Something that Needs More Consideration - Pacing

[the Jester]

Pacing is important, but it's equally important to be flexible.

From the sounds of it, I wouldn't enjoy the OP's game- with an artificial limit of a half hour for any given scene, a lot of the time that isn't enough time. If the party wants to sit and roleplay things out for four hours, they should be able to.

Naturally, each group is different and it's a matter of playstyle preference- but an artificial time cap on any given scene can be as bad as making the pcs play out examining each lantern in the general store, then going to the miner's store to compare prices.

 

[Chainsaw]

I can think of two factors determining pacing.

1) Degrees of abstraction. The level of detail in which something is described. This description could come from the players, they may want to search a room for example, but I feel it's mostly driven by the GM. He always has the power to go to a level higher -

"You search the room and find nothing"

Or lower -

"The fourth day of your journey is shrouded in mist, which muffles the usual cries of yellow-breasted scoters and Kemelin's pintails. As the day wears on the mist lifts revealing the dark tangle of the Codgil Wood to the East and, beyond, the Silver Hills, riven by the shimmering ribbons of numerous streams."

Whether it's more player-driven or more DM-driven is probably something that needs to be settled up front, before the game begins. I think we can all agree that making sure player/DM expectations are consistent is key to having fun.

 

[Hussar]

/snip
One thing that would probably horrify Hussar was when it took an entire session to have basically one conversation with an NPC (probably about 5 hours). But then it isn't every day when Asmodeus pops round your house for a friendly chat about problems you are having with Dispater, where you are casually asked if you wouldn't mind putting up your imortal soul as collateral in a deal.

Sounds like fun. So long as the entire group is participating, and it's not something that happens every week, I'm probably 100% groovy. But, see below.

I try and let the players set a pace they are comfortable with. The world keeps moving and things continue to happen even if the PC's sit on their bums and enter a long debate. XP does a good job of helping to manage pace. XP is earned for resolving goals and doing things.

Too much planning and debate will result in less action which will slow down advancement. Racing ahead full steam without consideration or thought will likely result in costly casualties.

This works well enough for campaign play with our group. I certainly favor more structured pacing for time sensitive (in the real world) games such as gameday or con one-shots.

The problem I find with this, both as a player and a DM, is analysis paralysis. While only a few minutes of in game time goes by, the players spend two hours screwing around on a plan. It sounds here like you tend to treat the camera as "always on" so that game time and real time are fairly parallel.

Pacing is important, but it's equally important to be flexible.

From the sounds of it, I wouldn't enjoy the OP's game- with an artificial limit of a half hour for any given scene, a lot of the time that isn't enough time. If the party wants to sit and roleplay things out for four hours, they should be able to.

Naturally, each group is different and it's a matter of playstyle preference- but an artificial time cap on any given scene can be as bad as making the pcs play out examining each lantern in the general store, then going to the miner's store to compare prices.

Sorry, I guess I mistated. There's no "stopwatch" going on. It's not like I'm sitting there looking at the clock and I'm going to cut you off at 30 minutes. However, watching two players hash out the exact questions of a Divination spell for three hours makes me want to paint my brains all over the wall.

Same with having that one player who wants to talk to EVERY NPC, even when there are other things going on.

Yeah, I'll admit I'd probably run a bit roughshod over those players.

I think it's because I've spent so many campaigns with glacially slow paces. They almost become Seinfeld campaigns - "It's a campaign about ... Nothing!" Only to spend several months getting into the campaign and then have it fizzle because of real life issues.

I've had enough cake over the years. I want the soft chewy center now.

Chainsaw mentions spending 50+ hours on a single level of a multi-level dungeon. No thanks. Never, ever again will I do that. Now, I just excuse myself from the table and find a new game.

 

[Hussar]

Aww, damn, I can't posrep everyone in the thread. Don't worry folks, I'll get to you.

Everyone here has been awesome.

 

[Reynard]

Chainsaw mentions spending 50+ hours on a single level of a multi-level dungeon. No thanks. Never, ever again will I do that. Now, I just excuse myself from the table and find a new game.

Asuming everyone at the table is engaged and having fun, what is the problem? Id it that it has all taken place in one locale? The fact that it is a dungeon crawl? That there (probably) hasn't been a lot of level advancement (if this is OD&D and they are still on level 1 of the dungeon, the likely haven't gained more than 1 XP level, if any)?

