the concept of time (dungeoncrawling)

[punkorange]

Woas, you have just hit the proverbial nail on the head. That is why in game they travel for about an hour in the dungeon and are ready to camp again. I don't have a problem with the strategical hit and run to break through static dungeons, the issue is with my player's wanting to sleep not four hours upon waking up.

 

[William drake]

I've had the issue of my player's not thinking about the concept of real-time versus game time, and I'm curious how others deal with this.

Mainly what I'm refering too is the group wakes up, has a couple encounters and is then ready to rest (camp) again?

Is the problem the CR of the encounters they are facing, or is there something else I can do to give them a better sense of they've only been up for a few hours.

Let me say that I don't generally try to overdo it on EL's, I try to keep it about average for the group.

Well, the players can't know the time, unless you know the time. As the DM you must be aware of the hours inwhich the story is moving through. To aid you, keep notes, time things, keep telling the players the position of the sun, or how low the light is getting. If the players are moving across country, you know how far they can move in a day, so you can break that down to hours, and from their you should be aware as to what time it is at most times.

 

[James Heard]

I really don't see what the problem is. Even if you think the encounters are fairly balanced and doable without resting then apparently your players don't agree. For me I think I'd just let them go ahead and do it, and if I had anything at all as commentary on the player's activities I'd keep track of things in town or, if they're really blowing through some time with their resting, maybe even seasons. No reason to slam the players for wanting to be able to kick in the door with their best foot all the time, but they might get a subtle, non-heavyhanded hint if the innkeepers kids are growing up rather quickly as they clear out the first level of the dungeon or they've spent two or three winters going back and forth from some dead guy's crypt.

Seriously though, part of the issue seems to be that the players want to make the encounters easier or at least keep themselves able to respond to threats they don't start by kicking in the door and launching the fireball. If you respond by making encounters harder then they're still not going to rest less. Indeed, they might even respond by going "Drat, let's find a dungeon that's closer to our level in difficulty." Very little in a DM's life is made by trying to avoid or punish patterns and behaviors that their players are clinging to. Maybe once would work without them noticing it, but if every time they decide to sloooowly work their way through the dungeon it starts scaling in difficulty they're going to eventually come to the conclusion (rightfully IMO) that the game is becoming less about rewarding them for their perceived need for caution and more about their GM punishing them for it. Once the game starts into "I think the GM is trying to screw us over" you're only justifying their behavior in the first place.

 

[Hussar]

If the party's actually leaving the dungeon, and returning either to town or to some safe hide-away (a la the Dead Gnoll's Eye-socket) to rest/recouperate, then it's much easier -- all you have to do is employ the "1 session/1 expedition" rule (the rule that says that the party must leave the dungeon by the end of each session) in reverse -- once you've left the dungeon, you can't go back in during the same session. You can spend the rest of the session playing in town or wandering in the wilderness if you like, or perhaps even going to a different dungeon (if the DM has one ready) but you can't go into the same dungeon twice in the same session. If the players complain, tell them the metagame reason -- that as DM you need time to adjust the dungeon to take into account the consequences of their actions during the last expedition. Most players should understand this, and if not, screw 'em -- ask them if they want to be DM instead and see how they like it when it's your turn to complain and mess up their adventures

I really hope a DM would not go that far. The FAR better solution is to prep reactions beforehand. Part of adventure design should be spent thinking of more than initial conditions.

Photocopy your adventure map a few times. On the first copy, write out what is in each room on the map. Just shorthand of course - something like "5 orcs, doors open, trap" for a room that has 5 orcs, open doors and a trapped chest. On the next copy, move around the encounters to reflect roughly what would happen if the party attacked and left. Sure, you might have to cross out a couple of baddies if they're dead, but, that's a 30 second job that can be done on the fly.

If you get REALLY energetic, make a third map which details patrols and troop movements.

