Quote from: gleichman;627587Wealth and Power. These are common sandbox goals as they are the only ones really supported by the concept. Hence why I described Sandboxes as amoral.

The wealth to build a hospital for travellers and the power of an order of knights to protect them.

Wrong again, Brian.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;627589The wealth to build a hospital for travellers and the power of an order of knights to protect them.

He didn't say anything about what they'd use the wealth and power for, the very thought seemingly didn't even occur to him it was so unimportant.

That's what a pure sandbox breeds.

The best case is that somewhere along the way the group outgrows the sandbox, and trades such things for real goals and a real campaign focused on them- and the sandbox is no more.

But campaigns commonly don't last long enough for that, ending in most cases according to WotC data after 6 months if memory doesn't fail me.

ADDED: and if one worships the Sandbox seeing it not as a stepping stone to something better but as an end of itself (like many here do)- it will never happen no matter how long the campaign goes.

Quote from: gleichman;627591He didn't say anything about what they'd use the wealth and power for, the very thought seemingly didn't even occur to him it was so unimportant.

That's what a pure sandbox breeds.

The best case is that somewhere along the way the group outgrows the sandbox, and trades such things for real goals and a real campaign focused on them- and the sandbox is no more.

But campaigns commonly don't last long enough for that, ending in most cases according to WotC data after 6 months if memory doesn't fail me.

ADDED: and if one worships the Sandbox seeing it not as a stepping stone to something better but as an end of itself (like many here do)- it will never happen no matter how long the campaign goes.

Ah, so can a Sandbox have goals?
I have often described my games as 80% sandboxes, since, like most reality, most things are continuums and not absolutes.
I have a lot of overarching storlyines, and games that have lasted for over a decade, where the characters find goals and motivations, get married, have children, establish themselves in guilds and in politics, where some PCs have more experience in their social skills than in their HP.
But where I still consider it my main job to play how the rest of the world reacts to my players.

I see a sandbox as a game that allows the players to find and create their own goals, and whereas this does not change the setting from a sandbox, to allows the game to grow and continue for years and years.

Nice strawman, Gleichtroll.

Clarifying this guy's misconceptions about sandbox gaming is as utterly pointless as correcting Pundit's on White Wolf. The real mystery to me is why Gleichbitch keeps posting here instead of, in his own words, watching NCIS reruns.

Quote from: LordVreeg;627597Ah, so can a Sandbox have goals?

It can easily have amoral ones. It can with some loss of purity and some pushing manage trivial ones. It falls apart beyond that.

So one can do Conan, but not Lord of the Rings in the Sandbox concept.

Does anyone anywhere have a recorded instance of Gleichman:

Saying something.

Being informed of a fact that proves that "something" categorically wrong.

And then he acknowledges it and gives up on saying it?

Quote from: gleichman;627389Sandbox campaigns are so... boring.

...With ultimate freedom comes ultimate meaninglessness.

...Sandboxes are without exception amoral, for to enforce morality is to raidroad the sandbox. They are without exception small minded, for to add an epic overarching story to is to destroy the sandbox. They are without exception meaningless, for no man can define true meaning on his own.

Does real life plunge you into depths of existential despair, then?

QuoteAnd certainly nothing happened that matched the epic fantasy works that had captured our imagination and caused us to play these silly games in the first place. The hopes of recreating them died with every roll of a d20.... We wanted Lord of the Rings, and what we got was Conan...

D&D was inspired more by the latter than by the former. Even in the case of Conan, the hero in D&D can fall prey to probability, whereas in the pages of Weird Tales his fate was in the hands of an Author keen on keeping him alive for another adventure (and even able to dip backward in time for fresh ones, had Conan's death been told).

The War of the Ring is the culmination of a long history of intervention in Middle-Earth by Powers greater than mere mortals. Nonetheless, Men and Hobbits have the freedom to choose their responses. By contrast, in the Hyborian Age humans are the chief agents.

For some players -- or characters! -- a Story may be inherent in their worldview, as much as physical characteristics similar enough to the human experience is essential to role-playing for others.

Quote from: gleichman;627602It can easily have amoral ones. It can with some loss of purity and some pushing manage trivial ones. It falls apart beyond that.

So one can do Conan, but not Lord of the Rings in the Sandbox concept.

I can actually glimpse what might be your thought process.
(so maybe I should check myself in)

I can see that LotR is a railroad start to finish.  "So, this here ring belonged to the dark Lord and unless I run to Rivendell, the Nazgul are going to take me to Mordor.  Which will end our game pretty fast.  Guess we are going to Rivendell, eh?"

But this example does not mean that all sandbox goals are trivial.  I have a many long-term, overarching plotlines that are purely Sandboxy, but are major if the PCs delve in and connect up the dots.  The rescue of the Lost God Amerer, the rediscovery of the Magic of the Shade, and the ultra-convoluted Dreadwing and the heir of Von Arbor storyline have been touched and worked with by PCs for decades.  Literally.  And they are plotlines put into motion and existing in the campaign with out without the PCs intervention.

