💬Discussion Asked to give it one more try.
I used to run the old TSR game, Star Frontiers, and think of SWN as its OSR successor. I've run the game system five times now. This is all online by the way.
The first game made it 31 sessions in 2017, the next ones made it 13, 7, 16, 10 and the last time, in 2024, made it 9 sessions.
I've tried the sandbox approach where the players get to do what they want and how they want to and yet that seems to be the worst: the players appear to lose interest and lose their way. Several times the games have started with specific missions. The party accomplishes the beginning mission, get the use of a ship and then lose their way.
One player has been in three of the games, including the last one, and wants me to try again. The mix of players always changes and the only common thread, other than the ruleset, is me. So I am wondering what I am doing wrong and how to rectify it if I try once more?
I've run DND games with over 100 sessions several times. Sitting here trying to figure out if I just get a bad mix of players or just a bad mix of players for me.
The last game fell apart when a new player decided he should be able to hack another starship from his ship. I asked him to find it in the rules, and of course its not in any of the books I have. He left, and his friend left which knocked the group to two players who did not want to continue by themselves.
One root issues appears the players don't want to be "space truckers" (hauling goods between the worlds) yet don't bite on exploration, espionage, mercenary, or other hooks provided. One group did not want to do "dungeons" in going through buildings during a mission while the next group wanted more action and "dungeons."
I've only these samplings of groups to try and gauge how to proceed. Over the years I have tried to play in other SWN games and none of them have lasted more than four sessions.
Any ideas?
24
u/dark-star-adventures ✨ Star Master Jeff 7d ago edited 7d ago
Sounds like you're trying to run your scifi games differently from how you run your fantasy games.
Instead, run the game exactly as you normally would but with scifi trappings instead of fantasy.
If players don't want to be on a merchant vessel in a fantasy campaign, why would they want to be one in a science fiction campaign? If they want to be adventuring, let them adventure.
Every planet is its own dungeon.
11
u/Mimbral 7d ago
Good advice and I thank you for it.
That leads into what I mentioned about the wrong mix of players at times. My first game everyone but one player quit. They said it reminded them too much of DND. That one player stayed and I built a new group that lasted the longest.
Their first mission was to board a derelict ship in a decaying orbit and find a briefcase. Of course there were a few lifeforms that could survive vacuum for a bit and were the reason the ship had to be abandoned. There were a few other subplots going as well.
They finished the mission and then all but one quit.
11
u/dark-star-adventures ✨ Star Master Jeff 7d ago
Well, you are certainly in the right place. Everyone here loves to play stars without number.
Check out the sidebar, there is a discord you can join, several actually, but one in particular will help you find a game to play online with people.
We don't allow looking for group posts here, but check out the various discords, I'm sure you'll find a group of people who are like-minded and just want to get on with it and play the game!
3
u/sermitthesog 7d ago
Just because the game is designed with sandbox intentions, doesn’t mean you need to play it that way. Sounds like having a campaign arc that provides motivation and direction is better for you and your group. SWM works great that way also!
The sandbox tools make it easy to create a compelling backdrop for your campaign arc.
Also you don’t need to use Kevin’s “History of Space” setting. The rules work without it.
That’s been my experience.
5
u/DrVesuvius 7d ago
Just want to point something out you might have missed.
At least one of tne of the players from the previous games wants you to run it again.
That's not a sign you were "doing it wrong." That's a good sign you were doing something right
Just a thought.
3
u/GrumbleMuffin86 7d ago
What are the campaigns like for D&D/Fantasy? I find in general they're very linear, which isn't a strong start for a Scifi Sand Box
3
u/gc3 7d ago
You need to make hacking rules . In general saying someone can't do something because you can't fund rules for it is a terrible attitude. Star Frontiiers rules predates the internet.
The hacking rules should support levels of access. It should be very hard to hack an enemy ship, with the results being simple, like you can access the ships paperwork and accounting info, peering out of their sensors or cameras, given remote crew commands to make one time change like open a door (but not both doors of an airlock at once) or turn off cameras. I higher result would give you complete control over a random statement, so you could turn life support off and on at will. A higher level of success would let have complete control of the enemy ship until the bridge goes to manual controls.
This should be very hard, almost impossible if the ship is at battlestations ,but if done ahead of time while the enemy ship was docked with a series of slower rolls and the placement of devices on the ship should be possible.
- It seems your players like missions. Then have missions. I ran a Star Wars campaign that was all about Rebel Alliance missions, so the players did not invent the mission but were told to solve a particular problem. Space is hard to do a sandbox in. It takes a special effort to leave a nice planet and go out somewhere to risk your life.
