Hi, just to let you know a bit about me. I've been DMing(GMing really) off and on for many years of my life. I've recently stumbled upon an approach called "The West Marches" I can't seem to find anything about it on the website and was wondering what everyone thinks about it. It seems a bit too good to be true. The basics are you create a town that acts like a safe area for the players, and they proceed to venture outward into a wilderness which the DM essentially generates seemingly at random whilst the only map of the area the players have is a communal map they make themselves. I'm asking you guys specifically because I've been burnt by DM advice online before and I don't have a group to test this with. Also a friend of mine is thinking of DMing a game and if this could help him I'd like to tell him about it.

Here are some links one is the author's blog, the second it matt colville, and last is the dawnforged cast . There's even an actual play podcast about it but ya know too much content there.
http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGAC-gBoX9k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L3qtpV9gwo

It's a very famous approach which encouraged a renaissance in sandboxing. Personally I find it works best if the town base is also an interesting place with living NPCs, contra to Ben Robbins' approach.

Main thing, you need a good detailed wilderness map with encounter tables and seeded dungeons. It is not a low prep affair. There are lots of free resources out there though, eg Rob Conley's Blackmarsh and many good free adventure modules at basicfantasy.org

Thank you for replying. I've just had trouble with sandbox games in general and thought this approach might help. Usually my players just kind of end up meandering about the town even if I end up setting some adventures there. It's gotten to the point where I just freeze up adding detail anywhere in the adventure. Anyway Back to the topic I seem to remember a few 3.5 wilderness supplements out ages ago. Can't remember what they were called but I think I had one for swamps.

I played in an explicitly West Marches-themed dungeon crawl game and had fun.  And I ran a less-explicitly West Marches inspired hexcrawl and dungeon crawl game and it went well.

One thing I now think was missing from both experiences was a true open table, with genuinely different groups running in the same world.  Supposedly Gygax at one point was running D&D six nights a week, for whoever showed up.  Could be twelve people, could be one trying to solo, and he'd run for it.

What we ended up with in both cases was one night a week with the same small core group of people, and a larger number who dropped in and out as they were able or interested.  And that works as far as it goes, you just always end back in town so people aren't teleporting in or out of dungeons, or having other people play their characters.  The problem was there was no catch-up mechanism for new players.  Once the die-hards got a level advantage they kept it.  And there's nothing wrong with a few levels difference in old D&D, but at around a 4 level difference it becomes unfun for the starting players.  And I didn't figure this out until the after-action, at the time I stuck to my guns on starting at 1st level.

Quote from: Alamar;1099918I've just had trouble with sandbox games in general and thought this approach might help. Usually my players just kind of end up meandering about the town even if I end up setting some adventures there. It's gotten to the point where I just freeze up adding detail anywhere in the adventure.

I always start a sandbox game with a defined quest.  To avoid railroading it should be something the players can succeed or fail at, and something they can walk away from if they choose, but do start them with a mission and not "what do you want to do?"  Because at first they don't have any information about the world or the game, "what do you want to do" is not actually an informed choice, it's just a coin toss.  So start them with something that gets them going, and as time goes on hopefully they'll start to pick their own goals.

Also, I recommend putting a regional map in front of them at the very beginning.  It can be very sparse, home base town, starting mission location, plus a couple other dungeons/locations/missions you have in mind for later, but you want them to have that in front of them from the start. Encourage them to write on it as they discover other locations or terrain features.  I was a few sessions late getting my map out, and it did hurt my momentum because it then took several more sessions for my players to start using it themselves.

Personally, I don't find sandboxes good for most RPG groups. I know this is UNSPEAKABLE HERESY online, especially in the OSR community, but most players aren't proactive. They expect the GM to provide the direction of the campaign.

However, I fucking hate railroading and I demand the lazy ass players to become proactive.

Here's my meet-me-halfway solution. Every campaign has some overarching threat, maybe multiple. NPCs are on the move and they are gonna FUCK SHIT UP if they are not stopped. Instead of spending time on adventures, I spend time on the NPCs, the directions and steps of their plots, their arc of actions, and cool locales of importance. I don't tell the players what to do or where to go, but since they know shit is gonna hit the fan, they run around the map trying to outsmart and outmaneuver the NPCs.

