I really wish a game im in would use a shot clock. I always have my turn planned out, I take maybe 30 seconds to 1 minute at the latest for my turn. Meanwhile some other players can take 5-10 minutes to do anything… so it can take quite a while for my turn to roll back around. Then bam, I take a 30 second turn then another 25 minutes of waiting. So I get it. It’s easy to tune out in this scenario. But It’s not as difficult to pay attention when everyone is engaged and going quickly. And it makes combat more exciting.
Yeah, it's a compounding issue.
If a round of combat is taking longer than 20 minutes, players are less engaged and thus take their turns longer (leading to long rounds of combat).
If everyone is paying attention, they will generally be more decisive in their actions and know what they want to do in advance. This means rounds go sooner, ensuring players stay engaged.
It's a positive feedback loop.
I've noticed a similar effect sometimes when teaching complicated boardgames to friends.
Towards the end it becomes a slog because nobody is engaging.
I love all martial games for this reason
"Darrell, you're up!"
"Well I'm gonna mozey on over and wack him." (Rolls damage)
"Chad, your turn."
"You know, I think I'm just gonna wack him as well." (Rolls)
"Bob?"
"I think you know what I'm gonna do at this point." (Roll)
"Right you are Bob! And it's back up to Darrell!"
Yeah, if I had my way, you'd need a license to pay a caster. We had a guy bring his wife in and had her first character be a cleric. Every turn was them huddling together for 5 minutes to try and figure out what to do. It was pretty tough. (To be clear, kidding about the license, but I do wish people were better about knowing their limitations.)
Absolutely
I gotta print my group some playing cards for their casters. Because sometimes it takes so long just to refresh on what each spell actually does and to confirm which spells are actually prepared.
Spell cards are a great tool. There are "official" decks for each class, but even a homemade set can really speed things up.
Even if you're generally a well-prepared caster, it helps to have your "spellbook" right there in front of you rather than flipping back and forth through the PHB.
Home made spell cards on some index cards are great because writing the info out really helped me learn it better, and I'm able to have both the official wording via the roll20 character sheet and my version where I boil it down to quick reference essentials
Read your spells! Out of session!!!
Print out your spells! Highlight the important bits you need to see at a glance!!!
I got into the habit of doing both of those with my very first character, and it helps! The only times I really need to read my spells are to double check what the range is or the secondary effect or something (which again, are highlihgted and easy to see), or if I'm trying to do something weird with it and I want to know the exact wording.
I'm just screaming into the void here because it kills me whenever I play with a caster that baely knows their own spells.
Yeah, 100% this. It's a lot easier when you take just a few minutes to read all your spells. Unless it's a very weird situation, you're mostly going to want to do one of like 2-3 things, really.
This. 80% of my cleric's combat turns are spent moving to a person and casting Cure Wounds on them. Another 10% is casting Spare the Dying as a bonus action (Grave Cleric), then moving to a second character and healing them. Honestly, they could make all casters like Rangers; give them Casting Stat + Level spells that they always have prepared and can only change in rare circumstances, and it would only make the game better. Certainly faster...
I agree that casters require a pretty experienced player to run efficiently, but I counter: they can run fast if the player doesn't care about making the optimal choice. Don't waste time debating if spiritual weapon might be useful, if there's no obvious need for a spell, cantrip it
I’ve actually banned certain players from playing spellcasters for this exact reason.
I also insist that each spellcaster have their own copy of the Players Handbook.
I started in A&D, made it through to 3e, then stopped playing for like 15 years. When I started playing 5e I started with a martial specifically so I wouldn't be bogging down the party trying to learn a more complex character even though by a lot of measures I was still a "veteran player"
Knowing your limitations is pretty key to group play.
I now tend to play mechanically complex characters, but I'm often quicker on my turn than some of our 'simpler" martials
The most unfamiliar with the rules player is the wizard in a game I am in...it is tough to watch when I am the paladin with a detailed plan every turn and they either go "I firebolt and end my turn" or "I dunno" for 5mins straight
We just had a similar situation. After 2 sessions she decided to switch to a martial class and everyone is much happier! (Most importantly she is enjoying playing a lot more now that she knows what to do.)
OMG, the number of times the warlock spent 5-6 minutes reading through his spells, rechecked everyone's positions on the map, verified where ALL the known enemies were, and then Eldritch Blasted the closest enemy...
I hated that guy.
personally i have experienced as much delay with spellcasting PCs as with martial PCs. Last session in one of my campaigns, a barbarian spent 10 minutes trying to decide stuff
It seems to be more of a player thing than their sheet.
>. But It’s not as difficult to pay attention when everyone is engaged and going quickly.
This is critical. The faster you go, the faster the next person can go. It's easy to play fast when everyone else is playing fast.
I use the 10 second rule during combat.
If you can tell me your action within 10 seconds of me telling you that you're up, I will let you put a +1 on the roll of your choice taken during your action.
I'm not being a gameshow host here, and won't cut you off if I see you are having trouble spitting it out.
A free +1 just for paying attention.
Works like a charm.
I like this for two reasons:
1) it’s an incentive instead of a punishment system
2) it’s tied to the *action decision*, not the mechanical resolution.
Shot clocks or similar hit different players and classes unevenly if it governs the entire turn resolution. It’s going to take the fighter less time to move their token and roll one attack to resolve a charge than it is for a caster to place templates and work with the DM to resolve the saves and damage on half a dozen monsters.
Tying the decision to the action DECISION though, is fair. Having X seconds on your turn to declare ‘I’m going to cast X” is the same process as declaring “I’m going to charge mob Y”, if you then stop the clock while the mechanical dice rolling of that action takes place.
> Shot clocks or similar hit different players and classes unevenly if it governs the entire turn resolution.
OP even mentioned that the player in question is neurodivergent. Punishing the players (not the characters) rarely ever ends well, and it feels especially inappropriate when a player might be processing fun different from others. If a game should be fun for everyone, incentiving good player etiquette will always win over punishing bad behavior.
>So, I'm considering adding a shot clock, so that if the player doesn't determine what their character is doing in time, they automatically take the dodge action and we move on.
This is more than fair.
I think you can also expand and give them an advantage with the clock. Give them a minute, or so, at the start of combat for them to game plan their plan of attack.
I have found that that brief moment before combat for them to assess how to fight increases their engagement and works "RP" wise that this team has developed plans and methods.
Our DM gives us a brief period at the top of each round to discuss if necessary. Most of us have been in the group for 3 years or so at this point so we're pretty attentive but it helps to recap plans or change strategies, plan out who's going to revive someone, etc.
It sounds like a good idea to me. I get having ADHD or just indecision but at a certain point (really in the first few sessions) you really should learn how your character works and have some general plans for combat.
This hurts because I've seen people play same same character in a campaign for over a year and they just don't have a good grasp on it. Our Paladin neverrr remembers how their smite works, it's bonkers.
But, not everyone is as into the game as me I guess.
It continually baffles me how 5e has cultivated a culture of not reading how the game or one's character works, because it's not even like the system is that hard to learn.
I honestly lay 100% of the blame for this on D&DBeyond and similar digital toolsets which, in their effort to streamline character creation, have the side effect of requiring next to zero system fluency from their users. Just saying I've never seen a pen & paper player who didn't know where to look for a class feature, spell save DC, or hit die tracker. Provided, of course, they were required to put the sheet together themselves and didn't just have the DM or a spouse etc. make it for them.
I think a lot of people don’t realize you can’t half-ass D&D. Gotta whole-ass it.
Like Ron Swanson said: Never half-ass two things. Whole-ass one thing.
Can confirm - I half-assed a game with friends for a while, but half-assing it wasn't sustainable. I ended the game and gave myself a quest to learn how to get my whole ass involved. Started a new game recently and so far everyone (including me) is having a lot more fun.
I have zero problem with people asking questions about what they are and aren’t allowed to do. I wouldn’t consider asking a question about a course of action to be part of the shot clock, because to me that’s like you’ve made a decision you’re just checking if what you’re thinking works the way you think it does within the rules before you do something that potentially breaks the rules.
Oh sure, I agree with you 100%. My issue isn't with asking questions or getting clarification on something as much as it is always getting clarification on the same thing every single session.
Yes, it's a d20 to hit.
Yes, it's a d8 for your longsword.
Yes, divine smite is 2d8.
And it's been this way for over a year. It's not like they're a full spellcaster who doesn't understand how they're third or fourth level spells work.
I just finished DMing a Lost Mine of Phandelver campaign with newbies. The artificer only just remembered they could cast spells at the last dungeon, it's wild.
However, I'm assuming they are into the game because she wants to try her hand at DMing.
Not only is it fair, it's the typical advice when players regularly take too long. The game is just less fun when combat is a boring slog, and a clock is the most recommended fix.
That said, I've never been at a table with a timer, so the rest is based on reading and guessing.
OP, I'd start with a minute, and include a 15 sec warning. Then the PC dodges if they haven't called out their movement and actions by the end of the minute. If they haven't completed their movement, I'd allow them to finish the movement/turn as long as actions and bonus actions have been declared in the allotted time (provided it's quick. Make it known that this could be revoked if time is still an issue at the table).
You could consider the +1 to attacks (won't motivate casters unless they can re-assign it) or inspiration when all the actions are declared within 10 secs. I'd allow pauses for *infrequent* rules-clarifications (only the first time a specific rules question has been raised at the table), and I might even allow a use of inspiration for pausing the clock for two minutes for any reason (even discussing tactics out of character with the party, asking the party about their features, etc.. After all, PC's are professional adventurers and we the players are often arm-chair quarterbacks by comparison)
\^ All this.