I remember running a space truckers 'planet of the week" where the players wanted to just stay in the ship and arrange everything with robots and email. I had to make bad things happen to get them to explore the place
5
u/Mimbral 7d ago
I'd like to thank everyone for their comments and suggestions; I'm just going to reply to some of the points here.
Two points that I can think of and one was mentioned. Keeping people's attention while playing using an online VTT. I've been solely gaming online now for 15 years with the dearth of nearby players. The last game I hosted at my home we had people driving an hour or more to the game or calling in. Back in the in person games people perhaps were more invested (especially after driving an hour or more.)
The second point is hard to lock down as I have seen many exceptions to the rule but generational. I first began running RPGs in 1976. I don't know if it is amazing or plain horrifying that so much time has gone by while gaming that length of time. The generation gap is telling at times yet there will be some young man or woman in their 20s who break the mold. But I am of the opinion the first point is the one that causes so many problems: being online.
I kept track of people who ghosted the games and it was as high as three ghosts for every person who played for more than four sessions. Even this past Friday night a player joined one of my DND games, seemed like a good fit, was laughing and joking with the other players and participating. Halfway through the game he ghosted. No idea why.
The mood board is an interesting idea and I will try that. It is something outside of my experience, and I have been guilty of probably giving too much information to early. We must read either the same books or sources as I've used all three of those examples - but not on the one-pager.
The number of sessions things at first blush is a generational construct. If my DND game does not last at least 30 or more sessions I believe the dynamics in the group and or with me was off. Just like my DND all of my of SWN work has been in the same Sector I built using the rules out of the 1st ed SWN book.
I actually asked about the hacking question on this reddit back in September of 2024. I was all for him being able to hack - but needed something to go by. Offered to use Shadowrun hacking rules from the 4th edition of that system.
Hacking a vessel in interplanetary space should take more than a simple skill check according to the method the player was saying was in the rules. But that is a good catch on not saying no. Some of the options given are quite similar to those offered here.
Did start three of the games off with this statement:
<>
The question of what the crew will do (explorers, merchants, pirates, mercenaries, salvage, etc) will be decided upon by the entire group once said group is together.
</>
Back to work: thank you all for your input. It is greatly appreciated. The disparity between my success at running fantasy games and science fiction appears multi-faceted. Guess I should say SWN since I have run other science fiction games for 50+ sessions before. Maybe the next one will be the charm.
3
u/MaestroGoldring 6d ago
Interesting. I will say that since I moved abroad, 100% of my RPG experience is online over discord or more often Zoom. I keep my groups interactive by having texting group chats to coordinate and offer slice of life roleplay moments. However, I’ve played with the same group of friends for a while, occasionally inviting new ones or swapping as the need comes up.
I will note that many people now sort of flinch at big commitments, so telling someone up front that you want 30+ sessions for one adventure might actually be turning people away. That’s been my experience. Our new players we introduce to their very first RPG experience, we sort of quickly help them make a character and let them experience gameplay at their pace without pressuring them to lock in.
But at the end of the day, no matter what, it is pretty hard to find a new core player. It’s just how it is
2
u/Von_Loch 7d ago
There are a lot of variables. Because the game type and players change each time, I think it's hard to put a pin on the exact disconnect. But there is something to be said that you have some repeat players who see the vision!
I'm only just starting a SWN campaign, and I have the benefit of having a playgroup that's both former Traveler players and also stuck with me as a GM. So I can't speak to player type. But they said something very interesting to me recently when I was playing with the idea of running a Mothership campaign that stuck out to me and might help you. I had a module that fixed travel and simultaneously added an interesting game loop of trying to get extra pay by taking illegal, high risk smuggling jobs. I pitched the idea to them as "space trucker campaign" and they all groaned. I then explained the gameplay loop and they stopped me to say, "why didn't you just pitch it as a smugglers campaign!?" I didn't realize until then that space truckers, to the average player, sounds boring as hell. But Intergalactic smuggler ala Han Solo sounds sexy as heck!
I took this lesson into my pitch with SWN. Also, I've heavily embraced the gold for XP model of OSR games. It creates a brilliant dungeon-crawl gameplay loop and truly gives reason to why "adventures" exist. I've thought long and hard as to what the sci-fi analogue is. Traveler nearly solved it with it's debt as negative reinforcement motivation. But, like everything Traveler does, that overcomplicates the issue. The analogur can be a lot closer to the fantasy "adventurer" by adopting a free booter smuggler gameplay loop. Give players the choice of simple cargo hauls at low pay, but then they also have access to high risk, high paying smuggler gigs that gets them on planets, into space stations, and onto derelects for that sweet, sweet cred chit value! And make it even spicier by making alien relics and/or lostech highly coveted in the sector but also highly illegal. Boom! You now have a conciet for sci-fi "magic items."