For instance, my Mazes & Minotaurs campaign is simple. Somehow Zeus has been poisoned and he will die unless an antidote is found...but which god was involved in this crime? Apollo claims not to know, but his prophecy is the cure (and truth) exists within the Archipeligo of Mists a chain of islands surrounded by clouds that obscure them from the vision of Olympus. Zeus gets weaker with each passing of the moon and the gods are squaring off against each other. Thus, our heroes have taken a three ships to the Archipeligo in their quest to save Zeus.

I don't determine where the PCs go. They do it all because its all about saving Zeus. So every session is about covering territory, learning from NPCs, gaining info by doing favors for NPCs and finding clues to piece together. And yelling SHIELD WALL!!!

Mazes & Minotaurs is a FREE RPG and its got a cool island generator and I didn't do much more than roll dice to create the archipeligo and then seeded various places with cool NPCs and imagined 3 different ways to achieve the cure for Zeus (each with its own nasty price). Also, I made 3 conflicting stories about how Zeus got poisoned so I'm not even sure which one is true or what god/goddess did it! I'll let that emerge in the actual play.  
http://mazesandminotaurs.free.fr/

BTW, Kevin Crawford of Sine Nomine Publishing offers kickass tools for sandboxing. He wrote Stars without Number (scifi), Silent Legions (horror), Godbound (epic fantasy), Scarlet Heroes (fantasy), and Other Dust (post-apoc) and half of each book is mostly sandboxing tools.

Here's his free fantasy RPG.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/144651/Exemplars--Eidolons

West Marches is literally Diablo. Or even Olaf's trading post from Pathfinder Kingmaker.

I'm not a fan. I prefer Persistent World.  WM assumes one branch that everyone eventually folds back into, it's very instance-based.PW assumes multiple branches along the trunk that may never interact -- it's very character-based. WM works best for one-shots. PW works best for campaigns, especially long-term.

Quote from: Alamar;1099913Hi, just to let you know a bit about me. I've been DMing(GMing really) off and on for many years of my life. I've recently stumbled upon an approach called "The West Marches" I can't seem to find anything about it on the website and was wondering what everyone thinks about it. It seems a bit too good to be true. The basics are you create a town that acts like a safe area for the players, and they proceed to venture outward into a wilderness which the DM essentially generates seemingly at random whilst the only map of the area the players have is a communal map they make themselves. I'm asking you guys specifically because I've been burnt by DM advice online before and I don't have a group to test this with. Also a friend of mine is thinking of DMing a game and if this could help him I'd like to tell him about it.

Here are some links one is the author's blog, the second it matt colville, and last is the dawnforged cast . There's even an actual play podcast about it but ya know too much content there.
http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGAC-gBoX9k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L3qtpV9gwo

Welcome to the Site, Alamar!

I've always wanted to run a Western Marches campaign, but my players don't want sandbox; they actually demand stories. The ars ludi post you linked to is a classic. My favorite part is how the players drive the entire thing:

QuotePlayers send emails to the list saying when they want to play and what they want to do. A normal scheduling email would be something like "I'd like to play Tuesday. I want to go back and look for that ruined monastery we heard out about past the Golden Hills. I know Mike wants to play, but we could use one or two more. Who's interested?"

I envy any GM who has players that are so interested in the game that they actually email about it between sessions! I also like the part where one group was filling in a map at the tavern, and another group wanted in on the action:

QuoteWhen people heard about other players finding the Abbots' study in a hidden room of the ruined monastery, or saw on the map that someone else had explored beyond Centaur Grove, it made them want to get out there and play too. Soon they were scheduling their own game sessions.

Good luck, and Let us know how it goes.

I think sandbox or a western marches style campaign can have story. I basically only ever run sandbox in any system I use and my main thing is to create a lot of NPC groups and factions and to have some sort of world event or two going on in the background. The players basically just live in that world and can choose to interact however they want. The story emerges from taking part in a small window of events that are happening along side the massive backdrop of the world moving forward.

For western marches specifically, one thing I haven't been able to try yet is allowing players to drop in and out. The tricky part of that is I think you really need a system that allows for a pretty diverse power range in the group and has good support for players owning alt characters. I don't think a lot of the more modern systems would work well with that. They kind of all assume a single long running group and no character restarts.

Quote from: PrometheanVigil;1099976West Marches is literally Diablo. Or even Olaf's trading post from Pathfinder Kingmaker.

I'm not a fan. I prefer Persistent World.  WM assumes one branch that everyone eventually folds back into, it's very instance-based.PW assumes multiple branches along the trunk that may never interact -- it's very character-based. WM works best for one-shots. PW works best for campaigns, especially long-term.

