What to do about the 15-minute work day?

[Dannyalcatraz]

I wonder how an urban, high roleplaying campaign can deal with this, how do you have a series of random combats while in a city? Does everything always have a strict timetable?

Depends on where in a city you are and what is going on.

In bad parts, there's toughs and lowlifes of all kinds...and undead & other threats of some kinds. Heck, you could stumble on a fight between to rival dojos or gangs (that actually happened to me). You could be mistaken for someone worth robbing...or who comitted one. And of course, there are drunken sailors on shore leave.

Elsewhere in the city? Perhaps you are accused of a crime by a noble scion lying to protect his own actions. Or two rival magic schools decide on a showdown...

High City? Get challenged to a duel because you OBVIOUSLY trying to rise above your station. Or you are carrying weapons you shouldn't be...

Is there a war on? Perhaps you missed curfew- and some fantasy cities are defended By the undead warrior ancestors of the inhabitants. Maybe a raiding party crosses your path. Or a spy thinks you saw too much...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Possibly. In a 'living,' verisimilitudinous world where the PCs are just one among many bands of adventurers, it's possible someone better than them will 'jump their claim' if they hesitate on any adventure - it's also entirely possible for them to hand something off if they decide they can't handle it. They're not really the protagonists of /the/ story, just the protagonists of their own story. :shrug:

That's how I run things, as does at least one other GM in our group.

 

[pemerton]

The 15 minute day only occurs in a static world.

I keep reading this in these threads. And for the same reason I and other have stated, it's not true.

Consider the following scenario: the PCs are mid-to-high level, well-respected operatives of an ancient, now fading empire. They spend their mornings investigating ancient ruins, trying to learn secrets of the empire and methods for restoring it to glory. They spend their afternoons back in the imperial palace, politicking with other factions over who will get the benefits of their latest discoveries. (The commute beteween palace and ruins is via teleport spells.)

I have run a version of that scenario, in Rolemaster. It is not a scenario for a static world. The world is dynamic and in motion. The PCs are up to their ears in plotting and scheming. Nevertheless, the imbalance it creates between casters and non-casters (ie daily, nova-capable PCs and at-will, non-nova-capable PCs) is extreme. In the morning exploration, the caster use their nova potential to dominate the action. Because commute is via teleport, they control when the party goes in and comes back out (and the non-casters are highly reliant on the casters to avoid getting straned in the ruins with no means of escape themselves). And then, during the politicking in the afternoons, the casters still tend to dominate because (in RM as in classic D&D) even low level enchantment and enhancement magic (charms, illusion, glibness etc) can provide a huge buff to social encounters.

The actual upshot in that game was the everyone played a caster. That is one "solution", but it has nothing to do with the staticness or otherwise of the world.

And what if it is the big boss fight and retreating means letting him finish his plans and open the gate to hell and allow demons to run freely over the material plane?

This happened in a game I played in we had to use everything we had to defeat him some of us died but failure and running away was not an option. I would have hated being in that situation where the wizard was limited to how may spells he could cast in a day based on some mechanic to stop 15 minute adventuring issues.

But why shouldn't it be the fighter who saves the day in that situation, with a heroic burst holding off the demonic hordes and then cutting down the big boss? Why does it have to be the wizard?

In classic D&D, the only way for the fighter to have a heroic burst of that sort is to get lucky dice rolls, or to drink a potion (of heroism, giant strength, invulnerabiliy etc). You don't need to go to 4e-style dailies to give the player of the fighter the option to nova his/her PC. [MENTION=49096]Mu[/MENTION]strumRidcully has mentioned in several posts over multiple threads the option of making Action Surge a more significant part of the fighter's quota of resources.

I think there are two issues being discussed here not one.

To me when someone complains about a 15 minute day as a problem my first thought is that the wizard has gone nova just because he can and didn't need to.

<snip>

But that is not what others are saying they are saying that they don't like the idea of one class being able to go nova and want to bring a more balanced approach

<snip>

This issue is the one that needs the rule change.

