Let's Talk About Clocks, Countdowns, Etc...

[aramis erak]

On a base level, sure. But since I am limiting my allowance of clocks to never 'untick' , that makes hitpoints greatly function differently.

the situation of a "knight attacking a troll, and a troll regeneration" = is a situation that my clocks will never be in.
via hitpoitns rules, its possible for the knight and troll to attack/regen forever, or for hits to be entirely negated.
that can't happen in my own use of clocks. once the tick is marked, nothing can remove it.

nothing can take my clocks progress away.
hitpoints can take away progress.

There are games where clock manipulation is in fact in the rules...

 

[Umbran]

Because if either of those things are false, then my statement still holds true.

As already noted, standard D&D Hit Points are a form of clock.

Maybe you tell your players how many hit points each monster has, and exactly how much damage is done by each attack, but I expect most of us don't. Most of us are therefore already hiding clocks.

You are trying to close our barn doors after we have let the horses out to graze.

So let's talk about why would a GM need to track things, in strict clock ticks - only for themselves.

It is not for you to decide when someone else should use a tool. It is for them to decide when they'd find that tool helpful.

You may have your personal preferences for your play. Your willingness to insist they apply to everyone else is... unappealing, to say the least.

 

[hawkeyefan]

My approach to clocks… generally speaking, I wouldn’t say there are never exceptions… is that they do indeed work best as a player facing tool. They give mechanical weight to the descriptions provided by the GM. They are meant to represent progress of some sort… so I think it’s best when they do that.

The comparison to Hit Points is pretty flimsy, in my opinion, because while yes, HP do have some similarities to clocks… they’re a pacing or countdown mechanic… HP are also purely gamist. Why that matters in this sense is that the information that knowing them conveys to the players is considered to be “out of character” but I don’t think that’s really the case.

Hit Points and the way they are often implemented, don’t really accurately represent the way physical harm works and progresses. If a character has 26 hit points, someone with a 20 Strength and a longsword cannot kill that person in a single hit. Which of course, is absurd, and is purely a construct of making a game out of combat.

Clocks are best used, In my opinion, to convey information to the players. To represent what they can observe and intuit and feel beyond just what the GM chooses to describe.

So a clock called “guards alerted” shows the players the progress toward that happening. Can that be divorced from the events of play to just be a number in a gamist way like Hit Points? Sure. Should it? I’d argue that it shouldn’t. Each tick of that clock should correspond to something in the world that shows the progress. Perhaps a first tick is one guard saying to another “did you hear that?” or similar. A later tick is hearing more movement about the location as the guards start moving about, investigating. And so on.

Something like a Faction Clock that represents a faction working toward a goal is known to the players so that it represents moments beyond play… rumors overheard, talk on the streets, reports in newspapers and the like. It represents the setting as a place that the characters live in and interact with… often in ways that aren’t specifically expressed in play.

So yes, while a GM can of course use a clock to track something solely for themselves, I don’t think that’s how they are best implemented. They are most effective to represent progress to the players so that they have actionable information. My advice to any GM who wanted to add clocks to their game would be to get over the gut reaction to keep them hidden and instead let them do what they do best.

 

[Reynard]

So a clock called “guards alerted” shows the players the progress toward that happening.

I want to talk about this sort of clock specifically, mostly because I do not like it as a layer facing clock. Or, rather, I do not want the players to know how many ticks are left. I DO want them to know the clock exists, and I am even okay letting them know when they have pushed to closer to filling or given themselves some breathing room. But in the same way that I don't want to tell them how many hit points the monster has but I will communicate things like "bloodied", I think the tension of them not know exactly how much time they have left is valuable and makes play more fun.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I want to talk about this sort of clock specifically, mostly because I do not like it as a layer facing clock. Or, rather, I do not want the players to know how many ticks are left. I DO want them to know the clock exists, and I am even okay letting them know when they have pushed to closer to filling or given themselves some breathing room. But in the same way that I don't want to tell them how many hit points the monster has but I will communicate things like "bloodied", I think the tension of them not know exactly how much time they have left is valuable and makes play more fun.

It may. This is often cited as one of the main reasons to keep information hidden from the players.

But do you think tension vanishes with knowledge? I don’t think that’s the case at all. There may be a shift in the kind of tension… the tension of the unknown versus the tension of a countdown… but clocks provide tension, they don’t remove it.

I mean, at their most basic, any countdown is effective because it’s known. Because the observers can count along and know that in 10 seconds it’ll be the new year, or in 30 seconds this bomb is going to explode, and so on.

Yes, you can obscure that information and still manage some form of tension… but it’s generally a different kind of tension. If what you want is a different kind if tension than what a countdown provides, then the question is, why use a countdown?

There may be reasons to do so… but very often, there are reasons to stick with the tool you’ve chosen to use.

So, to look at the example of an infiltration and a clock representing “guards alerted”… I think there are a couple things to consider here. The first is that, as presented in Blades in the Dark, the amount of ticks applied to a clock will vary depending on the fictional circumstances and the outcome of a roll… so the idea that there is certainty in when a clock will fill is most often not the case. Second, if a GM wants the players to know there’s progress happening (your “I DO want them to know the clock exists, and I am even okay letting them know when they have pushed to closer to filling or given themselves some breathing room”) then I’m not sure what’s to be gained by describing that, but shying away from a visual representation.

This is why my suggestion to any GM looking to use clocks in play is to make them player facing. Let them inform your narration and the thrust of play. Yield some amount of control to them. See how that can ultimately enhance play.

 

[Reynard]

It may. This is often cited as one of the main reasons to keep information hidden from the players.

But do you think tension vanishes with knowledge? I don’t think that’s the case at all. There may be a shift in the kind of tension… the tension of the unknown versus the tension of a countdown… but clocks provide tension, they don’t remove it.