This all takes about half an hour to do and it will really help to make your dungeons much more fun. Now, the idea of doing one or two encounters and then resting at 3/4 strength becomes much less preferable to pushing on a bit before the dungeon really gets organized.

I disagree with James Heard that this is punishing the players. It is a fairly reasonable consequence of their actions. Any intelligent group is going to mobilize to defend its lair when invaded. The level of organization will, of course, vary depending on what we're talking about. An orc lair will be pretty disorganized with groups working at cross purposes and maybe a few "friendly stab" incidents occuring (making things possibly a bit easier for the PC's). OTOH, a Formian lair, with it's hive mind ability, will react extremely quickly and with a minimum of fuss and go from a fairly easy set of encounters to a highly lethal deathtrap in a matter of moments.

 

[Kheti sa-Menik]

I've had this issue with my players as well. The PCs wake up at 9am, fight two-three encounters, travel very little and are ready to rest again by 11:30am-12pm when they should be breaking for lunch.

I go with a suggestion that I got from these messageboards. I say "Fine, you lay down but toss and turn, unable to sleep, no HP gain. Since you're resting for eight hours to 8 or so pm, the time to pray hasn't come yet. So no new spells for clerics and 24 hours hasn't passed and 8 hours or rest hasn't been had so no new spells for wizards."
I advise that 8 hours (a normal day of travelling/being up, doing things) has to go by before I'll allow resting again to be useful. So, if that party wants to rest at 11:30am, they'll have to wait five and a half hours additional before it will be beneficial (assuming the PCs were up from 9am to 11:30am in my example above).
And sure they can just stay still in their campsite for 5and a half hours until 5pm and then rest there for the 8 hours they need. But that's 13 and a half hours they're going to be just sitting in the same place, doing nothing. Depending on where they're resting that's between 13 and 30 random encounter rolls plus their enemy can surround them plus etc etc.

I mean really, up for two and a half hours then going back to bed?

It's gotten through to them (not completely but given time, I think it will) that they are better off pushing forward then standing still.

 

[James Heard]

But it doesn't matter if it's reasonable if taking reasonable action is a response to something they really want to do, how often do players go "Gosh, that's ok that we really got boned and died last adventure, because we totally deserved it for thinking we were being cautious and got canned for it."

Reasonable actions on the part of the GM aren't what players are about, they're usually about providing an interesting and enjoyable framework for them to demonstrate how cool and clever they are. If players lock every door in the room, tape the windows shut, cast the Alarm spell and hole up in a magical hut at night, it doesn't matter if it could be construed as reasonable to insert a villain who thwarts each of those precautions - unless you're really careful about it you're just going to come across as one of those sullen, petulant GMs who gets all pouty when players start trying to limit their risk. Especially the bits in the post about "having a talk with them" threatening them with stopping the game entirely for "messing up the game." What's that? They're messing your game up? How...fragile. I think that once you have an intervention asking them to stop doing something, because what they're doing is making it harder to kill them, you probably should just quit the game anyways and write a novel where you can dictate the amount of risk characters take with more precision.

Look, I'm not saying that verisimilitude is a bad thing. I'm just saying that it should probably be non-primary to the nature of your players. Find a way to point out how much time they're expending without slapping them across the face with it, but if they're cool with that then I think you just have to accept that they're cautious. If they're having fun with the static dungeon though, and their weird kick butt and nap routine, I don't know if it's worth doing to threaten that enjoyment for the sake of realism or your plotline, or anything.

If you've REALLY got a problem with it, I might simply ask them why they're doing it. Not "this bothers me, and I want you to stop," but why is this the way you do things? Maybe the balanced encounters don't seem so balanced, and maybe they've even got a better understanding of the mechanics and dynamics of their characters than you do. It wouldn't be the first time a GM overlooked some things about a character sheet because he or she was always busy in combat running the monsters. But I'd be prepared to simply nod my head and let it slide, because otherwise it seems like you're just looking for an excuse to end the game by making it less about the players fun and more about your own.

