Weeks and Weeks of Adventuring

[Tonguez]

I declare that each adventure takes 3 months (ie one quarter), that three months includes both the actual adventure time and also the downtime and 'faction events' (similar to a winter phase, where faction events are random events (and reactions) involving the PCS freinds, family, Patrons and Dependents)

 

[Gideon]

green puss? ewwwwwww.....

In the campaign I play in my charachter went from 5th -17th level in 1 year because we never stopped adventuring. Some of the players in my group just didn't like "sitting around" for a month or two. I know that my charachter always grumbles about "As soon as I get done my job; i am setting down, building a forge, and finally learning how to make a decent set of armor." So the point of all of that was that at least part of it should occur in charachter.

Mechanically, I agree with the disease usage. Although, I would use normal DMG diseases instead of the 'fatigue' disease listed above. You could increase the DC by 2 every week that the charachters adventure straight. I would also let the bonus from endurance be added to the Fort saving throw.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Mechanically, I agree with the disease usage. Although, I would use normal DMG diseases instead of the 'fatigue' disease listed above. You could increase the DC by 2 every week that the charachters adventure straight. I would also let the bonus from endurance be added to the Fort saving throw.

I like this idea.

"Hey guys, don't look at me, you've been through a lot of villages, and at least ten of them were having feast days. You didn't even stay around to the end of the celebration for that town you saved from the wyverns and the giants. You guys have been adventuring for at least a month with hardly a break. There's costs in that, you see. A pus-filled cost, but a cost nonetheless."

 

[poilbrun]

The problem I encounter in my campaigns is that, should the PC decide to have downtime, the big evil organization would keep on with its plan, and the PC would have big trouble to pick up where they left. In truth, they'd probably worse off having taken a break than having continued adventuring. At the moment, several organizations are on their trail, and the only reason they're still quite safe is because they've not stopped moving from one part of the kingdom to the other for 2 months now. The fact that they've been allowed to use a portal twice also helped them, since their trail was suddenly cut off.

In the FR campaign I'm playing in, I did some meta-gaming with the GM, insisting that it would be way too convenient and suspicious to just happen to find a ship going from Mimph to Sembia the very day we happen to be looking, that it very probably wouldn't be going straight there, and that he should add in some travel time due to weather and port delays.

But from another point of view, I don't think anything is wrong when that happens in a novel or a movie. If the action takes place on the other side of the sea, why should play be boggled down because there's no ship leaving to where you want it to go.

Of course, this, and the rest of the thread, all boils down to this: what are you looking for when you play? Me and my players are more in it for the action and the intrigues (well, I'm in it for the intrigues, but even though they say they don't, I'm not sure they would like the game with only more and more action each week). If your idea of fun is more realism in the game, I wish you all the fun you can have, and the idea of a disease-like effect for adventure burn-out is probably a good idea for you, as is adding days to travel because of bad weather. But I know that if I told my players: you trip from X to Y took 8 days instead of 6 because of bad weather condition, they would reply: ok, cool. Of course, that's not always how travel works in my game. For example, they recently had to cross a swamp on their way to a major city. The description of the travel was basically: after 6 uneventful days on the road, you enter a fetid swamp (add some more description, a couple of encounters so that they know they've entered an area were the law of the kingdom as no hold)... and then, after having exited the swamp and 4 more days on the road, you finally arrive to your destination.

 

[Chimera]

The problem I encounter in my campaigns is that, should the PC decide to have downtime, the big evil organization would keep on with its plan, and the PC would have big trouble to pick up where they left. In truth, they'd probably worse off having taken a break than having continued adventuring. At the moment, several organizations are on their trail, and the only reason they're still quite safe is because they've not stopped moving from one part of the kingdom to the other for 2 months now. The fact that they've been allowed to use a portal twice also helped them, since their trail was suddenly cut off.

Maybe your evil organizations are too impatient. They don't build slack into their timelines? Geez, no wonder they fail.

Or maybe your games revolve too much around fighting the plans of evil organizations.

But from another point of view, I don't think anything is wrong when that happens in a novel or a movie. If the action takes place on the other side of the sea, why should play be boggled down because there's no ship leaving to where you want it to go.

The simple answer is that they don't show this in a movie or novel, because it would destroy the pacing. The Harry Potter books take place over an entire year at Hogwarts. But you don't have chapter after chapter of mundane crap happening between the plot points.

Me and my players are more in it for the action and the intrigues (well, I'm in it for the intrigues, but even though they say they don't, I'm not sure they would like the game with only more and more action each week).

How does saying "Ok, you spend two weeks enjoying the town's gratitude and generosity before moving on" distract from the action and intrigue? Personally, it gives me a sense of reward.

 

[poilbrun]

Your response to my post seems quite aggressive. I hope you didn't feel my reply was of the "my way of playing is right, yours is wrong" type. English is not my native language, I can sometimes put meanings in my phrasing that I don't mean. As a matter of fact, I might be completely misreading your post, and it's not aggressive at all!

