Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snoweel" data-source="post: 5044091" data-attributes="member: 4453">No.I'm arguing that if there are no dragons in a sandbox setting and you want the DM to include some then you should be able to talk to him out of character.It is if you've looked everywhere for dragons and not found any.Spare me your stupid, one-dimensional strawman examples.If you'd been paying attention, earlier in the thread I said:Rendering your simplistic example just another dishonest attempt to muddy the waters and make this all about lack of PC proactivity, when clearly the setting is just as likely to be the problem.We agree!I never said it was.Disavow yourself of the idea that I (or anyone else) has a problem with sandbox play.Unless 'sandbox play' negates the possibility of collaborative input into world-building (like if the players just find the setting itself boring).And, one hopes, a sandbox that may be made right for everybody.I would hope you're aware that you're stating the obvious, as well as further confusing the issue by essentially claiming that 'sandbox' = any-campaign-that-doesn't-suck.The purpose of this thread is to define 'sandbox', which you'll see if you look at the thread title. The reason this issue of collaborative world-building has come up is because we want to know if it invalidates an otherwise sandbox campaign as being a 'sandbox'.No, I would figuratively be that guy. Only I'm not.You, however, are literally the guy joining the growing number of posters making clumsy and ill-fitting analogies in an attempt to misrepresent any position you disagree with, while trying to look clever.Correct me if I'm wrong.</blockquote>

Verification