Definition of "Sandbox"

[gonyaulax]

For the record, I am not a new player. I cut my teeth on the 3LBBs in 1977 and ran a full-blown campaign about the time the 1st Ed. DMG came out in the summer of 1979.

All of this is a prelude to what some will find as a simplistic question:

How would you define the term "sandbox", as in a "sandbox campaign" or a "sandbox dungeon"?

Take your time. In trying to define it myself, I've ended up with a totally unsatisfying overly complex answer. So I'm looking at all of you folks who express themselves far better than I do for help.

Thanks!


Further thought impels me to ask another question: What would be the best example of what is the polar opposite of either a "sandbox campaign" or a "sandbox dungeon", one that most of us would know . . .

[Deleted]

To me, "sandbox" means no right answer.

The referee creates a number of adventures. The players may choose some, all, or none.

If they choose an adventure, there is no "right" answer. They may escort the caravan, desert it halfway through, ignore it, or attack it themselves.

"Here is a world. Explore it."

[Keps]

Jan 24, 2014 23:28:06 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

To me, "sandbox" means no right answer.

The referee creates a number of adventures. The players may choose some, all, or none.

If they choose an adventure, there is no "right" answer. They may escort the caravan, desert it halfway through, ignore it, or attack it themselves.

"Here is a world. Explore it."

All of that plus, they may choose to fight each other. I've dropped out of a few of these scenarios lately.

[Finarvyn]

I think that the term "sandbox" tracxes its roots back to the sand table. Before I found OD&D, some friends and I used to play Chainmail in a sand table in my friend's garage. You could change the terrain each time by scooping sand into piles for hills, drawing in rivers, etc.

While we didn't use the term "sandbox campaign" back in '75, that's what I ran all of the time. I created a world and then the players would choose where they wanted to go and what they wanted to do. Honestly, I hardly ever ran an actual module for my first 20+ years of playing OD&D. (The exceptions to this were the old Judges Guild products like Thunderhold and CSIO and Tegel Manor, but even those tended to be "sandbox" modules in that there was no specific goal or linear path to reach an objective.

Jan 24, 2014 23:28:06 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

To me, "sandbox" means no right answer.

"Here is a world. Explore it."

As usual, Michael hits the nail square with the hammer.

[Finarvyn]

Jan 24, 2014 23:01:54 GMT -6 gonyaulax said:

Further thought impels me to ask another question: What would be the best example of what is the polar opposite of either a "sandbox campaign" or a "sandbox dungeon", one that most of us would know . . .

Most 4E modules that I've seen appear to be the antithesis of the "sandbox." (I don't have a specific one in mind; I'll have to think about it.) The plot seems to be something like: "run encounter one, then encounter two, then encounter three, then the big finish." This style of adventure design is easy to run and easy to play, but tends to rob the players from a certain creative element where they get to make choices.

[Deleted]

For me the core distinction is one of meaningful choices. Where the players can make informed choices as to where to proceed or what to do and those choices will matter. It's not sufficient that they are given choices if those choices are meaningless; for example, if they leave town going north, they encounter a caravan under attack and if they leave town going south they also encounter a caravan under attack. I don't think it's possible to run a completely 100% sandbox game as the initial setup would be too massive. It's more of an ideal or a feeling you are trying to create in the players.

I also don't think the term has anything to do with sandtables, but rather regular ol' playground sandboxes. i.e. an area where you can play in. It's usage became popular in reference to "open world" computer games, particularly Grand Theft Auto.

[Todd]

I think you can go completely sandbox provided everyone's willing to bear with improvisation. With all the random tables in resources like the ready reference sheets, there's no lack of material and/or inspiration.

[sulldawga]

Jan 25, 2014 10:45:31 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

I don't think it's possible to run a completely 100% sandbox game as the initial setup would be too massive. It's more of an ideal or a feeling you are trying to create in the players.

Who's to say the initial setup has to be massive? You can create contingencies for every direction the players could go, but they're going to choose only one in the end.

Prep what you need for the next game session, and if the players go in an unexpected direction, well, that's what random tables and a d20 are for.

[Stormcrow]

Jan 25, 2014 5:49:02 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

I think that the term "sandbox" tracxes its roots back to the sand table.

I'm pretty sure the term comes from a children's sandbox, where play is unstructured and you can do anything you want in the sand.