I mean, at their most basic, any countdown is effective because it’s known. Because the observers can count along and know that in 10 seconds it’ll be the new year, or in 30 seconds this bomb is going to explode, and so on.

Yes, you can obscure that information and still manage some form of tension… but it’s generally a different kind of tension. If what you want is a different kind if tension than what a countdown provides, then the question is, why use a countdown?

There may be reasons to do so… but very often, there are reasons to stick with the tool you’ve chosen to use.

So, to look at the example of an infiltration and a clock representing “guards alerted”… I think there are a couple things to consider here. The first is that, as presented in Blades in the Dark, the amount of ticks applied to a clock will vary depending on the fictional circumstances and the outcome of a roll… so the idea that there is certainty in when a clock will fill is most often not the case. Second, if a GM wants the players to know there’s progress happening (your “I DO want them to know the clock exists, and I am even okay letting them know when they have pushed to closer to filling or given themselves some breathing room”) then I’m not sure what’s to be gained by describing that, but shying away from a visual representation.

This is why my suggestion to any GM looking to use clocks in play is to make them player facing. Let them inform your narration and the thrust of play. Yield some amount of control to them. See how that can ultimately enhance play.

I guess I feel like there is a shift in player interaction with the fiction when they can see how many ticks are left. it becomes immensely more gamist: that is, the choices are driven by the mechanic more than the fictional positioning. It becomes boardgame like, in that regard, I think.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I guess I feel like there is a shift in player interaction with the fiction when they can see how many ticks are left. it becomes immensely more gamist: that is, the choices are driven by the mechanic more than the fictional positioning. It becomes boardgame like, in that regard, I think.

I suppose it could… but we could say that about any game mechanic that is representative of what’s happening in the game world. “Oh talking about my character’s stats and skills in terms of numbers is like a board game”… and so on.

For me, I feel that the players looking at the clock and feeling like “aw crap, the jig is almost up” feels very much like it would feel for the characters, and is a fun way to build tension. I don’t think that characters are (or perhaps “should be” is a better fit) as in the dark as hiding the numbers tends to leave them.

It also makes gameplay rather fun… you get those moments where it’s like “ah jeez guys… if I don’t get a 6 here, I think we’re toast” before you roll… and then that thrill when the 6 comes up and you immediately rejoice instead of having to look at the GM for them to confirm that you did it.

But… I also don’t shy away from the fact that we’re playing a game… so gameplay elements just aren’t disruptive to me.

 

[soviet]

I guess I feel like there is a shift in player interaction with the fiction when they can see how many ticks are left. it becomes immensely more gamist: that is, the choices are driven by the mechanic more than the fictional positioning.

That isn't what gamism means.

It becomes boardgame like, in that regard, I think.

That isn't what boardgame means.

 

[JConstantine]

I want to talk about this sort of clock specifically, mostly because I do not like it as a layer facing clock. Or, rather, I do not want the players to know how many ticks are left.

So, to fully understand why BitD recommends all clocks be player facing, one needs to understand what John Harper intends their purpose to be, which is to facilitate dramatic irony: player facing clocks allows players to know things that their characters may not. In at least one interview, Harper has mentioned he's not concerned about immersion because he doesn't experience it.
What @hawkeyefan describes here:

But do you think tension vanishes with knowledge? I don’t think that’s the case at all. There may be a shift in the kind of tension… the tension of the unknown versus the tension of a countdown… but clocks provide tension, they don’t remove it.

is basically immersion vs dramatic irony. Dramatic irony works in TV/film because the audience is completely separate from the characters, but in RPGs the character's performer is the same person as the audience member at the same time, so many (I suspect most) players don't really experience that dramatic irony which is why you observe it resulting in players approaching clocks mechanistically. It's rooted in the same differences of playstyle as player stances.

It also raises the question of which clocks should be Open (so the players see/are aware of them) and which clocks should be hidden?

To try to bridge the divide I laid out above, I take a mixed approach to clocks:

• If it's something the characters would be fully able to know/observe/comprehend/etc., I'll make the clock player-facing and clearly labelled. For example, the crew are trying to obtain a barrel of electroplasm from a capsized Leviathan hunter ship, and their presence (i.e. a bad roll) results in it taking on water to the point they risk drowning: 8-segment clock: Ship Sinks!
• If it's something the characters wouldn't fully be able to know/observe/comprehend, but may see/hear signs of, I'll make the clock player-facing, but labelled it something vague and evocative. For example, the crew's occult activity has drawn the attention of a demon: 6-segment clock: Something Wicked This Way Comes
  • If the characters learn of the thing before the clock fills, I'll rename it, to reflect that. Eg. the above may become Demonic Attention
• If it's something the characters have no way of knowing about, I might keep it hidden, or I'll make it player-facing but keep it unlabelled. For example, the crew decide to perform a bold and daring (read: foolish) heist on the Lord Governor's mansion, and the Lurk's player flubs their roll to crack the safe. The safe opens and triggers a silent alarm that alerts the nearby Bluecoat Precinct directly: In this case, instead of a hidden clock, or one labelled Guards Alerted, I might put out the player-facing 4-segment clock: ?

 

[JConstantine]

The comparison to Hit Points is pretty flimsy, in my opinion, because while yes, HP do have some similarities to clocks… they’re a pacing or countdown mechanic…

While conventional wisdom is that clocks shouldn't be used for HP, HP would just be a tug-of-war clock. Harper did just that in one of the actual plays he ran. They may have been named "defences" or the like, but they were tantamount to HP in play. Now, it was also a fantastic demonstration of why clocks shouldn't be used for HP in a game like BitD because, hoo boy, was it like pulling teeth (doesn't help that Harper is an incredibly dry GM).