D&D General Two sessions in a row without combat...

[atanakar]

My reading is that it was 4 hours of planning.

Correct, my bad. Even 4 hours is way too long. 1 hour should be enough. A timer is a good idea as has been suggested up thread. I've thought of it but never needed to use it. I let my players know when they are stuck in an analysis paralysis loop.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Correct, my bad. Even 4 hours is way too long. 1 hour should be enough. A timer is a good idea as has been suggested up thread. I've thought of it but never needed to use it. I let my players know when they are stuck in an analysis paralysis loop.

Saying "X time is too long" is pretty silly stuff and means you aren't understanding your role in this, as a DM. If you set up a really complicated situation, and make it seem really high stakes, and the players react by planning elaborately, you are to blame, not the players, and putting a timer on them, rather than apologising and asking if they could do it within a certain timeframe is dubious DMing, I would suggest.

 

[prabe]

I agree that the timer might be a reasonable solution, if your players routinely suffer from analysis paralysis. If this is a one-time thing, then it's probably something in how the players understand the situation, the possible outcomes, and the likelihood of recovery if things go badly. As a DM who has gladly let the players spend multiple sessions not fighting things, I don't entirely see the problem with the OP's situation--but the OP also made it clear that they weren't enjoying it, and that at least one of the players didn't seem to be enjoying it, either. Just because something isn't a problem for me, that doesn't mean it can't be a problem for someone else.

What I'm not thrilled by are the suggestions that the DM needs to essentially punish the players for not playing the DM wants them to play. That seems ... entirely and extremely uncool. I don't see much in the way of good outcomes from it.

 

[Krachek]

Verify if you don’t install a climate of suspicion and fear among your players.
maybe you describe the next encounter too much complex and they fear to fail and over prepare and doubt.

 

[atanakar]

Saying "X time is too long" is pretty silly stuff and means you aren't understanding your role in this, as a DM. If you set up a really complicated situation, and make it seem really high stakes, and the players react by planning elaborately, you are to blame, not the players, and putting a timer on them, rather than apologising and asking if they could do it within a certain timeframe is dubious DMing, I would suggest.

You caught me! I admit it. I'm a really terrible DM. My players all suffers from Stockholm syndrome. I put them in impossible situations and then I cut their fingers and eat them when they don't do what I want in a timely manner. They only have a thumb and one finger to roll their dice. They love and worship me as their ONE TRUE GOD! I am the fable tyrannical DM everyone talks about. MOUHAHAHAHAHA !

You should really try to stop giving silly advice and telling others that they don't know how to play. I have a social contract with my group that works perfectly fine for both sides of the screen. I've wasted enough time on this thread. I hope the OP will find a solution to his problem.

Mic drop /

 

[Reynard]

Saying "X time is too long" is pretty silly stuff and means you aren't understanding your role in this, as a DM. If you set up a really complicated situation, and make it seem really high stakes, and the players react by planning elaborately, you are to blame, not the players, and putting a timer on them, rather than apologising and asking if they could do it within a certain timeframe is dubious DMing, I would suggest.

Pacing is always the GM's responsibility, and probably one of the hardest things to learn. It can be especially hard for some GMs if they don't feel they should have any influence over what the players do in regards to roleplaying and let the group argue for hours or let that one player spend an hour buying rope.

It's okay to cut them short if they are spinning their wheels. It's okay to interject with clarifying information or suggestions based on what the characters reasonably would know or have experienced. It's okay to tell the players they have already spent too much time on this and they have 5 more minutes.

GMs must be able to read the table. It's a required skill for avoiding people hogging the spotlight or becoming bored. And reading the table means figuring out why they are spinning their wheels and helping them out of the rut.

Move the game along. Openly endorsing plan A, B or C. Or force their hand by outside influence. Or have bad guys break down the door.

The OP isn't terribly specific, but my guess is ambivalence on the part of the consulted NPC to Plan Acontributed to the over planning, and the player that suggested Plan.C just didn't like Plan B. If the GM was trying to warn the PCs off a certain course of action with the NPc, that's fine but probably suggest an alternate. If the GM was just "playing the NPC in character" and caused everything to come to.a screeching halt, don't do that.

To reiterate, pacing is the GM's job and one of their most important ones. In and out of combat. Rein players in when they are spinning their wheels, as a group or individually, and don't contribute to the slowdown by having NPCs disrupt the players' decisions. In the worst case scenario, force them to make a choice, with guidance if it seems reasonable.

 

[iserith]

This endless debating thing that players do is actually something that goes away if you point it out in my experience . A lot of people just play the game that way without realizing that it puts the brakes on forward movement and can be frustrating for some people at the table.

Shine a light on it. Explain why it can be problematic. Offer a way to come to consensus faster. Do this until they break the habit.

 

[Mistwell]

It happens.

We've had two seasons in a row involving THE SAME COMBAT. And it's going to bleed into a third season. Which used to happen back in 4e but this is a first (in 5 years) I think where it's happened for us in 5e.

It's mostly because there is a lot of weird environmental movement stuff going on which delays things and requires inventive thinking to deal with, but still.

 

[Guest 6801328]

It happens.

We've had two seasons in a row involving THE SAME COMBAT. And it's going to bleed into a third season. Which used to happen back in 4e but this is a first (in 5 years) I think where it's happened for us in 5e.

It's mostly because there is a lot of weird environmental movement stuff going on which delays things and requires inventive thinking to deal with, but still.

"season" == "session"?

 

[FarBeyondC]

Synopsis: Party comes up with a plan. Call it Plan A. They make preparations. They decide to consult NPC A about Plan A. [Scene with NPC A.] They think up another plan, Plan B. "Let's ask NPC A about it." [Second scene with NPC A.] They make preparations. Someone suggests Plan C. The party discusses the merits of Plan B vs. Plan C. "Maybe NPC B can help with Plan B." [Scene with NPC B.] "Wait, I forgot to ask NPC A..." [Third scene with NPC A.] Someone remembers Plan A. Its merits were never discussed against Plan C's! [Party discusses Plan A vs. Plan C]. "Let's ask NPC B about Plan A." [Third scene with NPC B.] "Let's ask for more money and supplies." [Fourth scene with NPC B.]

Why did they need to come up with a Plan B? Plan A obviously couldn't have been unworkable, otherwise it should have been discarded (and thus not had its merits compared with Plan C's).

Ignoring that for a moment, unless we're talking about long time scale planning, what are your NPCs doing (or rather, not doing) that they're consistently this available to discuss various different plans and their relative merits? Why, after 3~4 separate meetings on how to accomplish a single goal with no progress being made are either of these people not at least trying force some sort of commitment?

I don't know what to do. Maybe nothing. Hopefully it was just a bad session (for some of us) and the next one will be better. But if things start going the same way next week, I'm throwing monsters at the party. I don't care how little sense it makes. Orcs, goblins, red dragons, they're gonna fight them all.

Throwing monsters at the party won't solve the actual problem, so I wouldn't recommend that.

Instead, hard nip the back and forth in the bud next session if it looks as though it'll be a repeat of this session.