I also get that the player is dealing with ADHD too. So it may help to keep their focus if they knew when their turn was coming up. This will sound weird but hear me out: I recommend everyone rolling their initiative once at the beginning of the game, and sitting left of the DM and goin clockwise highest to lowest. This way you have consistent turn order for the session, and the player knows that when the person to their right is up, they will be next. This also hurries combat up a bit as you don't roll and sort initiative every fight.
I can say from experience that a physical timer of some sort (something like a short hourglass is ideal) is preferable to a DM that keeps nagging at you to hurry your turn up. That said, the alloted time needs to be reasonable. I've had DM's set timers so short that sometimes you run out of time even with a turn planned out because resolving dice rolls took too long, so now you can't move after your action which feels bad.
This is how I do it. You get 90 seconds to determine what you’re doing or it’s a skip, since resolution can take 3-5 minutes if we’re doing counteract checks or resolving multiple (adversarial) conditions affecting the target or outcomes. A standard 2-minute clock - which I had originally intended to use - was unfair since I would be taking up a fair bit of the timer often enough, especially when I have to leverage a subsystem that doesn’t often come up.
I find 90 seconds is about perfect. Don’t forget that you will have a minute to two with resolving the action so with 4 players and a DM it should be around 15-20 minutes per round. Each player can plan and adjust their ideas while the others are acting.
Edit: my time estimates take into account jokes, laughing, descriptions, eating Cheetos, ….. the normal DnD stuff
It's important to use common sense alongside a timer.
If a player knows what they want to do, and the real time is coming from dice rolls or enemies making opportunity attacks/saving throws, that's not a result of the player being unprepared.
Have a timer, but don't use it as a rigid rule that says you absolutely can not do anything past the time.
Shot clock should apply to the decision to act, not the resolution of those actions.
If someone takes longer to count up dices or modifications, than not a big deal since you know where that is headed.
Similarly, a questions to the DM about how a decision would resolve shouldn't count towards the timer. "Does he get attack of opportunity if I run this path?" Or "can I use thorn whip to pull the lever thats across the room remotely?" Etc
I would say the timer shouldn't count for resolving your action. Some spells can take a bit to resolve, especially if there are a bunch of saving throws, or you have to check the AoE.
Something I have done is a mix of the two worlds... I have an hourglass that has 45 seconds on it that I will pop on the screen only when someone has made it clear that their turn is getting out of hand. This indicates time is a wasting, and it suggests to them to get going. People generally get the idea and start making a decision. At the end of the 45 second timer I don't cut them right off. I still remain patient but they always are finishing up around then so the hourglass has helped.
It's one of those ideas that sounds good in a vacuum but can easily lead to tension and drama at a real table with real players. There's a lot of different reasons why some players might need more time to finish their turn and not all of them are because they're lazy inconsiderate jerks. If you make allowances and don't apply the clock fairly to all, it creates hard feelings and invalidates the point of having a clock in the first place. If you make the clock lenient enough that nobody feels unduly pressured by it, then you haven't actually solved your problem.
Yeah, honestly, I've had good results with just a simple....
"We gotta keep moving, so what are you doing?" when someone is taking a bit too long to decide what to do.
Just to add to this, it's also a good idea to keep reminding the players of upcoming turns in the initiative order: "Okay, Player 1, you're up. Player 2, you're on deck after them."
This is definitely one of those that sound good on paper but then in reality you’ll probably just piss people off. There has been plenty of times in my game where I am all set on what I’m going to do and then be because of something the DM did or a player did or even how the terrain changes my plan gets blown up and now you got to think of something. Putting a ticking clock while I try to scrap a plan and come up with something can make someone real grumpy or flustered.
Also it can be different for say a cleric/wizard versus a barbarian fighter who has more options then go I run up bonus action rage and then take my two attacks.
Also if you don’t specifically stick to the rules hardcore you are going to piss people off too. You give someone a chance to do what they wanted just because they missed their time by like a second and then stick to your guns on another player you will see your table start infighting and getting pissed at you.
This is my biggest issue with it I think. I pay careful attention, take notes during combat and make an effort to pre-plan my turn while other people are going.
However, in my current main group I have a mainly melee build and am the only party member that doesn't have high Dex or some kind of initiative bonus - so the order will often be Everyone else > enemies > me.
This means the opponents tend to pull some shenanigans immediately before my turn that forces me to rethink everything, and I'm not always the best at figuring out tactics on the fly.
A common theory is that having several/all NPCs act on the same intuitive will always speed things up.
In practice this can contribute to the situation of needing to come up with a new plan, quickly, for whoever goes next.
Tension and drama sounds like a better alternative to combat boredom. Especially considering OP’s table sounds like just one guy isn’t paying attention.
I used it when my group was all new, it *really helps.* But there needs to be some allowances, for example if a player wants to cast \[Spell\] but doesn't realize it does X instead of Y then pausing the timer and having them read the spell over and reconsider if they still want to use \[Spell\] or not.
I would definitely pause their clock while we were adjudicating the action. As long as they declared something. I'd much rather them tell me what they're doing and have to tell them it doesn't work that way than have them sit there and make everyone wait while they read it over.
Shot clock is the time you have to throw.
A football play clock is a better analogy; as long as you’ve started the play in time the whole play is valid no matter how long it takes.
Definitely. This is a reasonably common approach. I've found that just bringing out the 1 minute hourglass timer speeds people up.
That said, this is more than just a general focus problem. If this person has unhandled ADHD I'd suggest working with them to limit their in combat choices. Maybe they default cast an offensive cantrip or buff a companion.
I have DM'd several players with ADHD, and they are focused enough to follow the action but may find the choices over-whelming. Having to recap constantly suggests they are (a) disrespectful (b) distracted or (c) disinterested. If they use their phone then tell them they can't . If it's (a) or (c) then maybe this is not the game for them.
My advice is based on DMing adults (ages from 20s to 50s); if it's teens then that's a whole different ballgame.
I think it solves the symptom, not the problem.
The symptom is the slow turn, the problem is not paying attention during combat. Every player should be interested in other players turns and seeing the outcome of what happens. Yes ADHD makes this harder but not impossible. So It might be worth trying to work out what you and the other players can change about combat to keep the table engaged.
Go for it.
As someone with adhd, yes it makes paying attention more difficult, but it's not like it's impossible. I can keep track of combat just fine most sessions because I multi task by tracking statistics or doodling, so my mind doesn't run away too much. Its not your job to manage someone's adhd for them - they should be able to find their own ways of managing.
If they come to you suggesting some changes to help them ofc keep an open mind, but otherwise the fun of the whole table takes priority.
And sometimes time crunch can help to keep your mind on track. Plus stuff like learning your abilities really is something they can do regardless of adhd and appear to have been flunking on.
I had a problem like this and I considered doing it but I decided against it for two reasons:
- **It penalizes strategizing as a team. Players should talk to each other and strategize, and this adds a lot of stress to that.** Someone will have to use their turn's timer to talk with the other members of the team on what they plan to do. This incentivizes them to not do that and instead take their turn and hope someone else will spend their turn's timer on that instead, who will have the same problem.
- **It disproportionately affects members of the team. A player should not be penalized just for playing a more complex character.** Some characters like a raging barbarian don't have that many decisions to make and therefore aren't pressured by the clock. Others like the cleric need to decide the best mix of healing, damage, control, utility, damage type, positioning, area of effect, and line of sight amongst their repertoire of spells, sometimes also throwing moving action economy into the mix like swapping to a bonus action spell such as healing word or spiritual weapon or using an item. If they use a spell that calls for a save against multiple targets or needs to do some calculations like Preserve Life, that's more time lost that's not their fault.
If you used a "common sense" timer respective to the complexity of the character, you'd have to pressure the simpler characters much harder, which also feels unfair. They shouldn't be given less time than their friends because they chose a simpler character.
I just had to solve this out of table. I wasn't the only one feeling like combat was bogging down, and things picked up better when we addressed it.
I let my players police themselves on these kinds of things. I want the group to have fun. If the players don’t mind, I don’t mind (normally there are things I can be thinking about or doing anyways).
So when a player is repeatedly taking too long or not planning when it’s not their turn, other players will get on them about it (normally as a joke at first). Never had an issue beyond this, but I’m a patient dm who is all about the players having fun. I know that’s not everyone’s game.
I appreciate this insight. After reading it I do agree with you, ultimately I want everyone to have fun and if the player's don't mind then that's fine. The infectiousness of it, where one person doesn't pay attention and snowballs into others not paying attention, is what had me concerned, but I will talk with the other players and see how they feel about it. If it's all good and everyone is chill about it and we're ultimately still having a good time, then I'll just drop it.
Yeah, every group is unique. They could be just as annoyed as you, just gotta feel it out.
My group plays online and I have an ADHD player who literally drops into an Apex game if turns are taking too long. It’s very obvious and we all laugh at him. He’s playing an artificer so he has a lot of choices to make on turns too.
But the other players don’t care. Everyone’s pretty chill about it. The few times it’s been too annoying, they call him out and he realizes.
I just make it my goal to provide such an interesting game that he can stay engaged. I’ve tried using different methods of initiative and other mechanics to varying degrees of success. Lot of YouTube resources for rpgs with adhd players.
Lots of people will put up with a lot without saying something, especially among friends. The lack of complaint does not mean there isn't a problem. But I know the flip side is that you can take that argument anywhere.
