Quote from: Telarus;857610Great thread. I've been researching tools that will let you run a World-In-Motion/"Living" Campaign more easily, allowing you to track and update these character and location details on the fly. I think I found one that will work wonderfully: TiddlyMap (http://tiddlymap.org)

This is an "edition" of another tool called TiddlyWiki. TiddlyWiki is a "Wiki in a single HTML file". It's meant to be a "local HTML application", not a hosted-website (although you can make that work also). It allows you to create arbitrary small-blocks-of-data (called "tiddlers"), and link them to each other, generate lists, show one block of data in another Tiddler, etc. Really flexible.

TiddlyMap adds on a "concept map" plugin that takes all your cross-linked Wiki content, and shows it as a node-and-line concept-map, much like I manually created in my old "Extracting Semantic Content From Classic Modules" thread. TiddlyWiki also has "ToDo List" functionality that works with TiddlyMap, which I think can be used to map out future timelines (even with branching paths) and have a visual map to reference when you need to.

See this demo map: http://tiddlymap.org/#TaskManagementExample%202.0

Right now I'm considering re-doing that Hommlet project with TiddlyMap. I'm also learning how to code plugin "Widgets" that would allow me to create custom Character Sheets for say, Earthdawn or D&D. I just have to get the data-model nailed down first.

I use a full-line linked and searchable wiki for mine, but I know of a few who really liked TiddlyWiki for that purpose.

Quote from: Baulderstone;857015Rather than building a timeline, I think it's better to just give major NPC and factions strong motivations at the start. Decide what they are doing now. During a session, look for ways they might react to the PCs actions if they are helping or hindering them in some way, or simply making a lot of noise.

Between sessions, go back and revise what NPCs are up to. Maybe even revise their motivations based on events of the last session. Look for ways that NPC can be interacting with each other as well.

It's basically building a timeline, but doing it only a week ahead, so you don't limit yourself.

This is great advice.

Quote from: Itachi;857707This is great advice.

I think this is a lot easier if you keep the sandbox small either geographically or in the amount of stuff you`ve nailed down.

Ran a Viking campaign a while back where half of the adventures were set in a tiny fjord that wasn`t even a hamlet just a bunch of farms.

Had the PCs deal with local fueds, pushy outsiders, a creepy local ruin, people trying to get revenge on them and lots and lots of lawsuits. Then every so often they`d get in a longship and hit the outside world to raid, trade, war or tax Lapps.

Was a big world out there but the only place they saw twice was TINY.

Quote from: Daztur;856558I think this can be a real issue with a lot of sandboxes. Often it seems like the whole world beyond the horizon is caught in amber and things only happen when the PCs stumble across them. Generally it matters very much WHERE the PCs go but not at all WHEN they go there.

I see where you're going with this, but I think it's important to note that:

First, the GM is just one person. They are not capable of keeping an entire world in motion.

Second, the real world is largely a status quo. Whether I go to Chicago today, tomorrow, next week, or next month it's going to be basically the same place when I get there.

So, in genreal, GMs should be designing the vast majority of their world to a status quo. And then, by and large, they can leave that world in whatever status quo they designed. The interesting question is where and how that status quo is broken, which basically boils down to:

(1) If the PCs touch something, it goes into motion. If they continue to touch it, it will remain in motion. If they get distracted and stop paying attention to it, it will continue in motion... but then it will eventually settle down into a new status quo.

(2) The PCs are not the only actors in the universe, so in some cases we'll want a status quo to become disrupted by something or someone else. The number of such disruptions is going to be largely determined how much time and interest the GM has to invest in the campaign.

What's probably most interesting to consider are the methods the GM uses for determining disruptions that don't originate from the PCs. (Because, generally speaking, disruptions that originate from the PCs will generally just be a matter of thinking about what's happening and then playing out the consequences.)

Does anyone else just set up a virtual universe in their mind, and then let it follow an organic course where things develop without your intentionally planning them out?

