|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
So, I'm planning on starting up a sandbox campaign soon, and I'm wondering about how other GMs have handled making these. What do you start with? How do you decide what to make?
Mostly I'm just fishing for ideas here. I'm borrowing heavily from the Kingmaker ideas, but I want to completely homebrew this adventure rather than just take the hexmap from another book, and since I really want to tailor this to the PCs and create an adventure they'll like.
My current ideas involve the following:
So, the political system I think would end up being similar to Skyrim's methinks. Multiple smaller Kings, each in a coalition that elects a High King from among their people. The PCs are adventurers that have been tasked with taking a new area back from the wilds that surround the empire that the Kings control. Whether or not they end up being part of this empire once they've begun their kingdom is up to them.
However, the area is not very hospitable to them. Although once inhabited by people, the area was overrun in a bloody conflict, resulting in the destruction of the kingdom that was once there. The expedition then, also has a second purpose, which is to discover more of the details about what destroyed that kingdom.
Some hardy folk will have set up isolated camps, perhaps one or two that are on the eastern side of the kingdom. Very small, these areas are constantly harassed by the monsters that lie within, and have become some sort of bulwark against the creatures that lie within. Perhaps the first real quests could be trying to clear out these areas, and allowing the party to create a "base" within these bulwarks so that they can return and report their findings.
As to what destroyed the kingdom, I'm still unsure about that. I'm not wanting to bring in something extraplanar that much, so perhaps some sort of Lich or some evil spellcaster?
The actual environment I'm not sure about how large it will be, (that's something I could use some help figuring out). This will be more on the northwest, and perhaps will border northern seas. At some point this campaign could stretch into the more arctic reaches, but the main settlements will be in a semi-temperate zone (almost like the middle of Canada environment maybe?), which makes it somewhat difficult. If I make it the more northern kingdom, then I can also try to keep outside politics to a minimum, as the main kingdom will serve as a bulwark between the party and the south. (Perhaps later on that could become relevant, but not initially).
In either case, any other cool ideas that I could steal borrow and make it more awesome :)
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I do a sandbox by starting small. I pick the location and build from there. A small town and surrounding area. I populate it with NPCs and have the key NPCs with an agenda. They have plans and those plans will play out to their conclusion with no interaction but the players can involved and shake things up. I put several quests scattered about that the players can jump on if they choose.
As play goes on expand the area adding new places of interest, new NPCs, quests and such. I usually don't worry about the bad guys as they form from the players getting involved in the sand box.
I find doing a good players write up of the area with key NPC listed then have the players build characters with background tied to the area. They detail who they know well, who their friends are, what they do in the town, why they are adventurers an such. Works quite well.
My recommendation is to let the players determine what you develop and when to do it.
By this I mean that you have a basic outline or notes on a handful of adventuring sights or hooks. The week before the scheduled game night, have the players decide what it is they want to do. That way, the players are in control, but it gives you time to prepare and focus on what the players want to do, instead of spending a lot of time on stuff they may not want to do.
You could probably stat up a few recurring villains and allies, as well as have an outline for an over-arching storyline, but in theory, the above should strike a balance between letting the players decide for themselves while allowing you to prepare.
I actually really like what you people are saying, as it lets me have this idea of what I want to create and also, (especially Hangar's advice), lets the players have a really cool idea and explore.
I'm still wanting to have some of my own stories, and especially having the return of whatever destroyed this area (perhaps one of the Spawn of Rovagug? oo... that would be fun).
I'll probably have a discussion session with the players beforehand to ask what kind of environment they would like as well, making it easier for me.
---pregame---
About four hours of character generation per player(two players). Three for flavor, one for stats. (And I just give them the stats they need to make their characters be awesome).
I made the players write character personalities and introduce some NPCs with whom they have a relationship, friends and enemies(they both made orphans :'(... ). Then I expand these NPCs and do a spider's web of relationships(this also helps me think of plot and subplots, which isn't too easy for me). And they set some short, mid and long term goals(two each to start with).
Then making the local area, and a few hints about what lies in some directions, but very little fleshed out.
---game---
I started them in a large city, which I sort of regret... I think everything should start small and then build to epic proportions. And a big city becomes too much of it's own character(GMPC), and that was not my intention.
We are still at the beginning and it's going a little slow, I would like them to set up lives and work towards their goals and expand their range of relationships, but I'm patient - not really...
---more game---
I expect to have them do some of the filling-in-the-details, which is mainly why I didn't do a lot of that pregame.
I use hero-points and will(starting next session) use that as a reward for achieving their goals, because they appear to need some incentive. And I take them away when they try to game their own story, which isn't relevant because they don't.
If you're using hexes, it is well worth it to calculate travel time from the starting "home base" to each hex, mark that on a scrap hex map, and use that as the basis for positioning challenging encounters.
Allowing for a whole lot of flavour development will definitely help the players I have, as most of their previous characters have been fairly simple, although interesting. It also allows me to create more items that lets me test them in roleplaying rather than just rollplay. I'll also try to optimize combat speed so that any random encounters don't end up taking up most of the adventure.
Mwahaha! This will be a wonderful campaign!
Even though it's a sandbox, IME the DM needs to have a strong presence until the first session starts. I've been in too many failed sandboxes, and the failure was always something that happened before the game actually started. Communication isn't enough, communication out of campaign is important.