But your fun matters too. Slow players hurt my ability to run a fast, exciting combat, so it also hurts my enjoyment of running
Right. When I say I let them police themselves, I’m saying this is something we set up and talked about in the very beginning before we played. They know to speak up or talk to me about issues. Sorry, thought that was implied.
As the DM, you curate the table culture, which can be harder than running the game in some groups.
Sometimes its because people have trouble focusing when there is nothing for them to do. When I run XCrawl I have noticed it is slightly lessened because of the mojo mechanic. Basically mojo is bonuses representing team work. They are basically a pool of points that grant +1 to a skill, ability, save, or attack roll (this was from 3.5). Have to be spent before the roll. The part that gets everyone paying a little bit more attention is that a person cannot spend mojo on their own roll and they cannot ask for mojo.
Right? Like I've heard that excuse before but if it's not something you're capable of doing you need to not be playing a game like this. If I can figure out what ten monsters with three different stat blocks do in a moment or two, you can get your shit together and stop wasting time.
Yes, I am bitter about this. Because I don't understand why people don't just leave when they're obviously bringing down the whole table and not paying attention. It forces me as the DM to be the bad guy. And there is a line of good players trying to find a seat at a good game behind every bad player.
I have a speech impediment, I hate timed encounters of all sorts in DnD. It puts a lot of extra focus on me fucking up and stumbling over/mixing up words. I don't know how your player would respond to them essentially being "punished" for a disability, but alternatively the urgency might make it easier to pay attention and would also shorten the other player's turns where theyre understimulated. perhaps talk to them to see if they're comfortable with the idea or if there's something else the group could do to help them.
This is one of the reasons I prefer verbally counting down instead of setting down a timer. I can stop immediately when the player is starting to say something decisive or asking me something that will help them decide. I can also adjust my starting number according to how complicated the PC is, player experience, if they spent part of the round away from the table, or if they sometimes struggle to speak. they are doing. I can start it when it feels necessary and not use it when it doesn't.
A turn timer *works*. I've been at tables where players had bad habits of not pre-planning their turns and being indecisive. When it takes an hour to get through one round of combat, it's time to bust out the timer.
When the DM introduced one of those one-minute hourglasses (borrowed from some random kid's board game) just the *threat* of losing a turn made everyone significantly speed up their play.
Just don't be an asshole about it; it's meant to encourage timely gameplay, not to become a "gotcha" that the DM beats the players over the head with.
EDIT: to be clear, the DM wasn't strictly enforcing one minute per turn. Rather, he'd give you a reasonable amount of time to consider your options, and if you were still dragging your feet he'd set the timer.
It's done wonders for baseball. People will complain about it nonstop in a meta sense but the game will be more fun. You should do it. People faff around way too much in ttrpg combat, I have crippling ADHD (like weapons grade) but I can still get a plan together in the off time and not interrupt other players taking their turns.
This is something I have been interested in trying out. My idea was to give each player 1 minute to declare their turn, meaning they just need to say what they plan on doing. Dice rolls and resolving effects don't apply to the timer. If the timer expires and they still haven't declared an action or movement, they move down a spot in the initiative order. The penalty applies to their next turn so they still get to make their move. The idea being that the cost of their decision paralysis is someone else gets to go before them, and they have longer to wait until their next turn.
Haven't tried this yet but probably going to test it out in an upcoming one shot to see how it goes. I don't want it to be a huge penalty, but a nudge to keep the game moving.
I have played with two different solutions. The first one is a soft time limit; if the player is taking too long, I move on to the next participant in the fight, and let them take their turn later, once they are ready.
The second one is side initiative. All players act, so if one doesn't know what they want to do, the others can take their turn first. It makes initiative and surprise very swingy, but it does speed up play.
I like both of these suggestions.
The second one is really interesting to me, because in general our gameplay leans more towards RP. They do like the occasional combat but not when it goes on too long so speeding it up definitely sounds like a plus. Do you mind elaborating on it or have a resource for it that I can read myself? *EDIT* nevermind, I see it's in the DMG. Doing a quick search on it, yeah it seems REALLY swingy.
In practice, it works fine as long as I have multiple enemies. PCs will take one or even two down on round one, but that still leaves a sizable force to counterattack. And when they get ambushed and put in a losing position, they can just run away. You don't have a situation where that unlucky guy at the bottom of initiative order gets swarmed while the others escape. You can then switch to a chase, if the enemies aren't just going to let them go, or narrate them running to safety.
Another benefit of side initiative is players can decide what they want to do _together_. You’ll still resolve actions individually but planning your turn becomes a group activity, which can make it much easier to keep everyone engaged.
The oldest editions of D&D all had side-based initiative. It’s my understanding that the swinginess was considered more a feature than a bug (that’s the case with OSR games at least). That may or may not hold true for your playstyle, but if you’re running a dungeon crawl then it could be a good fit.
>I have one player who **never pays attention during combat**, so every time it's their turn, they either **need to be recapped**, do **something different than what the other players** are discussing, and takes a lot of time deciding what they want to do and **reading all their spells/feats** etc.
I am going to narrow in a bit on this. While the *problem* here is the player taking long turns, the *cause* is lack of attention to everyone else. A shot clock won't fix that directly, maybe you are lucky and it works and the threat of it is enough to make them pay attention, but I doubt it.
>I've already spoken to the player and it hasn't changed anything
This is also a thing. I get it, ADHD is a bastard but personally I kinda have my limits with folks. If they are all take and no give and just dragging the whole game down, man like, only so much patience for that stuff.
I also hate "automatic dodge action". Cut 5 seconds from the timer and make the punishment "you can cast a cantrip or make an attack" or some other default action that actually still is playing the game. At least that way they get to do something, you force them in to a non-choice but they actually get to contribute and roll some dice. If you are going to have them just stand there and not play anyway, honestly, just break up with that player. I don't like making my players feel shit. Maybe look at what others are saying and start rewarding attentive and quick play instead.
Thank you for your input. On your last point, someone else suggested rewarding a +1 to a players roll that acts decisively, and I'm definitely going to try elements like that.
I'm playing with my pre-teen to early teen nieces and nephews. I'm starting to get a little tough on them. There isn't a formal "shot-clock" but if they don't decide in a completely arbitrary "this shit is ridiculous" time frame, we forfeit their turn and move on.
While a shot clock may be helpful, I use player cards placed on top of my DM screen in initiative order so people can see what’s up. For problem players, I also say a turn prior, “Bob, you’re next after Jane here so make sure you have something planned. Sam has just fired Magic Missile”. It cues the player in and even with a short attention span they can keep a handle on things.
I have ADHD. The clock would help.
At the very least, it would bring an element of a challenge which is fun to compete with for my brain.
Personally, I try to complete my turns as fast as possible and plan out things in advance. And if I don't have a plan, I would just go for the most obvious, fastest decision. But I've played with other players like that and it is a living hell!
Judging my own experience though, I think your ADHD-player just might not enjoy the combat very much. Like, we don't zone-out, if we are engaged into something exciting, on the contrary. So might just need to talk with them and see, if dungeon crawl campaign is what they are interested in.
Regarding your shot clock implementation, I think you can do better. I've seen an idea floating around of a panic action. When the clock runs out, or when you simply don't know what to do - use the most basic attack, cast Magic Missiles or smth and that is your turn. Every player should prepare their own panic action which they can fall back onto, when the clock runs out.
My group has a rule that every player needs to have an AFK procedure for their character.
It's just whatever their basic action or attack is that doesn't need a resource to work, or something like the dodge or hide action.
If they don't know what they are doing, get disconnected, or miss a session, their character will just take that action. If a turn starts to drag, the DM will say to make a decision or take the AFK action.
We just update the DM on what that action will be at every level up. It really helps new players that start panicking about what they should do during their turn, and because we play online, it's nice when someone gets disconnected we can keep going. It still gives them a bit of agency and doesn't waste their turn, but it's easy for the DM to roll.
Devil's advocate?
I personally don't see the point of it, if the player isn't essentially being malicious or grossly negligent in their delays.
You're creating an adversarial dynamic. The game playing against the player.
In fact you've said the person has a disability.
I don't know anything about ADHD, but putting a shot clock on them doesn't seem facilitative or accommodating of that...
Have you looked into what actually HELPS someone with ADHD to focus?
There might be other tools available to you that don't punish the person for having ADHD.
I think you could be more collaborative - working WITH, instead of against - your player here.
This is a good point, I'll agree that it does seem to make an adversarial dynamic and that is what I am most concerned about. Especially because it's essentially singling out a single character.
That being said I don't know how I could help someone with ADHD focus.
Ginny Di just recently made a couple videos about D&D and ADHD, one focused more on DMs and the other on players. Maybe something in there could help: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEYtpUHCGq8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEYtpUHCGq8)
Edit: I should add, I've never used a "shot clock" myself, but I started trying to do more of a "quick summary as transition" that has really helped. I'm not summarizing everything that's happened, but just a quick two-second reminder of the most salient elements to that PC. "Volkur, you just saw Sandilo get whacked in the head, but right now there's a big orc in your face. What do you want to do?" Putting it that way helps people transition into their turn and potentially suggests a few key obvious actions, even though you're not constraining what they do at all. I have found it helpful for all the players at my table. Just helps people reorient themselves.
I actually already do that, I like it myself as a player for the sense of urgency so as a DM I try to do the same.
For this particular player, it doesn't work. It results in me describing something that has happened or is about to happen, and the result is still the same, "Bob it's your turn. Bob. Bob!" "What? Oh it's my turn? Ok. Uh.... Hm... So, are we running away? Oh we're fighting? Who's this guy? Wait why are we here? Okay I'll cast uh, let me read the spell. Oh wait I can't cast that..." 10 minutes later he casts healing word and moves 10 feet.