Maybe your evil organizations are too impatient. They don't build slack into their timelines? Geez, no wonder they fail.

I believe that organizations, by having a large numbers of people in them, can make sure their plans are constantly in motion...

Or maybe your games revolve too much around fighting the plans of evil organizations.

As a matter of fact, my games are more about organizations fighting against the players, than the players fighting against organizations. The fact that the PCs can only have a little downtime is that they are actively fighting one group (the church of Cyric), but have several groups fighting against them, either purposefully (the Cult of the Dragon, the Zhentarim, and a thieves' guild in Arabel, which they have all wronged in the past) or by chance, because the characters have in their possession an artefact everyone wants for themselves (nearly every other organization or powerful evil NPC between Baldur's Gate - their destination - and Cormyr).

The simple answer is that they don't show this in a movie or novel, because it would destroy the pacing. The Harry Potter books take place over an entire year at Hogwarts. But you don't have chapter after chapter of mundane crap happening between the plot points.

But then, why slow the pace of the campaign by showing them? My style is all about pace and action, that's why those kind of rules are of no use to me.

How does saying "Ok, you spend two weeks enjoying the town's gratitude and generosity before moving on" distract from the action and intrigue? Personally, it gives me a sense of reward.

I completely agree with you on that one. But what you explained is basically how two weeks of celebration would happen in my game. My players aren't really into playing out a celebration, or a travel, or anything the like. To give a real example, during our first adventure, which took place in an underground dungeon, I realized that they were already on their fifth day inside. I started throwing hints about the fact that they didn't really know what time of the day it was, started to feel a bit nervous always being underground and never seeing the light. Their answer was to go to the next room. There's no point in keeping describing how their character feel if they're not interested!

 

[Chimera]

Ah fun. Another post eaten. They downgrade the hamsters on this board???

Your response to my post seems quite aggressive. I hope you didn't feel my reply was of the "my way of playing is right, yours is wrong" type. English is not my native language, I can sometimes put meanings in my phrasing that I don't mean. As a matter of fact, I might be completely misreading your post, and it's not aggressive at all!

I think you're reading too much into it, although I am challenging your reply.

I believe that organizations, by having a large numbers of people in them, can make sure their plans are constantly in motion...

Not necessarily so. Numbers do not guarantee motion. In fact, numbers often are a liability. An excessive chain of command slows decision making, too many chefs spoil the broth, too many mouths make for ill-kept secrets.

The simple answer is that they don't show this in a movie or novel, because it would destroy the pacing. The Harry Potter books take place over an entire year at Hogwarts. But you don't have chapter after chapter of mundane crap happening between the plot points.

But then, why slow the pace of the campaign by showing them? My style is all about pace and action, that's why those kind of rules are of no use to me.

Does it spoil the book that time passes between events? Should the entire plot of Chamber of Secrets be wrapped up within a week?

I'm not sure what you're saying here. I don't see how simply saying "You all take a month to recuperate. Time passes and you meet back at the Inn to plan for X" derails or detracts from the plot. It's not like you're making your players sit around for an hour to simulate downtime.

Would it spoil your game if the various factions had to regroup and decide what to do next? Are they always 'Johnny on the Spot' with their next plot the very instant the first one fails? Or does it take them time to gather more resources and plot their next scheme?

Likewise, are they all lined up, taking numbers and waiting their turns to strike at your PCs? "Ok, faction A's plot failed, time for our plot. And make sure we're ready to go with plans C,D and E if this one fails, guys." Seems a bit unrealistic to me.

I realized that they were already on their fifth day inside. I started throwing hints about the fact that they didn't really know what time of the day it was, started to feel a bit nervous always being underground and never seeing the light. Their answer was to go to the next room.

Would be my reaction as well. Because there is nothing to react to. No consequences, no choices, nothing to be done but note it and continue moving.

IMHO, a good way to deal with this would be fatigue. Up north here we have seasonal disorders from people not getting enough sunlight - or light at all - in the winter time. Causes depression. Likewise if your players don't see the sun for days at a time, it could very well cause depression and disorientation.

(Of course, this may be less likely if they're dwarves or very experienced in underground activities.)

And when they finally emerge, it may well take them a couple of days to re-adjust to normal daylight hours and conditions.

Players don't like it? Of course not. Players will bitch about anything that negatively affects their characters. Some players will fight tooth and nail against anything not clearly spelled out in the rules. It's your job as GM to deal with this.

 

[Evilhalfling]

Time moves in fits and starts.
but looking back over it, it has been a game year since the current party formed - and they have gone from 3rd to 10th level. and 6 months real time.
This kind of advancement is unbeliveably fast, realismwise, nobody changes that fast. I require a week of training with a mentor and 2 weeks without.
but this is a mere speedbump. Now that they have teleport traveling time is going to drop.
Admittedly they are fighting with an evil organization that requires each of 4 members accomplish something every quarter. The winter quarter was supposed to be taken up with infighting. But I came up ideas that were to tempting to ignore. Well perhaps most of them were involved in the infighting, but one of the 4 managed to get something done.



