D&D 4E Sandbox game: should I 4e?

[Aezoc]

From everything I've seen of 4e so far, I'm excited because it does seem much better suited to sandbox gaming than 3e was. The biggest difference in my mind is that 3e tried to use a unified ruleset for PCs and NPCs, and 4e doesn't try.

Oftentimes in sandbox-style games, I had to do a lot of DM improv because the players opted to go somewhere or do something I didn't have fully fleshed out. In 3e, this meant a lot of times I wound up with "invalid" NPC stat blocks that didn't conform to the RAW. Most of the time this wasn't a problem (how often do you care what a gnoll's bluff modifier is, anyways?). But occasionally players were able to reverse engineer/metagame information about NPCs and realized that things didn't add up. Some players may not care, but I have had some that didn't like that, for various reasons. So for me, the fact that 4e dispenses with all that and just uses separate rules for monsters and NPCs feels very empowering, because I can make stats up on the fly without being concerned about "doing it wrong."

 

[keterys]

That is flat out wrong.

Given I was trying to make a mirror statement to your own, I'm glad you noticed. Of course, there is a huge kernel of truth in what I said. I'd actually say that if I'd chosen not to mirror your own statement and had coached the wording in a slightly different way that it would be quite true.

In my experience, 3e often contains slow combats of niggling details and statistics that are boring from a tactical perspective, swung by who is most prepared at removing possibilities or landing denial attacks (save or suck, immunity to foo, dispels and disjoins, etc). Example: The exciting spectre filled dungeon we once did with death ward on. Yawn.

In my experience, 3e has a narrow window where things are safe so sandbox would be horrible for it. You decide to go there? Random encounter kills you / Open the door and first encounter kills you / Save or die to the trap kills you, etc. Example: 2nd level and you wander into the 6th level area? Bad bad call. 6th and the 10th? Oooh, yuck. Very narrow band. Heck, even _1 level_ off and a Hezrou can TPK easily.

3e is also a lot more difficult to build characters and monsters for, as a DM, so it's more work to even attempt sandbox style. (No example needed)

3e's out of combat is so mechanically over the top that it often makes settings and situations look ridiculous at face value, and makes people focus on the math and game elements rather than the actual story. This makes for illogical situations. Examples: 'How is that even burning, wood has 5 hardness and takes half damage from fire' 'They're going to lay siege? But the defenders have infinite food, and one karma bead aided forbiddance spell means they can never approach pretty much' 'Why is this kingdom still standing - scry and die, or even just a flying sniper should have killed this kid by now' Etc.

Of course not all 3e games are like that and you can have good 3e games - though personally I choose to avoid the system once my current campaign ends - but your blindered 4e comments are absurd and that's what I was trying to prove. I'm glad you agree.

 

[Derren]

When you have a DM who can't run monsters effectively/interestingly and even divides areas according to levels like in a PC game its no wonder that you get the impressions that the 3E rules are bad. I suggest you play a bit under DMs who can think out of the box and take the abilities the PCs have into account.

 

[keterys]

So... you're saying the problem with 3e is that it's bad unless you have an excellent DM?

And doesn't work well with published worlds and modules, requiring that the DM custom make anything?

Man, you're sounding like more and more of a 3e hater as we go

 

[Jack99]

When you have a DM who can't run monsters effectively/interestingly and even divides areas according to levels like in a PC game its no wonder that you get the impressions that the 3E rules are bad. I suggest you play a bit under DMs who can think out of the box and take the abilities the PCs have into account.

I don't think you understand what a good DM is.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'm going to start up a sandbox game, modeled very closely on the West Marches game at Ars Ludi. It's nothing terribly pressing--I could start now as an alternate to our regular 3.5e game or I could start in a couple of months when the guy DMing the regular game is finished.

This would be the deciding factor, if you want my advice. If you are starting the game right now, definitely go with 3.5E. If you aren't starting for a couple of months, wait until the 4E game is released and go with that.

 

[Aezoc]

When you have a DM who can't run monsters effectively/interestingly and even divides areas according to levels like in a PC game its no wonder that you get the impressions that the 3E rules are bad. I suggest you play a bit under DMs who can think out of the box and take the abilities the PCs have into account.

So, uh... if the DM adjusts the world around the PCs' abilities, isn't that kind of... not a sandbox game at all? Which was, y'know, the topic of the thread?

Sandbox gaming may not appeal to everyone, but one of the defining characteristics IMO is that there's a world out there that the PCs can explore any way they want to. If the Mountains of Certain Demise are going to contain an orc fortress if explored at level 1 and a dragon at level 20, then I don't think we're talking about a sandbox game any more. So a suggestion to just not play in a sandbox in a thread devoted to that is a little unhelpful.

 

[Derren]

So, uh... if the DM adjusts the world around the PCs' abilities, isn't that kind of... not a sandbox game at all? Which was, y'know, the topic of the thread?

When a DM builds a world where the inhabitants know that spells like Death Ward, teleport and all the other problem spells exists and act accordingly and where enemies adapt their tactics according to the buffs the party has the game doesn't stop being a sandbox game.

Sandbox gaming may not appeal to everyone, but one of the defining characteristics IMO is that there's a world out there that the PCs can explore any way they want to. If the Mountains of Certain Demise are going to contain an orc fortress if explored at level 1 and a dragon at level 20, then I don't think we're talking about a sandbox game any more. So a suggestion to just not play in a sandbox in a thread devoted to that is a little unhelpful.

I never said that this should happen. Its keterys who wants areas based on certain levels.
And here is 3Es strength because unlike in 4E each monster has defined out of combat abilities and it is relatively easy to patch together a swath of land and fill it with creatures which interact with each other. You can also react to unexpected actions from the PCs rather easily as all creatures have a full writeup and out of combat abilities. You just have to look at the stats and decide what the creatures would do in the situation.
All this is lacking in 4E which means the DM has to invent the stuff by himself and has to keep track of it which means more work to create something to explore for the PCs and its harder for him to react to PCs using out of the box thinking without railroading.

 

[D'karr]

All this is lacking in 4E

Prove it.

to create something to explore for the PCs and its harder for him to react to PCs using out of the box thinking without railroading.

You have totally missed the point of what a sandbox game is.

 

[ShockMeSane]

It's obvious Derren has no intention of playing 4th Edition, and that's fine. I am a bit curious as to why he posts 200 times a day on the 4th edition forums when the books are at the printers and it's obvious that the boat has sailed, but I digress.

I'm not completely sold on every feature (or lack thereof) in 4th, but I am cautiously optimistic. From what we've had previewed I certainly believe that a sandbox game could be considerably easier to design from a DM PoV, simply because balanced encounters are far easier to design on the fly than they were in 3.x. Also, sandbox in 3.x has the notorious 1st round kills when a party is not perfectly prepared at all times. Sometimes these can be fun, but too many nights of trying to get a party member ressurected isn't fun for anyone, and without fudging the rolls as a DM this is extremely difficult to avoid in sandbox 3.x.

In any case, it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.