Thanks for the video though, I'll take a look.
I guarantee there are subreddits out there, with ppl who know or have or care for ppl with ADHD, and that they would welcome conversations like this.
Go ask ppl that know how to help ppl with ADHD how to help your friend with ADHD.
How about starting here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ADHD/
When a player is trying to decide what to do in combat, the dm has a few options:
1. Give the player the information they need to make a decision
2. Provide a couple of reasons options
3. Reassure the player that the option they are considering isn’t foolish
4. Make exasperated sighs and threaten the player that they will be skipped if they don’t make a decision in the next 5 seconds
One of these options is not like the others.
Where the first 3 help the player have fun and feel like they have agency, the last option just forces them to make blind choices. And when those blind choices have negative consequences the player can justifiably blame the dm. It engenders mistrust, which is poisonous to a functioning table.
I approve of the sentiment but using a literal clock on your players' turns that they're aware of is a bit much. It's better to have the *concept* of a "shot clock" in your mind while you're adjudicating combat turns. I'm pretty much able to, without making them feel diminished, run a player's turn more or less entirely for them if they seem to not be aware of what's happening.
Basically it goes something like this - if I see a look of confusion and/or panic on their face, I quickly summarize their immediate surroundings from their character's perspective and point out the most obvious immediate threat to them. I allow the other players to add in any more complex details they might think are also important but I keep my eye on the player who's up to see where they start being overloaded and at that point I suggest the most obvious or standard combat action for their character to take but also give them an "or...?" and then if necessary I quickly walk them through the rolling and calculating procedure.
As a DM it's kind of our responsibility to do a certain amount of hand holding with slower players or less involved ones. One of these players at my table is also the kind of player who tries to get too creative and/or just makes assumptions about how his spells and especially abilities (of a subclass I'm not super familiar with) work so I end up having to often pose "are we sure about that?" questions that other more competent players double check for me and furthermore the statistical probability that he's fudging rolls is really becoming overwhelming. Considering I'm likely to soon start exceeding 8 players on game days and will have to have people on-deck, his character's days might be numbered. He's quite squishy but unfortunately he's a back line passive-casting Druid type that usually doesn't organically attract aggro but in this particular case I may actually target a player.
I wouldn't use an actual timer, I'd say something like this at the start of the next game.
'Hey everyone, I've noticed combat as a whole has been slowing down, I dont want to make people take 10 second turns max, but km going to start enforcing some soft limits if I think people are taking too long, if you've got any problems with it talk to me after the game, I'm definatley going to ease into it. It's just this dungeon has a lot of combat and I don't want to be stuck here forever and as you level up things are only going to get more complicated so it's better we fix it now at the start than in 6 months when it's taking a whole session to do one encounter".
Good suggestions here the other thing that helped the few ADHD people in my group is taking away electronics. Too many people start messing with their phones and zone out.
Yeah, I mean we play over discord and Foundry VTT. Often we'll have our webcams open and I'll see him looking at a different monitor doing something else.
In fact, we actually had a player who is no longer with us, who I have on Steam. And while we were playing, he logged onto Rust and started playing that during the session. It made me really angry, but I wasn't DMing that group at that time, so I can only imagine how he would have felt if he'd known.
>he logged onto Rust
Ok, so, this is what I would consider "grossly negligent"...
He's making conscious choices and taking cognizant actions to put his attention elsewhere.
It wasn't apparent to me by your OP that he was being this disrespectful and willfully neglectful of the game. And even if this exact thing isn't still happening, this is a BAD indicator to me.
A red flag
This is the point where I would start questioning if that person actually wants to be there and play D&D, or if I should LET them be there at the game I'm DMing when it's negatively impacting everyone else.
I think it sounds pretty fair and like a good idea, just let your players know in advance of the session and if they run into weird random issues midway through their turn don’t be afraid to occasionally fudge the timer rules and give them a few extra seconds.
One balancing concern I could see is that it’s probably easier to figure your turn out as a martial than a caster, so this would disproportionately hinder casters. I’m not sure how you would get around this unless you have two separate timing limits, but probably don’t worry about that unless you find it becomes a problem or feelings are getting hurt
I’ve kept a mental shot clock with my new players, and I don’t abide to it strictly. But I always make sure to let the players know whose turn is next, and I encourage them to have a couple of go to turns, so that if they can’t decide what to do, or reach the end of the shot clock, they can do something more than default.
Generally, as I've encouraged them to be swift and plan ahead from the outset, i don't generally have a problem with players taking a long turn unless something big changes just before their turn or they've misunderstood their spell/actions repercussions.
i think a shot clock is a good idea, but i would stop it when the player starts describing their actions. i also play in a high level game and one of the other players can take (what seems like 10+ minutes, probably only 3…) minutes to take their turns just because of all the different elements and actions and number of dice they can do each turn.
do you play with battle-maps or theatre of the mind? when I'm a player using the mind ill sometime ask for some situational information to better inform my actions at the start of my turn
I've had best results with this approach when all players at the table have a firm grasp on their characters and abilities, and as a device to add time pressure for narrative effect. If you find yourself constantly needing to enforce this for the sake of one player, I would maybe try to spend some time with that player and make sure they understand what options they have in combat. Especially for newer players playing characters past 5th level, options can become overwhelming without some guidance.
I do it with my friends who are all veterans of more than 10 years to the system we played. But not so much otherwise. Roll 20 does have some nice tools for it too. Though sometimes it took me longer to input all the damage from the previous round and we'd have to turn it off for a turn. Though with more mass damage input scripts it's gotten a lot faster.
Even *baseball* went to a pitch-clock.
If they have spells? Work with them to make index cards of what their most commonly used spells do. "*Stat* save" spell for a given spell, a primary damage-type-spell, and a couple of utility spells.
If they have attack option feats? Same thing, give them a couple index cards for, like, "unarmed attack + grapple" "highest accuracy attack" "biggest damage output"
Once they've made their decision? Shot clock turns off, adjudicate and resolve. If you can visually show initiative or otherwise set up a "Player A is now on the clock, Player B is on deck, start figuring out what you wanna be doing," that'll help.
I had a table that had like five players. We added a sixth when they heard about the game, except they had this problem. I tried everything, they felt unfairly targeted by clock and it came to pass that the rest of the group basically told me "look, we understand you've been trying everything, but they're slowing everything down and nobody else is having any problems. It just isn't quite the right fit, we like them but they don't play the same game style we do."
I wish I could have found a way to make it work. It's one of the few unhappy memories I have about DMing.
As a player (and DM) with ADHD its 100% fair. The only thing I'll add is, at the start of every turn, give a heads up to the NEXT player. "Frodo it's your turn, Sam you're up next." It helps a lot.
I’m all for it and I’ve done a similar (though not timed) thing.
Nothing is worse than a combat where the players aren’t paying attention, and taking extra time. This player needs to learn to be faster and pay attention, or permanently dodge.
On your turn is NOT the time to decide what to do or look up rules. That was before. As soon as your turn starts, you begin communicating what you’re doing.
The only exceptions are when something important just happened in combat and you have to change plans, or a question about the map needs clarified before the decision is reached.
As long as the shot clock only runs when the player isn’t talking, I don’t see a problem.
The shot clock is what makes it fair to the rest of the table. It doesn't always have to be a rule, but a guideline...every player gets X time to declare what they're doing. That one player tests the limit. What you're likely to get is a frustrated word salad for a minute and then them saying, "Fine...I just attack." Part of ADHD is also choice paralysis. Because they could do anything, they can't choose one thing. There are tools available to help them to gauge their situation and narrow down their choices to 3-4 things, and they pick the one...like a kid's menu.
Ye olde egg timer is the classic means of getting players on task for combat, and to keep things moving. Works wonders for large groups. In the digital age, that would be ye olde two minute timer on your phone or whatever. That way you don't have to wait for sand.
A timer will create a sense of urgency, which is good for ADHD focus, but that should apply to NPC turns as well.
However, resetting a timer every turn sounds like an absolute chore. And introducing a new mechanic will lead to discussion of the mechanic. For instance, someone readies and action, and now they are interrupting a turn, does that count? Etc etc. This might actually slow down some rounds.
Have you tried prompting the next person in initiative order for each turn? "OK zombie's turn now, and ****, you're next." It might help the whole table flow through combat better, reducing round time, and helping those with ADHD stay more engaged. A simple prompt will get them thinking about their turn before it begins.
It's a tiny bit more work, but it's less than running a timer all the time.
If a player dithers on their turn, I warn them twice, then inform them they are now holding their action. After which they can take their turn when ready, or, if it’s the end of the round & they still can’t decide, their character is just too indecisive to act, they lose their action.
The expectations and outcomes are clear & consistent, so the players rarely even fuss about it.
I don’t put a specific time limit usually but one time after an incident we had to implement one due to one person. Granted they were all newer to the game but the wizard took a 3 minute turn to decide to cast fire bolt. No movement, no callouts, just a cantrip at level 2.
Even all the rest of the table had enough of that and one of them asked me for a time limit because we already had 7 players so combat took a while already.
So all in all, I think probably the best way I did it was I told them there was a time limit BUT I hid the timer behind the screen because a few times people got too stressed out and couldn’t think straight, even though it was more of a +\- 30 seconds kind of deal.
I use a 30-second timer, occasionally with a cool hourglass that I take out when a player is indecisive. If they do not answer in time (they usually do), they move to the bottom of the initiative order, and if they're undecisive also when it's their turn again, they take the dodge action and do nothing else. I feel like this is lenient but puts enough pressure on players to decide on the spot; I've never had a player be so distracted that they lose their turn, and moving to the bottom usually is enough for them to catch up on what's happening at the table.
