D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Faolyn]

In D&D and related games the assumption is that the players only know the HP and AC of their characters in games I've played. Players may share the information with other members of the group, although some DMs frown on exact HP details. On the other hand we never know the specific HP of the monsters, although we can usually guess the AC of the enemy after a round or two unless the GM decides to tell us.

Exactly. You can guess these things quite easily. That means you know it.

I do not use timeclocks like you do and apparently neither do at least some of the other people on this forum. Ipso facto your definition is not universal. Other games of course have their own rules but you were in a discussion with someone who uses a D&D variant.

The definition is universal. You're choosing not to use it. Which is sad, because it helps enormously and has made my game a lot more interesting.

 

[Faolyn]

Part of the disconnect here is that you seem to be using "clock" to refer to some form of metagame countdown timer unrelated to in-fiction time where I (and maybe others) see "clock" as shorthand for "in-fiction time deadline".

There are several different types of clocks in RPGs. There are also various different terms that are used, such as countdowns. I wasn't talking about an in-fiction time deadline.

 

[Faolyn]

I don't know anyone who doesn't understand the usage, I was responding to @Faolyn who insisted that it's always player facing.

I typically use something that can be observed by the characters such as a sunset on the winter solstice. But occasionally there will be a ticking clock where the players know there is time pressure but don't know specific details. Escaping a collapsing building would be an example, they know the building is collapsing they don't know exactly how long it will take.

I don't think I said always. If I did, then I used the wrong word.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It is not connected in the sense of cause and effect.

That's what I disagree with. I think anyone looking at these descriptions that's not doing so through the lens of task-resolution traditional RPG mechanics will see cause and effect all over the place.

The focus on task resolution is making you guys separate the task from the rest of the fictional world. Which is fine if that's what you want to do it in play... but then don't try and tell other people that what they're doing ignores cause and effect.

 

[pemerton]

It is not connected in the sense of cause and effect. Beyond that I don't see why it matters.

But this is ridiculous, and is why @hawkeyefan feels he's taken crazy pills.

It's obvious that a failure to open the door may be the cause of people dying in a house fire. That is why there are workplace health and safety laws, building codes, coronial inquest, manslaughter laws, etc.

Likewise, suppose you miss the phone call. The next day you're talking to your fried - "I rang but you didn't pick up!" "Yeah, that's because I couldn't get inside because I couldn't get the door open".

Or even, you come inside all wet. Your housemate sees you and says "You're drenched. What happened?" "I had trouble opening the front door, and so got rained on."

These are all straightforward examples of cause and effect.

I feel like I've taken crazy pills!

Here's another "crazy pill" aspect to it.

In his thread, @Lanefan, @AlViking and other posters have talked about the GM, in a sandbox, working out consequences via in-fiction cause and effect. Some of the reasoning they've talked about is pretty complex. In previous posts, Lanefan has given examples that are quite baroque, like this one:

Let me try an example.

There's skullduggery going on all over the city. The place is rife with rumours and plots and spies and gossip, and into all this prance the innocent naive low-level PCs looking to spend the spoils of their first real adventure. They take a room at an inn, and go out for a night on the town. At some point things go a bit sideways - there's some yelling and pushing and screaming and the party mage ends up having to discreetly charm a local harlot in order to calm the situation down; the charm works, well, like a charm. The mage now has a new friend, adventurers-plus-new-friend go about their merry evening, and a good time is had by all. The adventurers, including the mage, pass out around sunrise whereupon the harlot wanders off.

Player side: mage charms harlot who at his invitation joins mage and friends for a night of partying before slipping away a bit after sunrise. String pulled, result obtained.

DM side: harlot is actually an agent (who, depending on developments, the party may or may not have met later in this capacity) working for the local Duke. She realized the yelling and pushing was a distraction intended to mask something else, and joined the fray in order to get herself into the scene so she could try to determine what was being masked by the distraction. She managed to notice two men sneaking into an alley that she knew led to a hidden access to the Duke's manor house, just before being charmed by the mage and taken along for a night of revels. She didn't report this - in fact, she failed to report at all - and thus the two sneaks get where they're going and none the wiser. Meanwhile other agents who really can't be spared are sent out to search for the missing one, who none too sober comes in on her own not long after sunrise. String pulled, dominoes fall.

Ramifications: next morning word gets out of an attempt on the Duke's life during the night by two unknown men.

The PCs might never know of their unintentional involvement in this crime. Conversely, their mage might suddenly find himself arrested for treason and thrown in jail.

This is supposed to be an example of "strings pulled, dominoes" fall and yet Lanefan, Micah Sweet, AlViking and other "sandboxers" want to deny such a simple causal connection as failure to open a door leading to injury and death in a house fire.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, it doesn't say that specifically, but that's what it does. The PCs know there's only a few dice left. If they're climbing up a cliff, the GM should be narrating this to show the cliff is crumbling badly or the rope is fraying. Will they get to the top before the cliff completely crumbles or the rope snaps? If they're picking a lock where the GM felt a countdown was necessary because there's a trap slowly coming online, the GM should be narrating the ka-thunks and clicks in the walls getting faster and nearer.

That's the entire point of the countdown. It's building gradual tension--will the PCs succeed before the bad thing happens?

I figured the point of the countdown was to simulate a time-sensitive situation when the actual time remaining is unknown, but I'm glad it's good for drama too I suppose.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There are several different types of clocks in RPGs. There are also various different terms that are used, such as countdowns. I wasn't talking about an in-fiction time deadline.

I definitely was, like the Level Up countdown you used as an example.

 

[AlViking]

Exactly. You can guess these things quite easily. That means you know it.

Sometimes the players know other times they do not.

The definition is universal. You're choosing not to use it. Which is sad, because it helps enormously and has made my game a lot more interesting.

If it were universal I would use your meaning. Since I and others don't, it's not universal. Thanks for telling me I'm running my game wrong though.

 

[AlViking]

That's what I disagree with. I think anyone looking at these descriptions that's not doing so through the lens of task-resolution traditional RPG mechanics will see cause and effect all over the place.

The focus on task resolution is making you guys separate the task from the rest of the fictional world. Which is fine if that's what you want to do it in play... but then don't try and tell other people that what they're doing ignores cause and effect.

More than two things can going on simultaneously. If the clock is ticking down for the survival of the person inside the house the clock is unaffected by the actions of the characters. We're saying it's not cause and effect because it is not.

 

[AlViking]

But this is ridiculous, and is why @hawkeyefan feels he's taken crazy pills.

It's obvious that a failure to open the door may be the cause of people dying in a house fire. That is why there are workplace health and safety laws, building codes, coronial inquest, manslaughter laws, etc.

Likewise, suppose you miss the phone call. The next day you're talking to your fried - "I rang but you didn't pick up!" "Yeah, that's because I couldn't get inside because I couldn't get the door open".

Or even, you come inside all wet. Your housemate sees you and says "You're drenched. What happened?" "I had trouble opening the front door, and so got rained on."

These are all straightforward examples of cause and effect.

Here's another "crazy pill" aspect to it.

In his thread, @Lanefan, @AlViking and other posters have talked about the GM, in a sandbox, working out consequences via in-fiction cause and effect. Some of the reasoning they've talked about is pretty complex. In previous posts, Lanefan has given examples that are quite baroque, like this one:
This is supposed to be an example of "strings pulled, dominoes" fall and yet Lanefan, Micah Sweet, AlViking and other "sandboxers" want to deny such a simple causal connection as failure to open a door leading to injury and death in a house fire.

The cause of the people dying in the house is the fire. I do not cause someone to die because I failed to prevent their death.