D&D General Sandbox Campaigns should have a Default Action.

[GMforPowergamers]

Every sandbox and group is a bit different.

right and I honestly think shareing how we each woukd handle it would give a lot more examples for people to pull from... that is why I am asking.

A sandbox does have a conversational element that is important for figuring out where things might go. But if I have 5 players, and I am not trying to provide a plot, I simply ask them what do they do? Now there ought to be things in the setting, conflicts, NPCs acting on their goals, threats of various kinds, legends, rumors, etc. But ultimately it often boils down to the players responding by saying something like "well are there any X in town?".

that is great... my qusten is what you do when they don't ask that.

If there are they might say "Great I am going to go there and ask about doing Y". As a GM running a sandbox I do try to keep things alive. Sometimes there will be proactive elements that intersect with them, sometimes there will be things rolled on tables, but the players should be free to totally ignore those things if they want, or interact with them in very unexpected ways if they want (for instance a bully rolls into town with his minions and starts taking over casinos: maybe instead of trying to stop him, the players ask to join his organization. In a sandbox you never really know and you are expected to go more with the flow when players reject things, when they initiate things, when they put things together in the setting in ways you didn't expect.

that sounds like my idea of a sandbox

 

[Bedrockgames]

see there we go... that is not any sandbox but something that you agreed would be 0 DM plot, and even then I don't get it.. like would a PC say "My character heard about orcs amassing in the woods" and then you make up an orc encounter?

What he is describing sounds very much like a sandbox to me. Sandboxes all have a strange relationship with plot. I think most the GM definitely will have active elements in play (things going on the players could get wrapped up in). But these are usually more situations, than structured adventures, and 'plot' is a word many sandbox GMs are a bit allergic to (I think with valid reason, because they are trying to genuinely give the players the ability to explore how they want to). But that is why terms like living world get used.

My view is there are different styles of sandbox and every one handles the question of plot differently. I tend to throw in dramatic elements from time to time in mine. But I also make that clear to the party. But the drama is usually character driven drama (i.e. I am not thinking in terms of big cinematic beats, rather I am thinking in terms of drama stemming from NPC and PC motivations, interactions, etc).

In a sandbox I think you do have to be careful with things like NPCs approaching the players with quest goals. Stuff like this can happen, but it really needs to be organic. For example if the players go to a sect leader for some other reason (say they are seeking access to a mine he controls or need some artifact or manual in his possession) and you know the guy is dealing with a conflict with a sect in the next town over, it would be totally reasonable for him to ask for their help in contending with the sect in exchange for giving them what they want.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm not sure what you mean... if my necromancer comes in and kills and animates the orcs that is a living world (one he wants to make undead)
if another adventuring group beats the orcs tthat too is a living world

A living world is one where actions have consequences and ignoring a threat is an action. Where threats persist even if the PCs don't get involved. I am advised this is a key component in a sandbox.

maybe maybe not... I mean I can pick what ones have dire consequences and what ones get handled off page/off screen by others.
the cultist summon a demon and kill some people you didn't even know there names... the warband was stopped by the guards but now the two or three towns around the capital have 1/10 the guards... the young dragon didn't get the maiden or maybe he did...

So hypothetically, if I'm a player and these three plot hooks are dangled, I can safely ignore the ones that I don't like/aren't interested in with the knowledge some other force is going to handle them? That's mighty convenient! That might even answer the "where's Eliminster during all of this?" Question: he's handling the plot hooks we chose to ignore!

they don't have to but they can... every one of those can be a foot note or a major turning point... just read the room when making choice (and nobody is perfect at reading the room)

Again, that sounds pretty good. If I don't want to fight demons or dragons, I can just focus on fighting the orc hordes and nothing bad will happen to my home or family. I will continue to perdue only the hooks I believe I am able to triumph over and ignore the ones I think will be deadly. All GP spends the same, whether it comes from an orc's hand or a dragon's hoard.

Evil is ALWAYS afoot in my games (sometimes but rarely the PCs are that evil) but not every evil has to be a major thing... some can be, and when done my way I try to make sure they one the PCs choose to care about is that one that MUST be stopped... no matter the cost

Oh, I didn't EVEN get into high level, world shaking events. This isn't even the "save the world" stuff. I just wonder what happens when they don't bother to stop the evil plots of various monsters and groups. Sounds like things are pretty much under control though, so no big deal...

 

[Reynard]

see there we go... that is not any sandbox but something that you agreed would be 0 DM plot, and even then I don't get it.. like would a PC say "My character heard about orcs amassing in the woods" and then you make up an orc encounter?

YES! Exactly.

I would tell kari that she has heard of the wizard that made kurt... infact she trained under someone who trained under him... he had many dark scary stories of the man. One included a weird test in a cave full of necrotic energy,
I would tell Ken of a battle he fought in the war near old ruins
I would tell me about goblins thhat have hit the farms in this area
I would tell Kurt about a mystic convergence he knows about,, but it is in the underdark and hard to get to.
I would tell matt 'daddy wants you to grow up and do something with your life...' with daddy then being up to him if he thinks his father by birth or the patron of his hexblade powers...

