D&D General Time Pressure and Adventures

[CleverNickName]

However... if the DM starts to apply time constraints to players, with shenanigans like countdown timers in the middle of the table, I will play along but probably leave the group after the session.

Oh yeah, absolutely. I once suffered through a gaming session where the DM used an egg timer to "help speed up combat." When your turn came up in initiative, you had 60 seconds to call your actions and make your rolls, otherwise you were skipped, or your spell fizzled, or whatever else you were trying to do didn't happen. (And to make matters worse, we were using Pathfinder rules, so there were fifteen thousand different kinds of actions to consider.)

I said that I "suffered through a gaming session," but there was a mutiny after the first or second battle and we all threatened to walk if the DM didn't lose that timer.

Time pressure on the characters and the adventure? Absolutely yes.
Time pressure on the players and the gameplay? Absolutely not.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I want to post separately about ticking clock campaigns.

I like ticking clock adventures.

I really strongly dislike ticking clock campaigns.

D&D has so much fun stuff you can do with time. Crafting, carousing, exploring... Gaining allies, seeking treasures...

I've had DMs who always use a "the world is going to end in three months unless you do x y and z" plots, and I'm burnt out on them. I want time to explore town, invest in a business, and see what's haunting the forest! Feel free to put time limits on adventures, but let me breathe in a campaign!

 

[Jer]

Oh yeah, absolutely. I once suffered through a gaming session where the DM used an egg timer to "help speed up combat." When your turn came up in initiative, you had 60 seconds to call your actions and make your rolls, otherwise you were skipped, or your spell fizzled, or whatever else you were trying to do didn't happen.

I swear that I remember this being DMing advice from my youth that was in Dragon magazine or some similar source. Lots of folks really worried about players spending too long figuring out what they were going to do on a turn. I didn't run into this issue myself until 3e, when the number of choices a player could make really increased as they leveled up, and even then I never thought to put the players on a timer - that only would have made it worse!

 

[payn]

Oh yeah, absolutely. I once suffered through a gaming session where the DM used an egg timer to "help speed up combat." When your turn came up in initiative, you had 60 seconds to call your actions and make your rolls, otherwise you were skipped, or your spell fizzled, or whatever else you were trying to do didn't happen. (And to make matters worse, we were using Pathfinder rules, so there were fifteen thousand different kinds of actions to consider.)

I said that I "suffered through a gaming session," but there was a mutiny after the first or second battle and we all threatened to walk if the DM didn't lose that timer.

Time pressure on the characters and the adventure? Absolutely yes.
Time pressure on the players and the game? Absolutely not.

lol, love it. I used to have the players keep track of initiative but found out a couple things. Some dont want that work at all. The ones who really like doing it, suck badly at it. So, I took it back as GM. VTT actually does a fine job of helping out these days!

 

[Charlaquin]

While I don’t think every adventure needs a Ticking Clock (tm), I do think that the game functions best when time is a valuable resource. Whether that be because the dark ritual is going to be completed in X hours if you don’t stop it in time, or simply because there’s a check for wandering monsters every hour, it’s best that the adventurers not have the luxury of being able to loligag without any pressure. So, if the DM announces that this next adventure has a ticking clock? I’m happy about it.

 

[R_J_K75]

However... if the DM starts to apply time constraints to players, with shenanigans like countdown timers in the middle of the table, I will play along but probably leave the group after the session

I said that I "suffered through a gaming session," but there was a mutiny after the first or second battle and we all threatened to walk if the DM didn't lose that timer.

Addmidedly Ive tried this stunt with little to no success but it was more in an attempt to keep people engaged and thinking about their next moves rather that being a dicktator. As long as people started declaring an action within that 60-90 seconds that was enough for me. Keeping with the theme of being under a time limit, I never liked when players analyzed every possible thing they could do before deciding on an action. Combat or stressful situations are stressful and fluid, you dont have the luxury to consider every outcome of every possible action so I think the game should flow like that to an extent. Regardless I abandoned the sand timer and eventually replaced it with a gavel at the table.

 

[el-remmen]

I personally find an adventure where time is not of the essence, to be not only boring but also frankly lazy and unrealistic.

Sure, but there is a HUGE difference in the time pressures Frodo and Company had (Sauron was not going to take over and destroy anything tomorrow - in fact the timeline was a mystery and up in the air a lot of the time) and Luke needing to destroy the Death Star before Yavin is in range and it destroys the planet and the rebellion.

In the former, there can be long swathes of time that have no particular immediate pressure (they spend a month in Lothlorien!) over the course of a campaign with a vague time limit (that can become immediate if the One Ring is lost to Sauron's forces) while in the latter it is a specific scene with a time pressure

 

[CleverNickName]

The poll results are a lot more positive overall than I expected. I must have spent too much time in those threads about Long Rests and the Optional Gritty Rules.

 

[iserith]

I think one important factor of a ticking clock adventure is clear consequences.

If the consequence of not completing the goal in time is out-and-out failure... Well to be honest I don't find that as fun.

If the consequence of not completing the goal in time is a loss of reputation, the treasure hoard being cut in half, losing some hostages, the villain gaining more power... That kind of stuff is fun!

All in all, though, I want a DM to be clear about what the consequences are. It wouldn't be fun to arrive at the dragon's hoard and the cave is empty, and for the DM to announce, "During your week of downtime the dragon took the treasure and flew away."

Yes, making the stakes clear as to what the time pressure is and what happens on success and failure is important so the players can make reasonably informed decisions. It also removes any potential "gotchas" from the situation should they fall short of achieving success.

 

[payn]

Yes, making the stakes clear as to what the time pressure is and what happens on success and failure is important so the players can make reasonably informed decisions. It also removes any potential "gotchas" from the situation should they fall short of achieving success.

As GM, I will discuss this with players. I often frame it maybe terms. Maybe, the fleeing bandits are gone for good? Maybe, the fleeing bandits will be a problem tomorrow? Maybe, the fleeing bandits will regroup and be a problem in the next few hours? They can deduct the likelihood of any outcome and then make their decision. Also as GM, I do not make every decision screw the players over. That just forces their hand in a different way.