A Discussion in Game Design: The 15 minute work day.

[Mark CMG]

IMO, the problem is the desire to use the wrong tool for the wrong job.

Presenting only nails and hammers, albeit different sized nails, painted different colors, and a number of types of hammers, seems to be the modus operandi of most tabletop game systems.

 

[LostSoul]

And here is the only problem, IMO. The belief that D&D is designed to model archetypes and mimic narratives outside narration. It's designed to model archetypes (very roughly), but only in relation to a game, not a narrative.

That may be one problem from a certain point of view, but there are others. It's been too long since I read the 3E DMG so I'll just talk about 4E.

The 15-minute day is an optimal solution that significantly reduces the challenge of the game.

There are guidelines for the difficulty of the encounters that PCs should face based on their level. DCs and skill challenges are the same. If PCs are able to use all their resources in every encounter, the encounters are not very challenging.

The DM can cause problems for the PCs - not letting them rest , making sure they go through a set number of encounters between rests - but that presents two problems. 1) The choice to rest is taken out of the player's hands - it's not a choice at all. 2) Is there a system for this or is the DM on his own? This (refreshing resources) is a major part of the game; how does a DM decide what to do?

Two solutions seem obvious to me. One is to take away "when to rest" as a meaningful choice and set Extended Rests to happen after X number of encounters, no matter what. There's some space to play in there; a successful skill challenge might mean you get your extended rest early, failure means you have to fight another encounter. Locating a specific secret door that leads to a saferoom means you can take your rest now. Convincing the bandits that you can talk it out means you can avoid that encounter (or turn a combat into a Skill Challenge).

It could work, and it doesn't have to be that artificial/gamist, though you'd need to write a whole new chapter on how to DM - how to introduce appropriate consequences and rewards, how to design adventures with this in mind, that sort of thing.

The other way is to have the DM "play the setting" impartially as a living, breathing source of challenge and let the players guide their own destinies. This is AD&D's system as far as I can tell, but AD&D comes with a lot of things to make it work - wandering monsters, different DM advice, how to create an appropriate setting, and all of that.

To solve the problem you'd have to re-write how to DM the game.

*

However, saying all that, maybe it's not a flaw of the game design. Maybe the game designers expected DMs to see the problem and figure out their own ways to deal with it. Part of the game is plugging in your own system for figuring out how refreshes work, one that works for your group.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

You only really need the wizard, particularly his web and fireball, for the very tough encounters. It's the first, and only, time I've ever seen a wizard played as he's 'supposed' to be played, holding back, mostly just using a crossbow.

and

Using a crossbow??!
Does he yodel, too?
I'll eat the stars on my pointy hat before I'll go about pretending to be a mechanic or even a, pardon my French, warrior. Dignity of the profession, man, and conduct unbecoming! It sets a bad example, I say.

I suppose the cleric gets a missile weapon, too, so that she can also be played as she's 'supposed' to be played? Why not give her more attack spells while we're at it?

To be even handed, we must make the fighter a magician as well.

Why have the classes at all?

I've read/seen enough fantasy fiction to encounter more than a few spellcasters who hoard their power, eschewing the use of magic until it is absolutely necessary.

Instead of opening combat slinging spells, they throw daggers or fire crossbows or use a sling or even run...whatever else they may choose to do without using magic. Mundane, mundane, mundane stuff...just like Patrick Swayze's character in Roadhouse tells his staff to "Be nice...until it is time not to be nice."

And when its time not to be nice, they open up.

Their reasons for doing so are as varied as the settings: magic is fatiguing; magic is slower or less efficient than mundane methods; magic is undependable; magic is dangerous to the user; magic corrupts; the use of magic attracts unwanted attention; magic is a finite resource...the list goes on.

So I have no problem with my casters doing likewise, and happily fire bolts from my crossbow. Or eschew casting when the battle is well in hand...even or especially when the combat is clearly going to be won from the start.

 

[billd91]

I've read/seen enough fantasy fiction to encounter more than a few spellcasters who hoard their power, eschewing the use of magic until it is absolutely necessary.

cough*cough* Gandalf *cough*

 

[Dungeoneer]

This is blue-skying it a bit, but I think it would be cool if you had a system where Daily powers had to be 'unlocked'. Either by reaching milestones or by performing heroic feats. If players knew that they could really break out the big guns once they'd been in a few fights, that would really encourage them to press on.

