EVery Major NPC (including villians)and every major organization has a minimum of 1 plotlines associated with them.  These plotlines are broken down into key scenes, just like my character's three or so plotlines are.  As time progresses and conditions are met, the NPCs/Major Organizations tick through their key events from begining to end.  Unless the PCs do something to change events, (or change one event that may impact another plot line) they will eventually move through their history.  

Event 1
    *
Event 2
    *                                          *
Event 3  unless Y happens, then Event 5
    *                                          *
Event 4  or                             Event 6

This way, I can have a progress of history in an easy to track form.  

So the world moves around my characters.  If they do things to impact it (and often they can), it moves wayyyy around them.

Quote from: MoonHunter;633360EVery Major NPC (including villians)and every major organization has a minimum of 1 plotlines associated with them.  These plotlines are broken down into key scenes, just like my character's three or so plotlines are.  As time progresses and conditions are met, the NPCs/Major Organizations tick through their key events from begining to end.  Unless the PCs do something to change events, (or change one event that may impact another plot line) they will eventually move through their history.  

Event 1
    *
Event 2
    *                                          *
Event 3  unless Y happens, then Event 5
    *                                          *
Event 4  or                             Event 6

This way, I can have a progress of history in an easy to track form.  

So the world moves around my characters.  If they do things to impact it (and often they can), it moves wayyyy around them.

I see what you're doing there, but I tend to do it much more organically. Or at least, much more in my own head than laid out.

RPGPundit

Quote from: jeff37923;630167There is something to be said in favor of the GM having a bad guy who the PCs have pissed off, waiting in the wings for a dramatically appropriate moment to reappear in game.

And I agree. That'll probably happen a few times, but we'd just come from a game where that happened ALL THE TIME, so I was trying to avoid it. (This is a spinoff campaign.) No matter how unlikely or how far away you traveled, you could be sure the bad guys would show up. They seemed to have unlimited crystal ball, mind reading, and teleportation abilities.

Quote from: Dana;633513And I agree. That'll probably happen a few times, but we'd just come from a game where that happened ALL THE TIME, so I was trying to avoid it. (This is a spinoff campaign.) No matter how unlikely or how far away you traveled, you could be sure the bad guys would show up. They seemed to have unlimited crystal ball, mind reading, and teleportation abilities.

Yeah, everything should be used in moderation. ANY schtick can get old fast if it is overused.

Quote from: jeff37923;627031When GMing, I often have events happening in the background or foreground that can be affected by the Players if they so choose. Some of them will happen to the detriment of the PCs if they do not do something. The setting is dynamic and things are constantly in motion.

Yes.

Quote from: jibbajibba;627522Now 3 is the 'real' sandbox way to do it . . .

Yeah, you're the perfect spokesman for "the 'real' sandbox way to do it," all right.

Quote from: jibbajibba;628035They would say that because my goblin barracks only exists in my head and it's layout is taken whole cloth from a school I used to teach at becuase that is what I thought of 3 minuts ago when the PCs said that they would go there. That I am guilty of illusionism.

Improvisation != illusionism.

Quote from: jeff37923;627031When GMing, I often have events happening in the background or foreground that can be affected by the Players if they so choose. Some of them will happen to the detriment of the PCs if they do not do something. The setting is dynamic and things are constantly in motion.

How many others approach scenarios this way?

Always.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;633531Improvisation != illusionism.

well, yeah.  But it is part of the GMs job.  Like I said, the "Illusion of Preparedness" is part of the GM's job, but I also totally believe that PCs are pretty bright, and there is a subtle shift when they know you are making it up more than 'playing fair'.

Quote from: zend0g;633534Always.

Welcome to the adult swim.

Quote from: LordVreeg;633535Like I said, the "Illusion of Preparedness" is part of the GM's job, but I also totally believe that PCs are pretty bright, and there is a subtle shift when they know you are making it up more than 'playing fair'.

I think "Illusion of Preparedness" isn't a particularly good description.

Much of my preparation is specifically geared toward improvisation in actual play. My goal isn't to make improvising invisible to my players - they often know I'm improvising, in no small part because I roll everything in the open - but rather to take care that what I'm improvising is interesting and consistent with the rest of the game-world.

Illusionism - hiding the fact that you're taking away meaningful decisions from the players - is another thing altogether.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;633538Welcome to the adult swim.


I think "Illusion of Preparedness" isn't a particularly good description.

Much of my preparation is specifically geared toward improvisation in actual play. My goal isn't to make improvising invisible to my players - they often know I'm improvising, in no small part because I roll everything in the open - but rather to take care that what I'm improvising is interesting and consistent with the rest of the game-world.

Illusionism - hiding the fact that you're taking away meaningful decisions from the players - is another thing altogether.

Yes, I understand illusionism, but I use the the term in that phrase for that reason.

But I also know that it is a different player experience, psychologically, when they are in a prepared area (or they think they are) and everything is 'fair', vs when they are in an unprepared area, and GM fiat, real or not, is employed.

My opinion (and this is still all it is) has been thought out over years.  No matter how good and fair you are, whether you are rolling for it or not, it changes the ability to Immerse because it increases the metagame element (in this case, the obvious GM making it up as you go along).
Because players ALWAYS have to trust the GM not to take away meaningful decisions, but the idea of the perfect sandbox is that is it all created and they exist in it, whether in terms of events and time or in terms of maps or NPCs.  And every time the hand of the GM or the mechanics interfere in this feel, it reduces the time reacting to the setting as a consistent thing.  We all have to improvise, we all have to roll dice and create on the fly, good PCs will create outward, but another skill is not letting on when they are moving from a very detailed area to a partially detailed one.

" Vreeg's Fifth Rule of Setting Design

"The 'Illusion of Preparedness' is critical for immersion; allowing the players to see where things are improvised or changed reminds them to think outside the setting, removing them forcibly from immersion. Whenever the players can see the hand of the GM, even when the GM needs to change things in their favor; it removes them from the immersed position. The ability to keep the information flow even and consistent to the players, and to keep the divide between prepared information and newly created information invisible is a critical GM ability."

So I know we have to improvise, I agree that it is an important skill, but I think what you talk about in your blog in pre-prepping encounters, etc, works better when the PCs don't feel when they step from one scene or area to another, it is all consistent.

Even after hearing these concepts debated back and forth here and on RPG.net, I don't know if these are really even very useful. I think they are all separate axes rather than being dependent on each other. Nothing stops a GM from preparing an inconsistent and general setting before hand.  

Prepared vs Improvised
Consistent vs Inconsistent
Detailed vs General

However, I do think that Improvised/Consistent/Detailed games are rarer as it requires greater GM skill and memory isn't a perfect resource. Plus, sneaky players may use traditional psychological tricks to trip a GM up.

Keep a composition book handy and make notes for future reference. It works for me.