If the issue is number 2 then all the advice that the rest of are giving for waht we think is issue number 1 is not going to be what they are looking for.

Correct. Especially the last sentence.

 

[pemerton]

The DM narrates a situation and the players have to react to accommodate it. It doesn't work the other way around; the players do not tell the DM that they want to find a magic sword in the cave and the DM must react to accommodate them, for example.

A quibble - in the 4e DMG, there is an expectation that if a player tells the GM s/he wants her PC to find a magic sword, the GM will provide it, if not in this cave perhaps in the next cave along.

But otherwise, I tend to prefer a game in which the GM exercises primary control over scene framing. That doesn't mean that I completely disagree with LostSoul, however.

it still falls upon the DM to provide the plot and the setting.

I dont' really agree with this. I play a fairly traditional game where I, as GM, have primary responsibility for the setting. But the players are able to introduce plenty of setting elements themselves, both via PC backstory and in the course of play. And as far as plot is concerned, I very much prefer that that emerge out of play. I don't want the GM to provide it (either when GMing, or when playing).

I am not interested in playing through an Adventure Path. Neither am I interested in playing through a DM's pre-plotted campaign

I don't want to experience the DM's story, so I don't play in those games.

I don't mind a game with a strong initial situation - in fact, I like that, it gives me some guidance in character creation - but I don't want the DM to have any preference as to how the campaign will play out.

I'm not interested either in GMing or in playing Adventure Paths, nor pre-plotted campaigns. I quite like strong initial situations, though my own approach is to escalate the situation as the campaign progresses - I tend to find that this fits well with the general thrust of traditional fantasy RPGing, with the scope (thematic, geographical, metaphysical) growing as the PCs gain levels.

I must confess that I do have preferences as to how the campaign will play out, at least in the sense of having aspects of the PCs that I find interesting and want to push harder. That's not necessarily a preference as to plot outcome, but is a preference about thematic and genre content, I think. And to put up a negative example: I have a player who is into military history, and wargame-y board games, and would really like to play out an extended war scenario. Whereas I really don't want to run such a game, and even when he tries to build in hooks and prods to take the game in that direction, I as GM repeatedly fail to bite.

Luckily for both of us, the same player also enjoys the mythic history aspect of fantasy RPGing, and the scope that creates for a PC to be connected to the various metaphysical factions and their plots and schemes and conflicts. And this is stuff I also really enjoy, so I follow his leads in this department instead.

I want my choices to have an influence on how the situation unfolds. If the DM wants the situation to unfold in a certain way - and, I guess, takes steps to ensure that happens - then my choices aren't influencing the situation and there's not much point in me playing.

For me, it's the "taking steps" that is crucial. But "unfold" is also interesting. If, as GM, I find some aspect of a PC that the player has introduced, and started bringing out in play, interesting, then I might design an encounter or situation that tests that aspect somehow (simple eg the player has the PC expressing frustration at a lack of power resulting from following the gods' prescriptions; I might have an imp or quasit turn up to make an offer of an alternative path to success!).

That's my interests, as GM, making me take steps to have the situation unfold in a certain way - ie how does this PC (played by this player) respond to temptation. But I don't think it means the player's choices are failing to influence how the situation unfolds. It was framed in response to earlier choices they had made, and creates room for them to make new choices that will affect the framing of future situations.

I want to be able to, through smart in-character play, control the factors CNN listed in the post I replied to.

I certainly agree that smart, in character play should affect the nature of the adversity that a PC faces. That is, it should affect the plot. I'm not so sure about what effect I like it to have on the duration, intensity, frequency etc of that adversity. As a GM, I tend to assume primary responsibility for those things, in order to keep pushing the game forward.

 

[pemerton]

it's great for an RPG to have a tactical/strategic aspect and reward good planning, but it's not so great for it to over-reward it to the point that it becomes all about planning, with actually playing through and resolving challenges being a mere formality.

