What makes a Sandbox?

[howandwhy99]

To play a bit of devil's advocate: What if only some of the players are part of drawing up any given part of the maze? Can it still be a sandbox?

For a real world example: Unless I'm mistaken, Rob Kuntz continued to play in Gygax's Greyhawk campaign even after he became a co-DM and began developing his own portions of the campaign. I'd argue there's nothing in that arrangement that would be inimical to the sandbox.

IMO, a DM cannot play a PC. It's like trying to answer a riddle you told yourself (something I've been told is at the heart of storygaming). Maybe a better example is trying to play Mastermind(TM) against oneself. If you set the colored pegs up behind the screen, how can you also play that game?

I don't know how Gary did it and I'm not looking to emulate his game, but IIRC Rob played in the parts and dungeon levels of Greyhawk he did not have a hand in making. And vice versa for Gary in El Raja Key.

 

[Umbran]

Hm, the quality of discussion on this thread seems to have improved greatly recently, for some reason...

Who led you to think that taking potshots at folks who cannot defend themselves is okay? Because it sure wasn't any of the moderating staff.

After we eject people from a thread, we expect those who remain to comport themselves in a mature and polite manner. This was neither.

Step up your game, folks, or don't point fingers at others.

 

[Witty Comeback]

Here's a related question: some people seem to think that running a sandbox means knowing what is going on with every part of the created world, even if the PCs haven't seen it yet.

Is this a necessary part of that game style? Discuss.

 

[howandwhy99]

Here's a related question: some people seem to think that running a sandbox means knowing what is going on with every part of the created world, even if the PCs haven't seen it yet.

Is this a necessary part of that game style? Discuss.

No. Sandbox is whatever people want to do to keep other players in a player-driven world, totally improvised or not. I've only been stating how I run my own game, but it is by no means the only way to do things.

 

[The Shaman]

My list so far:
- The primary meta-game goal is discovery/exploration, which subordinates the meta-game goals of plot and cohesion
- The game is high on GM control of background, but low on GM control of events. In terms of trajectories, they remain constant until affected by the PCs, and the secondary effects of the PCs' actions.
- The environment is rich in things to do, rather than one thing being obviously more interesting than other choices.
- Encounters and events are emergent rather than programmatic.
- When the players affect the environment, the GM presents logical consequences from a realistical standpoint, rather than a poetic viewpoint.

Encounters (challenges, threats, whathaveyou) do not scale with the relative power-level of the adventurers.

A goblin remains a goblin whether the adventurers encounter it at first level or at tenth.

 

[Krensky]

Encounters (challenges, threats, whathaveyou) do not scale with the relative power-level of the adventurers.

A goblin remains a goblin whether the adventurers encounter it at first level or at tenth.

Which ignores systems where things don't work like that.

 

[pawsplay]

Encounters (challenges, threats, whathaveyou) do not scale with the relative power-level of the adventurers.

A goblin remains a goblin whether the adventurers encounter it at first level or at tenth.

I already excluded that criterion. It leads to self-contradiction. I've given examples very early in the thread which describes situations where this is impossible, or where it becomes impossible to say whether an encounter changes because of metagame goals or because of ingame events.

 

[S'mon]

I already excluded that criterion. It leads to self-contradiction. I've given examples very early in the thread which describes situations where this is impossible, or where it becomes impossible to say whether an encounter changes because of metagame goals or because of ingame events.

Yeah, something like Oblivion: The Elder scrolls still looks like a sandbox to me even though the threats scale perfectly to PC level. In fact scaling threats make running a sand box much easier. I guess personally I'm about 95% static to 5% scaled, but I'm not above playing my 1 hit dice orcs a lot meaner vs 20th level PCs than against 1st!

 

[The Shaman]

Which ignores systems where things don't work like that.

Where characters don't have differences in ability? Could you give me an example of such a system?

 

[The Shaman]

I already excluded that criterion.

Yes, and I disagreed with you then, too.