I'm not badwrongfunning Hussar, just curious.

 

[Chainsaw]

Chainsaw mentions spending 50+ hours on a single level of a multi-level dungeon. No thanks. Never, ever again will I do that. Now, I just excuse myself from the table and find a new game.

Well, it is a REALLY big level in a megadungeon-focused "campaign," so it's not necessarily supposed to be short-lived. Besides, we have had many opportunities to go down to lower levels (we know where several level two entrances are) and people have decided they'd rather see what else is going on at level one. There are several fairly distinct areas controlled by different groups and a bunch of weird rooms with puzzles and traps mixed in. It's not a linear-quest type situation with a over-long level one that you have to "beat" before you can proceed to the Big Bad Evil Guy. It's a "campaign dungeon," if you will. Anyway, more importantly, everyone's having fun, which is requirement number one.

Fortunately, though, we don't all have to play the same way. Some can have more DM-driven pacing, some more player-driven pacing. Some can focus more on political intrigue, others on adventure paths, and yet others on megadungeon exploration.

 

[billd91]

Asuming everyone at the table is engaged and having fun, what is the problem? Id it that it has all taken place in one locale? The fact that it is a dungeon crawl? That there (probably) hasn't been a lot of level advancement (if this is OD&D and they are still on level 1 of the dungeon, the likely haven't gained more than 1 XP level, if any)?

I'm not badwrongfunning Hussar, just curious.

This is why I try to take my pacing cues from the players at the table. If they're starting to glaze over or other table talk increases, I pick up the pacing. If everyone seems pretty much into the current action, I don't try to move along to another scene until we've played it out a bit more.

 

[Imaginary Number]

I've had enough cake over the years. I want the soft chewy center now.

I agree completely with Hussar on this. If everyone at the table is interested in RPing a particular scene or interacting with an NPC, that's great and is to be encouraged. More often in my experience, however, only one or two players are interested in doing that while the remainder of the players are bored by it and want to move on to something else. My job as the DM is to keep everyone as engaged in the game as possible, and if I see some players' eyes glazing over, I'm going to cut off whatever's happening in the game and nudge them in some direction that will hook everyone back in.

With respect to Hussar's original query about how to control pacing, I think the DM needs to consider pacing issues as part of adventure design. I've been in too many games (my own included) where the DM set things up in such a way that the players need to find a particular hidden entrance, solve a particular puzzle, or contact some particular NPC in order to get to Where The Fun Is. Even if the players have enough information to figure that stuff out, it's frustrating for them to spend half a session mucking around trying to get through a choke point. If you want to give the players some sort of challenge to get to Where The Fun Is, it's also important to give them some different ways to get there.

 

[the Jester]

Sorry, I guess I mistated. There's no "stopwatch" going on. It's not like I'm sitting there looking at the clock and I'm going to cut you off at 30 minutes. However, watching two players hash out the exact questions of a Divination spell for three hours makes me want to paint my brains all over the wall.

Haha... I ran a 3e game to epic levels with a diviner cohort in the party, and the WHOLE GROUP would spend 3-4 hours almost every session discussing various things that they could figure out with commune, contact other plane, etc. They really taught me the value of "know thy enemy" like nothing else ever has, but yeah... sometimes it took a while. But since it was a key part of their strategies, I didn't feel like it would be right to push them through it. Also, divinations offer a billion chances to drop hooks, hints and clues.

I know what you mean, though- if a player is regularly involved for four hours while the other five players are bored stiff, something's not quite right, even if the involved player is different each time.

 

[ExploderWizard]

The problem I find with this, both as a player and a DM, is analysis paralysis. While only a few minutes of in game time goes by, the players spend two hours screwing around on a plan. It sounds here like you tend to treat the camera as "always on" so that game time and real time are fairly parallel.

That would be correct. If the players spend two hours discussing a course of action, then two hours pass in the game world. Time sensitive activities require that the players actually respond to what is going on with alacrity.

While anaysis paralysis sometimes becomes a factor, a gentle reminder that the playtime clock is ticking with no time outs remaining, and the party has thus far only attempted one field goal, is usually enough to spur a hurry-up offense.