GMs and DMs often like to formulate "sandbox" campaigns and worlds where the party can go and explore anything they like and do whatever they want. This "bragging rights" aspect of a campaign is a myth, and I'm here to walk you through why I think so, and what we should replace it with.
The first aspect of any game is that it is about something, as determined by the mechanics used and the expectations of players involved. Just like Dungeons and Dragons would not be the rule set to use for a game about investing in real estate, neither would Monopoly be a good ruleset for adventuring against monsters. For this reason, the choice of "doing anything" has already been narrowed down when a ruleset is chosen.
Second, in games with advancement, there has to be a bit of the "quantum ogre" in the game, or PCs are just going to run into challenges way above or below their level 90% of the time, and end up dead or bored. So even with the choice of where to go and what to do, there has to be path for them to take that leads them to appropriate challenges, or these challenges have to appear when they choose to go that direction.
Third, random encounters, even set in the backdrop of a world, makes for a boring game. As a player, I don't want to just fight different creatures in the same way over and over again. I want to manipulate the world to achieve my goals. I want to make a difference. A series of random encounters in a disconnected world does not make for a good game.
Why are these encounters random? Because locations on a large scale just simply aren't connected. There is no reason for you to walk from the grocery store to the library and expect the encounters you have at each location to be connected in the real world; why would you expect something different in the game world? An attribute of a sandbox world is this disconnection.
The bottom line is that sandbox is used to really mean the opposite of railroading, but the terminology is used incorrectly. Railroading is simple eliminating player agency by either 1) not giving them a choice, or 2) by only allowing one outcome that doesn't depend on their actions. Sandboxes are these mythical game worlds that exist outside the influence of the PCs and can be interacted with however the PCs decide to.
Instead of sandboxes, what we really want is a rich plot. A rich plot is one that revolves around a series of motivated people / organizations trying to achieve goals which incite involvement by the PCs, but do not dictate the form that this involvement may take.
For example, a rich plot might have a group of kobolds hiding out in a nearby mine, attacking caravans. The kobolds have a goal of attacking and stealing from the caravans. The caravan driver and guards have a goal of getting their shipments to the town without injury or loss. The town has a desire for these shipments to arrive. The PCs could do a number of things to interact with the town, kobolds, and caravans. The PCs could be hired by the town to go clear out the mines. The PCs could choose to guard the caravans themselves. The PCs could go enslave the kobolds and take over the operation to steal from the caravans. The PCs could completely ignore the situation and go find something else. As a GM with a rich plot, you set up the plot, and let the players figure out how to interact with it.
Rich plots work because they give the PCs free reign while providing the framework for a good story. They also work because they give the GM specific things to prepare in advance. In the case of out kobolds, I need to prepare the town, the caravan along the road, and the kobold mine. If the PCs jump into the plot, these are the obvious locations where they may encounter the NPCs relevant to the scenario. I can stat out these locations, lay traps, and prepare motivations for each of the NPCs. When the party comes along, I know what the NPCs will do, I know how they will fight, and I know how they will negotiate. I can react to whatever the players decide to do.
Implied in the rich plot is the social contract clause that states that the PCs will follow the plots set out for them. While interesting aspects can pop up occasionally outside the normal definition of what the game is about (like buying and running a business, or developing a romance with an NPC), generally the players agree implicitly to play the game as spooned out by the GM. This doesn't mean they have to do everything, and so the GM is wise to offer several options on the menu.
So next time you hear the term "sandbox" thrown about by a GM, consider discussing with them what they / you really want: a rich plot. And help them to see the light in how a rich plot can greatly enhance the storytelling of the role playing game.
Comments
Post a Comment