Or is that just a Real-Life-Wizard thing?

Quote from: RPGPundit;858287Does anyone else just set up a virtual universe in their mind, and then let it follow an organic course where things develop without your intentionally planning them out?

Or is that just a Real-Life-Wizard thing?

I do, but, then, I also screwed around with runic divination and galdr for a while, so that doesn't disprove the "real-life-wizard" hypothesis.

Quote from: RPGPundit;858287Does anyone else just set up a virtual universe in their mind, and then let it follow an organic course where things develop without your intentionally planning them out?

Or is that just a Real-Life-Wizard thing?

More or less that what I do. Sometimes specific chain of events are obvious other times it takes a while for things to build as consequences pile on top of consequences.

The best training for this is trying to write a good Alternate History. Start with a single Point of Departure and see where it takes you. Often you have an broad idea what the PoD will eventually result in. For example a more successful Axis in World War II will have some obvious consquence. However often when you start writing specifics and develop the new time line things spin off into unexpected direction as you move forward in time.

That pretty much how it works for when I run the Majestic Wilderland except for the fact that the player as their characters do a lot of the developing for me.

For example City-State is undergoing a Civil War because in the mid 80 a campaign involving "evil" PCs resulted in one of them becoming a powerful City-State noble. Then in the early 90s in another campaign another PC aligned with a religion that opposes the older "evil" character became a powerful noble. Then in the mid 90s a third group screwed up a rescue and got the Overlord son and heir killed. Causing a regency to form when the Overlord died in the mid 00s and his grandson was crowned. And then regency was taken over by the "evil" PC when yet another group causes the original regent faction to lose prestige and power. And the "good" PC noble revolted and City-State split.

After which I plotted out the events of the civil war. In subsequent campaigns PCs did not get involved thus they played out as I planned until a campaign two years ago knocked it off-kilter. Ironically the highlight of that campaign was the group building a tavern at wilderness crossroads.

The money for the Tavern came from the PCs unexpectedly kidnapping the Viking High King of the Skandians and ransoming him to the "good" guy Prince Artos of Nomar. Nomar defeats the disorganized Skandians making them strong enough to deter the "evil" High Regent from attacking them. Which puts him in a weaker position in regards to the "good" PC's faction

So everything is influx until the current campaign is over.

Quote from: RPGPundit;858287Does anyone else just set up a virtual universe in their mind, and then let it follow an organic course where things develop without your intentionally planning them out?

Or is that just a Real-Life-Wizard thing?

Do you mean without writing anything down?

I usually set the boundaries of my sandbox in terms of "where are we starting and wtf is going on here?" Fill it with my set-pieces to scale with the scope of the initial game. Those could be pirate fleets, city-factions, gangs, locations of import etc.

I generally have an idea of which factions and important individuals are doing as the game progresses. I keep track of who knows what and have them act accordingly in my head. I spend downtime between game sessions writing out notes to myself about possibilities that would affect the game, by the next week's session, barring the incessant bluebooking I end up doing between games, I'm ready to hit the ground running. To the players it looks, feels, and reacts like a living world.

So it's virtual, but I keep notes just to stay on track. All I use is Google Docs. Easy peasy.

I usually create a primer so my players can see what the scope and scale is. Here is an example I used for my DC Universe (with some Marvel and a few other tidbits tossed in), I wanted the players to understand the big picture up front in terms of how big I was thinking.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BSYV9pzL0FgSRT16nHuQ8KgOMEOW6nvl-u2Vi2dPncg/edit?usp=sharing

So I just crammed all the baby-notes I could to give people perspective with a little timeline leading up to the start of play. What I didn't tell them was the high-end of the game was literally about the forces of Law fighting the forces of Chaos (which is why most of the main characters were DC Earth 2 where magic was the main focus). So yeah I was setting them up for some epic shit. And the all the verbosity was because I was hinting at who was at play (if you're familiar with the DCU you'll see because I'm naming them in every paragraph).