Emphasis mine.

That's the part I am saying is unnecessary and can be done without, if that is the way you want to play. Again I reiterate: I am not and have not said that is the only way to play a sandbox game, just that it is a viable way to play and that sanboxes DO NOT REQUIRE the GM to populate them first.

 

[Bedrockgames]

that is great... my qusten is what you do when they don't ask that.

That is why I said every group is different. In most cases I find they do ask. If you do end up with a group that doesn't have the confidence to ask, or is unsure of what questions to ask, it is fair to explain that process to them, and if they still have trouble, point out the various things that you know do exist in the town and tell them they are free to explore any aspect of that in any way they want. If they truly need an adventure and adventure hook, then no problem giving them something (usually once a sandbox gets going it takes a life on of its own so I don't think there is anything wrong with jumpstarting it like that: and sometimes you have players who just like concrete adventures, but they want some elements of sandbox)

I think the most challenging situation is actually when you have a group of players who want different things or approach things in very different ways. It is easy to solve a problem that everyone at the table has because it is quite clear what needs to be fixed in that moment. But when you have two players engaging the sandbox in the above described way (Are there any X? I go to X and see if we can Y), and two who are more lost and obviously looking like they are itching to break down some dungeon doors, that is a more complicated problem. I've actually solved that when it has happened by splitting the party: give the players who need an adventure a side quest (and again ideally you are doing so as organically as possible so the details will depend very much on what is happening in the sandbox), but allow the other two players to continue to explore. Provided you connect the side quest to whatever goals the other two players have set for themselves, it is actually quite seemless. But again here you are throwing a bandaid on a sandbox because you have players who aren't really as interested in being in a sandbox as you thought (you are going to have a problem whether you have players not engaging a sandbox, a mystery, a dungeon crawl, or whatever, that is just a mismatch of expectations).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

What he is describing sounds very much like a sandbox to me. Sandboxes all have a strange relationship with plot. I think most the GM definitely will have active elements in play (things going on the players could get wrapped up in).

but not just here but in other thread I get really weird reactions to 'thing happen in the world and the PCs may or may not care' type things... from being told that isn't a sandbox to being told I run railroads.

But these are usually more situations, than structured adventures, and 'plot' is a word many sandbox GMs are a bit allergic to (I think with valid reason, because they are trying to genuinely give the players the ability to explore how they want to). But that is why terms like living world get used.

in my case I don't mind the word I just think it means diffrent things in rail road and sandbox (and I don't even think 1 way is wrong)

My view is there are different styles of sandbox and every one handles the question of plot differently.

yes and I would LOVE if we didn't accuse each other of not being 'real' sandboxes when we do things a bit diff...

In a sandbox I think you do have to be careful with things like NPCs approaching the players with quest goals. Stuff like this can happen, but it really needs to be organic. For example if the players go to a sect leader for some other reason (say they are seeking access to a mine he controls or need some artifact or manual in his possession) and you know the guy is dealing with a conflict with a sect in the next town over, it would be totally reasonable for him to ask for their help in contending with the sect in exchange for giving them what they want.

now this one I will slightly disagree with... any friend, allied NPC that knows them approaching asking for help doesn't seem outside the bounds... but it is a moderation thing I would not think it much of a sandbox if that was every plot hook was that way (not that there is a problem with that kind of world i am just not sure I would call it sandbox)

 

[Blue]

IME most sandbox campaigns fail because of the players. It's a player driven style, and most players prefer to react, rather than act.

I find that players who primarily play traditional prep games have been trained to be reactive. The strong, sometimes inviolate, feeling is that the DM will put the adventure in front of them, and they need to accept it. It's not a preference to react, it's what they have to do to catch the hook of the adventure, so that's their default mode of play.

But there are RPGs with a lot more player direction. For example Apocalypse World has Fronts - things that are going to get worse unless the characters deal with them. And the players are quite adept at either picking a front or working towards another goal in a proactive manner. A large part of it is different expectations, and reinforcement that you pick what you do.

Just telling players primarily familiar with D&D and similar games that it's a sandbox still leaves them having to overcome their training inclinations and their assumptions about what they should be doing. And still may hit into other assumptions - I did that to a set of smart veteran D&D players having told them in session 0 that they would be setting direction and the world was non-level-specific. Half couldn't make up their mind, only one suggested anything outside the presented, which was research into a few of the presented, and the paladin eventually convinced the party to go for the one that was the biggest threat to order - but with the assumption that the world was level specific and it was the DM's job to make sure that whatever challenge they went after would be fun, even though session 0 established that it was not level specific and there would be threats to big to handle via combat.

