Quote from: Benoist;598735Pure rhetoric. No substance. And no imagination.

You quote part of a post of mine to toot your own opinion, then when I respond to your toot, you get to accuse me of 'reframing the argument'?

Ad nauseam. Et bis repetita.

Quote from: Benoist;598762Ad nauseam. Et bis repetita.

You be the one doing the accusin, so show me.

Post 1

Quote from: Sommerjon;597905I think it comes down to Players having issues and/or timid DMs

I've seen players do this.  Usually it happens after the Dm had a lethal campaign/adventure that pissed a couple players off.  So the next go around the players refuse to engage the setting the DM is providing.

It also happens when players cannot decide on a course of action.  Their characters have their own agendas(no comprising) the players cannot let go of and the DM is to timid to call them on it.

I've seen DM get so flustered about 'railroading' and/or 'player choice' that they refuse to give direction/hints/ guidance in fear of being 'That Guy'.

Post 2

Quote from: Sommerjon;597980My players end up being clueless and indecisive, apparently they have too many options, or I'm not providing enough of them.

I have seen the majority of sandboxes fall apart because of this.

It is why I don't run 'true sandboxes'.  I think a true sandbox only works when;
1.  The group are long time gaming buddies.
2.  The group doesn't know each other from Adam.

Post 3

Quote from: Sommerjon;598002Or they know you will "If players cannot take a hint, I start laying tracks. Loads of tracks. Discreetly, if I can, with the equivalent of Idea rolls, if I suck."
They may just be waiting for the rails?  No idea, but that is also a side effect of LTGB.  
Like you most likely know what can set one of them off, perhaps one doesn't like funny accents, so in order to get a reaction you use a funny accent with one of the NPCs, etc.

Post 4

Quote from: Sommerjon;598047I realized long ago I don't give a fuck about railroads or sandboxes.  I will use every technique available to keep my players engaged.  

The problem with sandboxes is for every hints and hooks and situations one person perceives as choice another screams "RAILROADING MUTHERFUCKER!".

Post 5

Quote from: Sommerjon;598056Then I would love for you to come to my neck of the woods and meet a guy named Randy

And that will always be the problem with Railboxes & Sandroads.  Each person will choose to see what they want to see.

Then you come up with this gem

Quote from: Benoist;598060Nice excluded-middle, dude. One moment sandboxes are these horrible aimless places where there's nothing to do and nowhere to go, players don't know what to do and "you gotta have the railroad for these folks who need it, man," and the next there's "really" no difference between a sandbox and a railroad because "that's all the same, so, there's really no such thing as a sandbox."

You are trying WAY too hard, grasshopper. Your mental gymnastics are showing.

And you are accusing me of the mental gymnastics?
Care to show me from my posts where I said anything about "One moment sandboxes are these horrible aimless places where there's nothing to do and nowhere to go, players don't know what to do and "you gotta have the railroad for these folks who need it, man," and the next there's "really" no difference between a sandbox and a railroad because "that's all the same, so, there's really no such thing as a sandbox.""

Hm.. nah, I don't care to. People can just rewind the thread and check out how you fucked it up with inane rhetorical bullshit for themselves.

Quote from: Benoist;598767Hm.. nah, I don't care to. People can just rewind the thread and check out how you fucked it up with inane rhetorical bullshit for themselves.

And that's why you're an asshole.  You come in just to stir the pot.  That's alright I listed every post of mine in here, let them read it for themselves. We knows you never back up your bullshit.

Quote from: Sommerjon;598774And that's why you're an asshole.  You come in just to stir the pot.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Quote from: Sommerjon;598766You be the one doing the accusin, so show me.

Post 1


Post 2


Post 3


Post 4


Post 5


Then you come up with this gemAnd you are accusing me of the mental gymnastics?
Care to show me from my posts where I said anything about "One moment sandboxes are these horrible aimless places where there's nothing to do and nowhere to go, players don't know what to do and "you gotta have the railroad for these folks who need it, man," and the next there's "really" no difference between a sandbox and a railroad because "that's all the same, so, there's really no such thing as a sandbox.""

I appreciate you gathering all your quotes on why you believe extreme sandboxes fail, but they all are attributed to shitty DMing.  (Apparently quotes don't nest...)

Although I suppose there might be players out there that would admit to "I don't like to make decisions, choices, or plans; I just want the GM to entertain me."  That would make the DM's job harder; part of a DM's job is teaching - rules, and how to actually play.

Does anyone seriously have those kinds of players?

Quote from: Beedo;598814I appreciate you gathering all your quotes on why you believe extreme sandboxes fail, but they all are attributed to shitty DMing.  (Apparently quotes don't nest...)

Why are they all attributed to shitty DMing?

Quote from: Beedo;598814Although I suppose there might be players out there that would admit to "I don't like to make decisions, choices, or plans; I just want the GM to entertain me."  That would make the DM's job harder; part of a DM's job is teaching - rules, and how to actually play.

Does anyone seriously have those kinds of players?

Yes.  I know a lot of people who don't have enough time or desire to get all up into a setting.  They are perfectly content to show for 5 hours and react to what is going on that week.

Quote from: Sommerjon;598832Why are they all attributed to shitty DMing?


Yes.  I know a lot of people who don't have enough time or desire to get all up into a setting.  They are perfectly content to show for 5 hours and react to what is going on that week.

As a player, I get very immersed when sitting at the table.

I don't generally think about the game between sessions.

Well, I do sometimes think about the cool stuff that happened in the game, but I don't plan what my character might do in between game sessions.

Running a railroad campaign is going to succeed or fail based on the writing, the sandbox is going to succeed or fail based on the DM's presenation at the table.  It requires clear information,transparency, frequent recapitulation, and even a bit of training of the players on their responsibilities.

Lethal campaigns or adventures piss off the players

Sandbox transparency requires the DM to provide sufficient information so that the players can make informed decisions about risk vs reward.  That's the essence of a good sandbox.  Death isn't the fault of the campaign model - it's either shitty DMing or a natural consequence of bad play.

DM is Timid - Either Doesn't Push a Decision or Provide Directions

People without social skills shouldn't be Dungeon Masters, and that means ground rules and frank (social) discussions about what the game is about.  All this ivory tower discussion seems to miss the point that most in-game problems need to be cleared up out-of-game with a 5 minute human to human discussion.

"Look fellas, this campaign is a bit of a railroad, because it involves a scripted adventure path, but as long as you understand that and follow the basic storyline, you'll have plenty of opportunities for decision making and agency; it's really a great story".

"Look fellas, this campaign is a set up as a sandbox, at any given time there's going to be a handful of interesting things to do, built on last week's session, and you'll need to come to a decision each night on which opportunity you're going to pick".

Both techniques can lead to great game sessions, but laying the ground rules about how the style is going to work is a social problem, not a game problem.  A DM that can't handle social problems shouldn't be a DM, and a player that can't accept the table ground rules shouldn't be invited.

Per Bill's point, in both types of campaigns, there can be problems with player engagement and memory - no one memorizes or remember every detail of what happened last week, or two weeks ago.  It's a good technique to do a game recap and set the stage each week - that's like game master 101 kind of stuff.

This is why I said sandbox (or railroad) problems start with shitty DMing.

Quote from: Sommerjon;598761You quote part of a post of mine to toot your own opinion, then when I respond to your toot, you get to accuse me of 'reframing the argument'?

BI = 3