 

[jgbrowning]

That may be one problem from a certain point of view, but there are others. It's been too long since I read the 3E DMG so I'll just talk about 4E.

The 15-minute day is an optimal solution that significantly reduces the challenge of the game.

There are guidelines for the difficulty of the encounters that PCs should face based on their level. DCs and skill challenges are the same. If PCs are able to use all their resources in every encounter, the encounters are not very challenging.

There's two answers to this "problem" based upon if you build the game world around the players (the challenge of a location changes based upon PC power) or if you build the game world independent of the players (the challenges of a location do not change based upon PC power).

If you do the former - just make the challenges harder - you've already admitted that scaling the world to fit the player's abilities is acceptable, so just do it again.

If you do the latter - you wouldn't care. The PCs are playing smartly.

The "problem" with the 15-minute work day is that the GM has a mental construct of "how things are supposed to happen" that the players playing smartly and sitting down to rest is disturbing enough that a smart tactical option is considered a "problem."

In other words, narrative desire - the desire to have a "plot" or a "story" - is being impinged upon because the GM desires things to happen in a certain way. We're the GM impartial and relying upon the players to drive the game (as opposed to a "plot") there is no more a feeling of unease or dissatisfaction from the 15-minute work day than one gets from from when the players use any other of their available options to perform better as a group.

IMO, because of the above, the problem of the 15-minute work day is wanting to play a story and not play a game.

The other way is to have the DM "play the setting" impartially as a living, breathing source of challenge and let the players guide their own destinies. This is AD&D's system as far as I can tell, but AD&D comes with a lot of things to make it work - wandering monsters, different DM advice, how to create an appropriate setting, and all of that.

Exactly. AD&D has the "world exists independent of the character's power" as the default.

To solve the problem you'd have to re-write how to DM the game.

No, you just re-scale the encounter according to the current 4e guidelines. The real problem is the desire a GM has for something to happen the way temporally expected.

Finally, if everyone would think of some of the fun action movies or stories they enjoy, almost invariably, one will find a narrative reason as to why the 15 minute work day didn't happen. It's not like John McClain wouldn't have taken a week off to rest during Die Hard. It's not like Frodo and Sam wouldn't have rested had they that option. It's not like Rocky wouldn't have rested during the fight with Apollo.

If a GM demands a narrative exist, he or she needs to learn to create narratives that make the 15 minute work week "problem" impossible or simply be willing to have the end of the world happen and everybody dies game over man, if the PCs decide to rest anyway. The fact that "the end of the world" isn't narratively pleasing contributes heavily to the belief that the 15 minute work week is a "problem." GMs thinking "I want this to happen, but they're resting even though everything should blow up... how do I change the world so what I want to happen happens regardless."

In summation, IMO it's the GMs desire to control what the players do that makes a "problem" out of the 15 minute work-day. And that's probably all I have to say on the subject as I'd probably just end up repeating myself if I keep posting.

joe b.

 

[Doug McCrae]

cough*cough* Gandalf *cough*

Sparrowhawk in The Farthest Shore is very strong on 'never use magic where non-magic will do'. He's a good model for a parsimonious Vancian rpg wizard. The wizards in Vance aren't tho. Mazirian the Magician uses all five of his memorised spells, and a magic item, as he pursues T'sain thru the forest.

The Dying Earth is a magic and monster heavy world - the only fictional world I've seen that approaches D&D in its monster density. That's another thing. In order to get Vancian magic, daily resources, to work, the world must contain huge quantities of wandering monsters. D&D needs its Monster Manuals. It's no coincidence that the game has so many more monsters than other rpgs. But this means D&D is a very limited game. It only works in worlds that are far more monster rich than those in most fantasy fiction. D&D doesn't work in Middle-Earth, for example.

 

[BlubSeabass]

The "problem" with the 15-minute work day is that the GM has a mental construct of "how things are supposed to happen" that the players playing smartly and sitting down to rest is disturbing enough that a smart tactical option is considered a "problem."

In other words, narrative desire - the desire to have a "plot" or a "story" - is being impinged upon because the GM desires things to happen in a certain way. We're the GM impartial and relying upon the players to drive the game (as opposed to a "plot") there is no more a feeling of unease or dissatisfaction from the 15-minute work day than one gets from from when the players use any other of their available options to perform better as a group.

