D&D General Sandbox and/or/vs Linear campaigns

[payn]

I think linear adventure are a well enjoyed and valid form of play that’s probably easier to make fruitful then full “sandbox/etc” for many. Especially if everybody is sitting down at the table bought into the premise of the linear adventure and has contributed characters that fit well, you’re gonna have a good time!

But if people don’t have this sort of open conversation in the session 0 or whatever and think they’ll have space to explore more of a sandbox and set their own goals, now you’ve got some tension of play priorities. And next thing you know the DM is feeling like they have to shut things down, or players are flailing about because they thought it was a sandbox but it’s actually BioWare style river/lake campaign play or whatever (like, I thought Drakkenheim was a lot more sandboxy then it was).

Style points for Drakkenheim.

 

[Bedrockgames]

One thing the boards have made clear to me, to many, linear means crap until proven otherwise, and sandbox gets the benefit of the doubt as ideal until its proven otherwise.

And this I think is an unfortunate attitude. Sandbox is just one structure among many. And while I like it, it isn't the answer for every kind of campaign. And it has downsides like any structure. For example I know people who use sandbox for everything, but if I want to run a horror campaign, I don't want sandbox most of the time. I want more of a crafted adventure or scenario.

 

[Bedrockgames]

If I choose to go to a restaurant I like, and then choose from the menu an item a really want to have... yes, technically I might have had more agency if I walked into the kitchen and made my own dish myself. But if I am not as good a cook as a chef, that extra agency may not actually be working for the betterment of my dining experience.

Unless I am making very basic pasta dishes like e olio or pesto and steaks, I don't feel like I would have much agency at all if I were let loose in a kitchen. There are some parts of the cooking process, I simply don't know how to do (I might have an idea of what I want, and can imagine the end result, but have no idea how to get there)

 

[CellarHeroes]

I think linear adventure are a well enjoyed and valid form of play that’s probably easier to make fruitful then full “sandbox/etc” for many. Especially if everybody is sitting down at the table bought into the premise of the linear adventure and has contributed characters that fit well, you’re gonna have a good time!

But if people don’t have this sort of open conversation in the session 0 or whatever and think they’ll have space to explore more of a sandbox and set their own goals, now you’ve got some tension of play priorities. And next thing you know the DM is feeling like they have to shut things down, or players are flailing about because they thought it was a sandbox but it’s actually BioWare style river/lake campaign play or whatever (like, I thought Drakkenheim was a lot more sandboxy then it was).

Absolutely agree on the importance of the Session 0 conversation.

In the nearly 40 years I've been DM'ing (A)D&D, I bring to the table "something sandboxy and something a bit on rails". Much to my dismay, I have only run the sandbox once. I run what the players agree upon. So, either the idea of a sandbox isn't that appealing to players, or I just need to figure out a way to sell it better.

 

[Reynard]

A linear game is not necessarily a railroad, and a sandbox isn't necessarily a theme park. A theme park is a collection of linear adventures. Think WoW or BG3. Rime of the Frostmaiden is a pure theme park dressed up as a sandbox.

 

[bloodtide]

It's a sandbox if the DM doesn't have a series of steps the players must accomplish in order to achieve their goal. My example was a request for help from a town with multiple NPCs including enemies and allies along with some monsters. I have no expectation that the characters are going to do anything other than presumably talk to the person that was asking for help. After that it's up to them. For that matter, if they get to the town and decide to do something completely different (i.e. the player who decided his character was bored so he just went for a walk) I will start improvising using the existing lore and possible monster groups I had created.

So the problem here is this is just a normal game. So what makes it a Sandbox?

They can decide to talk to the goblin king, infiltrate and try to avoid a fight, go in spells blazing. They could get there and decide to set up an ambush or any other of other activities. Admittedly I don't do "dungeons" per se, if they are going to the ruins of Kassth it's because there's some threat or mystery and I'll have the place populated. How the group interacts with that population is up to them. What won't happen is a series of planned encounters that must be accomplished in order for them to succeed.

Again, this is a normal game. What makes it a Sandbox?

As others have stated, I don't understand the hostility to the concept of a sandbox. I see a clear difference from what I do and linear campaigns. I don't plan encounters or results of encounters, I plan locales and inhabitants. I have no long term plots even if the NPCs and groups have long term plans of their own, how the players interact with those plans is completely up to the players. What the players do is up to them every step of the way.

And yet again this is a normal game.


