Temporal railroading.

[Zappo]

Ouch. However, this "temporal railroading" is usually the only way to actually have those cool scenes where the villains narrowly escapes or is narrowly thwarted. Otherwise, it is just too unlikely for the PCs to arrive within one hour of the Event (TM), let alone one minute. If I never used it, I would have to renounce a lot of them.

So, I often adjust the villain's arrival time in order to get better drama. That said, the key word here is "adjust" - not "revolutionize". I act to compensate for random variations in the PCs' schedule, not against purposeful variations.

If the PCs actively do something to arrive there before the villain, and that something does work, they will succeed. Similarly, if they waste time, they will arrive when the deed is already done.

In your case, it is clear that the drow were supposed to arrive at the illithid city after one week - but since you found a way to get there in a day, they arrived in a day. One week versus one day is a variation of, what, 86%? The DM did this for drama, but he also rendered pointless your hurry in getting there. This far outweighs the benefits; I would never do it.

 

[Philip]

Ouch. However, this "temporal railroading" is usually the only way to actually have those cool scenes where the villains narrowly escapes or is narrowly thwarted. Otherwise, it is just too unlikely for the PCs to arrive within one hour of the Event (TM), let alone one minute. If I never used it, I would have to renounce a lot of them.

On the contrary, you can plot for it as well. If the PCs arrive early, make the villain change his plan. Escaping is a particularly good example, actually. The villain desired to rule the world from the luxury of his lair, but the PCs barge in before his plan is complete, forcing him to make a run for it.

Alternately, the villain could activate the artifact that would grant him ultimate power before all proper rituals are completed, risking global destruction in the process.

I like to include scenes of villains caught with their pants down into my plot as well. Most players seem to enjoy that after they have come up with a brilliant plan or somehow beat the odds.

I truly enjoy imagining cool scenes, but I realize now that a large part of my enjoyment sits in me imagining them, and if it plays out totally different in our game, well, there's always an alternate good scene lurking around the corner. There were thousands of ways the Orb of the Undead scene could have been handled that would have been cool too.

 

[Faraer]

Almost by definition, the best time for things to happen is when it's most dramatic. But if GMing schematically and uninteractively is not effectively dramatic, obviously it isn't effective and doesn't meet its own (or anyone else's) goals. It does also sound like there's some (potentially resolvable) conflict of approaches there.

 

[BlackMoria]

If my DM pulled off this blatant 'temporal' railroad, I would be tempted to make a statement to the fact that 'this is beyond us' and let someone else save the world. Like the tall, dark and ever 'never available' patron who sent us out on this turd hunt in the first place.

Even if it meant the campaign comes to a screeching end.

I am prepared to 'chase the carrot' only so long. If the bad guys are alway 'one step' ahead of us and always make their getaway regardless of our best efforts, then they can find some other chump to save the world.

 

[John Morrow]

I know I'm overreacting a bit, because we have defeated villains before. But it seems like it's never before they do their cool thing. I know you want to give us a challenging victory, with some people dying but hopefully us winning in the end. But, y'know, just once, why not let us win something small ahead of schedule?

This is why GMs should set up scenes that don't require specific outcomes unless the outcome is guaranteed without a lot of hand waving. Scenes like this can be good so long as they feel natural but when they are forced they eventually become cheap cliches, like the time bomb that gets stopped with five seconds or less to spare. After a few times, such time bombs produce rolling eyes or sighs rather than any dramatic tension and become fodder for comedy movies (e.g., the self-destruct countdown in Galaxy Quest).

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Classic case of DMFNPC. This deserves cynical sneers from the players.

 

[satori01]

Essentially it sounds like your DM wanted you guys to "witness" a pivotal event, hoping to build up tention. Of course as a player it is going to be frustrating to "witness" something happen, especailly when you have been told the scenario is interactive, and your goal is to stop it.

As a DM I will say it can be quite a challenge to plan truly interactive plot pivotal junctions. Your notes suddenly become like a chose your own adventure iceburg, 1/3 is visible to the players and 2/3s of your work is never really seen. I dont think this is a case of DM vs Player, but rather a case of DM concentrating on story, but not an interactive story.

I would ask your DM for your wish back, as it seems that it was an expenditure of a mighty resource for what essentially turned out to be a cut scene; a wish is a mighty hefty ticket price to watch a film of someone porting away.

I wouldnt expect to get the wish back, but like NBA coaches commenting to refrees in the playoffs it might get you some future consideration, it might also prompt the DM to reveal some behind the scenes factors maybe your party missed that could have altered the outcome.

 

[fusangite]

Weirdly, I had a big dust-up in an old campaign over me not doing this. One of my players went ballistic over the fact that my villains kept doing stuff in the time it took him to don his armour. I think one of the biggest advantages of D&D is the fact that time is measured precisely enough that the outcome of a big scene can turn on a delay of 18 seconds or less. (And certainly on 2 minutes.)

In my view, intelligent NPCs should know they can get the drop of PCs by shaving off a few rounds; and, of course, the reverse should also be true. In the above-mentioned campaign, nobody complained when they killed the BBEG two episodes early quite contrary to my plans and I had to rewrite the finale of season two of my campaign. Personally I loved the experience of having the PCs mess up my timeline and force out of me the kind of innovation I try to demand of them.

In other words, RangerWickett, I too am backing you 100% on this one.

 

[carpedavid]

I used to be that kind of DM. My players ended up not caring - and why should they have? If they wanted to participate in a non-interactive event, they could rent a movie. They play D&D to interact. Once I figured that out, I became a *much* better DM.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I'll admit i have had my problems with temporal railroading. You want the game to be dramatic, you also want the party to have a chance. I tried running a game once where time really mattered, I thought it would be great to have real consequences for delaying. I ended up getting so bogged down in timekeeping, the rest of the game suffered and it didn't turn out to be great for anyone.

[hijack] on the topic of video games and temporal railroading - I had a game a long time back with an interesting twist on this. The game was a third person 3/4 perspective. The hero walked to whereever you pointed and clicked the mouse. He always moved the same speed no matter what. There were several scenes in the game when I and my friends would scream at the guy "Run, you idiot!" and commented how much better the game would be if you could choose a speed to move. Little did we know the programmers understood this as well. In the final scene of the game, once you got the macguffin, the perspective changed to a straight-on and a timer appeared at the top of the screen reading 2:00. Suddenly the hero could run and (to a really cool soundtrack) you had 2 minutes real time to maneuver him through the ship to the shuttle bay and escape before the countdown reached 0:00 and the ship you were on self-destructed. Loved that game... [/hijack]