their relevance and in some case they come up with excellent ideas and those ideas get fed into the story, of course hopefully without them knowing you did that.I like to think of the DM as the engine and the players are mechanics who tune up the engine and make it better. You could also consider it agile development/cowboy coding/extreme programming vs. the more standard structured development. You have a very consistent outcome with the structured approach but it takes longer has more documentation and it can be stale, not true with the other development methodologies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sadrik, post: 5041041, member: 14506"] I personally think that sandboxing works best when you have smaller sites / areas of interest / dungeons that collectively become the greater. So where as I don't like long and deep dungeons mostly because they take so long in game. I would rather get the point of that dungeon across and that can be done in a few rooms as opposed to tedium infitium (mapping and the whole nine yards). I also think that the world is a more integral part of the campaign and what happens around off stage can be as important as in the flow of the game. Foreshadowing future events and letting the players add their own thoughts to the process is a key difference in this style of play too. As you offer clues, threads, tangents and arcs players contemplate their relevance and in some case they come up with excellent ideas and those ideas get fed into the story, of course hopefully without them knowing you did that. I like to think of the DM as the engine and the players are mechanics who tune up the engine and make it better. You could also consider it agile development/cowboy coding/extreme programming vs. the more standard structured development. You have a very consistent outcome with the structured approach but it takes longer has more documentation and it can be stale, not true with the other development methodologies. [/QUOTE]

Verification