How do you Control/Set the Pace of a Game?

[Hussar]

Quick gaming story.

Some time ago, I was playing in a homebrew setting 3.5 D&D game. It was a really fun game, high rp, not a lot of action. The plot was fun, we moved along decently, stuff happened. I had a good time. Then, the campaign ended and we moved on to a Shackled City campaign.

Now, I lurve me the Adventure Paths. I do. But, suddenly, the pace of the first campaign seemed glacially slow. The other players were talking to every barkeep/storekeep/random orphan and doing this and that about the town of Cauldron. I chafed. We knew where we had to go, we had a pretty good idea of what we had to do, but the other players wanted to spend far more time on, in my mind, extraneous details. Several frustrating weeks later, I bowed out of the campaign. I just wasn't fitting in.

This got me to thinking. How do you control or affect the pace of a game? What can you do as a DM or as a player to speed things up or put on the brakes? Should you do it entirely in character? Should you step out and meta-game? What things can we do to keep things going at a pace that the table likes?

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Generally I find one of the best ways to start off with setting pace is to be upfront with some stuff with the campaign (this is also relevant I think too your other thread on characters). Stuff like themes, tone and such being upfront about it can help set the mindset for the Players and DM. Also more meta-gaming is to simply go, "okay guys what should we do?" I find nothing is loss by just having upfront discussions about what each person wants out of it.

I find it is good to have set-pieces too. Sprinkling these set-pieces about can help keep the pace going. Though this can depend on the style of gameplay. I run mysteries mainly so having the PCs stumbling across a set-piece can come naturally. Along with set-pieces having focused plot-hooks can help move it along, a number of murders happen, a burglary of a arcanist tower occurred, etc. it can help push the plot along. Just have them be mentioned in the bar or in newspapers. If you want it to be more relaxed you level off on set-pieces or focused hooks.

But overall I think discussion before the game starts and during of what each person wants out of the game and what focus the game should take is the best way.

 

[Lanefan]

As DM, I largely let the pace set itself* as long as they're in character, knowing that if the players get bored the characters will do something rash or stupid and end up instigating a fight either with each other or with some random nearby lifeform that may or may not be the enemy they're after. Things never stay dull for long. It's the out-of-game slowdowns that get in the way.

* - with an occasional exception where if for out-of-game reasons (e.g. a player is moving away and we want to get the adventure done this session) the pace needs to be forced.

As player, it sometimes depends on what I'm playing. Right now in one game I'm playing a lawful wizard who wants nothing more than to get this current series of missions over with, so she's constantly (if only vaguely successfully) hammering at the party to stay on mission and get after it. In other cases I'll be the character/player who is going for all the intricate details when others think they already have everything they need.

Lanefan

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Quick gaming story.

Some time ago, I was playing in a homebrew setting 3.5 D&D game. It was a really fun game, high rp, not a lot of action. The plot was fun, we moved along decently, stuff happened. I had a good time. Then, the campaign ended and we moved on to a Shackled City campaign.

Now, I lurve me the Adventure Paths. I do. But, suddenly, the pace of the first campaign seemed glacially slow. The other players were talking to every barkeep/storekeep/random orphan and doing this and that about the town of Cauldron. I chafed. We knew where we had to go, we had a pretty good idea of what we had to do, but the other players wanted to spend far more time on, in my mind, extraneous details. Several frustrating weeks later, I bowed out of the campaign. I just wasn't fitting in.

This got me to thinking. How do you control or affect the pace of a game? What can you do as a DM or as a player to speed things up or put on the brakes? Should you do it entirely in character? Should you step out and meta-game? What things can we do to keep things going at a pace that the table likes?

In Torg, in Terra or in the Nile Empire, the "Law of Action" applies. The PCs are running around aimlessly? They don't have a clue? In short, they don't take action? Then the action comes to them. They run into a shock trooper patrol. A group of rivaling Ninjas attack them.

A little more generalized - sometimes the PCs need pressure. Not neccessarily guiding them in any specific direction, just something that requires them to make a choice now.
Some scenarios have this naturally. A murder mystery? If you don't do something now, follow clues, interrogate people, and so on, the murderer might be long gone or have found his next victim.
Some archpriest planning a vile ritual, sacrificing a virgin to summon a powerful demon? Well, you can ignore that, but then the virgin is dead and the archpriest has one extra demon at his side.
Others don't have it inherently. A generic dungeon that only contains the promise of treasure, no cults to stop, no goblin invasisons to bring to a halt, just lacks this.

The pressure doesn't need to come from death and murder. The caravan looking for guards will move out in two days, with or without the PCs. The new leader of merchant guild will be elected in one week, regardless of whether the mysterious death of the previous leader will be solved or not.

The reason for PCs running around more or less "aimlessly" is typically that they missed a clue. Sometimes it is just that nothing seems particularly "worthy" of interest. Why should they bother with a particular clue or hook? What makes it important? Why do they need to do it now instead of 3 weeks later?

 

[OchreJelly]

It's interesting because for our group, time has sort of put the focus on a more beer-and-pretzels style game. We really only have 4 hour blocks and we play after work so everyone is usually pretty fried, so gaming for us has become less of a RP activity and more hack-n-slash. The truth is that we have never been a super heavy RP group, even when we had more time to play. But with 4 hours we really all subconsciously agree not to spend too much time "talking to bakers" and such.