Most players I've had over the years aren't uncommunicative, if you ask they'll tell you in detail what they're enjoying and why your game sucks. If they're not telling you anything at all though, you're probably not doing anything wrong. Ask them how they'd want you to improve it...Heck, it might be that they're clinging to downtime hoping that there will be more roleplaying opportunities, in which the case the problem isn't the downtime itself but the lack of utilization and glossing over of the downtime.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

I'm reminded of a campaign that friends of mine described, where they would take four hours to go down half of a corridor because they were so paranoid.

One way to structure your adventures is to give the PCs a few easy mook encounters early in the day to give them confidence and let them blow through stuff with ease and without expending their best stuff. Then bring in the big guns.

 

[Hussar]

James Heard - I can agree with that. Perhaps moderation is the key. Deliberately going out of your way to screw over the player's tactics is bad, but, OTOH, the players steamrolling your adventures because you're too scared that they might see you as "petulant" is not good either.

So long as you're careful about it and keep actions and reactions within the realm of plausibility, there shouldn't be a problem. No one is going to get pissy about the trolls marching around to find you after you've invaded their home. Or, at least they shouldn't. OTOH, if the party takes excellent precautions, then they should be rewarded for that as well. Mord's Mansion is a great spell for a reason.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

3rd edition BY DESIGN assumes that if all encounters are of a level EQUAL to the PC's level then you'll only get 4 encounters before the party needs to rest. That assumes a lot of averages and so forth but it's reliable. If you have a short dungeon corridor with 6 doors along its length, behind each of which is an EL=Party Level encounter then you will NOT get to the end of that corridor before your PC's need to rest (again, assuming other variables are equal).

Look at your adventure or dungeon design. Do you have a string of bunches of encounters of EL=PC Lvl? If so then you should not be surprised when the PC's make such slow progress. If you have a decent sized dungeon or adventure with a couple dozen equal level encounters then what do YOU think is going to happen? Not only will they need to REPEATEDLY rest and recover but they'll have to level up once or twice as well!

This IS the 3rd edition paradigm for adventure design. There are two practical ways to push it to work more in your favor:

First is to OVERstock the PC's with disposable "refreshments" to keep them going strong through the earliest parts of your dungeon/adventure. Hand out a lot more healing potions, bulls strengths, and other "powerups". Let the PC's rely on these disposables rather than their personal reserves to keep moving long enough to get to the REALLY tough parts where their mettle will genuinely be tested.

Second is to remember that you need a VARIETY of EL strengths. In particular, in the earlier stages of an adventure you'll almost certainly want to provide a LOT more UNDER-powered encounters punctuated only by a very few equal or higher strength fights. You want to PULL the characters deeper into the adventure or the dungeon to where it makes MORE sense to forge ahead than to try to REPEATEDLY go back or hole up in a closet for 8 hour stretches. Although you CAN do that too - just be sure that your adventure design will make that practical or that the dungeon you've prepared will provide secure places for resting and that the dungeon will NOT have to be entirely re-written when 8 hours goes by as PC's rest (or perhaps that you CAN reorganize the entire dungeon to a "war-footing" after the PC's start moving again.)

These things really cannot be done with off-the-shelf products used as-is. This requires the expertise of a DM who knows what the PC's strengths and tendencies are and how to manipulate them at least minimally on the fly. That's going to be different for EVERY gang of PC's. And when you put all this planning into appropriate pacing you STILL have to be prepared to adjust your adventures when play actually proceeds and you either need to slow it down or speed it up.

 

[Delta]

Sometimes I feel that 6-second base is just too fast. The most recent example of this was about six game sessions back the adventuring party was involved with some ship-to-ship combat... Thats 36 seconds!

Yeah, I grapple a lot with that. People always complained about AD&D's 1-minute combat rounds.

It seems to make sense that you can swing a sword in 6 seconds. But, it somehow doesn't make sense that you can regularly kill several men in 30 seconds.