Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zarionofarabel" data-source="post: 9732879" data-attributes="member: 7026405">Yes! Yes I would! I would also champion players trying to take the biggest duce they possibly could! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="😁" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f601.png" title="Beaming face with smiling eyes    :grin:" data-shortname=":grin:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />I often see the argument that "sandbox" games are meandering chaotic random messes that are ultimately meaningless. Yet I myself have neither ran nor participated in a so called "sandbox" game that was any of those things. I have however participated in a few "railroad" games where as soon as the players tried to do things the GM hadn't prepared for, the game either shut down completely or the GM had a really tough time improvising things to continue and it often turned in to a meandering chaotic mess. I don't think either playstyle is better or worse, and I admit that having the GM be the primary narrative driver and plot creator seems to be far more common than the onus for those things be in the hands of the players. I guess I'm just a lazy GM and I'm bad at figuring out what kind of storyline the players will be keen on experiencing, so I leave it up to the players to point me in the right direction. I also don't prepare plotlines, scenes, or encounters, preferring to improvise those things in real time at the table. I do engage in world building (or use published settings) but I do think that "adventure prep" and "world building" are two distinct things.Of course, I think I'm also weird in that I love it when the players take a big duce in my litterbox and I have to scramble to deal with the consequences. Having to deal with crazy players doing crazy things is half the fun! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🙃" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f643.png" title="Upside-down face    :upside_down:" data-shortname=":upside_down:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />That I can definitely agree with. I find it very confusing that many people seem to consider the GM doing anything with the narrative as somehow removing player agency. If the GM can't manipulate the narrative in any way without it being seen as them impeding on the players agency, how would the GM continue to have any role in the game? I think at this point the definitions of "sandbox" and "railroad" playstyles has been stretched to the point where they have become absurd to the point of being effectively meaningless. Long live the "sandroad" and "railbox" playstyles! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🥰" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f970.png" title="Smiling face with hearts    :smiling_face_with_3_hearts:" data-shortname=":smiling_face_with_3_hearts:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />Well, you know what they say about opinions...mine included! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="😋" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60b.png" title="Face savoring food    :yum:" data-shortname=":yum:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>

Verification