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

[payn]

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.

I actually prefer for story element decisions over mechanical benefit ones. Someone mentioned people in real life pushing clocks all the time in cases where they see how far the gas tank can go, or party the night before class. Those dont have major consequences to them. You might run out of gas and need to get some more. You might get a bad grade but you can make it up or take the class again. Lets reframe that where you want to stretch your gas tank but are transporting vital organs to a hospital. You are now gambling saving a buck with saving a life. Although in game-mechanical terms you can metagame mitigate any contingencies such as car accidents, flat tires, gas tank leaks, etc.. So, if delivering the organs last allows you to make the maximum buck at no risk, you go and do that.

I think we are on the same page, just framing it a bit differently. To me the character making decisions based on what matters to them, is the same as "doing it for a better story." Its, "I know mechanically, I the player, can optimize all outcomes by metagaming" that ruins the experience for me personally.

 

[SkidAce]

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 a way it does become gamist, but I was also very surprised to see the effect when they saw the clock. It made me think about it more.

Using the guards example;

• no clock, i describe actions from the guards as they go deeper into the castle. Tension rises based on my description. This is good, and not "gamist". But they don't see the clock, and my descriptions may be no big deal to them (/shrug)
• uses clock, prompts me for descriptions, players can see it, they realize they have gone from calm guards to one tick away from discovery. This causes them to image overwhelming sense of near failure...i.e. tension they caused themselves. (best kind?)

My conclusion, after all this disscusion? Clocks can be hidden or shown, either will work. A hidden clock with a descriptive narration by the dm can be fantastic and thrilling. (its what we did before "clocks" after all). A visible clock along with narration, you get the players tensioning themselves. (not sure best phrase).


Here's a quote from one my current players/group. They have only played for a year, and this was just the day before yesterday, with a visible chase clock...

 

[SkidAce]

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.

The key here would be the players would be 3 ticks behind the orcs (orcs having a lead gained while putting out the fire. IMO.

 

[payn]

The key here would be the players would be 3 ticks behind the orcs (orcs having a lead gained while putting out the fire. IMO.

Thats not the point I was making. It was that the players knew they could do both, and despite what was more compelling from a narrative and character-driven purpose, they chose the best mechanically optimized outcome because they have precise info to do so.

Look im not 100% against metgaming and/or clocks. I just have a preference in how they are applied and executed. I know thats not universal.

 

[SkidAce]

Thats not the point I was making. It was that the players knew they could do both, and despite what was more compelling from a narrative and character-driven purpose, they chose the best mechanically optimized outcome because they have precise info to do so.

Look im not 100% against metgaming and/or clocks. I just have a preference in how they are applied and executed. I know thats not universal.

I definately see your point, and it could certainly turn out that way.

Most clocks I run are based on skill checks and challenges. So in the scenario you and I are discussing, the chances of the orcs getting away nearly doubled from them deciding to fight the fire.

So they needed to decide what risk to take.

 

[hawkeyefan]

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?

This was a hastily described hypothetical. I would expect that if this is something that comes up in play, the GM will deploy the clocks when needed. Is that when the characters see the orcs? I don’t know! Perhaps they hear them. Or hear other townsfolk calling out about them. It can be whatever makes sense based in the situation.

As for how long it takes, typically that’s kind of the point of the clock. The thing happens when the clock fills. Exactly how long that will be depends on the play process. The games in which I use clocks, they get filled based on the actions declared by players and the corresponding rolls. In Blades, the Position and Effect would be determined, and then the roll would dictate the outcome. Typically between 0 and 3 ticks on a clock are the possible outcomes.

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.

Well, no, not ideally. At least not with the way clocks work as I’ve seen and used. A clock that’s at 3 out of 6 ticks is halfway full… so it shows progress toward the outcome. Compared to another clock that’s at 0 of 4 ticks, you have a very rough idea how they compare. So if “the village burns” is at 3/6 and “the orcs escape” is at 0/4, the players have a rough idea that the village is about halfway to being destroyed by fire, and that it’s likely to happen sooner than the orcs escaping will.

But no… the players do not know precisely when these things may happen. Their actions will play a part in how those clocks progress. Clocks can typically be ticked 0 to 3 ticks per action that applies, as I mentioned above.

So what the clocks do is give a sense of the two things that are progressing, and they can be compared a bit, and some sense of the comparative odds can be surmised. But they do not typically give the precision you’re describing.

 

[Retros_x]

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

But how on earth can they react to the pressure if they don't see it. If you describe the effects, you might as well just show a visual reminder. Or not use a clock at all behind your DM-screen and just narratively increase the pressure. I just dont get the point of an abstract clock kept secret.

Plus if a player makes decision based on what would make a better story of what their characters might do has nothing to do with the representation of information IMO. There are just different player types. A power gamer will always react differently than a "story-driven" roleplayer, no matter if you show the "city burns down" clock or describes the city burning down.

there is a certain point of abstraction that I balk at -- when play starts to feel like a "writer's room".

Interesting a writers room has no abstraction at all. Writers don't have any clocks or game systems or any other abstractions, they talk directly about the story. I'd say abstractions lead to the opposite direction, more gamey, less freeflow writing/creating. But thats what I play games for, so no issue for me. I go to my theatre group if I have the dire for scene work, writers room vibes, free creations etc.

 

[Reynard]

But how on earth can they react to the pressure if they don't see it. If you describe the effects, you might as well just show a visual reminder. Or not use a clock at all behind your DM-screen and just narratively increase the pressure. I just dont get the point of an abstract clock kept secret.

Plus if a player makes decision based on what would make a better story of what their characters might do has nothing to do with the representation of information IMO. There are just different player types. A power gamer will always react differently than a "story-driven" roleplayer, no matter if you show the "city burns down" clock or describes the city burning down.



Interesting a writers room has no abstraction at all. Writers don't have any clocks or game systems or any other abstractions, they talk directly about the story. I'd say abstractions lead to the opposite direction, more gamey, less freeflow writing/creating. But thats what I play games for, so no issue for me. I go to my theatre group if I have the dire for scene work, writers room vibes, free creations etc.

I don't know what to tell you. Those are my experiences with using clocks in the open like that sometimes. So I pick and choose between when clocks are open, when they are hidden, and whatever in between works at the moment.

 

[SkidAce]

Interestingly enough (in a psychology way), I had a 4 count clock on an index card that I had hidden from the players behind the screen last night.

They could not see it, but they did notice me pulling it off the screen and scribbling (filling in a tick) and putting it back up.

"Whats that?" they said.

"Just me tracking something" I replied.

...did I get the stink eye or what...and then they got mildly paranoid...

 

[Laurefindel]

Interestingly enough (in a psychology way), I had a 4 count clock on an index card that I had hidden from the players behind the screen last night.

They could not see it, but they did notice me pulling it off the screen and scribbling (filling in a tick) and putting it back up.

"Whats that?" they said.

"Just me tracking something" I replied.

...did I get the stink eye or what...and then they got mildly paranoid...

View attachment 438697

That’s like the good old “roll a wisdom saving throw”

“What for”

“Oh, you’ll see!”

But back on subject, there are many ways for building tension. Player-facing clock and ominous sus DM behaviour are only two of many.