And BTW, I consider player-determined and created goals to be very, very important and fulfilling.  And consistent with Sandbox play.

Quote from: Zak S;627603Does anyone anywhere have a recorded instance of Gleichman:

Saying something.

Being informed of a fact that proves that "something" categorically wrong.

And then he acknowledges it and gives up on saying it?

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=297676&postcount=13

Quote from: Zak S;627603Does anyone anywhere have a recorded instance of Gleichman:

Saying something.

Being informed of a fact that proves that "something" categorically wrong.

And then he acknowledges it and gives up on saying it?

I dunno. I like Brian--I think he has interesting things to say--but I don't bother arguing with him usually.

I am annoyed at the fact that I started this thread specifically to gather examples of actual campaign starts, and I got a theorizing screed.

For that matter, Brian, your description of what you actually do, which you've decided isn't a sandbox, i.e.

Quotelarger worlds with many stories on different but yet interrelated levels. Like an extensive web, they will ensnare those who pass by and they will deal or not according to their talents. We traded useless freedoms for purpose searched for and found. We put pointed questions to the adventurers, and didn't meekly respond to their base passions.

is close enough for my purposes that I'm still interested in seeing a real account of how a new independent group (preferably not a character who is added to an existing group) got started in a campaign.

Quote from: Phillip;627607Does real life plunge you into depths of existential despair, then?

"If Christ has not risen, then everything is in vain.", William F. Buckley, JR

And I'd add, since he did- nothing is in vain.

Quote from: gleichman;627619"If Christ has not risen, then everything is in vain.", William F. Buckley, JR

And I'd add, since he did- nothing is in vain.

Then you could try considering 'sandbox' to mean nothing more than the same free will as in this life -- which I think is closer to what most people really mean than whatever "straw man" you have in mind.

Quote from: meFor some players -- or characters! -- a Story may be inherent in their worldview, as much as physical characteristics similar enough to the human experience is essential to role-playing for others.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;627615is close enough for my purposes that I'm still interested in seeing a real account of how a new independent group (preferably not a character who is added to an existing group) got started in a campaign.

OK.

In very general terms (so as to not bore anyone, cause is there anything more boring than reading about other people's games?)...


The most recent example would be our current one we're playing, set at the being of the millennium of the Second Age. The characters began on Númenor. This is actually our first Second Age campaign, always focused on other eras before but we've long wished to visit it.

This being Middle Earth (and thus nothing like a Sandbox), there was a overarching destiny if one may use that world that applied to at least one of the characters. This would become revealed over the course of the adventures as part of his family history, and then encounters related to matter and finally as full on conflict.

All was determined by myself, using only my experience of the players in question (which after a few years of play, I know rather well). I have a good chance of picking something they'd like.

Actual play begin with the millennium celebration, the contest of champions, and accompanying the princess  on her tour of the Island. Encounters and stuff follows.

The future conflicts appeared after the tour in an encounter with a ghost ship, where the first hints that a greater problem existed.

Currently the players are exploring a cave complex on a small Island in the Bay of Belfalas, there they will find clues that will send them all over the wider areas of Middle Earth (as those of Númenor were famous for doing).

Along the way they will pass by many things, get involved in some, skip others, always dogged by their destiny and the coming conflict.


In purest form, this is a modified railroad- for Middle Earth is a railroad ("This task was appointed to you, and if you do not find a way, no one will."). But the method is up to the players, as is their success (although the dice will have their say).

Along the way they will encounter all sorts of unrelated things and react to them as they well. This part actually resembles a sandbox and has the virtual of being as result unable to detract from the main quest line for more than limited time.

Quote from: Phillip;627627Then you could try considering 'sandbox' to mean nothing more than the same free will as in this life -- which I think is closer to what most people really mean than whatever "straw man" you have in mind.

If the games were a real world simulation, perhaps I would- although I wouldn't be interested in them enough to comment.

However in my mind, a fantasy campaign (in any era or setting) should be more, what's hidden in our world should be manifest in them.

Been kind of busy with stuff, so not as much time to devote to this thread as I'd have liked...

Quote from: Doctor Jest;627395I told the players where in the game world we'd be starting, and gave them a description of the region and the town or village they're starting in. They devise the reason their characters are in that town. Once in game, I allow the players free reign, and let them find out rumors and the situation in the town and they get involved or not as they see fit.

Thanks.

Okay, you've got a setting, and the players came up with a reason to be in town (and, I'd guess, why they'd be together).

So then you just threw rumors and situations at them. Were there consequences to ignoring a rumor or situation? If so can you give an example?

What exactly was the first rumor or situation with which they got involved?