Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="lamia" data-source="post: 5405040" data-attributes="member: 93118">I'm not entirely sure what provoked that attack, perhaps I am not wording things well.All I was saying was that it has been an interesting thread to read, because the only exposure I had to the play style was apparently a poor example.I have played in several campaigns over the last fifteen years, but this was the only one that was introduced to me as a &quot;sandbox&quot;. I tried to enjoy it, and waited for it to get going. But after 5 sessions of nothing but fighting for no particular reason, I decided that it wasn't for me. As previously stated, I have enjoyed reading the thread to see the different takes on what exactly it is. The extreme that I was presented with where the world does nothing and the NPCs are all nameless and faceless with no motivation was obviously a bad example. Just as many people who have had a particularly railroady campaign have had their experience colored.I think in-between is perfectly fine. The game I run has plot bits and NPCs with motivations and plans. I don't have a story planned out to every last detail, but I do give the PCs something to interact with and learn about. What they choose to do with that is their business. I had to improv last weeks adventure in it's entirety because the group decided to get off the ship they were on and go riding hippocampi into some weird rocky area they spotted from the deck. I never tell them no.But I still plan, and I really don't think that is a bad thing.I'm sorry if you perceived my being insulting in my post somewhere, but that is not what was intended.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="lamia, post: 5405040, member: 93118"] I'm not entirely sure what provoked that attack, perhaps I am not wording things well. All I was saying was that it has been an interesting thread to read, because the only exposure I had to the play style was apparently a poor example. I have played in several campaigns over the last fifteen years, but this was the only one that was introduced to me as a "sandbox". I tried to enjoy it, and waited for it to get going. But after 5 sessions of nothing but fighting for no particular reason, I decided that it wasn't for me. As previously stated, I have enjoyed reading the thread to see the different takes on what exactly it is. The extreme that I was presented with where the world does nothing and the NPCs are all nameless and faceless with no motivation was obviously a bad example. Just as many people who have had a particularly railroady campaign have had their experience colored. I think in-between is perfectly fine. The game I run has plot bits and NPCs with motivations and plans. I don't have a story planned out to every last detail, but I do give the PCs something to interact with and learn about. What they choose to do with that is their business. I had to improv last weeks adventure in it's entirety because the group decided to get off the ship they were on and go riding hippocampi into some weird rocky area they spotted from the deck. I never tell them no. But I still plan, and I really don't think that is a bad thing. I'm sorry if you perceived my being insulting in my post somewhere, but that is not what was intended. [/QUOTE]

Verification