I've been in player-driven campaigns where the PCs didn't like each other, didn't trust each other, had no real reason to hang out, or had no common goals. When these campaigns did work out, the DM made sure the PCs all knew and trusted each other ahead of time and had a common goal. The last part is the hardest, because goals change. IME, these goals need to be decided between sessions. You don't want one session after taking down Baron Evil to start with an argument between five players, all of whom want to do different things.
The best sandbox I was in actually started as a "railroad" (it wasn't a bad railroad) and gradually became a sandbox when we got a new player. The PCs already trusted each other, and the new player provided a goal in-game.
The biggest piece of advice I would have for a sandbox game is to sit down with your players and talk to them a bit. They will be driving the story more then a 'typcial' adventure, so that means their input is extremely important. It also means their character goals have to overlap somewhat. If you have one lawful paladin who is determined to bring this wilderness in line for his king, and a bard who wants to set up his own fledgling kingdom, you have a problem. Players should take some time to talk it out, and see what they would like out of it, and coordinate their characters to the poit where they can actually work together in an open world.
So a major group discussion will help a lot. It'll also make the group much more cohesive in combat as well, though I'm not going to force them to play a class they don't want to play.
Valdast wrote: So a major group discussion will help a lot. It'll also make the group much more cohesive in combat as well, though I'm not going to force them to play a class they don't want to play. This isnt really about combat, your group (I would assume) will handle the dispensation of 'roles' and responsibilities for characters however they normally do.
Its about the characters themselves. What their goals are, how those fit with the general story you have set up. What that means for the story, for their planned character development (and eventually for the unplanned stuff).
my sandbox game emulate the Elder Scrolls. it is the best source of reference as to how a sandbox game should run. a ton of simple, yet flavorful, mini quests a few expansive multi session quests, an the main storyline.
the hardest part of a sandbox game is making the mini quest not feel like quests, and not juat making them go kill a bunch of stuff. i mix in non combat skill quests, and a few other random type quests for every location i send my players. i literally have a binder that i pull out with about 200 random quests, or more, that i choose one for that session and allow the players to choose if they want to do that quest by making in game decisions. for instance...
me "you see a cave, it is very ominous"
players " hmm i think we should stick to what we were doing".
also i remove the CR system from my sandbox games. if you're level 1 and you decided it was a good idea to go to the litch's cave to find treasure... well thats why you tpk'd, and why you're an idiot.
i dont pull punches when i sandbox, it gives the world a much scarier feel.
Remember all the tips and tricks that make things feel sandboxy. I downloaded a bunch of free adventures when I was GMing last and scaled the monsters a bit up or down to line up with the party. If you have 3 - 4 pre-canned go to adventures, then you can just kind of pull out whichever one feels most appropriate to what the PCs are doing. And if you toss 2-3 side quest type things on top of that, then there are all kinds of options to grab from.
Valdast wrote: So a major group discussion will help a lot. It'll also make the group much more cohesive in combat as well, though I'm not going to force them to play a class they don't want to play. You'll need discussions between sessions, as well as the first big one.
I don't think a discussion on roles is that important, at least not compared to a less player-driven campaign.
TheSideKick wrote: me "you see a cave, it is very ominous"
players " hmm i think we should stick to what we were doing".
also i remove the CR system from my sandbox games. if you're level 1 and you decided it was a good idea to go to the litch's cave to find treasure... well thats why you tpk'd, and why you're an idiot.
i dont pull punches when i sandbox, it gives the world a much scarier feel.
The key to making that work though, is to make sure the player's know and/or get used to finding out what they're likely to face in any given area and roughly how dangerous it is. For which CR is a useful guide. :)
GM: You see a cave. <after a couple of rolls> No real tracks outside and no signs of life.
players: We'll go in and check it out.
GM: The lich kills you.
players: What!
GM: Well what did you expect going into a lich's cave at first level?
players: How were we supposed to know it was a lich's cave? There weren't any signs!
GM: Of course not. He was hiding out.
players: <ragequit>
You really do have to put up the signs. Or at least make it possible for the players to find out. And push them to do it.
You've also got to watch out for quests that put pressure on the players to do something beyond their level. Especially if some of your players like to be heroic and aren't strictly motivated by cash. "The trolls live in that cave. They've got a lot of treasure" can be passed up or saved for later if you're not ready for trolls. "The trolls have kidnapped the mayor's daughter and will probably eat her tonight!" can't really wait.
It's not so much roles as personalities -- who Re these people, why are they adventuring, what do they want out of life? That's going to drive a large part of your plot.
I plan basically nothing. I just talk to the group about what kind of characters they want to play before we start the campaign. We spend large amounts of time working on each character's background, build, and hopeful goals, add a few NPC the character has befriended or angered, sprinkle in a few secrets the character may or may not know and BAM! you have a campaign.
At first, it sounds difficult, but over time you get better at intertwining all of the different character's stories and goals. They don't all have to always match up perfectly. In fact, it's the discrepancies that allow for wiggle room in the story and let you craft a very intricate plot without even trying that hard.
Once you have character's made, pick a location. I like to grab a Campaign Setting like Faerun or Greyhawk, unfold the map and basically randomly pick a place I haven't used much before. Read some of the lore on that area, pick a town or cool geographic location and start the party there. Just be sure to toss out random adventure hooks so the group always has something to do. You can even use these random adventures for springboards into far more grandiose plots.
Most importantly, just have fun!
Either way...just my 2 cp
|