I have found this to be a serious issue with high level Rolemaster.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I have found this to be a serious issue with high level Rolemaster.

High Level 3E D&D had that problem as well.

One of the players said he prepared his entire character each session for several hours to know all the spell s he could use and how to combine stuff. Then anothe rhour or so might have been spend each session for the group to organize all the buff spells so that everyone could eek out the last enhancement bonus or deflection bonus or whatever. People made attack matrixes for their fighters to cover all the various scenarios and buffs. I once played a shapeshifter prestige class and looked for good forms to take for various situations (my favorite, the Elephant, was not a good choice. The Delver was awesome, and the Annis Hag wasn't too bad either) and wrot edown all the variable stats.

A lot of time each session was spent preparing the characters for whatever could come. But the combats itself were often not that exciting. (But to 3E credit, some definitely were. Usually those that involved novaing against an opposition that would "counter-nova" ...)

 

[pemerton]

A lot of time each session was spent preparing the characters for whatever could come.

The particular variant of Rolemaster my group played (Rolemaster is very much a "pick and choose what you like from oodles of supplements" system) made "meta-magic" techniques quite important. One of these was Stored Spells - a bit like a contingency, but able to be triggered at the active desire of the one who has the Stored Spell. The downside of a Stored Spell is that you can't cast other spells. Unless, of course, you use the Bypass Stored spell utility. (And then there is the possibility of having an Additional Stored Spell, which triggers the need for Bypass Additional Stored Spell.)

So one important feature of planning at high levels was mapping out all the Stored Spells, and making sure they were layered across the various PCs in the correctly nested sequence, so that they could be smoothly unloaded to give effect to the plan. (And one subset of this tactical game was working out how to get Stored Spells onto the fighters, who don't need to be able to cast their own spells to do stuff. The whole thing can become very mechanically self-referential when you're trying to work out which fighter should have the Stored Spell that, when cast, will let someone else they touch - presumably a caster, who is going to put a spell into play of his/her own spell points - Bypass an Additional Stored Spell, so that the whole intricate sequence will unfold correctly. Also, being Rolemaster, the line of dominoes can be knocked over by a failed casting roll - and then we all have to start it over again!)

 

[Lwaxy]

I wonder how an urban, high roleplaying campaign can deal with this, how do you have a series of random combats while in a city? Does everything always have a strict timetable?

If no one waylays you in the city, you don't have a 15min workday, because you aren't using up your resources. So if you are doing diplomacy, research and such it's not an issue at all.

And if you are to break into somewhere etc you will need to do some planning and such, and probably do the breaking in it at night, after which you rest anyway.

Maybe your party is on guard duty, then it's a lot more likely you get into trouble. Someone mistakes you for an old enemy. You take a wrong turn and end up in the bad parts of town. You come to a murder scene and are mistaken for the killers. Or you are looking for someone who does not like being asked after. A bar fight happens in the tavern you pick.

Plenty of possibilities if there is really a need for the GM to drain your resources. If there is not, it is not a problem.

I think urban situations would be less likely to suffer short workdays. Isn't it more of an issue when you travel through dangerous terrain and already got attacked twice before midday?

 

[CleverNickName]

A quibble - in the 4e DMG, there is an expectation that if a player tells the GM s/he wants her PC to find a magic sword, the GM will provide it, if not in this cave perhaps in the next cave along.

I never played 4E...I tried it for about two weeks, but I couldn't get past the healing mechanics. So there are a lot of things about that edition that I am fairly ignorant of. But I gotta tell ya--this sounds HORRIBLE.

The players get to tell the DM what treasure they find?! I'm sure there are checks and balances in place to prevent abuse...but I can't help but imagine it going something like this:

DM: You enter the ancient crypt, and there upon the altar of Odin, you find the legendary Spear of Power! Your quest is finally at an end!

PLAYER: Sword.

DM: Huh?

