Quote from: rgrove0172;982999Others have seemed to suggest that a specific element is relocated and used again simply because the players didnt engage with it initially. That I would have a problem with.

Who has suggested that? I wonder if you might have misinterpreted.

Mind you, don't people reuse published modules, often relocating them to different campaign settings? That seems pretty uncontroversial. It only becomes railroading when the GM sets the same thing down in front of the PCs & makes them engage with it no matter what decisions they make.

Quote from: rgrove0172;982999The notion you and others have presented of a number of generic elements (locations, NPCs or what have you) set aside to be pulled up on a whim is fine. Others have seemed to suggest that a specific element is relocated and used again simply because the players didnt engage with it initially. That I would have a problem with.

Very few others have suggested that. Has there even been more than one person in this thread who did?

Quote from: rgrove0172;981899Lots of good stuff here guys. Thanks! Ive got reading material for a week!

One element I THINK Im hearing but would have trouble with is the notion of making up locations/NPCs/situations etc. and just moving them around depending on where the players go. If I understanding this you conjure up a tavern for example and then just plop it down in whatever town the PCs visit, that way you dont waste it should they go in a different direction.

If thats common practice, I gotta say Im not a fan. I consider part of what I do as GM as "World Building" and if the Black Goat Tavern was generated to exist on the outskirtz of Harlington, beside the old bridge... thats kind of where I want it to be. I like to think that its there even if the PCs never go there...ever. Ill grant you that doing this does generate a lot of campaign material that may not have an effect on the game (at least for the moment) but it is fleshing out the world in which the players are adventuring in. Im not sure I like the idea of a campaign where taverns, dungeons, NPCs and whatever mystically appear a few seconds in the PCs future along the path they happen to be travelling down. It seems, well artificial and contrived.

At the risk of raising hackles - what is the difference between a railroading GM arranging for the PCs to head in the direction of the Black Goat and another plopping it down in front of them no matter where they go?

Admittedly, maybe Im not understanding this notion completely and if so, Im open to explanation. Im not knocking it, just trying to get my head wrapped around it.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. While it might be silly for the Black Goat Tavern to move from one place to another to make sure the PCs end up there, it's not silly to assume there's a tavern or similar place along almost every road. So if the DM wants a messenger to meet up with the group to give them news that the king has summoned them for military service in the upcoming war, there's no problem with having messengers go to every stop possible and not just the Black Goat Tavern along the east road.

Now I often use the same maps and many of the same stock NPCs for things like taverns, bazaars and the like, but I make sure to at least change the names and descriptions. Which leads me to a very important piece of advice for any DM/GM and not just sandboxers:

Don't throw anything away. File it away for future use. If you need a map for a tower or stables or even a whole village you'll have one ready (with some changes) when the PCs take a detour into an area you haven't fully mapped out yet. The same goes for NPCs and monsters.

Quote from: rgrove0172;982999The notion you and others have presented of a number of generic elements (locations, NPCs or what have you) set aside to be pulled up on a whim is fine. Others have seemed to suggest that a specific element is relocated and used again simply because the players didnt engage with it initially. That I would have a problem with.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that, but personally I wouldn't do it that way.

You said

QuoteFirst, let's define sandbox. Best definition I'm come up with is that an RPG sandbox exists when the players can either choose or define what the next scenario is going to be.

I said

QuoteThis part I am in disagreement with. An RPG sandbox exists when the referee provides many hooks(options) for the players and those can take many forms. The players get to choose whether or not they pursue one of those options or they can decide to pursue some other option(s) that the ref did not think of.

Then

Quote from: Justin Alexander;982108Generally speaking, when you just literally repeat the exact same thing I said in slightly different words, that doesn't constitute "disagreement". FYI.

You are incorrect, I do not agree that the players get to define the next scenario in a sandbox, one because the players get to make choices, they do not get to define things and two because a sandbox doesn't have scenario's (adventure modules). So I did not "repeat the same exact thing in slightly different words," what I did do was state something quite different than what you said and that does constitute "disagreement." FYI

Quote from: Justin Alexander;982108Exactly. There's a distinction between sandboxes, non-linear scenario design, and not railroading. In practice, there's a set of personal tastes that tend to associate these ideas with each other. But they're distinct things.

Hmm, all sandboxes are non-linear but they are not scenario design and they are not railroads. So you might want to explain exactly what you mean by non-linear scenario design, since scenario design is writing adventure modules which by their nature are not sandboxes.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;982108I talk about the fact that treating "sandbox" as the opposite of "railroad" heavily distorts the clear understanding of both terms in The Railroading Manifesto.

Dungeoncrawling is sandbox play and HexCrawling is sandbox play and both involve combat. Obviously mystery scenarios are more railroad than anything else and are typically something you do at a dinner party. Having read your article I just see three structures and those are Railroad, Sandboxes and Scenario Writing (Adventure Modules).  I didn't see an example of anything else.

Quote from: soltakss;982247First of all, there is no One Way to tun a sandbox.

Everyone has their own ways and techniques.

The way I do it would have sandbox zealots throwing their hands in the air and shouting "That's not a Sandbox".

My number one rule of a sandbox is "Don't over prepare". I once spent a few months writing up a 20 storey tower full of vampires (Tower of Lead in Dorastor, Glorantha) and the PCs came close and said "We don't like the look of that" and turned around. Nowadays, I don't do anything like that.

Don't over prepare - good advice.

