Quote from: estar;952858Part of managing a sandbox campaign is setting a interesting Initial Context for the characters. Choice is meaningless if it is the equivalent of throwing darts at a dartboard in the dark.

The most effective way of doing is to talk with the players both individually and as a group and weave to together a Initial Context from their responses. Usually the response are pretty basic and gives you a lot of latitude.

I was going to say something similar... but you got there first.

I would add: Rumor Tables. They are awesome.

The problem with "Okay, you have your characters, what do you want to do?" approach (which many people try, often in Traveller for some reason) is that the Players have no context for making decisions or taking actions. They don't know really what they can pursue or how to pursue it.

As Ester says, sitting down and talking is really terrific on this front -- and probably should be done no matter what so everyone is on the same page in any game.

But Rumor Tables offer another way in, this time in the context of the fiction. The Referee creates a list of things he cares about sharing with the Players about his setting -- details to investigate, treasures to loot, factions at hand, in ways that offer the Players locations and NPCs and objects to pursue with their PCs. Then the Players choose which ones they want to go after. Thus, the Players are making choices and yet they aren't throwing darts in the dark.

Note: in my games they can completely blow off the Rumors as well. But at least they are there if they want them.

Quote from: Baeraad;952798On the one hand, pure sandbox play gives me hives. As a player, I don't want to be told that I can do whatever I want, because I don't want to do anything. Doing something when you don't have to is strange and unnatural. I want the GM to have the courtesy to give me something I'm forced to react to.

You just functionally described my current group of players.  When faced with a sandbox they just sit there unmoving. Prod them with in character adventure hooks and they might move slightly. Come right out and tell them "You are doing this" and they will go along, until they don't.

Engage with the game world they do not. Play in character with actual character personalities they do not. Drive me to distraction they do.

Stuck with them I am, because I run a drop in game at our local public library.

Quote from: Baeraad;952798I feel like I should step in and argue heatedly with someone, but I'm not sure who. It's the eternal dilemma of the crotchety old bastard - so many people to disagree with, so little time!

On the one hand, pure sandbox play gives me hives. As a player, I don't want to be told that I can do whatever I want, because I don't want to do anything. Doing something when you don't have to is strange and unnatural. I want the GM to have the courtesy to give me something I'm forced to react to. And as a GM, I have to struggle to stay awake during sessions when the players just poke around and don't get much of anything accomplished. I do realise that players occasionally want a session like that, so I try to provide them in the interests of creating an enjoyable experience, but I keep having to struggle to not tell the players to wake me up when they want to do something that isn't completely irrelevant.

On the other hand, I have absolutely no use for modules. The key to have a meaningful progression of events without having it feel like a railroad is to make sure that the PCs have strong and compelling in-character motivations for going along with it. And you just can't do that with a scenario that's meant for a generic group of 4-6 characters of level 3-5.

So, you admit to doing it wrong, then:p?

Quote from: DavetheLost;952872You just functionally described my current group of players.  When faced with a sandbox they just sit there unmoving. Prod them with in character adventure hooks and they might move slightly. Come right out and tell them "You are doing this" and they will go along, until they don't.

Engage with the game world they do not. Play in character with actual character personalities they do not. Drive me to distraction they do.

Stuck with them I am, because I run a drop in game at our local public library.

Do you roleplay your NPCs in first person and force them interact with you in first person? That a trick that works for me.

Note that "acting" i.e. pretending to be a character with a different personality is not needed for this to work. The only thing I am focused on is getting them to interact with me as an NPC or several NPCs depending on the situation. Originally I did this to get the players to stop treating their characters like fucking game pieces and accordingly acting like mad dogs. "Oh a shopkeeper! Kill him! And grab his cash box!". Despite the immaturity of myself and my high school friends back in the day this was effective in making the players actually treat the NPCs as people.

And once they started to interacting with the NPCs some of the players actually gave a shit about what troubled them.

Quote from: estar;952860Being told to throw darts at a dartboard in the dark isn't appealing to a lot of people.

That's such bullshit, estar. How many sandbox referees hand their players a map and say, 'You are here. What do you do?'

