Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

[Spideydave]

I have a new Dark Champions game I am running. The Game is set in Hudson City. The player characters are built like supers but are all Street level. It is very much a masked vigilante/crime fighter game. As archtypes I have a "Batman" , a "Question", a "Green Arrow" and a "Punisher(minus the dead family)".

 

Now I have been toying with the idea of a Sandbox style game. But I have never really tried it. I can usually get my players invloved in my plots. But I have been thinking that instead of always giving the players the mission or mystery why not let them discover the city and its mysteries by themselves.

 

Now I have been running dark champions mystery style detective games for a long time. So I am skilled at presenting the hook for a mystery, and then through clues leading the players to the bad guys. But I want to do this game differently.

 

From what I understand Sandbox games are more player driven. The GM sets up the game but the players are really in the driver's seat when it coms to the plot and where the game goes.

 

So how would you go about running a Sandbox style game?

 

Suggestions tips and tricks are welcome.

 

Dave

[assault]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

Throw lots of hooks at them, and let them choose which ones to bite.

 

Study their characters. What the players have written about them can tell you about what the players want/expect. "Map in that direction".

 

Encourage the players to write up NPCs for you. Obviously, start with DNPCs, contacts and the like, but anyone interesting should be welcome. You don't have to use all of them!

 

Likewise, encourage them to design locations for you. Then you can lay breadcrumbs to lead the PCs there.

 

There's quite as big a difference between sandbox and railroad games as is often assumed. The main thing is that the players have multiple options and a more active role in creating the game world. You'll still be preparing hooks for them.

[sinanju]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

I wouldn't say that I run "sandbox" games--but they do tend to be heavily player-directed. My approach is to work out who the bad guys are, what they want to accomplish (and why), what resources they have, and how they'll respond to attempts at interference (will they try to buy or scare off trouble? jump immediately to trying to kill them?). Then I create some plot hooks (some ways of getting the players to stumble across the bad guys and their machinations).

 

Then I leave it up to the players to decide how to handle the situation. Because I haven't planned specific encounters, I only need to determine whether (and how effectively) the PCs' plans would uncover more info, and when/where they'd encounter the bad guys (or their minions). If the players come up with really inventive ideas, as they often do, things I never would have thought to plan for, I can wing it. If they seem to be floundering without direction, THEN I'll throw another hook in their path.

 

If you work up a number of different bad guys (or bad guy groups) all with their own agendas, and you know what they want to do and how they plan to do it, it's not hard to find a way for the PCs to stumble across one or another of them. Of course, you do need proactive players who understand that THEIR part in the game is to be out there digging and fighting the good fight. If they're going to wait around to be spoon-fed the plot or ride the railroad from plot point to plot point, this approach doesn't work.

 

Study their characters. What the players have written about them can tell you about what the players want/expect. "Map in that direction".

 

Encourage the players to write up NPCs for you. Obviously, start with DNPCs, contacts and the like, but anyone interesting should be welcome. You don't have to use all of them!

 

These are both excellent ideas. Think of a PC's disad/complication list as their way of saying "I want this to be part of my experience in the game." (Just because a character has a secret identity doesn't mean he HAS to take that as a disad. Maybe it never causes him trouble in his personal life. That's a choice. The character who DOES take "Secret ID" as a complication/disad should have to deal with missing or being late for work, for dates, explaining his absences, etc.

 

Having the players create several NPCs they know, a "supporting cast" as it were, is another good idea. Not necessarily DNPCs. In fact, they shouldn't all be DNPCs. They should be people the character knows and interacts with. Family, friends, co-workers, employees, employers, neighbors, the local barista, whoever. It provides good role-playing opportunities, and you can build on (and around) the ones who are most interesting.

[Folded]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

I tend to improv a lot, because I got tired of working for weeks and having the entire campaign blown away in the first session. I tend to plan relatively short adventures and let the players complicate them. We usually refer to that as "urinating around" (not really, but you get the idea). We've had a lot of fun that way, and it seems to be my best mode.

 

My buddy Matt, on the other hand, ran a campaign once (I wasn't there for it), where he built a city and decided what was going on in it. Each game day, the characters had the chance to do pretty much whatever they wanted. If they got themselves involved with something that was going to happen, then an adventure of some kind ensued. If not, then the plot lines advanced as planned. He had various ways to get hooks into the character's hands, but it was largely up to them what they wanted to do or respond to. People in the group said it was great. But he's a planner by nature.

 

So, there are two completely different takes on the basic idea, both of which work pretty well.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

Been playing "sandbox" style Epic City for a loooong time. Here's how I do it: My Process

[Bloodstone]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

Several of my players hate it. They don't want to be totally railroaded, but they want a pretty clear path in front of them. They really seem to prefer when there aren't too many branches along that path.

 

If there are too many plot hooks, they just get racked with indecision. They get frustrated when they feel like there is too much going on for them to keep track of. I think it all kinda depends on the players motivation, attention spans and memory for details (or in many cases, note taking skills). Many players just want to chill out and finish a fun adventure. So sandbox style games can be incredibly frustrating for them, since it requires a much greater investment from all parties involved. And, with too many irons in the fire, they sometimes complain that they no longer feel like they are accomplishing anything, because succeeding in part A just means they have to get to work on part's B-Z. This seems especially bad for players that have something of a Completest mentality.

 

So, know your players is probably the first and most important step.

[Orion]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

Most players I've met, and every one that I ever GM'd, wanted to be railroaded. They knew how to dungeon-crawl, and couldn't really envision any other way to play. They don't want to think - just be shown the direction to walk to find the monsters.

 

My preference is a modified sandbox. I create a lot of background details and events that will happen regardless. These get passed on to the players as tv newscasts, newspaper articles, or the town crier calling out the news on market day. If the players choose to get involved, I go with that. Some of these events will be tailored to specific characters and/or players. For example, a rival might be robbing a bank, or I might toss in some time travel if a player has mentioned that in the recent past. Doing one thing may prevent them from doing others. I do not guarantee that all events are of equal priority or power level - the disturbance is probably ogres, but could also be kobolds or an ancient dragon that will kill most or all of the party if they don't run away at full speed.

 

At the start of the campaign I request that each player give me several ideas/events/etc that they'd like to see - I believe I got the idea from this forum. I also require a detailed history and personality writeup for each character, so that gives me a pretty good idea where to go with possible storylines.

[Vondy]

Re: Do you run Sandbox style? and how?

 

The success for a "sandbox style" game is heavily based on player personality. They have to be self-motivated and interested. Some players want to be led. If you have a group of those players it won't work. Aside from hungry players with a have at thee! attitude, the game master will need to be more flexible than usual.

 

The GM has to be willing to run with the player's ideas, and even give them some license in shaping scenes and plots. This is not to say the GM isn't the arbiter, and that most player license should be restricted to cosmetic elements, but it will require a more open-minded GM. That said, the world will need to be very well fleshed out and the GM will need to provide lots and lots of hooks to snare the players with.

 

With the right personalities involved these games can be great. Right now I only run solo games because its all remote from the other side of the planet, or my wife here in my home. My wife prefers to be led into a plot, but takes the initiative in character/RP scenes. My other player is self-directed and we end up with a mix. I have a plot, but constantly rework it based on his use of license, which is more influential than at table-top games because PBEM gives you more time to react.

 

With my old group, there were two very self-directed players and four "lead me, please" players. This created the problem that, if I didn't have a plot and wanted to run "sandbox style" it was invariably those two players who defined the game. It worked well enough, but in some groups that might generate complaints.