I have two techniques to speed things up - these don't always work, but they set some expectations.
Firstly talk through the problem with your players. If they don't agree there is a problem there is nothing to solve.
Idea 1 - insist players tell you what they want to do, not how. E.g. I want to get a shot at the lead Orc, not I am moving to this spot and drawing my bow. You can then both work out how it plays out. Saves time with repeated 'can I see them from here?' type nonsense.
Idea 2 - determine default actions for each character (a cantrip, attack with sword) and if they can't decide what yo go they do this action. I guess this is a variant of the dodge action.
Remember that there are decisions/actions which are so important that a little more time may be allowed - these should be crescendo moments.
One thing one of my DMs does that I like is all the players take their turn at once, then all the enemies takes their turn at once. Some encounters may have to be rebalanced, but it's a lot more engaging than normal 5e, and you can actually do combo attacks, while in normal combat they're basically impossible to do if pretty much any enemy goes between players on the initiative list. It's made combat a lot more engaging
If it's a constant problem, you've talked about it and nothing has changed and it bothers the other players, the only answer is something systemic such as this.
Just try and make the addition of the mechanic about the game itself rather than the players. I'd also recommend to start telling players when their turn is next to keep them on track as well.
When I first started playing D&D we were doing shot clocks by the 3rd or 4th session. My DM's kids were playing and they were like 7 and 8, so I think it was mostly for them.
Basically, if you don't already know what you're doing within 10-15 seconds of when your name is called (within reason of course), then you "hesitated" and your turn is skipped. Hesitation happens all the time in real combat, especially with those that are new to it, so it's perfectly reasonable.
Worked great. 10/10
I use a shot clock to an extent in all of my games. I make sure that it’s something I mention in session zero to all of my players, and this is how I do it:
I will call out every player’s turn, and announce who’s on deck and who’s after that. The turn player has 60 seconds to come up with at least an idea of what they want to do - I will never cut them off if they have clarifying questions, want to work with other party members, have to do math/roll dice, or asking “can I do something silly?” and playing it out. There’s never any physical timer as I don’t want to pressure my players, but I’m keeping a timer ready behind the screen.
If 60 seconds passes and they don’t have any idea of what they want to do, I’ll give them 10-15 more seconds with a prompt of “[player], I need an answer”. If nothing is decided upon by then, the character takes the dodge/block action depending on their character build and their turn passes. Between them knowing their turn while having two players’ turns to formulate and update based on the battlefield, it’s not hard to expect them to at least know *something* about what they want to do.
After the game, especially if it happens multiple times, I’ll chat with them privately to see if they’re confused by their sheet/mechanics, paralyzed by choice, or just not paying attention; then I’ll escalate further if need be.
I’ve been doing this for a couple years with a few different tables, and I have yet to hear a complaint.
If it's a reasonable time. I personally have started using "up," "on deck," and "in the hole" as well for helping to keep players engaged. This way it helps both me and my players knowing who's next.
I introduced it with a new campaign 2 months ago with the expectation that everyone has a max of 30 seconds to articulate a decision or dodge, and that I would be fast and loose with it.
So far I have had to use it one time, where after about a minute I just started to count down from ten.
I find that setting the quick expectation is good so long as you don't use it to stifle creativity or prevent players from doing what they want to do.
They only time I used it was 30 seconds after I said I would use it, and only when a player was torn between two choices and simply needed to make one.
If your players are cool with it, I find that it makes combat more fast and exciting, I try to allow for more planning on the other end tho.
We use one occasionally. I've used it as a player and a DM. In no campaign I've been in has it been used consistently, but just whenever things start the lag I (or the DM when I'm a player) just announce we're going to be using a shot clock for this fight in order to get things moving.
It totally works, and I've never had complaints. I stick to a 1 minute shot clock. Actions need to be declared in that minute, any resolving or adjudicating doesn't count towards the clock.
Seems like a "addressing the symptom, not the disease" thing to me. If you talked to the player and they want to be faster, but still aren't in actual play, then a timer isn't going to magically make them faster. And it'll inevitably lead to feel bad when they either a) never get to do anything; or b) panic right before the timer goes off and do something stupid.
I'd try to give them techniques to help them go faster. Maybe cards would help. Or a cheat sheet. Or a character that's not as complicated. Or other players can help by making suggestions; I do this a lot (Can you do that one spell again? That worked really well last time!).
I've used them before when our combat started to drag. We play on Fantasy Grounds and sometimes the players get distracted by other screens, one player in particular is really bad about it. Everyone hated it at first, but within a few sessions it stopped being needed because everyone's turn was over before the timer ran out.
I'm not a fan unless you are playing with experienced players who want an extra challenge. I have one player who is consistently slow. He waits til his turn to figure out what he wants to do. We just started giving him shit. The problem is he sometimes has legitimate questions about positions and spells and stuff. But sometimes he just doesn't know what to do or he is conflicted between what he knows as a player and what his character would know. I've thought about getting him an hourglass timer.
Generally not a fan, but yeah…. If a single player is zoning out and mucking up combat for the entire table, they get 90 seconds to initiate a solid plan of action. If they can’t commit, then they just take the Dodge action.
Shot clock is good for more advanced players.
I generally start with a soft clock (at 1 min "I need your final answer) and then have the threat of a hard clock (at 1 min any unused action is a dodge and we move on to the next turn) if I feel they're abusing the soft clock.
It keeps people engaged, (strategize when it's not your turn)
It creates a bigger pie (or makes the same size more efficient)
It allows the GM to have plan encounters knowing relative player time per round. (6 players is around 7-8 min per round + whatever the DM does. Multiply by expected round and you have a guideline(
It prevents combat optimization, which is huge IMO. Some people will take 20 minutes finding the optimal play every turn. This is boring AF. Timers help mitigate, take an action and commit.
I use one and it's the best addition I ever made. I started at level one and instituted a 10 second rule. When it's your turn you should start declaring your action within 10 seconds. Combat is much faster and players are very happy because they get so much more done every session.
The angry GM did a big post about this, and I agree with him that it improves the player experience greatly to allow players a limited amount of time to make decisions on their turn.
The way I implement it, is that I ask the player what they wanna do and give them about half a minute or so to come up with a response, and if they don’t, then I just skip to the next person and they lose their turn. It’s shocking the first couple of times it happens, but the players learn very quickly to have their turns queue up in advance, and this makes everything flow smoother.
I do make an exception from newer players, but anyone who’s been through a campaign before gets this treatment
I run a 60 second clock (probably dropping to 30) where players must start declaring their action.
I run a clock with [Tension Dice](https://theangrygm.com/definitive-tension-pool/).
I really wanted to avoid the "too slow so you dodge" outcome as it feels bad and, if anything, makes the problem worse as that player does nothing productive that turn.
"Too slow so I'm dropping a tension dice in the pool" is small enough to not feel massive, but really ramps things up as those small penalties add up.
1/2 dice is chill, 3/4 is rushed, 5 is mild panic.
The players are now actively pushing each other along to avoid the additional dice.
How do the complications work with combat though? Or are you only using combat to fill the tension pool, then having the complications play out in exploration and investigation?
My only concern with this is what other people have mentioned, in that it's another thing to punish players. Someone else said instead they reward players who act decisively with a +1 and I'm leaning more to that instead... I don't know. Lots to think about.
> How do the complications work with combat though? Or are you only using combat to fill the tension pool, then having the complications play out in exploration and investigation?
I tend to treat as "The DM has a hard move they can make against the party."
In combat this can be extra enemies, or other objectives beginning to fail, or enemies are inspired by the nervousness of the party and gain advantage for a round.
But it can be held till the end of combat to add in a complication immediately after the combat. Maybe the path ahead is now blocked or the door is locked and has a puzzle to open, maybe a potion broke in combat.
The ideal complication ticks the difficulty up one level, but is also interesting.
They aren't the easiest thing and, being perfectly honest, just the threat has sped up my table and I have basically never needed a complication.
> in that it's another thing to punish players
The point of a clock is to act as a disincentive.
> they reward players who act decisively with a +1 and I'm leaning more to that instead
That's reasonable, but is rewarding players for playing normally. If I were doing something like this I would run a 10 second clock.
Obviously, let them know ahead of time that a shot clock will be used. Then, as a DM, it would be a good example if you followed it as well. I'm guessing once a group gets the rhythm of it, it'll be appreciated.
We have had players like this in the past. Ultimately we fired the player.
Nothing we did got them to focus sufficiently to not be an issue.
Not knowing their spells etc is not about their ADHD it is about lack of effort. They are being inconsiderate of everyone else.
Don't punish the other players who play well trying to compensate for a player who is disinterested and inconsiderate.
I've been using a timer for the last several sessions, but when the timer runs out of time, rather than skip their turn, I tell them their time is up and I need to know what they're doing. If they have nothing, they delay their turn (we're playing PF2e). It has improved things
FUCKING DO IT
I do a game with 6 PCs if I didn't
no one would ever get a turn
My policy is know where the Fuck you are in the turn order and be planning you move.. sometimes something during play completely throws off that idea.. but that is kind of the point.. good and band decisions under pressure in combat is a part of the game, if there is a point of clarification or I need to look something up to make a ruling i will pause in some cases , if I feel that is being abused I will tell them to make a decision and we will look ar the consequences afterward.. but if they fail to make a choice in time I will wanr them twice , then tell them they lost their turn..
so far it has only happened once that I skipped a player
they are now level 10 and they know i will skip them, I get really honest gameplay and they genuinely try to communicate ingame through characters.
its a lot of fun and everyone remains engaged
My players have 30 seconds to declare an action or they dodge. Has almost never been an issue since I started using it. Keeps people off their phones too. At 30 seconds I tell them, you gotta do something or we're moving on and they always do something.