[Deleted]

Jan 25, 2014 12:41:43 GMT -6 Todd said:

I think you can go completely sandbox provided everyone's willing to bear with improvisation. With all the random tables in resources like the ready reference sheets, there's no lack of material and/or inspiration.

That, and a willingness to say "I'm not ready for that, want to do something else for tonight and I can have something ready next week, or just go get a beer?"

[robertsconley]

A sandbox campaign is one where it is the players choices that drive the action. The referee job in campaign development, is to look at what the player did and choose the most interesting consequence. The term usage for a type of campaign came about in the mid 2000s as a result the a necromancer trying to promote the Wilderlands boxed set it was adopted by the team because of its use in describing computer games that were free ranging and open ended.

I was involved with the process although I did not come up with the term myself. Nor did the team felt it invented something new. We felt we came up with a good label to,describe what many of us were doing for years.

[gonyaulax]

Thanks for the thoughtful replies.

I can see that the definition that I was trying to write concentrated too much on DM's "openendedness", "open world", "endless options", etc. I should have been concentrating on "meaningful player choices", ones with consequences to that setting, where those choices drive the action: both the direction and the pace.

Sometimes it's hard to keep my verbage down. Thanks again!

[Lord Kilgore]

Well, I think the "endless open world" is a part of it, for sure. When I started getting back into things and everyone was on about sandboxes and stuff, I had trouble understanding what the big deal was because that's more or less how we had always played. It seems that many who played in the early days (I was a latecomer, not starting until 83) feel the same way. Our sandbox had a little more DM-driven storyline than most descriptions of sandbox usually allow for, but I think the key is that the world is open and that player choices and actions have a lasting affect. There might be an edge of the map, but the world goes on.

[gonyaulax]

As I was searching for something else, I was re-reading a big part of the Advice to build a megadungeon setting and campaign thread over on the "Underworld & Wilderness Adventures" category, and I found this quote: (in the ninth post of the thread)

Benoist on July 17, 2012:
Note that the fact this diagram looks like what a chart showing relationships between factions or NPCs in a game setting might look like, or how the links between various clues or elements in an investigation scenario might be organized prior to play, is no coincidence at all, here. Fundamentally, there is no difference between Melan’s analysis of dungeon layouts and Justin Alexander talking to us about the Three Clue Rule: it’s all about managing the players' choices, not by trying to trap them into a prefabricated suit of rooms or clues or events, but by giving them even more choices and alternative courses which you then manage on an action-reaction basis which forms the core of the game itself, rather than trying to work the group towards a predefined outcome that would need to occur one way or the other for the game to be remotely satisfying once played.

This is in the context of his discussing "Jaquaying the Dungeon", it forcibly struck me that a large part of the paragraph above could be used directly in a definition of a "sandbox" dungeon or campaign.

I will now try to take all of your excellent comments and form them into a reasonable definition of "sandbox". I'll post it here if anyone is still interested.

[gonyaulax]

Jan 25, 2014 5:49:02 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

While we didn't use the term "sandbox campaign" back in '75, that's what I ran all of the time. I created a world and then the players would choose where they wanted to go and what they wanted to do. Honestly, I hardly ever ran an actual module for my first 20+ years of playing OD&D. (The exceptions to this were the old Judges Guild products like Thunderhold and CSIO and Tegel Manor, but even those tended to be "sandbox" modules in that there was no specific goal or linear path to reach an objective.

I have to agree with this. In our initial group (1977-1982, the "Waldwarf Austerians"), we would occasionally run a module or two (I remember playing in one of the Giants series), the great majority of the time we played in the sandbox world that one of us started up. The party did what it wanted and we didn't know that there was any other way to play. It was GREAT!

I just wanted to be clear that while I did know what "sandbox" was (and in fact prefer playing it rather than a "story" method), I was having a hard time actually defining it.

[Deleted]

I always try to run as close to 100% sandbox as possible. Everytime I ask the players to make a choice there are always at least two choices and in some cases 10 or more choices and they almost always lead to something different. Now in a dungeon sometimes two different directions do lead to the same place, but the vast majority of the time they do not. And out of doors you can go any place you want, and they will all be different. In the campaign that I started four years ago, I gave them four rumors and each of the three rumors they chose not to pursue would have resulted in a completely different game than did the one that they chose.

[gonyaulax]

I never realized as a player how "close to the edge" it can get for a DM. One of the best adventures of ours started in a bar. Our party got into a discussion with a couple of real interesting and slightly shady NPCs and we ended up role-playing that bar scene for almost the whole night. Near the end of the game session, we had decided what we wanted to do and set out "for the rendezvous", at which point we closed the session.