 

[Bedrockgames]

but not just here but in other thread I get really weird reactions to 'thing happen in the world and the PCs may or may not care' type things... from being told that isn't a sandbox to being told I run railroads.

Definitely don't let people on the internet stop you from playing how you want. I think trying to appease someone who isn't even at your table is pointless. I've been in a lot of these discussions and I think you will just find people come in with very hard definitions of their own and it can be frustrating when you view things as more open and get backlash

in my case I don't mind the word I just think it means diffrent things in rail road and sandbox (and I don't even think 1 way is wrong)

I have to admit to some allergy to it, but that is only because I got into sandbox as a way of avoiding railroaded plots. So I tend to use language like 'situation' or 'scenario' or 'events'. But I get that plot has a pretty casual meaning and I don't think there is any reason to jump on someone for saying they have a plot in a sandbox

yes and I would LOVE if we didn't accuse each other of not being 'real' sandboxes when we do things a bit diff...

Here I will agree, some of the worst advocates for sandbox play are sandbox fans (which I think is common in a lot of niche fandoms). The effect can be to make sandboxes overly intimidating to new players, or to get preoccupied with a sense of purity about them. I think it is important to have a common understanding of what the base term means, but we can surely qualify that and expect some people will use sandboxes differently.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

A living world is one where actions have consequences and ignoring a threat is an action. Where threats persist even if the PCs don't get involved. I am advised this is a key component in a sandbox.

yes and no.... there should always be change I would say but not all change is a bad consequence... the necromancer killing and animating the orcs DID escalate the threat (so my level 4 adventure you ignore is now a level 7 adventure you may or may not take) but no I am not going to kill the PC members family cause they ignored orcs... I spent YEARS convincing players that it is okay to have friends and family and things you care about and I wont just take them away. Last thing I want is "ooppes you picked the wrong threat so uncle Jessy is dead" unless I very well forecast teh danger uncle Jessy is in (take that as dukes of hazard or full house...either way)

So hypothetically, if I'm a player and these three plot hooks are dangled, I can safely ignore the ones that I don't like/aren't interested in with the knowledge some other force is going to handle them?

to a point yes... my living worlds will of course SOMETIMES have something really bad happen but in general like I said I read the room. IF you reserched the cult and put effort in but went after the orcs first, I would escalate the cult so when you got back things got worse... but in general if you just ignore it I will spend LESS time on thhat plot.;

That's mighty convenient! That might even answer the "where's Eliminster during all of this?" Question: he's handling the plot hooks we chose to ignore!

oh gosd this is why I hate running superhero games in the comic worlds, and I hate the FR more... 'let the justice league midnight handle it' is my go to phrase for why the realms is not my idea of a well thought out world. (I am a FR hater fyi)

but also yes... sometimes a bigger fish (good or bad) may handle something... now that bigger fish is in play do you make friends or enemies or do you ignore them too?

Again, that sounds pretty good.

thank you it is an evolving concept of how I run and has been for 15ish years

If I don't want to fight demons or dragons, I can just focus on fighting the orc hordes and nothing bad will happen to my home or family.

with the caveat that things will evolve around that choice... but yeah I will spell out "Mama is in danger if something isn't done" but moveing moma to three towns over is as good as stopping the dragon from destroying were she lives... (I mean not really that is super evil but hey you saved your famility right?)

I will continue to perdue only the hooks I believe I am able to triumph over and ignore the ones I think will be deadly. All GP spends the same, whether it comes from an orc's hand or a dragon's hoard.

yeah, I have had players take the water route 'path of least resistance' However the orcs might have hundreds of gold and 1 or 2 minor items... the dragon and the drow working with her may have thousands of gold and 4-5 magic items 1 that is rare and powerful...

but if treasure is your goal D*D makes that easy anyway.

also xp (not to put too much a game spin on it) but hunting orcs is only xp worthy for so long as you level you are going to want bigger xp pay out to level quicker too.

Oh, I didn't EVEN get into high level, world shaking events.

by world I meant YOU the PCs world not the planet sorry... killing your family and burning the home you grew up in is pretty world shakiing to that person.

This isn't even the "save the world" stuff.

if the worlds in danger of really being destroyed there isn;'t much I can do to pull that punch, and I don't often have super high level NPC allies... but yeah, El-muchkin might just save toril.

I just wonder what happens when they don't bother to stop the evil plots of various monsters and groups. Sounds like things are pretty much under control though, so no big deal...

again it depends. diffrent situations are diffrent... in above examples I have towns loseing 90% of there guard/reserves... so now theives run amock there, or the next threat is worse cause no one can fight it, or the PCs take up being a protection wracket... or (and this one is a real example) the PCs take all teh items they can't use, find people train them to use them then send another group out to handle things...

 

[Bedrockgames]

Guys, this is a great topic but I think if it is going to be back and forth insults between posters it isn't going to get anywhere