Quote from: soltakss;982247Learn to Improvise - If the players say "We want to go to Hobbiton", let them go and make things up on the spot.

Anytime you need to, improvise - good advice.

Quote from: soltakss;982247Use plots liberally - (Sandbox Zealots, now is the time to throw up your hands) Prepare some plots and scenarios to drop into the campaign at opportune times. If the players get stuck for something to do, throw in something from a background plot to spark things off.

Sandboxes don't have plots, Novels have plots. Sandboxes have possibility hooks and these are generated constantly by the living world of the sandbox and the players are constantly becoming aware of some of them, you don't have to throw something in as the rumor mill is in a constant flow around them.

Quote from: soltakss;982247Don't be afraid to run with things - If the PCs decide to kill the Princess and rescue the ogre who kidnapped her, don't complain about them ruining your game. Instead, follow the concequences. maybe they become friends of ogres, maybe the Princess's family send people after her, maybe the Princess was the head of an evil cult and the ogre was tryign to defeat her.

Good advice, you cannot ruin a sandbox, you cannot break a world, what happens, is what happens.

Quote from: soltakss;982247It helps to be familiar with the setting, or to have written your own setting.

If it is a sandbox it is your own setting/world and of course you are familiar with it.

Quote from: soltakss;982247Make things up- on the fly. Simple as that.

Good advice.

I think some people use the words "plots" and "scenarios" interchangeably.  They aren't really the same thing.  A "location" that has a "story" (aka, a background or history) such as a haunted castle or a dungeon is not a "plot".  I think it's perfectly fine to say a good GM should have lots of "scenarios" pre-planned for the characters to either investigate or ignore at their discretion.  The word "plots" has more of a narrative implication and leads more into notions of railroading and narrative/story gaming.

For me, if I were running a sandbox, once I've placed a location on the map, that's where that location exists in the world.  It ain't moving.  That applies to anything specifically related to that location as well...

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;983287I think some people use the words "plots" and "scenarios" interchangeably.  They aren't really the same thing.

Man, I am happy to get into a scenario but I sure don't want any part of someone's plot.

Quote from: Dumarest;983301Man, I am happy to get into a scenario but I sure don't want any part of someone's plot.

yeah, exactly.

Quote from: Dumarest;983301Man, I am happy to get into a scenario but I sure don't want any part of someone's plot.

Novels have plots and Adventures Modules are scenario's.  Sandboxes have neither.

Quote from: Crimhthan;983315Novels have plots and Adventures Modules are scenario's.  Sandboxes have neither.

sorry, but I disagree.  Any significant location on your sandbox's map where PCs might wish to venture is a scenario.  Modules obviously contain one or more scenarios as well.  But the word "scenario" doesn't specifically mean Adventure Module.

I think we could debate the finer meaning and regional variations on meanings of words all day. This is why I don't think it is helpful to get too hung up on words like "story" or "plot" when people obviously mean something more like scenario or adventure. Most gamers speak pretty casually about this stuff.

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;983287I think some people use the words "plots" and "scenarios" interchangeably.

Quote from: Dumarest;983301Man, I am happy to get into a scenario but I sure don't want any part of someone's plot.

Quote from: Crimhthan;983315Novels have plots and Adventures Modules are scenario's.  Sandboxes have neither.

Dynamic NPCs have plots, i.e. plans for how they intend to accomplish their goals. My campaigns have multiple dynamic NPCs. Ergo my campaigns, including all sandbox style campaigns, have plots.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;983344Most gamers speak pretty casually about this stuff.

Yes. In my experience, most gamers are pretty casual about their gaming so they have way less ego invested in the specific definitions of RPG terminology.

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;983343sorry, but I disagree.  Any significant location on your sandbox's map where PCs might wish to venture is a scenario.  Modules obviously contain one or more scenarios as well.  But the word "scenario" doesn't specifically mean Adventure Module.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;983344I think we could debate the finer meaning and regional variations on meanings of words all day. This is why I don't think it is helpful to get too hung up on words like "story" or "plot" when people obviously mean something more like scenario or adventure. Most gamers speak pretty casually about this stuff.

I suppose we could go with words having non-standard meaning , but that is not helpful IMO.

Scenario: first standard definition is - a written outline of a movie, novel, or stage work giving details of the plot and individual scenes. "imagine the scenarios for four short stories" This means that the definition of "Any significant location on your sandbox's map where PCs might wish to venture is a scenario." is patently false.

The words story, plot, scenario and adventure all imply and all are pre-written scripting and that is anathema to the whole idea, reason and purpose of a sandbox. These four words all are linked to the to the idea of the railroad and have nothing to do with a sandbox.

A significant location on a sandbox map is just that a significant location, a place where the players may or may not know something about and a place where the players can choose to go or choose not to go, but there is no script for what happens when they get there. The reaction of NPCs or monsters has not been pre-written those things will be determined through play and not by following a scenario.

Quote from: Bren;983353Dynamic NPCs have plots, i.e. plans for how they intend to accomplish their goals. My campaigns have multiple dynamic NPCs. Ergo my campaigns, including all sandbox style campaigns, have plots.

Yes. In my experience, most gamers are pretty casual about their gaming so they have way less ego invested in the specific definitions of RPG terminology.

Dynamic NPCs have "lives", not "plots". "Plots" are fixed with no options as in a "plot" everything is scripted. "Lives" not "plots" means that all of their decisions and reactions to the PCs and their subsequent actions are fluid and they could go several different ways not just one pre-determined way.