Running a tight game

So here's my problem: As a GM past experience has taught me to keep each session within roughly 4 hours long, because I run my game on a weekend evening and some of my players are one or two hours ahead of my timezone. I know it puts a strain on them if the game drags because they likely have work the next day and it's already late in their locale. As a result each session needs to tie up neatly within that 4 hour time frame. However, keeping things on track means that I sometimes resort to letting the Players kill enemies too easily in order to wrap up combat, or give them too many hints in a puzzle scene because time is running out. I feel this erodes the challenge in my games and the system I'm running (WH40k Only War) is supposed to be tough and unforgiving. Normally I'd just end the session if the players can't stick around and continue in the next session, but this is a bad option for me because: -Players flake and cancel, it happens, I compensate for it when I can, but having one character be in an encounter one week and then have him poof out of existence when the encounter continues next week is dumb. Have neat self-contained sessions helps mitigate this annoyance. -In the campaign I'm running, the Players choose their next mission at the end of each session so I can spend the week designing it and have it ready for them. If the group gets through 3/4 of a mission in one session then finishes it off in the next one it could mean having only an hour of game time before being forced to end it there or pull a mission out of my ass on the spot (never a good idea). -It personally annoys me. I've tried the obvious tricks: speeding up the number crunching using macros, having NPC stats ready, researching the appropriate rules before hand. All these have really helped, but I want to do better. TL;DR : How can I give my Players room to "scratch their heads" at a problem while still keeping the game session within a certain time limit?

I think that is an age old and hard question to answer, and will be different for any given set of people. This doesn't fix the players flaking out problem (I'd probably just run them as an NPC if they can't make it), but I would probably look into how you can extend your session to fill two sessions in the case that it's going long. If you wrap at 4 hours and have an hour's worth of game left, work the week on expanding that part out to fill the whole next session, possibly add some twists, or some short follow up scenes ("Remember that ship that got away from the space port as you arrived.. you just caught up with it and..."). Start adding optional portions to your scenarios that you can trim out or expand as needed to adjust the run length. Puzzles are hard. I ran a puzzle a few weeks ago that broke down to "there are 2 buttons, One adds 1, the other adds 3, push the right number of each to get a given number." To me, it seemed pretty simple, to the players it was near impossible. I let them run with it until they figured out it had something to do with math, and roughly what the buttons did, and then I let them have the answer and moved on. You might want to start gathering some metrics about your scenarios. Write how long you think each part will take, and then record how long it actually took. Use that information to estimate how long future scenarios will be, and to build small vignettes you can slap in as needed or replace longer bits with. Start puzzles early since they are so variable. That will give you buffer time to let it run it's course and make dynamic adjustments to the later plot.

Or - use the game forum during "down time" to finish up things like puzzles and tactical planning. I try to keep a balance between non-combat rp and combat rp. I've gotten fairly good at hitting my 4-hour mark every time. Iron clad rule I use - MACROS. If a player doesn't know how to make macros, I walk them through the basics and create simple macros for them. Macros make a huge difference. If you've got slow players (and I've played with some SLOW ones), prod them along by giving them a time limit to decide and carry out an action. Once time expires - turn is missed. One minute should be long enough for any player to make up his/her mind (even casters) because they should be planning during other players' actions.

The offline puzzling suggestion is a good one. We frequently use Play-By-Post in a forum for discussing and dealing with slower aspects of gaming (what 5 questions will we ask the corpse, what can we learn from the prisoner, what do we want to do for a week in town...).

Hmm. Thanks guys. I'll try out some of your suggestions. I also realised that I haven't really run puzzle scenes before. What I should have said is exploration scenes, where the Players can look around an area adventure game style. I haven't really formally collected metrics but over several sessions I start to get the feel of what bogs down the game and what doesn't. Combat is usually the biggest thing. I've found that I should limit myself to two combat encounters per session, and try not to use "hold out for evac" scenarios as those can potentially drag on forever...

Be realistic about your expectations. If your group tends to not finish in the allotted time, plan on doing less. Break your plot points/objectives into smaller more manageable pieces. If you get all them done in one 4hr session great, otherwise they get as far as they can and you break the session at the nearest "mark" you've set as a GM or at a convenient point in the game. Make sure everyone is made aware of how your sessions need to be adjusted. Most players should understand your plight. I like the idea of taking advantage of as much out of session(roll20) time as well to take care of "housekeeping" or otherwise non-paramount story issues. This would also allow you to "adjust" or prep the upcoming game as well. Have fun.

I'm thinking that if I need more time or want to run a larger mission I should just design it to run over multiple sessions.

But yes, it is a challenge. You do reach a point in a combat (usually) where it is obvious that the PC's have it sealed. I boost the damage the pc's deal at that point, maybe drop all critter defenses by 1 or 2 but it does have to be obvious to the GM that they have it done and dusted. Scripts that give away what I am doing can be an issue thou. Just ended an adventure where the party (and certain NPC's) were effected with a curse. They pass out, literally.... Mid combat, on top of a rope bridge, wherever. Up to the rest of the party to keep them alive which is always fun if there are hungry critters around who are looking for easy prey. I asked for 7 players, fully expecting to only get 4 that stick around but got 5 with a 6th that was later added too many maybe but whatever. I believe that the original call for players made the difference. Be *very* specific about what you are looking for and ignore the messages that do not follow your specific requirements. I believe that while I may have been unfair on some of the points, they did make my life more simple. Mine said this is the time, no not ask to change it, anyone that had issues with the time was excluded. Second was we would use Skype which after session 1 was dropped and we switched to teamspeak (unanamous agreement). The other requirement was a char sheet submitted with the request to play, if no character sheet was submitted, they were also excluded. And no, I did not follow up on any messages If you did not like Skype in the game ad, you were excluded. If you did not make the first game, you were dropped right there. Other than one or 2 issues, with RL there were no problems.

When I GM a custom scenario, or even a pre-made one, I tend to create or identify 'links'. These links are parts of the story that I can cut out if I'm short on time, and not impact on the overall scenario. Basically, I edit my scenarios from a running time of 'x' to a more audience friendly 'x' if we're struggling. I ran a game once where the players spent forty minutes phaffing around with planning and exploring before actually going to do their mission. I made the concious choice not to rush them, instead I just altered the scenario so that characters who would have been alive had they gone straight to the mission, were now dead, etc.

That's an interesting way of handling things Cal. I'll keep that one in my figurative tool box.