My thong itches.

Well see now estar, I'm not sure if that campaign does fall under the sandbox heading (very cool campaign idea, for sure, though).  Undoubtedly, you approached it as a living world that would continue on whatever the party did and in that sense, the setting was following the rules of the sandbox.  But I think this is just classic simulationist world-building.

By deciding ahead of time "we are going to be in this limited roles, under the structure of an authority that can order us around a cultural/professional role with a lot of restrictions" you are already, as a group, guiding the story growth of the campaign, focusing towards "the story of the guards".  I don't see that as a true sandbox.

QuoteBut I think this is just classic simulationist world-building.

And yet he gets defensive and weird when people assume he's with the Forge?

Quote from: walkerpBy deciding ahead of time "we are going to be in this limited roles, under the structure of an authority that can order us around a cultural/professional role with a lot of restrictions" you are already, as a group, guiding the story growth of the campaign, focusing towards "the story of the guards".  I don't see that as a true sandbox.

Same here. "You can leave the story at any time" isn't sandbox, it's non-railroaded plot. "Hey, they just left the story and headed for the pyramids of Dosequisia" would be the start of the full-on sandbox part of the game. Alternatively "you're all city gaurds, go do what you want in order to lower crime" could also be a sandbox.

I used the same techniques, tools, and setting for the guard campaign as for the "wandering around and do the hell I want" campaign. I needed the same level of detail to do both in a fun and entertaining way.

It is my view that sandbox should go where ever the players want it go. Sometime they want to be become the King's flunky and I will go with it and generate things for the new made flunky to do for the king. Again the difference between the guard and the flunky is that the players choose to be guards before the start of play.

If all sounds lot like a simulation well it is. Because frankly reality holds it own truth better than a contrived situation. By playing it realistic you will find that the players have a more choices than alternatives.

My techniques are a tool with the goal of maximizing opportunity and choice for my players. Doesn't mean it will work in all circumstances or situations. It has disadvantages in that it takes a lot of work to get it setup. Luckily I done most of the work long ago and I do now just adds to the already rich pile of stuff I use.

In the end the goal of using sandbox play giving the maximum amount of choices and opportunities to the players. If what you do does that then great. The mechanics of running a sandbox setting are complex enough that more than one approach is going to be viable.

Quote from: James McMurrayAlternatively "you're all city gaurds, go do what you want in order to lower crime" could also be a sandbox.

If I wasn't clear before, your comment accurately reflects how I ran the mage, thief, guard, temple campaign.

However for the guard it was more like "how we control these crazy ass adventurers overrunning the city". The result was instructive and let's say they don't mess with the city guards anymore in my campaign. I believe the thieves campaign was ran before the guards as well and they figured out how to deal with some of the issues brought up in that game as well.

Quote from: James McMurraySame here. "You can leave the story at any time" isn't sandbox, it's non-railroaded plot. "Hey, they just left the story and headed for the pyramids of Dosequisia" would be the start of the full-on sandbox part of the game. Alternatively "you're all city gaurds, go do what you want in order to lower crime" could also be a sandbox.

It now becomes clear that the use of the word Sandbox is in fact arbitrary and subject to a great deal of personal interpretation - one person's Sandbox is not the next person's Sandbox.   That's ok.   Use it if you like, but since there is no actual definition that is universally applicable, and it is therefore entirely open to anyone's interpretation, it is rendered semi-meaningless.  This, I find, seems to be the case with a great deal of the Theory stuff I've read about.   Some people seem to want to create a science out of RPG with Theory, but there's no authority yet established to actually codify and authorize the meaning of all of the terms people are strewing about, and therefore the terms themselves quickly become diffused in discussion, rendering them more or less meaningless.   Sandbox is a nice, though semi-useless for anything other than light discussion, term.   I think I'll substitute it for myself with "Free Play".   I like that term better.

Quote from: VBWyrdeIt now becomes clear that the use of the word Sandbox is in fact arbitrary and subject to a great deal of personal interpretation - one person's Sandbox is not the next person's Sandbox.   That's ok.   Use it if you like, but since there is no actual definition that is universally applicable, and it is therefore entirely open to anyone's interpretation, it is rendered semi-meaningless.  This, I find, seems to be the case with a great deal of the Theory stuff I've read about.   Some people seem to want to create a science out of RPG with Theory, but there's no authority yet established to actually codify and authorize the meaning of all of the terms people are strewing about, and therefore the terms themselves quickly become diffused in discussion, rendering them more or less meaningless.   Sandbox is a nice, though semi-useless for anything other than light discussion, term.   I think I'll substitute it for myself with "Free Play".   I like that term better.

What part of my usage are you disagreeing with? It's quite possible I'm misrepresenting the word, since I'm just talking about how I've heard it used and don't actually use it (or many other play style labels) myself.

Quote from: estarIf I wasn't clear before, your comment accurately reflects how I ran the mage, thief, guard, temple campaign.

However for the guard it was more like "how we control these crazy ass adventurers overrunning the city". The result was instructive and let's say they don't mess with the city guards anymore in my campaign. I believe the thieves campaign was ran before the guards as well and they figured out how to deal with some of the issues brought up in that game as well.

I'd love to hear about them if you've got the time to start a thread. It makes me want to run a guard campaign. It'd be a sort of urban Reverse Dungeon.

Quote from: James McMurrayWhat part of my usage are you disagreeing with? It's quite possible I'm misrepresenting the word, since I'm just talking about how I've heard it used and don't actually use it (or many other play style labels) myself.

Actually I'm not objecting to any one person's usage.  I'm pointing out that there is no authorized defintion (nor can there be since RPGs have at present no authorizing body that all RPGers feel is representative), and that therefore any discussion of Theory is somewhat pointless, since the basic terms are subject to personal interpretation.  I got this impression just now from the general back and forth nature of the discussion on Sandbox, wherein I find this to be the case.   Sandbox, therefore, it seems to me, is a term that can be lightly used to mean one of a number of similar, but not exactly the same, things in RPGs, ... and that's ok.   Personally, I like my term "Free Play" for the same meaning.   The term seems more representative to me of what the Sandbox is, by some, intended to mean.

Oh, cool. I got confused when you quoted me and then denounced the entire discussion.

"Sandbox" has been used, in the way we're using it here, in computer gaming circles for years.  See Doc Rotwang's post above.

But why don't we make that term mean something entirely different, and use another word to describe sandbox play?  I nominate "Beluga Play."

Quote from: KenHR"Sandbox" has been used, in the way we're using it here, in computer gaming circles for years.  See Doc Rotwang's post above.

But why don't we make that term mean something entirely different, and use another word to describe sandbox play?  I nominate "Beluga Play."

You've been spending too much time at the Forge, haven't you?  HAVEN'T YOU?!  Are you now or have you ever been a swine?

Quote from: J ArcaneYou've been spending too much time at the Forge, haven't you?  HAVEN'T YOU?!  Are you now or have you ever been a swine?

You and that brain-damaged head of yours...

Quote from: VBWyrdeActually I'm not objecting to any one person's usage.  I'm pointing out that there is no authorized defintion .

Well one problem is the lack of products for the style. The classic example is still Wilderlands of High Fantasy  and CSIO. With more product then the market can form a consensus of what supports "Sandbox" play and what doesn't.