Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5014449" data-attributes="member: 18280">You know from our previous discussion that I don't believe in the dichotomy that this suggests.&nbsp; I would argue that a sandbox can have any number of ongoing plots, and that it is how those plots are implemented, rather than their existence, which determines whether or not the game is a sandbox.See, thisPlots can be explored, just like maps. A GM worth his salt doesn't force players through a set of preconceived scenes with preconceived outcomes any more than he designs a dungeon that's just a straight line of rooms.

In fact, the plot-oriented GM probably has more leeway than a GM running the classic dungeon; the players aren't constrained by walls and can run off in unexpected directions. As I've said many times before, the good GM doesn't just allow this, he welcomes it. Keeps the game interesting. He can always go back to his notes between sessions and see how the new direction impacts things and what changes, if any, he needs to make to keep on course down the outline.sounds sandbox-y to me, so long as the PCs have the opportunity of exploring whatever plots they want, so long as whatever plots they choose to ignore continue to impact the setting, and so long as they are free to devise plots of their own.I agree that the more the players are allowed to choose what to do, the less the GM can constrain their actions to a narrow path (and, therefore, the less the GM can structure that path).&nbsp; This doesn't mean that there is anything that could not happen in a sandbox game, with the sole exception of a railroad.&nbsp; The only way to use the &quot;full suite of story structure tools to their fullest&quot; is to eliminate player agency altogether and write a story.&nbsp; I don't think any of us are advocating that.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5014449, member: 18280"] You know from our previous discussion that I don't believe in the dichotomy that this suggests. I would argue that a sandbox can have any number of ongoing plots, and that it is how those plots are implemented, rather than their existence, which determines whether or not the game is a sandbox. See, this [indent]Plots can be explored, just like maps. A GM worth his salt doesn't force players through a set of preconceived scenes with preconceived outcomes any more than he designs a dungeon that's just a straight line of rooms. In fact, the plot-oriented GM probably has more leeway than a GM running the classic dungeon; the players aren't constrained by walls and can run off in unexpected directions. As I've said many times before, the good GM doesn't just allow this, he welcomes it. Keeps the game interesting. He can always go back to his notes between sessions and see how the new direction impacts things and what changes, if any, he needs to make to keep on course down the outline.[/indent] sounds sandbox-y to me, so long as the PCs have the opportunity of exploring whatever plots they want, so long as whatever plots they choose to ignore continue to impact the setting, and so long as they are free to devise plots of their own. I agree that the more the players are allowed to choose what to do, the less the GM can constrain their actions to a narrow path (and, therefore, the less the GM can structure that path). This doesn't mean that there is anything that [I][B]could not happen [/B][/I]in a sandbox game, with the sole exception of a railroad. The only way to use the "full suite of story structure tools to their fullest" is to eliminate player agency altogether and write a story. I don't think any of us are advocating that. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification