Episodic vs Sandbox - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Episodic vs Sandbox

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
skritz_the_lizardmen
Apr 17, 2010 8:48:55 Im still trying to decide if my Eberron campaign should be purely episodic (all adventures stand-alone and the players have a home base) or pure sandbox (I let them loose in the campaign world, let them go where they want and just roll with it). The thing is that I don't plan to make any long-spanning story arc. I tried that once and it was a bit...well, it sucked.
#2
skibo_the_first
Apr 17, 2010 10:37:14 Sandbox campaigns are good if you can improvise, and go with the flow. You have to be able to alter key events, not remain attached to NPC's, and understand the land you're dealing with.

Really it all comes down to how you DM. Do you do alot of set up? Do you just shoot from the hip?
#3
skritz_the_lizardmen
Apr 17, 2010 12:07:00
Sandbox campaigns are good if you can improvise, and go with the flow. You have to be able to alter key events, not remain attached to NPC's, and understand the land you're dealing with.

Really it all comes down to how you DM. Do you do alot of set up? Do you just shoot from the hip?

I plan alot ahead. Do I actually do the stuff I plan? Thats a whole different story. Plus the players always find a way to screw things up.
#4
skibo_the_first
Apr 17, 2010 16:08:17 Well if you're fine with it, the sandbox campaign is alot better. Players like choice, the more choice they have, the better.
#5
skritz_the_lizardmen
Apr 18, 2010 8:54:39
Well if you're fine with it, the sandbox campaign is alot better. Players like choice, the more choice they have, the better.

Yes, except it means I never know where the campaign is going. Last one had a dozen plot thread that where left hanging at the end.
#6
skibo_the_first
Apr 18, 2010 11:12:25
Well there's tradeoffs to everything, giving your players choice means that they'll often drop quests and go on tangents unless you give them incentives to stay on the path. But if you are forcing them to stay on a path then its not a sandbox world, it's a linear world.

So for you, perhaps a hybrid would be better. You have a main quest, that's linear. And then you give the players sidequests to choose from every so often.

The PC's go the the evil Baron's castle and defeat him only to find a letter from the king himself.

* On the way back to town the PC's can find and help a mining town troubled by hobgoblins, a rancher who keeps losing his animals to dire wolves, or an artist who needs a large boulder brought down from the mountain in one peice. The pc's can help one, two, or all three of these people and can come back later to help.

This is the best of both worlds, a strong backbone to the world, with plenty of juicy meat for the players to pick and choose at thier leisure.
#7
calm
Apr 20, 2010 15:35:52 I find that players who are contributing to a story tend to value the game and their characters more, but it depends on the group.

Ask your players for story hooks about their characters. Look at all of the hooks they give you. I bet you can find some common threads. Thus you have a natural story arc. In any given encounter setting, one to three of the character's story elements could be present so they feel like they are progressing. Mix it up so different characters are focused on at different times. I guarantee they'll take small elements that are part of that arc and get interested, and so you have new hooks developing as you go.
One trick is, at the end of each session, if they have some options on what to do next, force them to make a decision (that they will stick with for a while at least) and tell you what they plan. That way, you'll at least know where to put in the most work for the next game. It's always good to have a few alternate options when things change, but the players should be okay with giving you a little time to prep, since it will mean a better game for everyone.
#8
Spor
Apr 24, 2010 8:20:57
Well if you're fine with it, the sandbox campaign is alot better. Players like choice, the more choice they have, the better.

My group prefers episodic, and find sandbox frustrating and slow.

I'd suggest following the groups play style, worst comes to worst you can start episodic and then convert to sandbox at a nice juncture,if the group isnt feeling it.
#9
skritz_the_lizardmen
Apr 24, 2010 9:32:34 Im gonna go with episodic, but will give them a choice at the end of each adventure. Since the idea is to make them adventurers-for-hire, they will have to choose if they want to wait for their next paid mission or go somewhere else of their chance.

Lets say that after fighting goblin slavers, they want to go to Sharn (Running Eberron, btw). I will put the next adventure on hold and prepare a one-shot adventure that happen there. They will get their urban adventure, but that probably mean they won't get paid for it. (Aside from the loot).
#10
uhf
Apr 27, 2010 10:59:02 I'm in the same boat, and I'm planning to do something in between. I'm roughly preparing 3 adventures for the players, and see which one they bite on. So... I pick a theme, grab a pile of fun critters, prepare a sheet(s) with all the monster stat blocks. Then I have the encounter list (9 or 10 just enough to go up a level) appropriate to the level of the players.

If the players bite on one of the adventures, then I wing it with the encounter list.

You can then link together (free form railroad) clues to a campaign in between.
#11
feyberry
Apr 28, 2010 3:16:12 Google: West Marches and D&D
#12
AbdulAlhazred
Apr 29, 2010 19:45:52 Its pretty easy to mix and match things. Once you have established the starting point for the players you can develop a number of related story arcs for instance. The players choose to do a certain thing, you focus more on developing that, the other plots can then remain open and be modified to show some passing of time and to make them level appropriate when the PCs get there. If they come back to pick up some pieces of a dropped plotline they will find new challenges have cropped up or entirely new story arcs can show up.

#13
Seakog
Apr 30, 2010 15:00:21 You might want to try a mixture. Look at how adventure tv shows handle this. The best example if something like Buffy. Some of the episodes are main story arc stories. These would be your episodic D&D adventures, in that the story is dictated by the big bad plot. The other episodes are more sandbox. The scoobies get into some kind of trouble and have to work it out, but it is not about the main plot. It is just a reflection of the world they live in. These would be your more sandbox style events. The advantage of this is it allows you to guide some of it, gives the players a chance to interact with an immersive world and make the semi ruglar use of recurring villians a thrill. If you fight the same villian every adventure, it gets stale. But if the plot rears it's ugly head every couple of episodes, it is more fresh.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 skritz_the_lizardmen Apr 17, 2010 8:48:55	Im still trying to decide if my Eberron campaign should be purely episodic (all adventures stand-alone and the players have a home base) or pure sandbox (I let them loose in the campaign world, let them go where they want and just roll with it). The thing is that I don't plan to make any long-spanning story arc. I tried that once and it was a bit...well, it sucked.
#2 skibo_the_first Apr 17, 2010 10:37:14	Sandbox campaigns are good if you can improvise, and go with the flow. You have to be able to alter key events, not remain attached to NPC's, and understand the land you're dealing with. Really it all comes down to how you DM. Do you do alot of set up? Do you just shoot from the hip?
#3 skritz_the_lizardmen Apr 17, 2010 12:07:00	Sandbox campaigns are good if you can improvise, and go with the flow. You have to be able to alter key events, not remain attached to NPC's, and understand the land you're dealing with. Really it all comes down to how you DM. Do you do alot of set up? Do you just shoot from the hip? I plan alot ahead. Do I actually do the stuff I plan? Thats a whole different story. Plus the players always find a way to screw things up.
#4 skibo_the_first Apr 17, 2010 16:08:17	Well if you're fine with it, the sandbox campaign is alot better. Players like choice, the more choice they have, the better.
#5 skritz_the_lizardmen Apr 18, 2010 8:54:39	Well if you're fine with it, the sandbox campaign is alot better. Players like choice, the more choice they have, the better. Yes, except it means I never know where the campaign is going. Last one had a dozen plot thread that where left hanging at the end.
#6 skibo_the_first Apr 18, 2010 11:12:25	Well there's tradeoffs to everything, giving your players choice means that they'll often drop quests and go on tangents unless you give them incentives to stay on the path. But if you are forcing them to stay on a path then its not a sandbox world, it's a linear world. So for you, perhaps a hybrid would be better. You have a main quest, that's linear. And then you give the players sidequests to choose from every so often. The PC's go the the evil Baron's castle and defeat him only to find a letter from the king himself. * On the way back to town the PC's can find and help a mining town troubled by hobgoblins, a rancher who keeps losing his animals to dire wolves, or an artist who needs a large boulder brought down from the mountain in one peice. The pc's can help one, two, or all three of these people and can come back later to help. This is the best of both worlds, a strong backbone to the world, with plenty of juicy meat for the players to pick and choose at thier leisure.
#7 calm Apr 20, 2010 15:35:52	I find that players who are contributing to a story tend to value the game and their characters more, but it depends on the group. Ask your players for story hooks about their characters. Look at all of the hooks they give you. I bet you can find some common threads. Thus you have a natural story arc. In any given encounter setting, one to three of the character's story elements could be present so they feel like they are progressing. Mix it up so different characters are focused on at different times. I guarantee they'll take small elements that are part of that arc and get interested, and so you have new hooks developing as you go. One trick is, at the end of each session, if they have some options on what to do next, force them to make a decision (that they will stick with for a while at least) and tell you what they plan. That way, you'll at least know where to put in the most work for the next game. It's always good to have a few alternate options when things change, but the players should be okay with giving you a little time to prep, since it will mean a better game for everyone.
#8 Spor Apr 24, 2010 8:20:57	Well if you're fine with it, the sandbox campaign is alot better. Players like choice, the more choice they have, the better. My group prefers episodic, and find sandbox frustrating and slow. I'd suggest following the groups play style, worst comes to worst you can start episodic and then convert to sandbox at a nice juncture,if the group isnt feeling it.
#9 skritz_the_lizardmen Apr 24, 2010 9:32:34	Im gonna go with episodic, but will give them a choice at the end of each adventure. Since the idea is to make them adventurers-for-hire, they will have to choose if they want to wait for their next paid mission or go somewhere else of their chance. Lets say that after fighting goblin slavers, they want to go to Sharn (Running Eberron, btw). I will put the next adventure on hold and prepare a one-shot adventure that happen there. They will get their urban adventure, but that probably mean they won't get paid for it. (Aside from the loot).
#10 uhf Apr 27, 2010 10:59:02	I'm in the same boat, and I'm planning to do something in between. I'm roughly preparing 3 adventures for the players, and see which one they bite on. So... I pick a theme, grab a pile of fun critters, prepare a sheet(s) with all the monster stat blocks. Then I have the encounter list (9 or 10 just enough to go up a level) appropriate to the level of the players. If the players bite on one of the adventures, then I wing it with the encounter list. You can then link together (free form railroad) clues to a campaign in between.
#11 feyberry Apr 28, 2010 3:16:12	Google: West Marches and D&D
#12 AbdulAlhazred Apr 29, 2010 19:45:52	Its pretty easy to mix and match things. Once you have established the starting point for the players you can develop a number of related story arcs for instance. The players choose to do a certain thing, you focus more on developing that, the other plots can then remain open and be modified to show some passing of time and to make them level appropriate when the PCs get there. If they come back to pick up some pieces of a dropped plotline they will find new challenges have cropped up or entirely new story arcs can show up.
#13 Seakog Apr 30, 2010 15:00:21	You might want to try a mixture. Look at how adventure tv shows handle this. The best example if something like Buffy. Some of the episodes are main story arc stories. These would be your episodic D&D adventures, in that the story is dictated by the big bad plot. The other episodes are more sandbox. The scoobies get into some kind of trouble and have to work it out, but it is not about the main plot. It is just a reflection of the world they live in. These would be your more sandbox style events. The advantage of this is it allows you to guide some of it, gives the players a chance to interact with an immersive world and make the semi ruglar use of recurring villians a thrill. If you fight the same villian every adventure, it gets stale. But if the plot rears it's ugly head every couple of episodes, it is more fresh.