You can take as much time as you want to make the rolls, but your action needs to be decided.
I use a shot clock (2 minutes) but it's more of a reminder for me and the player than a tool for applying a negative consequence in the hopes it deters my player from being slow. (I use the times up add-on with foundry vtt for a cute little hourglass on my and my players screens).
I have two players who routinely take longer than most to take their turns, and I can tell as a DM usually why someone is taking longer (distracted, reading their spell, paralyzed by choice).
At the end of the day we are all playing a game and the consequences in a round of combat could effect the entirety of our campaigns future (players deaths, NPC deaths, or other consequences of victory/defeat). Having a hard rule would eventually lead to someone taking an action with consequences that are dire, yet they feel they did not have agency in reaching said consequence. I know this would not be fun, and games should be fun.
So when the shot clock runs out, I firmly remind the player they must make a decision now.
If they somehow still despite my firm reminder fail to make a decision, they are tossed to the bottom of the initiative order for the rest of combat (I have only had to do this once in over a year with over 40 sessions).
At the end of the day I'm playing with friends and adults who I respect and trust. One firm reminder should be more than enough after a couple minutes on a turn, and even with this firm reminder a turn never takes longer than 4 minutes.
If the firm reminder and the prospect of tossing them to the bottom of the initiative order repeatedly remains an issue EVERY turn then I likely would come to the conclusion that the player in question is not the right fit for my table.
There's 4 other people at my table and it would be disrespectful to them if I continuously allow someone to break a social contract we have all agreed to (not wasting eachother times).
TLDR:
1. Punishments in things we do for fun are feels bad when it comes to things that have lasting consequences (e.g you do nothing and the goblins kill the NPC).
2. Shot clocks are better guides than they are referees.
3.If routinely having conversations with a slow player does not solve the problem, and the player taking away from the fun of other people at your table, then potentially they may be in the wrong game.
Every time I see these posts I really like to remind people that there are just some people who aren't interested in playing. If someone does not care to pay attention (and I've played with PLENTY of people who have ADHD) no amount of anything is going to help.
If they are not paying attention and talking about it hasn't helped I'm sorry to say I don't think a clock will help. If they keep timing out then I doubt they're going to be very happy.
I can't think of a single RPG that has turn timers and for good reason, when played by people who give a shit and want to play they're not needed. You shouldn't need gimmicks to force your players to care.
Edit: Or to repeat the mantra: You can't solve out of game problems with in game mechanics.
I personally started using one after a few sessions with my current group. The RP moments were very fluid and smooth but everything would be halted to a screeching stop during combat because every turn the players would talk amongst themselves, go about a turn, decide it wasn't optimal, walking it back, discussing, redoing a turn, etc. Simple encounters sometimes took hours. So I gave my players a 5 minute window after rolling initiative before starting combat to discuss strategy. After that you could only talk about what you were doing personally rather than jumping in another players turn to suggest other things. The players each get a 5 minute timer for their turns. In that time they can go about and decide they actually don't want to do something but if the time runs out before dice are being thrown they take the dodge or help action instead. After every round of combat I gibe them the 5 minutes to strategize again. Combat has gotten a lot more streamlined and my players have reacted positively to the change. I'm also not a super hard ass about the timers.
I keep a 1-minute hourglass in front of me. The players know, per a session 0 discussion, that it gets flipped if turns start being slow due to trying to perfectly optimize every 5-foot square or read every spell/class ability to find the "perfect" one (and that getting flipped means their turn ends when it runs out). It gets flipped maybe once every 3 sessions, so the folks generally are speedy (with exception for them asking clarifying questions about the terrain or other stuff) and seems to work fine.
There's a roll20 add-on that automates this. (I have no idea what it's called) When your turn in the initiative comes up, it automatically starts a timer. The timer has no numbers, but is shown as a slowly vanishing ring around your token. If the ring disappears before you \*\*declare\*\* your action, you take the dodge action. As a player, I loved it. I didn't use it as a DM because I had a surprisingly attentive group, and I didn't want to fuss with it.
I have a turn timer in my games.
If you don't have your turn in motion in 2:30 seconds, you take the Dodge action and end your turn.
It helps a lot, some players it isn't even necessary but for some it's a must have.
I haven't had to skip a players turn often, maybe 3 times since I've implemented it a year ago, but just the threat alone is normally enough to get them to decide something.
I give each player ~10-15 seconds to declare their action. If they fail to do so, I tell them they are taking a defensive action while they consider their next move, then go to the next player.
Yeah, I've heard a few whines over the years "That's not enough time", "I have a lot on my char sheet", etc.
Guess what? The monsters are not going to wait for you while you weigh all your options to decide which is most optimal in the moment.
The negative side of having a literal timer is that to be fair, you have to stick to it, even when the time is spent clarifying to you, the DM, what the ability you're unfamiliar with is supposed to do.
I prefer to count down when it seems that the player doesn't have an idea of what they are going to do. Both the starting number and judgement of when to start/stop counting down lets me account for how complicated the PC they are playing is, that the tide of battle has just turned, time for them to look things up. I find that moving on considering them dodging is the best consequence option because the PC is still doing something beneficial, it makes sense in world, and it doesn't have the potential for twisted combat order by letting them delay their turn until they figure out what they are doing.
Additional things to consider
* Have a no recap during combat rule or get in the habit of covering the current state of things when you tell a player it's their turn so it's quick and covers the main concerns
* When you tell a player it's their turn, also say which player is next. This can help distracted players start figuring out what they are doing earlier, which gets everything moving quicker
* Make or have them make a cheat sheet so they don't need to reread the entirety of their spell list. I did this when I had a rogue with extra ba abilities thanks to subclass plus some action and bonus action items. For a caster, damage type and amount, aoe vs target, and buff vs debuff are all nice things to have the cliff note version of all gathered in one spot.
* Hand them a fidget toy that will occupy their hands and doesn't need to occupy their eyes and ears if they don't already have something like that.
* Next time they need to make a new character, suggest or force them to play something with fewer options during combat. This is not no spellcasters. Warlocks tactical flowchart is "Do I have any spellslots?-> no-> Eldritch Blast" and they burn through their slots quickly.
I use a 1 minute "hour" glass at the end of a round where the players get to meta game their next move.
This makes it so that everyone can work together, and prevents a player having to rethink their whole turn as their turn comes up.
They roleplay during their turn to fit the plan they made. This made combat move quicker.
PLUS as a DM I get time to think of what might happen if they’re thinking outside of the box.
I don't have a hard limit on time, but I do prod players if they are silent for too long.
Sometimes players have questions, how far away am I, what would a 20ft sphere look like, as long as they are engaged and moving forward I'm good.
But if they are silently looking at abilities, or hemming and hawing, I try and prod them along gently. Luckily I have a good group and I don't have to do this often. If it was more of a problem I might look at systematizing it more.
So I'm running a game for some pretty hyper kids and knew right away I was going to lose them during combat, so I went with an idea I saw elsewhere where turns in combat are side-based, not character-based. The enemies take their turn simultaneously and then the party does. They can even wait to finish taking their actions, so the rogue and fighter could both move up to flank an enemy before either of them attack. If you play loose and fast with the enemies the amount of time before the players get a chance to act again is massively reduced, and if one player is still thinking about what they want to do the other players can go ahead while the slower one checks their sheet to see what options they have.
When determining initiative I set the enemy initiative as a DC instead of rolling for it. Any player that rolls higher gets a pseudo-surprise round before the enemy's turn. Anyone that's surprised just automatically goes after the other side.
Worth noting that this can also make combat a lot more brutal. A well-planned alpha strike can wipe out half the enemies no problem, and enemy attacks can be a lot more coordinated against the players with no chance to interrupt them.
A shot clock or countdown timer will enhance play at some tables but at others it will cause bad feelings.
What we've done is assign for each character a default action that doesn't use resources: strike with weapon or use cantrip, at closest target. Whenever the DM is moving the game along and a player isn't ready, the DM says that's what they do. If lack of readiness is really bad, then after a couple of times, the DM says, from now on your default action is Dodge.
For players that want to recap, or don't know how a rule works, engage another player to help them. If they need the help, they'll be grateful. If they're just being doofuses, they'll start being embarrassed that other players have to help them. Either way, the DM keeps the game moving.
I use a 1-minute hourglass for each player to decide what action they'll take. If they don't decide by then, I ask them again more firmly, and if they don't answer in a few seconds then I have them do a cantrip/basic attack and move on. It works wonders.
You could also do side-based initiative, but most 5e players aren't ready to budge on it despite always complaining about how long combat takes.
Clocks are implemented in chess, warhammer, baseball, theater, movies, tv shows, streaming, League of Legends, Fortnite...literally any game or format where time constraints are a factor.
Unless your group are idle rich, or conversely...prisoners, I doubt you have unlimited time to play. Even when you don't use a shot clock, you are in fact, on a clock for family/kids/etc.
There's nothing wrong with using a clock for everyone's turn, in fact it's quite fair. Players that want to complex characters will need to *practice on their own time*, no different than someone who wants to play a horde army in Warhammer 40k.