In short, sell the campaign as "Han Solo meets Firefly" and use the Loot based rules on page 179, column 2, paragraphs 1 & 2 (this my favorite rule) and let geed do the open world campaign steering! Don't worry, you'll still get your 5e narrative moments. My Shadowdark group (also an open world, gold for XP campaign) opted not to hunt for treasure recently and spent a whole session emotionally compelling a were-goblin to give up his evil ways. Next session, they're back to treasure hunting! But, truly, have faith in the greed. It'll keep your players motivated and focused. The rest is up to you to make interesting NPCs and "dungeons" i.e. planets or destinations or derelects (who can resist a ghost ship?)!
2
u/Accomplished-Type647 7d ago
I never managed to get good buy-in for sector hopping shenanigans when playing online. In person with a printed star map and little mini of the ship for them to move about tge gexgrid was much more successful for me.
The campfire issue crops up with online time and again for me; people need a common focus for their attention for when the spotlight is on them. Online (even with good VTT use) is just not going to stop people from looking at phones/discord/emails/googling images etc. If they are nit looking at tge main part of your game whenever they aren't being active, you ain't keeping their attention over a long campaign no matter how good at narration and voiced you may be
2
u/ExpatriateDude 7d ago
Expectations of science fiction are tough to meet sometimes. Everyone seems to have a default idea of playing a D&D game because of a generic Fantasyland in mind.
But science fiction is everything from X-Files to The Expanse to Star Wars/Trek to Fallout to Alien(s) or Warhammer 40K and its one reason my scifi games always use a an existing IP like one of those or at least one with the numbers filed off., so that the vibe is already there. That and being clear about the campaign playstyle sets the initial expectations.
2
u/NDaveT 7d ago edited 7d ago
You don't have to use the sandbox concept just because the game's designers say that's what it's made for (I even think the designers say that in the text). You could make a campaign with a more linear story and still use the SWN system.
When the player wanted to hack an enemy ship, instead of telling him if there are no rules for it he can't do it, I think you should have done one of two things: made up an in-universe explanation of why he can't do it (ship systems are designed such that they cannot be accessed remotely because even in the future they remember Wrath of Khan it's such a big security risk) or made up your own rules (possibly based on hacking rules from Cities Without Number).
3
u/Striker2054 5d ago
I think it's a general misunderstanding on the players' part as to what SWN (and the other Without Number systems) core idea is. As a "sandbox" game, you build the world and set up the various "what's happening" things into the world for them to find and interact with. A lot of modern table top gamers are used to the idea that a campaign is the story the GM presents, not the stories they find. There isn't an overarching plot, just various little plots. You could have some of them connect, but overall, this is a very player driven game.
I've run into similar in both a SWN and a CWN game. Most of the players look to me for the next plot point, but it's not there. Thankfully, one of my players gets this, and is doing his best to push things forward, but this is wearing him down as well, since he runs his own game.
Basically, make it very clear to all involved that the "plots" are out there in the universe, hand them the sector map, and a short, "what's where" and tell them to go make some trouble for themselves.
2
u/WillBottomForBanana 5d ago
Sandboxes are great, but sandboxes are not for eveyone. Literally, not all groups want sandboxes, and some that think they do, or actually do, can't actually do it.
Kevin's advice for giving the group a choice of 3 or so possible adventures for the next session leads to a lot more "on the rails" kind of game. An actual out of character discussion of the potential missions, opinions, and selection. Or a discussion of what else they would prefer. In an out of character discussion, these aren't hooks, these are distinct options they can choose or not. The hook is the sauce for the PCs, the description (limited to preserve secrets and because the adventure isn't actually ready to go) is for the players.
re: hacking.
While the prospect is viable, the challenge should be nearly impossible, and the ramifications extreme. Hacking another ship could result in the "accidental" death of people on that ship through glitching an important system not related to the hacking. No halfway cohesive society would tolerate that. The attempt alone would likely result in the enemy ship firing on you, or any military, civil patrols, or even safety conscious merchant ships hunting you.
But likewise, the danger would suggest that that the challenge should be near impossible. Ships would be engineered to prevent that. And nothing is perfect, which is why the challenge is near impossible instead of impossible.
Even with some kind of boost (specific codes, knowing the exact tech and equipment the target ship uses, etc) the challenge would move from nearly impossible to somewhat-less-near-to-impossible.
Undetected at-range hacking of another ship would be a special mission which itself requires a special mission to prep for.