IMO, because of the above, the problem of the 15-minute work day is wanting to play a story and not play a game.

In summation, IMO it's the GMs desire to control what the players do that makes a "problem" out of the 15 minute work-day. And that's probably all I have to say on the subject as I'd probably just end up repeating myself if I keep posting.

joe b.

I totally get what you're saying, but I disagree on some vital premises. Let me start of saying that I never played 4e, and play Pathfinder. I'm going to try to explain why I see the 15 minute work-day as a gameplay failure, aside from the narrative attractive " acting heroic".

Resource management is a very important aspect of strategy in 3.x/pf. Especially on lower/mid levels, and especially for casters. The way your battle looks is strongly dependant on how many battles the PC's predict they will encounter today after this one. Some even might say that the balance of the classes depends on the resources aswell. The fighter shines more or less equally over all battles, while the wizard loses a lot of power when he burns his resources.

The point with the 15-minute work day, is that it denies the point of resource management. resources can be nova'd, and then people just take a rest to regain the resources. Hence, players are actually encouraged to nova, because it makes them stronger. As long as the DM does not tackle this(It's impossible to rest), the players don't have to think long to decide what to do. The option to rest is just infinitely better. Encouragement of one certain play-style, and certainly one that involves always doing all the cool stuff that you have, has the tendancy to reduce challenge, strategy and fun. Here lies the problem. The system actually encourages the player to do something that is likely not fun. The strategy of resource management is gone. This aside from what some people may also see as a balancing issue.

Now the DM can stick this. He can threathen the player with evil things and time limits to press the PC's onwards. But here is where I think you made a wrong premise. We don't want to force the player to do something. We don't like hitting our players with a stick (well except when they're playing painfully dumb). We want to encourage a certain play-style, just as much as another play-style is encouraged. Resting has the major benefit of replendishing resources. What does pushing on bring us? Absolutely nothing. Any optimizing party that would take 1 second to think, would rest if he could.

So to include the marvelous strategy of resource management, that shapes battles into different tales, the DM is currently forced to take the choice of resting away from the party. It would be more fun for both the players and the DM, if the PC had a reason to go on instead of rest. Hence the carrot.

 

[Storminator]

The point with the 15-minute work day, is that it denies the point of resource management.

Isn't the 15 minute day a resource management strategy? The problem is that some want the resource management mini game to be a challenge in and of itself, while others have identified the 15 minute day as a powerful and reliable solution to the game. It's not that resource management is denied, it's that resource management is solved.

PS

 

[BlubSeabass]

Isn't the 15 minute day a resource management strategy? The problem is that some want the resource management mini game to be a challenge in and of itself, while others have identified the 15 minute day as a powerful and reliable solution to the game. It's not that resource management is denied, it's that resource management is solved.

PS

It's hard to say why I disagree with this, because you can certainly see it as a solution to the resource management problem. First I don't see resting as a solution to resource management. It's resetting or cheating the problem. For me, the solution is the path from full resource to no resource (or rest). It's not how you replendish it, it's how you spend it. For me that's the challenge. Resting strongly encourages the true nova strategy. But I can see how you would disagree with this.

Where I think you surely agree with me, is that the way you solve your resource management, greatly influences your gameplay and variety. Using the same resource management strategy every time results into very monotone battles. Especially one like "strongest moves first", like Nova. First my level 5 spells, then my level 4 spells, then my level 3 spells etc.

Second, you're kind of getting where I tried to get. You say that the 15 minute work-day is a powerful solution to the resource management. But it's so strong, it's the only sane solution. The player is actually encouraged so badly to rest, and therefore encouraged to use the same resource management strategy. From this I conclude it's encouraged to do a certain play-style, which I tend to find boring and easy if overused.

So if you agree with me that resting is not solving the problem, you can see how it denies the resource management aspect of the game. If you don't agree with this, I think you would agree with me that resting is an overpowered way to solve the problem. It's a strategy that has no peers in sheer power. Therefore the player is encouraged to use it, and therefore it is encouraged to Nova. I see this encouragement as unfair and boring, and a flaw in the gameplay mechanics.

If you, however, don't mind players to Nova, and the players are having a blast doing it, nothing of my argument stands. This because of my premise that repeatingly using nova will hurt the experience.