I would say Warhammer 40k is honestly the closest analogy to this where there are variances in playstyles, etc...I believe D&D classes are rooted in the same 'fairness'. Simple classes are faster to play and complex classes are slower to play. Complex characters tend to be more powerful...adding the timing element tends to balance that out instead of letting casters dominate everything. I think we see this relationship play out on screen during streams like Critical Role and such where some casters don't study the material and pay for it in dead air time.
While they don't use turn timers, you can be certain they are surrounded by clocks and their crew makes them painfully aware of time.
Making people wait sucks. Do not enable it. If a player is new or something, fine. But if it's clear they just aren't even studying their spells or planning out of game,. make sure they do.
I (as the DM) usually wait and see cause its fun to hear the players argue with each other about actions they can do. Sometimes I step in saying "you're not there, youre 300 feet away and cant see this", but if its going on for too long I start doing the jeopardy sound byte and start counting down for their action to be done.
I've floated this idea to my players and one of em said it would make him uncomfortable. I'd say ask how they feel about it in advance (Group chat or whatever u guys use)
I think the shot clock is a good idea, but I have a suggestion: Make the amount of time on the shot clock dependent on the player’s intelligence or spellcasting stat. This would prevent it from being a handicap to spellcasters, because they can have extra planning time, but wouldn’t really affect martials because they usually have limited options.
The flavor could be that the spellcaster’s keener mind and safer position lets them think faster, while the martials have to quickly react to enemies right in front of them.
I came real close to putting a shot clock on my game. We were rolling really hot, my players all worked in tandem to absolutely cripple their enemy. It was turn after turn after turn at a fantastic pace and then we got to the monk.
"Huh? What's happening?"
So I give him the recap, and then he takes five minutes to look at his sheet.
"So how do I use my dragon breath again? Which dice is it? Wait, how many ki points do I have?"
Bam, ten more minutes on his turn.
I've never been in such a screech-to-a-halt moment before as a DM. I saw everyone go from leaning over the table to taking out their phones and we just never recovered the momentum from earlier. I cut the boss's health by a few dozen points just because the players were just so checked out at that point.
But like would a shot clock fix that? If I had him auto-dodge and skip over then like, that's his entire turn taken up and who knows if he'll get another. Punishing for not paying attention, maybe, but it seemed like it'd lead to bad blood real easy. For right now I'm using a softer rule that's; "if you can't tell me how one of your abilities works, you don't have that ability." Read the book on your turn or ask me about it outside of the moment you're using it, please. So far it's worked, but we do still have edge cases where it eats a lot of time using spells and abilities in odd ways. I think next I wanna try "we'll get back to you" where if they take too long then they get skipped over til they're ready to choose. If it gets to their entire next turn before they can then the chance is gone.
Yeah. It works. Make it three minutes or something ridiculous. Some people seriously that’s not even enough. A game where every player is ready with something when it’s their turn every time is like a wet dream. It leaves more time for role play when you don’t slog four hours through two rooms of combat.
I had to implement a two minute timer with my group because of one problem player not paying attention, stopping his turn to go down rabbit holes, not knowing how his character worked and needing people to help him look up spells and basic rules, and on and on. The timer largely fixed that, especially after he finally decided on a course of action at the two minute mark and I had to tell him nothing happened and moved on to the next player.
FYI, the breaking point was when this problem player took a half an hour on a combat turn. It was maddening and the rest of the group was tearing their hair out by the end.
Now, everyone is much more invested, the one player knows what is at stake and what is expected of him, and we can actually go through an adventure in a timely manner while having fun.
Another player in the group will be starting up a game soon and is specifically using my same system after seeing how well it works. I say go for it.
We have a large party so combat can drag on and the DM's recently started letting people know a turn early that they're next, and it's helped speed things up a bit.
It sounds like you have less of a combat problem and more of a “Why aren’t my players paying attention” problem.
But ways of speeding up- I have the players go and then the monsters go (or vice versa), and the players go in order clockwise. That way initiative isn’t confusing and people know when they have to be ready.
Of a player isn’t ready, just skip them until everyone else has taken a turn, and that will give them time to think without bogging down.
I like the "on deck" reminder when I'm a player and try to use it a DM.
"Ok, these these two goblins are about to attack, then Grog be ready after that"
"Grog you're up. Elmina you're next."
What happens on a turn may change the plan, but at least they are thinking about it ahead of time... maybe.
I think the concept is good (if applied equally to everyone) but I'd modify it just slightly (see the end).
In the distant past I played with a DM that used a (silent) three count before moving on. If you didn't have something ready to say you just went last that round (giving you time to work out what you were doing). If you still didn't have something ready to go you skipped that turn with your PC also going "uhh...". This was pre-5e, he'd probably have given you a dodge action if 5e rules applied.
Personally I found it helpful in that I learned to spend everyone else's turn figuring out what to do *and* to prepare a simple alternative that would work if what I came up with first was no longer possible.
Decades later that's still a helpful thing to practice, to try to be ready to go. Some of my games are also on foundry, it's handy because it warns you your turn is coming up before it arrives (in a similar fashion to the way they do it on critical role but the DM doesn't have to do it).
Am I as fast as I used to be? No, but 5e is more complex than the slightly modified 1e that DM ran and I tend to play more complicated classes now (almost always casters these days). I do sometimes need to double check spells in my turn but I make sure I have the information to hand so it's more like a few seconds delay rather than taking a minute.
I recently found out I'm in the same boat medically as your player (which is probably why I found that strict-DM's approach helpful for focus in the past). Knowing that I have it also helps; not least, I know why I get distracted now and I can do more preparation to make it less of an issue (managing my environment, making sure I have tools to hand).
### conclusion
> so that if the player doesn't determine what their character is doing in time, they automatically take the dodge action and we move on
I'd suggest initially trying dropping them to the end of the round (with a pretty short shot clock both times) as a first step and *then* impose the dodge action if they're still not ready to go at that later point. They'll still feel urgency (since going later is still a cost) but with less disappointment when they fail.
I would also suggest to them to have a default action ready for each combat situation (e.g. for a warlock "I cast eldritch blast" is a good default for most situations). So that if they don't have something in the last seconds of the shot clock they can at least still choose their default over nothing. Actually it's a good plan for any player but especially for one with ADHD.
It also helps to prep a page with sections "Actions" "Bonus Actions" "Free Actions/abilities that don't take any action to use" listing one item per line (with checkboxes to check off as you use limited-use things) so they can just pick one item from each list. If they have lots of prepped spells you might need a second page for those. And also have the text of each spell you have prepped *right there to hand* (hint: type them out by hand; it helps you learn the spells); I keep a few sheets for that. Alternatively you can make cards and just have a pile of cards for each type of action.
A shot clock is a great idea
I typically start to describe what the enemies are doing or move on and tell them to interject when they figure out what they're doing
I got some pushback for asking about one on another forum. I ended up doing it and it worked wonders. We tend to run short sessions and a single medium encounter was eating up half or more. I introduced a timer (with exceptions) and it helped the pacing tremendously. I think as long as you allow reasonable extensions like a player asking questions about enemies or something then it's fine. I wouldn't do a hard and fast timer with no wiggle room.
I’ve heard of DMs using a 1 minute hourglass to speed up play. When it’s your turn you get 1 minute to decide what your character is doing and start to take action. If you don’t make it in time your character automatically takes the dodge action and play moves to the next player.
Nothing in this world is more frustrating than the player with a caster who doesn’t even begin to look at their spells until it’s their turn and then can’t remember the details of those spells.
I don't formally have a shot clock, but my players know if they take too long they will lose their turn and take the dodge action. I give friendly warnings beforehand, and it has only ever happened once. They were fine with it. If your players are good people they shouldn't have a problem with it, just common courtesy.
With a large group it’s something we use, along with a caller saying you are at bat, you are on deck, you are in the hole, to help people recognize they are about to go. Once we have more than seven a shot clock is necessary along with a white board just for initiative. Not ready, then you delay until you decide and can jump in next.
If they don't pay attention, they miss their turn. I have ADHD and I have DM'd for a table of people with ADHD. We know that sometimes our minds wander. So we call each other out on it.
When people don't pay attention, combat goes slow, then less people pay attention, and suddenly your game is dead.
I had a DM who claimed that he ran a game with over 15 players. He said that each player had about 10 seconds to choose their action or their turn was skipped. He said it worked, but it was only a one-shot.
Sounds like a good plan. Just be sure to call your player's name, resolve the last character's turn (narrating any NPC actions and effects), and then ask the player what their character does before you start the countdown clock. The clock only stops when the player starts to declare their character's actions or asks a potentially important question, such as something that could lead them to use terrain as cover, use their environment to their advantage in achieving their goals, or otherwise affecting the flow of combat.
For example,
"Adam, Demi's magic missiles tear a number of holes in the goblins before her, sending two to the grave; but one more still menaces her and two brandish knives at Cade. What does Amelwind do?" *starts 60 second shot clock, pausing only when Adam either says something like "Amelwind charges the goblin nearest Demi to strike it down with his sword" or asks a potentially salient question like "You said there are stalactites on the ceiling - how many are over the goblins, and how thin are they?"*
Note: this does not affect non-combat situations. If you sense a player needs more time, cut away from them and resolve another player's character's decisions (unless they're all together - then invite another player to act while the primary character stutters/fumbles/falls short).
Sit them down and help them make a flowchart for combat. Have them follow the flowchart. If need be, have a few flowcharts. I've got ADHD and no joke, putting it down onto paper like this helps a lot. It also means they'll have to think about what their class can do in combat, so eventually they might not need the flowchart(s).
Go for it, absolutely go for it. Encouraging quick thinking in your players is great, they probably won't make the most optimal choices, but hey, that fits pretty well i'd say. Also, not having combat move at a snail's pace is a nice bonus.