At a barest minimum there's a campaign pitch - 'You're adventurers in a world of ruins, monsters, and treasure!' 'You're swashbucklers in the time of Louis XIV!' 'You're traders and mercenaries in the far future!' - but anyone with even a modicum of horse sense can manage something like, frex. the three paragraphs which set the stage for Keep on the Borderlands.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;952867What Tod13 means is that Adventure 1: The Kinunir has four adventures (or "Situations") inside of it.

Ahh, you're right, I misread that.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952882That's such bullshit, estar. How many sandbox referees hand their players a map and say, 'You are here. What do you do?'

At a barest minimum there's a campaign pitch - 'You're adventurers in a world of ruins, monsters, and treasure!' 'You're swashbucklers in the time of Louis XIV!' 'You're traders and mercenaries in the far future!' - but anyone with even a modicum of horse sense can manage something like, frex. the three paragraphs which set the stage for Keep on the Borderlands.

Agree with this, but think it's more apt to say the dart throwing isn't completely in the dark when you have a scenario. It's more like throwing at a dartboard when you have a flashlight.

And sometimes the players will insist on ignoring all your carefully prepared plot hooks to chase off after an artifact mentioned in a bit of overheard tavern gossip that was supposed to be just background color...

But even that bit of gossip does more to provide motivation than a map with a you-are-here dot on it.

Highwaymen are waylaying travellers at the crossroads, a royal courier dropped a sealed letter while changing horses, someone is in trouble and asks the PCs for help... Dangle a few of these hooks in front of the players and see which they bite. Of course you may also get lucky and have one or more players who give you a motivation along with their character "I want to slay the dragon and reclaim the halls of my father", "I want revenge on the six-fingered man".

A starting sandbox need not be a static environment.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;952825Suiting up, grabbing your weapons, and heading out to the unknown because you heard those bastards out there have treasure they're not sharing with you is one of the most primal motive forces of civilization.

Quite possibly, but I'm the descendant of a long line of people who didn't do that put stayed put instead. An absolute lack of adventuring is in my blood!

Quote from: Willie the Duck;952837Sounds like that's a case of too little structure instead of too much. I can see that. Can you give a hypothetical boundary? Say your being DMed, and example A is too little structure, but example B is enough (maybe even an example C that is too much)?

Er, I dunno. I guess something like...

A: "You are sitting in a nice cosy village where nothing in particular is happening. It's surrounded by savage wilderness full of horrible monsters. In which direction do you go out into it for no apparent reason?"

B: "When traveling to the city to look for work (because the problem with nice cosy villages is that they have limited employment opportunities, so you had to face the choice between risking becoming someone's food and not being able to afford your own food), you spot a group of goblins down in a gulch, worrying at some kind of chest. There is the wreckage of a wagon lying tipped over next to them, and immobile bodies - you're not sure if they're alive or not. The goblins haven't seen you yet. What do you do?"

C: "Actually no, it turns out that they have seen you. They rush up the hill to attack you. No, you can't run away, they run faster than you. No, they can't be reasoned with. No, you can't start a rockslide over them to give yourself time to escape. Look, just mindlessly roll attack at them already!"

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952853You suck as a roleplayer and cannot satisfy a man or woman in bed.

Quite possibly, but unless you were hoping I'd seduce you and now you're bitterly disappointed, I don't see why that's any business of yours.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952853You're really incapable of roleplaying a character with ambition?

Yep.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952853A character who's self-directed?

YEP.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952853You can't imagine living in the game-world?

Oh, no, that I can do. And then I immediately imagine finding someone to tell me what to do, because I frankly have no idea what I'm supposed to be doing - in this world or any other!

Though alternatively, the GM can just tell me to make a character who wants a particular thing, because going after that thing will be the main activity of the campaign. And then I can do that. And then all is well.

Quote from: Sommerjon;952866Why is it an impossible task to take a scenario that's meant for a generic group of 4-6 characters of level 3-5 and then tailor it to make sure that the PCs have strong and compelling in-character motivations for going along with it?

It's not, technically, but if I have to go through the trouble of shoehorning character motivations into a scenario that didn't come with them pre-existing, I'm already past the point where playing a module is more work than coming up with something of my own.

