The flow of in-game time seems like a relevant part of scene-framing to me, so I'm happy to keep that discussion here. A quick caveat - I'm not sure how well I'm going to explain this. And, of course, it is simply my opinion...
Effort appreciated, and caveat understood.
So, if you play a boardgame and you can take 5 actions a turn that represents a resource. What constitutes managing that resource is an understanding of what represents a turn. All the players know what a turn is, when it starts and when it ends.
But what if you don't know what constitutes a turn? I have finite resources, 5 actions, but I no longer have any idea of what I might be asked to accomplish with them. At that point I'm not managing. If my opponents can make whatever moves they like, and allow me my five moves when they like, the appearance of having five actions is an irrelevance.
I think have a mental grasp on what you're saying, but I think I might have an objection depending on where this is going.
So in Runequest I have 16 power. That means I start with 16 power points to spend on casting spells. I get back 4 points every 6 hours. How long is 6 hours? It's whenever the GM decides. In other words I don't get to 'manage' my points. I get to spend them while the GM uses them as a cue to manage the tension in the situation. They can relieve the tension by giving me points back or ramp up the tension by presenting a new threat.
I think a lot of what passes as 'resource management' in RPGs is similar to the RQ example. It may appear I'm making a meaningful decision about expending resources or keeping them in reserve, but in reality I do not have the information on future threats, or control over the passage of in-game time before I face those threats, required to do so. How and where I expend my resources are actually a tension and pacing mechanic for the GM. This is what I meant by resource management being an illusion if the GM controls the passage of time.
Oh, I see what you mean in regards to strong scene framing. The GM is much more proactive in cranking up the tension, so he may do that whether or not you're spending that 16 power. Which might mean more stressful situations when you have 16 power (anything that might take up 4-16 power, say), or less stressful when you're at 4 power (enough to make you sweat, but not as big a threat as you could handle at 16).
This isn't necessarily always the case in gaming, of course. I think I'll go into that later.
That isn't to say resource management play isn't possible. For example, I think if you play an AD&D dungeoncrawl and the group both knows and is scrupulous about using the rules - it takes x minutes to move along y feet of corridor, it takes x minutes to search z area - then players have access to the information required to manage resources. But I think in this example you couldn't say the GM is in control of time because a player searching an 10' by 10' room or moving down a 50' corridor can say how long it takes without reference to the GM. The whole group is abiding by known rules, so time is under collective authority.
I remember from the DMG that Gygax was an advocate of meticulous adherence to the tracking of time. I think it's because doing so is a fundamental requirement for resource management be meaningful.
In the interests of keeping this vaguely on topic I'll add that scene-framing, with its fluid use of time, is particularly unsuited to games aimed at testing resource management.
I hope that makes some sense.
I think it does, yes. Though, for example, my RPG has rules for what happens if you don't eat or get enough sleep. With that in mind, isn't my RPG an example of something that measures resources, as long as I'm not, like, saving the party?
What I mean by that is, if the party takes a rotational sleep schedule without being careful, they might take penalties after a few days for getting inadequate sleep (and thus take penalties), whereas they could avoid this (hire another guy to help keep watch so this doesn't happen). Or if the players say "we walk from X to Y, we have no rations, and we're not gathering food as we go", then we know what will happen: they'll begin to starve, or starve to death if it's far enough. So, on any journey that takes time, wouldn't they be managing their resources to not "starve"?
Now, I know what you mean by "managing against what?" in that there's often an unknown quantity of time. I guess my reply to that is "all of time", in a sense. They're managing resources like food so that they can go as long as they can without starving. And, I know what you mean in regards to strong scene framing making this less prevalent, since a lot of the time it's about purposefully cranking up the tension, which often means not letting the PCs unceremoniously die from starvation if they didn't bring enough food (you might wait until they're weak, and then give them a situation where they might have to resort to banditry to survive, or have them find food carried by some evil orcs, or whatever).
But, if a game isn't based around that kind of strong scene framing, where you can unceremoniously die from not eating, isn't keeping track of food a form of resource management (since you know when the penalties for not eating will kick in)? Just curious on your thoughts on that (and a question below, too). As always, play what you like
What I have in mind when making this comment and holding this position is simply the way battlefield strategy and tactics can work in our world. I may not be able to say with 100% certainty what the enemy is going to do, but I can try to gain knowledge about them, and I can also attempt to dictate the flow of a battle or a war. I can also take precautions to protect myself and my allies when we stop to make camp and rest.
This is similar to what I'm talking about. The same goes for food to a greater extent (when the game has rules for not eating, for example). The party can have a firm grip on the passage of time, barring interruptions (which will happen in a strong scene framing style more often, I'd imagine). The PCs in my current game keep letting months go by, while they lead a unit in war (though interruptions happen occasionally along the way). They essentially can say "I want to wait [X amount of time], doing the same stuff. I want to try to get A, B, and C done along the way."
Of course, this can still happen in strong scene framing games, too. But this does give the players some pretty strong control over the passage of time. Though, in that type of game, if you have resources that replenish or diminish based on time (money, food, spells, abilities, magic item uses, etc.), then giving the players more control time might mean you have to set up scenes in a more uniform way (setting up scenes when they're at full power more often if they take their time, or where they're at low resources if they're the type to truck on quickly even if low on resources). But I think it's possible to tailor these scenes, even with strong player control of time (most of the time). So, chaochou, pemerton, what do you think? As always, play what you like