This is not a value judgment on RP, but given time constraints we tend to focus on the stuff that gets the most bang for the buck with all of us together, i.e. tactical encounters. I tend to keep the pace moving and I've found that my players don't mind if I steer too much. The times I tend to offer more choice to players usually occurs offline between sessions. We even take some of the RP offline via email.

So to sum up. Here's OchreJelly's advice on keeping a brisk space for the average working stiff: 1) prepare as much as you can ahead of time. Having the encounter maps ready ahead of time is a huge time-saver. 2) Look for logical breaks in adventures where real choices can be made and try to end your night there. This is more of an art than a science. 3) Offer choice and minimal RP between game sessions. If you have a free online group this is pretty easy. 4) Use an online wiki like Obsidian Portal to unload much of the lore / history checks about your adventure. The players will appreciate the reminder and help them keep the story fresh for when they arrive next session, so you don't have to spend much time reviewing the previous session.

 

[ExploderWizard]

It is a special thing to have an entire group of players all agree to a pace that suits them. Part of the challenge of DMing is maintaining a pace that every player can be happy with. In our group we have some people that enjoy dialogue and formulating well (or not so well) thought out plans and others who want to "just doooo it!" Satisfying both desires is a juggling act that's difficult to pull off.

The investigating/planning has GOT to pay off when done right to let team impulsive know that it can have value. That same planning NEEDS to fail at times to let the planners see that too much dithering can lead to disaster. The pace overall is player driven with the occasional ticking clock to ensure that the impulsive side of the coin can be vital to success at times.

 

[Piratecat]

My players tend to drag their feet when they're nervous about an upcoming encounter. When I mention this, I usually get a chorus of "No I scared!" (see 1:15) A gentle reminder usually solves the problem.

More generally, I ask the group "mind if I fast-forward a bit?", then I summarize all the non-interesting bits that get them to the next scene. Seems to work really well. I'll also sometimes tell them when they're overthinking a problem.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I like a fast-paced game, one of the major frustrations for me as a player is that I can't control the pace. Often I notice I'm the one who, like Hussar, is pushing for the party to get on with the mission.

As a GM this problem doesn't exist, GMs have total control over pacing. Fast forwarding, resolving a problem with a skill check, declaring a fight over when one side as a clear advantage, moving to another player. And as both Mustrum Ridcully and Raymond Chandler put it - "When in doubt, ninjas attack."

 

[howandwhy99]

Truthfully, a referee can never set the pace of a game. They can only resolve the players' attempted actions. Unless the DM is playing an NPC, the speed of the game should ideally proceed irrespective of his or her responses. This is true for the same reason railroading a predetermined plotline cannot happen in an RPG, a DM can neither control how fast the players choose to play nor what their decisions will be. It's as simple as that.

On the other hand, if the players all agree to "let things ride" for a set amount of time, then a Referee can relate what happens from the PCs' point of view over that time chronologically. In the end, this is still just a player technique for advancing the game's time clock. But a good DM might suggest it to inexperienced players. And will stop at any moment's hesitation by a player who wants to halt the relaying of information before the asked for set time is reached. I mean, no one is going to let a group of orcs ambush and kill their characters just because their characters are declared to be "meditating for the next 3 hours". The players are always in charge of the speeding up of the clock and bringing it back to actual time. The DM is just the timekeeper, in essence.

Also, a good DM will always remember they can have a subtle influence over the outcome of the game if they are not careful in how they give their descriptions, the clues of the game. Since everything a DM does during a game session is clue-giving by definition, it's best to keep one's game face on when running a game. But... if things start getting boring for the players, it certainly doesn't hurt to look a little bored yourself. Just to remind them they are the ones needing to speed up the action, if action's what they want.

 

[Hussar]

I like a fast-paced game, one of the major frustrations for me as a player is that I can't control the pace. Often I notice I'm the one who, like Hussar, is pushing for the party to get on with the mission.

I would just like to interject here that this isn't always true of me. For me, it really depends on the campaign. In a plot heavy campaign like an Adventure Path where you basically know your marching orders, I want to get to the action. In a more freeform style game, I don't mind so much taking time to smell the roses.

As a GM this problem doesn't exist, GMs have total control over pacing. Fast forwarding, resolving a problem with a skill check, declaring a fight over when one side as a clear advantage, moving to another player. And as both Mustrum Ridcully and Raymond Chandler put it - "When in doubt, ninjas attack."

Truthfully, a referee can never set the pace of a game. They can only resolve the players' attempted actions. Unless the DM is playing an NPC, the speed of the game should ideally proceed irrespective of his or her responses. This is true for the same reason railroading a predetermined plotline cannot happen in an RPG, a DM can neither control how fast the players choose to play nor what their decisions will be. It's as simple as that.

I just find the juxtaposition of these two viewpoints, right after each other to tickle my funny bone.

Howandwhy - I'm not sure I agree that the DM cannot set the pace of the game. He can most certainly slow it down - "ok, guys, wandering orcs attack you. And then more wandering orcs attack you. And still more wandering orcs attack you." or speed it up, "You hit for fifteen damage? ((glances at notes, sees that the baddie has 17 hp left)) It goes down in a welter of blood!"