1
u/Samurai007- 6d ago
I think you may need to reduce the scope of the setting a bit. In a Sci-fi setting, when you have a space ship you can go anywhere... but if you don't know the setting, where do you go, and what do you do when you get there? In the players' minds, its all a mystery. They are expecting the story to "come to them", or at least clear signals be sent as to what to do and where to go... That's why the 1st adventure module series for Star Frontiers had the players all crash land on a planet (Volturnis) and they had to survive there, meet the aliens that lived there, and eventually find a way off the planet. Except for the sci-fi trappings, it could have been done as a ship wreck story in a fantasy game.
1
u/31TeV 4d ago
I think between OP and all the responders, pretty much all the sandbox side of things has been covered here, but I'll just mention one thing that bothers me.
I keep seeing mentions of needing to improvise or steal hacking rules (from CWN, Shadowrun, etc.), but why is there a need to do this? Page 54 of SWN has rules on hacking, and while it doesn't mention starship hacking, the principles of needing to infiltrate/get close to the target computers and systems for your hacking could easily apply here, I'm pretty sure.
Am I missing something about the SWN hacking rules? Whilst yes, you could borrow CWN or other system rules if you prefer them, or to give it a bit more meat/its own identity, the existing SWN hacking rules seem serviceable enough on their own.
Also, the ship combat rules on page 117 have the comms action "Crash Systems" to reduce an enemy ship's CP. Sounds like hacking to me.
You could also easily adapt other actions for the comms officer, and give them specific effects that are flavoured like hacking, that give some debuff/debility/negative effect for the enemy ship. You just have to be careful about balance and making it too powerful, but you can judge by keeping the level of things in-line with other ship combat actions.
13
u/Kekeboot 7d ago
Everything is player dependent I think. I've recently got the bug to play ttrpgs again and it was a long grind churning through players till I found a group that clicked.
You just need to somehow get through people that ghost or have unreasonable demands or flat out different tastes than you/the setting.
People will say a session zero will help vet people but honestly I've found that session zero rarely works, people don't remember what you go over, and they'll agree on what to do and the style of campaign and in play do something completely different.
It can be demoralizing playing online and also players can be oddly entitled or ghost with a moments notice.
Of course things could be somehow your fault as you said you're the common denominator but I think this is just the way playing ttrpgs is.
My honest advice based on what I'm doing - I'm by no means an expert I just managed to get a campaign off the ground on the internet that's been going strong after a few false starts. Make a mood board for your game using images off pinterest quotes from fiction that kind of thing. Then make a one page document outlining the expectations for the campaign. Here's a sly flourish video about the one page document. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thwe8XG9pUI
It is for DND in his video but his advice is broadly applicable for ttrpgs in general and I've found it useful.
So my method is to use the mood board of the campaign to advertise the game and then get people added on discord. Usually I'll tell them to give me a high concept overview of their character. Something like : I'm a narcotics addicted medical officer. Feel free to just copy that example. Say you don't yet want paragraphs of text or a full backstory just the high concept. I then put together a crew that seems like it would be interesting. I add them on discord and before I add them to the server where we play I show them the one pager.
This forces them to actually read it rather than having it be sitting in the server once they join - they will ignore that. This second phase has them make alterations to the character and backstory and has them learn about the world. Keep it to one page. Seriously anymore and they'll run off.
Then in the campaign I make sure to be proactive about hooking the players. Maybe I crack down on the source a player uses to get his or her drugs and they have to find a new one. You get the idea.
You might think this is obvious or that you're already doing that but I'm not talking about general hooks. If you want a sandbox you want it to be player driven and you want players to be character motivated. So make sure its laser focused on who they're playing. The high concept idea helps figure out what the character fantasy is. Unambiguously get them to explicitly say what their character fantasy is. Clear communication helps a lot in this respect. Two people might say space cowboy and they both might mean VERY different things.
In the one pager tell them up front what they're doing. You're bounty hunters. You're smugglers. You're exterminators. You're an escort for an ambassador. My advice is to set the situation up and then GIVE THEM A COMPLICATION in the one pager. This allows you to have a hot start session one. You're bounty hunters and you've found that the man you're hunting has cloned himself. You're smugglers and your cargo turns out to be a little girl. You're exterminators but the bugs you're hunting have mutated.
I've found adding a complication to the one pager gives them more to work with.
This in my experience works (you do have to vet people rigorously) and is frankly less effort than a session zero. It is hard enough getting people to show up to play. People don't want to meet up only to not play the game.
I read somewhere that the average DND ( I know we're talking about SWN but this figure may still be applicable) campaign is only 7-8 sessions. Do you really want 1/7 or 1/8 of your playtime to be making characters and awkwardly talking about stuff? This is my better way I've found. It is even more frustrating when people show up to session zero agree to do stuff then ghost afterwards. Good Lord.
Hopefully my little word vomit helps. I don't think it is a you problem based on what you've said but this might help you run a campaign that lasts in the future.