PLAYER: Sword of Power. Remember, I told you I wanted a sword for my character...that was like, ages ago.

DM: But it's an altar of Odin. Odin's weapon is a spear.

PLAYER: Then change it to Thor, then.

DM: What?!

PLAYER: We are in Thor's temple, and I walk up to Thor's altar to claim Thor's Sword of Power. What's the big deal?

DM: Thor's weapon is a hammer!

PLAYER: Then go with Freya or Loki or something. Surely there is at least one swordy Norse god you can use. What are my sword's stats?

DM: *headdesk*

If this "expectation" still exists in D&D Next, then I'm gonna have to pass.

I dont' really agree with this. I play a fairly traditional game where I, as GM, have primary responsibility for the setting. But the players are able to introduce plenty of setting elements themselves, both via PC backstory and in the course of play. And as far as plot is concerned, I very much prefer that that emerge out of play. I don't want the GM to provide it (either when GMing, or when playing).

I agree with you; I think we are thinking of different definitions of "plot." The plot, is the reason that the party is in the dungeon in the first place, and the conflicts and complications of it. The player doesn't decide that there is a princess that needs rescuing, and that the princess will be guarded by a dragon, for example...that is decided by the DM. But the actions and decisions made by each player must have a significant impact on the story that develops...whether or not the party is successful in finding and rescuing said princess, and whether they slay (or hoodwink, or befriend) the dragon.

 

[mlund]

I can't help but imagine it going something like this:

DM: You enter the ancient crypt, and there upon the altar of Odin, you find the legendary Spear of Power! Your quest is finally at an end!

PLAYER: Sword.

DM: Huh?

PLAYER: Sword of Power. Remember, I told you I wanted a sword for my character...that was like, ages ago.

DM: But it's an altar of Odin. Odin's weapon is a spear.

PLAYER: Then change it to Thor, then.

DM: What?!

PLAYER: We are in Thor's temple, and I walk up to Thor's altar to claim Thor's Sword of Power. What's the big deal?

DM: Thor's weapon is a hammer!

PLAYER: Then go with Freya or Loki or something. Surely there is at least one swordy Norse god you can use. What are my sword's stats?

DM: *headdesk*

If this "expectation" still exists in D&D Next, then I'm gonna have to pass.

Someone needs to write a book titled something like, "Dr. StrangeDM or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Game."

The game is for amusement purposes only. If you want to run a game with a weapon as the key treasure / artifact feature and your primary weapon-user has specialized in using swords then why shouldn't the artifact should be a sword? Put the Sword of Tyr, One-handed in the shrine. Odin's the head of that pantheon anyway. Everyone who pays homage to Thor or Tyr or Freya has to bow to the All-Father.

I know DM's aren't mind-readers. You can't anticipate players just deciding on a whim one day that he wants a sword. DMs and Players need to share their expectations and goals and the game needs to evolve around those. It's nobody's novel. The DM isn't the player's monkey. The players aren't the DM's subjects. It's cooperative fun.

The playing's the thing.

The player doesn't decide that there is a princess that needs rescuing, and that the princess will be guarded by a dragon, for example...that is decided by the DM.

Dude, I'd practically give my left kidney for one of my players to jump out and suggest or interject that there is a princess in the clutches of a dragon that needs rescuing. I might die of a heart-attack if a player told me that while in town they are searching for anyone with a similar tattoo to the slavers that kidnapped his brother 3 years ago. While I don't want player's gaming the system with unlimited power by ret-conning unreasonable advantages into the world around them at every turn, I'd give eye teeth to have people look at the game world beyond their character sheets as a creative canvas by default rather than the DM's exclusive sandbox box of spiky death and plot-hooks.

There's a reason so many PCs have no families, friends, mentors, servants, businesses, or loved ones. The stereotypical caricature of D&D is that these built-in plot hooks give the DM more control over PCs and give players no influence over the rest of the world. So players generally just stick to the sheet.

- Marty Lund