There are only two points:

1.The hate for anything pre made by the DM as many players hate the power the DM has to create the gameworld

2.The players desire to "do nearly anything" with no limits, and for sure no limits made up by the DM-player

So the DM makes a setting, then steps back and lets the players choose anything they want to do....and everyone class this "a sandbox game"......I guess for the couple minutes the players choose.

So if a DM makes a location "the cabin of the retired ranger Roz". And this is the important point: does the DM make up any details or does the DM leave the details mostly blank?

See, if the DM writes down....say 12 paragraphs about Roz, this limits what the players can have their characters do. If paragraph 10 says "Roz is retired and won't join with the characters to help them", there are a huge number of players that hate that. They don't want the DM making such things in the game.

The players want the freedom of an Improv game to "do nearly anything", so they want the cabin of Roz to be 'blank' so they can add to the fiction and do whatever they want without the DM saying "no, it is written".

 

[Bedrockgames]

So the problem here is this is just a normal game. So what makes it a Sandbox?

Again, this is a normal game. What makes it a Sandbox?

And yet again this is a normal game.


There are only two points:

1.The hate for anything pre made by the DM as many players hate the power the DM has to create the gameworld

2.The players desire to "do nearly anything" with no limits, and for sure no limits made up by the DM-player

So the DM makes a setting, then steps back and lets the players choose anything they want to do....and everyone class this "a sandbox game"......I guess for the couple minutes the players choose.

So if a DM makes a location "the cabin of the retired ranger Roz". And this is the important point: does the DM make up any details or does the DM leave the details mostly blank?

See, if the DM writes down....say 12 paragraphs about Roz, this limits what the players can have their characters do. If paragraph 10 says "Roz is retired and won't join with the characters to help them", there are a huge number of players that hate that. They don't want the DM making such things in the game.

The players want the freedom of an Improv game to "do nearly anything", so they want the cabin of Roz to be 'blank' so they can add to the fiction and do whatever they want without the DM saying "no, it is written".

What is your definition of sandbox, because your posts don't seem to be operating from any standard definition of sandbox I have encountered

 

[AlViking]

So the problem here is this is just a normal game. So what makes it a Sandbox?

Again, this is a normal game. What makes it a Sandbox?

And yet again this is a normal game.


There are only two points:

1.The hate for anything pre made by the DM as many players hate the power the DM has to create the gameworld

If that is an issue it's an issue with the player, not the system. Also something I've never encountered. Someone has to define the gameworld and I don't think a collaborative approach makes much of a difference.

2.The players desire to "do nearly anything" with no limits, and for sure no limits made up by the DM-player

You can't do "nearly anything" in any structured game. There will always be limiting factors. Heck, I can't do "nearly anything" in real life but I don't think my life is linear.

So the DM makes a setting, then steps back and lets the players choose anything they want to do....and everyone class this "a sandbox game"......I guess for the couple minutes the players choose.

What the characters do can and frequently does change the entire direction of a campaign to something I had not anticipated.

So if a DM makes a location "the cabin of the retired ranger Roz". And this is the important point: does the DM make up any details or does the DM leave the details mostly blank?

See, if the DM writes down....say 12 paragraphs about Roz, this limits what the players can have their characters do. If paragraph 10 says "Roz is retired and won't join with the characters to help them", there are a huge number of players that hate that. They don't want the DM making such things in the game.

The players want the freedom of an Improv game to "do nearly anything", so they want the cabin of Roz to be 'blank' so they can add to the fiction and do whatever they want without the DM saying "no, it is written".

Roz would have motivation and personality but I don't predetermine whether or not he will help them. It may be highly unlikely based on his motivations but I will never say never. On a side note I don't think I've ever had 12 paragraphs about an NPC. It could come close if it included a lot of history of interactions with the characters.

The only way anything would change is if the players have influence over the world outside of what the characters say and do.

 

[zakael19]

We’re in “No True Sandbox” territory here.

 

[Reynard]

The players want the freedom of an Improv game to "do nearly anything", so they want the cabin of Roz to be 'blank' so they can add to the fiction and do whatever they want without the DM saying "no, it is written".

once again: this isn't the definition of a sandbox. It is the definition of cooperative storytelling. Which is fine, but it is a different thing.

You keep asserting this thing as if it were true, and everyone else is lost in the woods not understanding it. The thing is: you are using the wrong definition. You are arguing something that isn't true.

Anyway, I'm certainly not going to be able to convince you otherwise. You do you.