We only found out later that the DM had skated along the whole night by the seat of his pants, but now, at least, he had a week to "get ahead of us". It really worked out very memorable.

But I'd be surprised if this experience was in any way unique among players at the time. I wonder how often players of the newer editions have similar experiences . . .

[Keps]

A sandbox style game has a different feel when played by experienced vs. inexperienced players and DMs. An experienced player can tell where the DM has prepared for and will oblige, while the inexperienced player votes for the usually silly route that best benefits their individual character. An experienced DM, can and will without the feel of railroad, get the party on his/her prepared path. The end result for either is that you still played D&D and had fun but experienced players and DMs leave unfulfilled when the game is controlled by an inexperienced player/s or DM.

[benoist]

Jan 24, 2014 23:28:06 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

To me, "sandbox" means no right answer.

The referee creates a number of adventures. The players may choose some, all, or none.

If they choose an adventure, there is no "right" answer. They may escort the caravan, desert it halfway through, ignore it, or attack it themselves.

"Here is a world. Explore it."

That's about the best definition of "sandbox" I have ever seen.

There's a world. The players choose their own objectives, and do stuff. There's no right answer. The world just "is".

[benoist]

Jan 27, 2014 14:03:15 GMT -6 gonyaulax said:

As I was searching for something else, I was re-reading a big part of the Advice to build a megadungeon setting and campaign thread over on the "Underworld & Wilderness Adventures" category, and I found this quote: (in the ninth post of the thread)

Benoist on July 17, 2012:
Note that the fact this diagram looks like what a chart showing relationships between factions or NPCs in a game setting might look like, or how the links between various clues or elements in an investigation scenario might be organized prior to play, is no coincidence at all, here. Fundamentally, there is no difference between Melan’s analysis of dungeon layouts and Justin Alexander talking to us about the Three Clue Rule: it’s all about managing the players' choices, not by trying to trap them into a prefabricated suit of rooms or clues or events, but by giving them even more choices and alternative courses which you then manage on an action-reaction basis which forms the core of the game itself, rather than trying to work the group towards a predefined outcome that would need to occur one way or the other for the game to be remotely satisfying once played.

This is in the context of his discussing "Jaquaying the Dungeon", it forcibly struck me that a large part of the paragraph above could be used directly in a definition of a "sandbox" dungeon or campaign.

I will now try to take all of your excellent comments and form them into a reasonable definition of "sandbox". I'll post it here if anyone is still interested.

Fundamentally, you're right. It's about the players, their choices and objectives. It's about the freedom to go left or right, and the GM remaining cool with whatever outcome and developments that produces.

[Keps]

Jan 28, 2014 13:44:49 GMT -6 benoist said:

Fundamentally, you're right. It's about the players, their choices and objectives. It's about the freedom to go left or right, and the GM remaining cool with whatever outcome and developments that produces.

From a DM perspective, you guys are really nailing down that definition. Cheers. From a player POV, a mixed group of experienced/inexperienced or individual minded players breaks all of the rules to your sandbox. A Con game should NEVER be sandbox, unless you just like rolling dice for a few hours with no endgame.

[bestialwarlust]

Jan 27, 2014 21:35:47 GMT -6 gonyaulax said:

We only found out later that the DM had skated along the whole night by the seat of his pants, but now, at least, he had a week to "get ahead of us". It really worked out very memorable.

This happens to me often I work hard keeping the players in the dark "Oh yeah I had that whole thing planned out"

[joseph]

Jan 27, 2014 20:39:37 GMT -6 @theperilousdreamer said:

I gave them four rumors and each of the three rumors they chose not to pursue would have resulted in a completely different game than did the one that they chose.

This is pretty much what I like do. However, in order to create a feeling that the world is alive, "the world just is" as benoist and Michael said, those three plot hooks don't stop just because the party wasn't interested. Someone else checked them out, or no one did and the bad guys won. Whatever the case the PCs hear about this stuff later...maybe leading to further adventures. In my definition, the world has to continue with or without player involvement.

[Keps]

The sandbox feel of play should exist in every game. If the party is in a massive dungeon crawl and they find a unique item or acquire treasure they wish to sell, an opportunity to leave should be available. When the party is determined in one driving quest, if there is no time limit for completion of said quest, along they way the party can investigate any nearby caves/dungeons/towns etc on a whim. Large cities also are sandbox by default.