I have two major events set for spring, but neither has a definate time, so as long as the PC's don't teleport home before then the timeing should work out.

 

[fourthmensch]

The role of downtime probably depends on the nature and preferences of your group. My main group (FR) is pretty averse to it, and they start to grumble if I try anything more than "Ninety days later construction is finished and your new armor is enchanted." So, to keep them happy, I either skip ahead or allow them to adventure nonstop. In fact, I have actually taken steps recently to increase the sense that they don't have the luxury of downtime, for more of that Osgiliath-is-under-siege-and-the-Westfold-has-fallen-and-we-need-to-make-it-to-Mount-Doom kind of feeling in the campaign.

On the other hand, I played in a Star Wars game for a while where downtime was carefully built into the campaign by our DM. We had long stints of training (as low-level characters), training others (as high-level characters), and even some plain old vacation and recuperation. I remember a particular session where, failing disastrously in two separate missions on the planet Tatooine (because nothing good ever happens on Tatooine), our characters staged a jedi party on a beach planet and took the rest of the month off. We roleplayed the whole thing, and it was a strangely satisfying way to wrap up an otherwise frustrating session.

So, I don't know that it needs to be avoided or enforced. In my mind, its really simply a preference of the group. One thing I can second: dren's suggestion that the characters get small bonuses for their long breaks. They may be more inclined to go for some downtime, if, say, you give the character who spends the time working a forge a free rank of Craft, or (what my DM did) give those who go to Officer's Training for six months 2 ranks of Knowledge (bureaucracy). The trick is not to give anything crucial, like amazing feats or primary skills (say, Spellcraft to a wizard), but just small tokens that make the players feel like spending downtime is worthwhile.

 

[poilbrun]

I think you're reading too much into it, although I am challenging your reply.

Then that's fine by me!

Does it spoil the book that time passes between events? Should the entire plot of Chamber of Secrets be wrapped up within a week?

I'm not sure what you're saying here. I don't see how simply saying "You all take a month to recuperate. Time passes and you meet back at the Inn to plan for X" derails or detracts from the plot. It's not like you're making your players sit around for an hour to simulate downtime.

Chamber of Secrets could very well take place only in a week. Making it take a whole year doesn't add anything to the plot.

I totaly agree with your point on the rpg aspect, but I'll come back to it later.

Would it spoil your game if the various factions had to regroup and decide what to do next? Are they always 'Johnny on the Spot' with their next plot the very instant the first one fails? Or does it take them time to gather more resources and plot their next scheme?

Likewise, are they all lined up, taking numbers and waiting their turns to strike at your PCs? "Ok, faction A's plot failed, time for our plot. And make sure we're ready to go with plans C,D and E if this one fails, guys." Seems a bit unrealistic to me.

The pace of the game is not set by the fact that one plot follows the other. The plots are taking place at the same time, and the players have to decide which one to resolve first. They also often discover plots during an adventure. For the players, of cours it looks like they are within plot A, which is followed by plot B, where they discover plot C which they have to deal with immediately afterwards, and so on. But as far as the organizations are concerned, they have severals plots in motion, it just happens that the characters take part in one after the other.

Would be my reaction as well. Because there is nothing to react to. No consequences, no choices, nothing to be done but note it and continue moving.

And here I come back to the point you made a bit higher. If there is no point in just saying that time has passed, then why say that "You all take a month to recuperate. Time passes and you meet back at the Inn to plan for X".

IMHO, a good way to deal with this would be fatigue. Up north here we have seasonal disorders from people not getting enough sunlight - or light at all - in the winter time. Causes depression. Likewise if your players don't see the sun for days at a time, it could very well cause depression and disorientation.

(Of course, this may be less likely if they're dwarves or very experienced in underground activities.)

And when they finally emerge, it may well take them a couple of days to re-adjust to normal daylight hours and conditions.

Players don't like it? Of course not. Players will bitch about anything that negatively affects their characters. Some players will fight tooth and nail against anything not clearly spelled out in the rules. It's your job as GM to deal with this.

I don't mind adding to or removing from the rules, and my players usually have nothing against it either, as long as it makes sense.

The ideas you propose are quite good, but wouldn't fit in my games. After a terrible fight, you have finally defeated your enemy. You exit the dungeon in which you have spent the last week and are blinded by the light. Until then, that's fine by me, but then It takes you a day to recover enough from the temporary blindness to leave on the road seems a bit anti-climactic and anti-heroic to my tastes.

For travel, for example, I think I play it like shown in the Indiana Jones movies: if all I want is the player to get from point A to point B, I show them a map (but don't mark the itinerary with a red line) and tell them: "it takes you a week of uneventful travel to reach B", but if I want the travel to be an actual part of the adventure, then I'll definitely describe it and prepare encounters along the way.