Quote from: RPGPundit;858287Does anyone else just set up a virtual universe in their mind, and then let it follow an organic course where things develop without your intentionally planning them out?

Or is that just a Real-Life-Wizard thing?

Um, yes?
http://boingboing.net/2011/10/10/an-interview-with-sir-terry-pr.html
Neil Gaiman: When you put your Vimes-writing head on, is there a difference in the way you view the world to, say, when you're in your Rincewind-writing head, or your Granny Weatherwax-writing head?

Terry Pratchett: Oh, yes, surely you know how it is. Once you have your character sitting right there in your head, all you really need to do is wind them up, put them down, and simply write down what they do, say, or think. It really is like that. It verges on the weird; you know you are doing the thinking, but the thinking is being driven by the Sam Vimes module. There is also a fully functioning Tiffany Aching module, too, which is rather strange.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;857722Second, the real world is largely a status quo. Whether I go to Chicago today, tomorrow, next week, or next month it's going to be basically the same place when I get there.

So you are saying that you could visit New York on Sept 10 2001, and again on Sept 11 2001 and one day would be much like the other?

Shit happens, in the real world and in make believe ones. When it does happen, then it matters.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;858507

QuoteSecond, the real world is largely a status quo. Whether I go to Chicago today, tomorrow, next week, or next month it's going to be basically the same place when I get there.

So you are saying that you could visit New York on Sept 10 2001, and again on Sept 11 2001 and one day would be much like the other?

Shit happens, in the real world and in make believe ones. When it does happen, then it matters.

I agree with you 100%. Which is why I said, in the very next paragraph of the post you quoted: "The interesting question is where and how that status quo is broken..."

Quote from: Skarg;858329Do you mean without writing anything down?

Yes. At least, what I mean is: you write stuff about the setting before you start. Then, when you start, you just imbue life on the NPCs, the world, etc. and see what it does.
You MIGHT write down stuff AFTER the fact, just to keep track of what happened. But you don't 'write stuff down' in the sense of sitting and thinking about it and saying "ok, it would be cool if the evil overlord tried to make a pact with the merchant guild" or something like that.

Quote from: Telarus;858441Um, yes?
http://boingboing.net/2011/10/10/an-interview-with-sir-terry-pr.html
Neil Gaiman: When you put your Vimes-writing head on, is there a difference in the way you view the world to, say, when you're in your Rincewind-writing head, or your Granny Weatherwax-writing head?

Terry Pratchett: Oh, yes, surely you know how it is. Once you have your character sitting right there in your head, all you really need to do is wind them up, put them down, and simply write down what they do, say, or think. It really is like that. It verges on the weird; you know you are doing the thinking, but the thinking is being driven by the Sam Vimes module. There is also a fully functioning Tiffany Aching module, too, which is rather strange.

That's about right.

Quote from: RPGPundit;859147Yes. At least, what I mean is: you write stuff about the setting before you start. Then, when you start, you just imbue life on the NPCs, the world, etc. and see what it does.
You MIGHT write down stuff AFTER the fact, just to keep track of what happened. But you don't 'write stuff down' in the sense of sitting and thinking about it and saying "ok, it would be cool if the evil overlord tried to make a pact with the merchant guild" or something like that.

I see. I do "channel" large amounts of stuff similar to how you say, but I also write a lot down (as much as I can without slowing things down), because otherwise I know I will forget or mis-remember details, or generate inconsistent stuff, and I like abundant consistent details and mapped locations and so on.

Well, and I "channel" when I make worlds, and I determine what's where are what's going on and keep notes on (and maps of) all that too. So while I channel for source, it's what generates a lot of pre-generated information that has me going into game sessions already knowing a lot about the setting, so the generation there is mostly about details and what actually happens. I rarely invent entire major things that didn't exist before during play sessions, at least in my preferred GM mode.