On the other hand, I do like setting descriptions and generalised plot hooks. It's like the difference between a big pile of building blocks that you can use to construct your own stuff, and an already standing structure that you have to dismantle before you can make your own use of the materials.

Quote from: AsenRG;952874So, you admit to doing it wrong, then:p?

No, I admit that the rest of you are doing it wrong, on account of my approach being objectively correct and the one true way!

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952882That's such bullshit, estar. How many sandbox referees hand their players a map and say, 'You are here. What do you do?'

Keeping getting reports of people trying just that. So it isn't bullshit in my opinion. I will say it way way better than it was ten years ago. From the feedback I get the common problem is more subtle. The referee creating something that the players find uninteresting or boring. That is when it is a problem. A lot of people successfully run sandbox campaigns or more commonly a hybrid with some sandbox elements.
 

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952882At a barest minimum there's a campaign pitch - 'You're adventurers in a world of ruins, monsters, and treasure!' 'You're swashbucklers in the time of Louis XIV!' 'You're traders and mercenaries in the far future!' - but anyone with even a modicum of horse sense can manage something like, frex. the three paragraphs which set the stage for Keep on the Borderlands.

Sorry I disagree. For a minority yes that works. The majority need something a little more specific to engage their interested. For example You're swashbucklers in the time of Louis XIV!', fresh out of training with several opportunities joining the guard of various nobles knowing that with enough renown you can join the King's musketeers.

The players who are go-getters will ignore the obvious path and do their things but other players have a clear path as a starting point, Join noble guard, do well, join the King's Musketeers. At least in my campaign things diverge quickly from that however the vision of that path provides the crucial pull to get them over the initial hump of "What do I do with my character?"

Now you may think that the players are being putzs or that I am coddling them. Understand I been doing this for 30 years by trying things and seeing what works and what doesn't. Again you don't need hand your players a treatise on your setting but they do need more than just You're swashbucklers in the time of Louis XIV!'. In short when I did this it worked, multiple times over years, with player of wildly varying ages and backgrounds.

Quote from: Baeraad;952894Yep.



YEP.



Oh, no, that I can do. And then I immediately imagine finding someone to tell me what to do, because I frankly have no idea what I'm supposed to be doing - in this world or any other!

Wait. Do you really mean that you need someone to tellyou what to do in real life? It reads that way, but Im having a hard time believing it...
I mean, who told you to come to this forum and rile the sandbox-loving majority?

QuoteThough alternatively, the GM can just tell me to make a character who wants a particular thing, because going after that thing will be the main activity of the campaign. And then I can do that. And then all is well.

If you are that cooperative, would it work if I told you "you are a swashbuckler in 17th century Paris looking to uphold his honour, get famous, and seduce noblewomen just to spite those better off than him"?

QuoteNo, I admit that the rest of you are doing it wrong, on account of my approach being objectively correct and the one true way!

You pass;).

Quote from: DavetheLost;952872You just functionally described my current group of players.  When faced with a sandbox they just sit there unmoving. Prod them with in character adventure hooks and they might move slightly. Come right out and tell them "You are doing this" and they will go along, until they don't.

Engage with the game world they do not. Play in character with actual character personalities they do not. Drive me to distraction they do.

Stuck with them I am, because I run a drop in game at our local public library.

I feel for you, man.  Where do you live?

Quote from: Baeraad;952894Quite possibly, but I'm the descendant of a long line of people who didn't do that put stayed put instead. An absolute lack of adventuring is in my blood!

What country do you live in?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;952853You suck as a roleplayer and cannot satisfy a man or woman in bed.

Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you? You're really incapable of roleplaying a character with ambition? A character who's self-directed? You can't imagine living in the game-world?

+1.

If you don't want anything get the fuck away from my table because I have a bunch of people who DO want to do things.

Quote from: DavetheLost;952872You just functionally described my current group of players.  When faced with a sandbox they just sit there unmoving. Prod them with in character adventure hooks and they might move slightly. Come right out and tell them "You are doing this" and they will go along, until they don't.

Engage with the game world they do not. Play in character with actual character personalities they do not. Drive me to distraction they do.

Stuck with them I am, because I run a drop in game at our local public library.

"Fuck you, I quit."