Respectfully, I think you're missing the ability of a WM game to evolve due to both the presence of an intelligent, creative, DM rather than a computer program, and player input.  A West Marches style campaign is a living world.  Diablo is frozen in amber.  A fun place to visit, but you can't really live there.

Quote from: Aglondir;1099983Welcome to the Site, Alamar!

I've always wanted to run a Western Marches campaign, but my players don't want sandbox; they actually demand stories. The ars ludi post you linked to is a classic. My favorite part is how the players drive the entire thing:



I envy any GM who has players that are so interested in the game that they actually email about it between sessions! I also like the part where one group was filling in a map at the tavern, and another group wanted in on the action:



Good luck, and Let us know how it goes.

Why thank you. I first heard about you guys through the RPGPundit's videos. So far you've all been wonderful and thanks again. But yea one issue I have is the insistence on player feedback I've never had a group that interested in playing it.

Quote from: PrometheanVigil;1099976West Marches is literally Diablo. Or even Olaf's trading post from Pathfinder Kingmaker.

I'm not a fan. I prefer Persistent World.  WM assumes one branch that everyone eventually folds back into, it's very instance-based.PW assumes multiple branches along the trunk that may never interact -- it's very character-based. WM works best for one-shots. PW works best for campaigns, especially long-term.

Well it is consistent in the aspects of the world itself at least from what I can gleam. There is a section of the blog posts I linked that talk about recycling the maps especially in regards to the wilderness areas. I think most of the changing or living aspects come from the monsters and such wandering about and taking up residence in old previously cleared dungeons. Also on a different note since you mentioned them, can you believe how expensive those old Kingmaker books have gotten? I only have the first two and was thinking about finishing off my collection but I'll need to stop paying rent to do that. Hundred bucks minimum. They were pretty good but I don't remember them being THAT good lol.

Here is a link to that part
http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/80/grand-experiments-west-marches-part-3-recycling/

I really don't see why you would need to "sell" your players on a "West Marches style" game.   The only buy in you really need is for D&D.  Do your world prep, which should be fairly minimal.  Establish a home base, some hooks, and a few nearby areas.  Let them roll characters and turn them loose.  You can give each player a "hook" or explain to them that they need to go find them but I think the main hurdle is passing the motivation on to them.  It isn't your job as a DM to make them go out and do stuff.  As players, they are responsible for motivating their characters.  If they are more interested in self-referential play acting, rather than going out and adventuring, you might need to have a chat about what kind of game you want to run.

One thing that really keeps me away from West Marches is the emphasis on player involvement and feedback. The map making, multiple groups as some have mentioned, etc. It just sounds like more of that "Have the players do the heavy lifting, take the stress of the DM." kinda thing that has burned me before. Like the old "Have the players come up with a enemy and an ally in their backstory, then have these characters show up in the adventure." I tried that on the last group I ran and all my players scoffed saying they didn't like the extra work and accused me of being lazy. I even offered up some pregens for those roles and then they accused me of hijacking their characters. I just want to draw them into the world.

Back to the multiple groups thing. What do I do if one of my players gets it in his head that he can just kill one of those other groups or individual players and steal their stuff?

Quote from: Brendan;1100073I really don't see why you would need to "sell" your players on a "West Marches style" game.   The only buy in you really need is for D&D.  Do your world prep, which should be fairly minimal.  Establish a home base, some hooks, and a few nearby areas.  Let them roll characters and turn them loose.  You can give each player a "hook" or explain to them that they need to go find them but I think the main hurdle is passing the motivation on to them.  It isn't your job as a DM to make them go out and do stuff.  As players, they are responsible for motivating their characters.  If they are more interested in self-referential play acting, rather than going out and adventuring, you might need to have a chat about what kind of game you want to run.

The whole not having to sell them on the world thing is one of the things I like about it. As you said I can just sell them on the game itself, do some world prep and give them hooks to lure them out into it. In fact one reason why I posted this thread though it kinda escaped my mind at the time was applying this approach to other games like Star Wars d6. Do you guys think this approach would work with that Game?

Quote from: Brendan;1100047Respectfully, I think you're missing the ability of a WM game to evolve due to both the presence of an intelligent, creative, DM rather than a computer program, and player input.  A West Marches style campaign is a living world.  Diablo is frozen in amber.  A fun place to visit, but you can't really live there.

Diablo is killing the big demon at the bottom of the random dungeon. I don't see what it has to do with sandboxing at all; it's a single story with no branches.