Timeframes: Going Faster or Slower

[CosmicGamer]

Changed this to straight DMs. Want Bane/Boon to be mostly (wholly?) a referee thing.

Bane/Boon for Timeframes going faster or slower page 60?

First change I made DM-1/+1 per step.

I have a few things to bring up for discussion regarding time frames.

Some of this obviously falls under rule zero so lets not jump to this response seen in half the threads. If you don't like something and want things as is, man (woman or child or Aslan or Vargr or whatever) man up and say so. Even better, explain why you think the current rules are best.

I'm also not looking for the other canned response, to put all ideas that differ from the raw in the Companion. Now is the time to shake things up. Examine the rules. See what, if anything might work better. Or maybe not? Not sure if the time for more significant rules changes has passed?

1) The randomness in regards to how long a task takes.
The time a task takes is completely random and the characters skill and characteristics have no impact. Tasks can just as likely take 6 times as long, 6 days instead of one day, for no other reason than randomness. This doesn't sit well with me. Here are some possible alternatives.

Perhaps let a GM decide for themselves how long a task would normally take. If they can't decide, perhaps they make a roll before the task is even attempted to determine how long it might take.

Make the die roll adjustable by skill and/or characteristic used. Something like 1d6 - Skill level (+3 if unskilled).

Maybe use a more specific time as the approximate, then allow the effect of the task roll influence the time required. Super high effect, you finished the task in record time! Huge failure and you've spent time trying this and that but it was time wasted because you've failed.

2) Is +1/-1 DM per step enough?
As written, a time shift is from 6 to 10 times faster/slower. Personally It's one thing if one rushes a bit, takes 10 min instead of 20, but going from 30 hours to 3 hours being just a 1 DM? Personally I think this isn't enough incentive or penalty.

3) Are the times within a time frame too large?
I can see if something normally takes an hour and it takes a few minutes more or less. But a task ranging from 1 hour to 6 hours long?

4) Are the times between time frames too large?
Based on a die roll being the same and just shifting time frames, a task can go from taking 3 minutes to 30 minutes. I can see taking your time and taking twice as long, but 4 to 10 times as long - for one shift?

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

The time I'll give for a task usually depends on the context when it's being used. I'll also set the time based on a previous Effect of a roll.

 

[MongooseMatt]

2) Is +1/-1 DM per step enough?

I don't think it is, and you are quite right to bring this up - have already changed it to DM+/-2

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

I would consider using a D3 for the timeframe instead of a D6.

As a Referee, I usually pick a time frame and I am picking either the highest or lowest time within that range.

Most of the time, I think the exact time doesn't need to be rolled. Basically, I am looking for "is it possible in a combat round, is it possible in a Ship Combat round?" or a general "order of magnitude" of the actual time (minutes, hours, days, etc.)

While I can appreciate that the Task has a variable, honestly I don't use that variability very often. Just like a combat round lasting 1-6 seconds. As far as I am concerned they all last 6 seconds and lets move on. The time SCALE is important to me, not the variability.