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

[payn]

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.

In my experience, this is very true. The more info players have the more they will approach it in gamist terms. "Well, that village is definitely in trouble, but we got at least three ticks until we have to worry about it..." I like to avoid that kind of thinking. Though, there are lots of things I remove to stop it, like XP for example.

So, yeah clocks can add tension but there needs to be some fog of war. Bloodied is a go notion, but its shy of an exact number. Finding the right amount of info to share so players have agency, but not omnipotence where they just optimize every move regardless of the narrative choices before them.

 

[hawkeyefan]

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.

I was talking about there not being a difference in what the character knows versus the player or audience. That clocks represent what the characters can observe or intuit.

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).

Well, my criticism of the comparison to hit points is more about the typical approach of being hidden from the players (those of enemies, at least). But why? Can my character not see that the orc is wounded? If hit points aren’t meat, then can I not tell that he’s getting winded or otherwise worn down?

They’re not a good comparison because we can’t even agree on what hit points represent other than a general attrition to being closer to death. But the way they function in play is not really anything like the way real life works.

With a clock, it is representative of a specific thing. When this clock fills, the guards will be aware that we’re here. If we make a mistake or otherwise draw attention to ourselves, we’ll be closer to discovery.

Yes, a clock can be used in a way that would function similarly (and there are some Forged in the Dark games that do this), but again, this would be best portrayed by progress toward the goal being described as the clock fills.

In my experience, this is very true. The more info players have the more they will approach it in gamist terms. "Well, that village is definitely in trouble, but we got at least three ticks until we have to worry about it..." I like to avoid that kind of thinking. Though, there are lots of things I remove to stop it, like XP for example.

But might there not be a time when the characters (and therefore the players) need to make such a decision? The town is burning… but outside of town, the orcs are heading off with the duke’s daughter as a captive… what do they do?

Should the characters (and therefore the players) not have any sense of how far along the blaze is? Or how soon the orcs might be beyond reach?

I don’t know… such a decision doesn’t seem purely gamist to me?

 

[Reynard]

But might there not be a time when the characters (and therefore the players) need to make such a decision? The town is burning… but outside of town, the orcs are heading off with the duke’s daughter as a captive… what do they do?

Should the characters (and therefore the players) not have any sense of how far along the blaze is? Or how soon the orcs might be beyond reach?

I don’t know… such a decision doesn’t seem purely gamist to me?

So does the orc clock only start when the PCs can see it? So if they don't, the event sits in stasis? Or do the orcs get away with the daughter? If so, how long does that take?

 

[payn]

But might there not be a time when the characters (and therefore the players) need to make such a decision? The town is burning… but outside of town, the orcs are heading off with the duke’s daughter as a captive… what do they do?

Should the characters (and therefore the players) not have any sense of how far along the blaze is? Or how soon the orcs might be beyond reach?

I don’t know… such a decision doesn’t seem purely gamist to me?

It's an interesting dilemma and Id like to make the choice with info the characters have at hand. If, however, the players know it takes 6 ticks for the orcs to get away, but only three to put out the fire, they have the easy decision of doing both. Thats the situation I want to avoid. Not all clocks work like this, but ive seen GMs run them like that.

 

[Laurefindel]

Not all metagaming is gamist.

With a player-facing clock, the players have information, which they can use to make a good story. The characters too have some information from the clock, which they can use to gain the most out of the situation.

If the boat is sinking, or the town is burning, or the rebellion is gathering its fleet, the characters typically have some clues on where the clock stands. They can tell by the tilt of the sinking ship, they can see the fire progressing through neighbouring districts, they ear rumours of captains heading toward the rendezvous point, or get their coded standbys on their long-range comms.

Even with more abstract “impending doom” clocks, they can see reality rupturing but demons not yet breaking through, they can ear that the cultists have not yet reached the apex of their chanting, they can extrapolate that the blight is still two days away before it reaches the town.

Even in real life, people stretch their gas tanks until the needle is past empty, bystanders waste time seeing if someone better qualified will take the lead before administering first aid, students will party up to the night before their exam… We “game” our clocks on a mundane, daily basis; extraordinary characters gaming theirs is not that far out.

 

[Retros_x]

Push pull clocks are a known thing. Blades has 'em, for example. Racing clocks can handle similar situations.

Yes but you can do the same with concrete time units, that was my point, you dont need an abstract clock for it. You can just add or substract x days "until the evil sorcerer finishes his ritual" or something like that.

 

[Retros_x]

Sure he is, because there are demonstrable reasons for the GM to hide the clock, as Umbran articulated.

Let's use D&D's most ubiquitous clock: monster hit points. That clock is run down whenever damage is done to the creature. But it is very common for the value of that clock to be hidden from the players until it runs out.

Many GM give hints if the enemy is barely scratched, bloodied or close to death. A clock with 4 quarters isn't that much different. Instead of naming the number of burned down houses, you just have a 4 quarter clock until city is burned down. Most often abstract concepts like this represent actual information the PCs should have. They see how hurt a monster is, it doesnt make sense to completely hide that information. They see how much of the city is burned down or messagers tell how close the enemy army is etc.

But even if the PCs could not see it for example a clock until an evil sorcerer finishes his ritual in his dungeon - why would you hide that clock? If you hide it, there is literally no reason to have it. You could also just arbitrarly decide that the sorcerer finished their ritual, it makes no difference to the players. If you have a clock you have to show it in some kind of way, to build pressure and let players make informed decisions.

In the end I just want to repeat my mantra I repeat for years on different RPG forums now: METAGAMING ISN'T BAD

 

[Fenris-77]

Yes but you can do the same with concrete time units, that was my point, you dont need an abstract clock for it. You can just add or substract x days "until the evil sorcerer finishes his ritual" or something like that.

Sure you can. I don't find that concrete time units help that much in general, but there are specific instances where I'm sure they do. A lot depends on system and how that system atomizes time in play.

 

[Reynard]

In the end I just want to repeat my mantra I repeat for years on different RPG forums now: METAGAMING ISN'T BAD

Metagaming isn't necessarily bad, but i think everyone has their own preferences and limits for it. I'm not much into immersion as a goal of play, but there is a certain point of abstraction that I balk at -- when play starts to feel like a "writer's room". Other folks are fine with that, while others want everything in character all the time.

The players looking at the clocks and making decisions about what would make a better story, rather than responding how their characters might to the pressure the clock represents, is a step to far for me. YMMV.

 

[Fenris-77]

Every roleplaying game has meta elements. It's not a bad word.