Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beginning of the End" data-source="post: 5131047" data-attributes="member: 55271">Could you give some examples of that? You seem to be replying to a bunch of people who aren't posting in this thread.The difference is qualitative, not quantitative. (The characteristic of "sandbox" is also not limited to a single decision point, but let's set that aside for a moment.)For example, the PCs are at the crossroads. Somebody says, by way of example, "In a sandbox, they can choose to go north, east, south, or west. It's up to them."And you say, "But in my campaign I give them the choice to go north, east, south, or west. I'm almost religious about making sure my players have enough information to have several meaningful choices with regards to direction in which the campaign can go."Which is great. But that was only an example. In a true sandbox the players could also say "we'll just wait here at the crossroads" or "I'll fly into the sky" or "I'll hop over to the Ethereal Plane" or "let's dig straight down and see what happens" or "I'm going to build a new road going southeast" or "screw this, I'm teleporting back to town". Or anything, really.In your game, OTOH, that's the point where you say, "I brought a north-south-east-west game to the table tonight. Are you going to engage it, or insist on doing your own thing to the detriment of the session and the group overall?"Meanwhile, over in the sandbox, the PCs have settled down to a life of banditry preying on the merchant caravans passing through the crossroads.And that, right there, is why you're not playing in a sandbox. You believe that the theme/structure/direction of the campaign flows from the GM. In a sandbox campaign, OTOH, the theme/structure/direction of the campaign flows from the players.It's the difference between saying:(1) "I bought several lego sets: You can build a space station or a pirate ship or a skyscraper. If you want to build something else, I'll go out and buy you a different lego set with instructions for building something else."(2) "Here's a bucket of legos. Build whatever you want."Yes, it's true. In both cases we're talking about legos. But you're missing the forest for the trees.This is incorrect. A sandbox campaign does not have a structure supplied solely by the GM. But the GM is not the only one sitting at the table.I think it only requires players who aren't spoiled 5 year olds. Do you really have this much trouble finding people who aren't completely unfamiliar with the concept of "cooperation"?I find it more puzzling that you find yourself baffled by the utility of the West Marches format in such a case: It's specifically designed to allow people to easily sign on to the stuff they're interested in while skipping the sessions they're not interested in. If your players really aren't capable of finding any sort of common ground, the West Marches would be the perfect solution for your problem. A linear campaign that tries to force a common ground down their throats, OTOH, doesn't sound like a viable solution at all.I love that you claim I put words in your mouth and then went on to repeat exactly the same thing a second time.... unless it's the GM choosing it?It's specifically this belief that players are little children who need to be led around by the nose is one that I don't understand at all. I wouldn't want to play with people like that.As a GM I have no ego at all. I don't presuppose that my choices are superior to the choices of my players (particularly when it comes time to answer the question, "What would my players find fun?"). Your mileage apparently varies.</blockquote>

Verification