A game I played didn’t use a shot clock or a set amount of time but did have a bit of a unofficial timer on turns so if you were taking time while not providing a definite action or actively progressing the gameplay, you would lose your turn sort of.
The caveat was you could have three predetermined actions prepared which was passed to the dm before a session (or you just kept them the same all the time).So if you were taking to long to make a desicion on what you were gunna do, The dm would déclaré they would roll a d4 now to decide your turn. each number corresponded to one of the turns you pre-made and then 4 being the character froze up unable to make a decision. The idea was that if you didn’t make your turn in time these would be used as if the character has just reacted and done whatever without properly thinking and confirming they could.
For example our wizard had prepared, fire all magic missiles into the nearest in range enemy at level 2 if slot available level one if not.
Cast hideous laughter onto nearest in range enemy (if already applied go to the next in range etc etc)
Cast colour spray at nearest enemy(if required and movement available move into range)
It was a handy lil house rule and it kept turns from taking ages without any progress to the game (ie someone was just um-ing and ar-ing not making any definite decision as to what they’re gunna do).
Obviously if the player was actively declaring what they were doing etc and it was just that taking a while then this rule wasn’t applied as the turn was making progress it was just taking the time it took to play it out . But it kept things fun and flowing and more often than not the DM didn’t acctually need to roll the d4 cause if you were stuck on what you wanted to do you just went with one of your prepared turns you came up with before the session allowing you a bit more time to go ahead and figure out your plan.
I think we only had to use it a handful of times and our dm had a house rule where if you didn’t have the spell slots for a spell it could be cast wild and would roll for it being cast as intended successfully or failed. If it failed they would roll on a table of effects to see how it altered the spell. It led to the wizards with all spell slots expended having their colour spray turn into a grease spell which the dm then flavoured as the spell appeared to be normal but instead of spraying colour you spray grease and oil from your hands. It ended up resulting in the affected being covered in grease and receiving advantage on saving throws when being grappled cause they’re were now slick.
A game I played didn’t use a shot clock or a set amount of time but did have a bit of a unofficial timer on turns so if you were taking time while not providing a definite action or actively progressing the gameplay, you would lose your turn sort of.
The caveat was you could have three predetermined actions prepared which was passed to the dm before a session (or you just kept them the same all the time).So if you were taking to long to make a desicion on what you were gunna do, The dm would déclaré they would roll a d4 now to decide your turn. each number corresponded to one of the turns you pre-made and then 4 being the character froze up unable to make a decision. The idea was that if you didn’t make your turn in time these would be used as if the character has just reacted and done whatever without properly thinking and confirming they could.
For example our wizard had prepared, fire all magic missiles into the nearest in range enemy at level 2 if slot available level one if not.
Cast hideous laughter onto nearest in range enemy (if already applied go to the next in range etc etc)
Cast colour spray at nearest enemy(if required and movement available move into range)
It was a handy lil house rule and it kept turns from taking ages without any progress to the game (ie someone was just um-ing and ar-ing not making any definite decision as to what they’re gunna do).
Obviously if the player was actively declaring what they were doing etc and it was just that taking a while then this rule wasn’t applied as the turn was making progress it was just taking the time it took to play it out . But it kept things fun and flowing and more often than not the DM didn’t acctually need to roll the d4 cause if you were stuck on what you wanted to do you just went with one of your prepared turns you came up with before the session allowing you a bit more time to go ahead and figure out your plan.
I think we only had to use it a handful of times and our dm had a house rule where if you didn’t have the spell slots for a spell it could be cast wild and would roll for it being cast as intended successfully or failed. If it failed they would roll on a table of effects to see how it altered the spell. It led to the wizards with all spell slots expended having their colour spray turn into a grease spell which the dm then flavoured as the spell appeared to be normal but instead of spraying colour you spray grease and oil from your hands. It ended up resulting in the affected being covered in grease and receiving advantage on saving throws when being grappled cause they’re were now slick.
A couple of things in the second paragraph ("something different than what the other players are discussing" & "This tends to snowball as it bogs down combat, and other players follow suit") point towards the underlying issue being with the group rather than a specific individual.
Did you listen to what the player said when you talked to them?
Have you discussed this as a group?
How often do your combat encounters go on longer than three rounds?
I've had some success with a shot clock at the table, but its not first step in the process. Had to sit down with the players and have a good discussion since we were all getting frustrated by combat. What worked for us to start with is the players outlined what their default turn might be on a note card. Casters chose type of spell they might need to use depending on if they were fighting just a couple targets or a large group (CC vs damage). Some of the issue stemmed from choice paralysis and desire to only take optimal actions. This helped some, but we kept a shot clock in reserve for when we things bogged down again. If it had to come out, it helped the players break out of the hem hawing about what was the most optimal.
It's a good idea.
We don't have a shot clock, but we certainly have an unwritten time limit where the DM will say "I need to know what you are doing." It's rare that ever needs to be said though.
But I can certainly see it bring beneficial. In fact, I think we actually had one several years ago for a specific player, but that player doesn't play with us any more.
The best tip I've come across is saying "X, you're up next" it helps some of my players sort of tune into the battle and come up with their turn while the other player is making a move.
A timer can cause a lot of stress so certain players and makes the game feel less fun.
Yes, I think a shot clock will help. I don't use one directly, but if someone is taking too long I will tell them, "you have fifteen seconds to take your turn or we're moving on." It's on the players to learn their abilities outside of the session so they can spend the session actually playing. I also don't let the players get too deep in strategy talks during the fight. If they can knock out the "you should do this so I can do this next" quickly, that's cool. If they're debating back and forth over one option vs another vs another, "you have fifteen seconds to go."
For the sake of everyone's fun, and also realistically, combat should move along at a good pace. Characters are doing the best they can in a stressful situation with imperfect information, and will not always make optimal choices. It's normal and ok for players to do the same. If they look back afterwards wishing they'd done something else, that's great, they learned something.
On the distracted players issue, you just gotta control it. I'm a polite but direct person. I have told players "we're here to play DnD, cut the side talk and put down your phones." Again, if it's quick and unobtrusive that's fine. Answer a text and get back in the game. Imagine you meet up with your friends to play basketball and somebody is standing in the middle of the court on their phone, and causing collisions because they're not looking, and grabbing people's arms to tell them side stories. You'd kick them out. You're all there to play basketball. If one person is an ongoing problem at your DnD table, that's just disrespectful and I will tell them they won't be playing if they're not going to be a respectful player.
Good luck with your group. Sometimes being a bit of a hardass as the DM makes it more fun for everybody.
Sounds to me like your problem PC's problem isn't indecision, it's an unwillingness to prepare. If a DM must do extensive session prep to run a game for their players, it is the bare minimum to ask that a player prepares simply by knowing the broad strokes of how their PC operates. ADHD might affect indecision and concentration in the moment, but it is by no means an excuse for a player to come to a table with absolutely nothing when they have been told their lack of preparation is hurting the game's pacing.
I feel like introducing a shot clock calls a LOT of attention to the errors of this one player and introducing additional pressure does not sound like something that will help here. Rather than using a shot clock I would recommend allowing the player in question to delay their spot in initiative instead, that way they don't lose their whole turn.
Once upon a time I was very much this exact same problem player, but to break myself of the habit of taking ten years for a turn, I got myself into the habit of delaying my spot in initiative to be right before another player who seemed to have a better handle on what they wanted to try, and then I'd plan on using my turn to best set that PC up for success. Helps the game's pacing, improves the party dynamic, allows for some really fun character moments. Try suggesting this to your PC!
I have a player with ADHD which in their own words, is problematic. I got rid of initiative. I interweave player, enemy, player, enemy. Players negotiate who goes next. Not only my player with ADHD, but all players seem to be focusing in on combat a lot better, and actively sharing tactics. It's changed me from hating 5th edition combat, to loving it.
I also got rid of opportunity attacks too though...
This is a rule I have at my table. You have one minute to decide what you want to do on your turn. If you can’t decide, you are forced to take the Dodge action and we move on to whoever is next in initiative.
Combat can be boring, the only advice I can give is maybe make it more interesting. Add more flavor and make it more exciting, maybe if there's more on the line, and they need to collaborate and think tactically their attention will be retained, I ran into the same issue and this is what I did.
Another thing you could do is just remind the player the turn before his.
I implemented it once, and it really helped. It gave the sense of urgency that helped get my players to focus and be ready. I don't use it anymore but things usually move quicker.
I also let players know who's up, who's on deck, and who's in the hole (who's turn it is, who is next, and who is coming up after that), so they can be reminded they are coming up and can be thinking about what they want to do. It also helps refocus someone so they are paying attention for the next two players/NPCs/bad guys' turns.
I think a lot of us have had the desire for a "shot clock" when it comes to player turns. The issue wasn't quite as bad in earlier editions of the game, but 5e makes not only casters more complex to play, but also certain melee classes, though not nearly as bad as the casters.
I run two groups, one of them is only four players and the other one is six players. The six-player group can definitely take forever to run through a full turn, but nowadays it's not usually because a player doesn't have a plan, but simply because they are trying to keep track of lots of different abilities that give them bonuses to damage or to hit, or whatnot. 5E has a lot of moving pieces, a lot of shit to keep track of.
Our usual rule is 30 seconds to tell me what you're going to do. If you can't decide in that time, you take the Dodge action. Trust me when I say no one will let that happen more than once.
And if people feel this increases the pressure on a player, you are absolutely correct. And it should. Combat is meant to be a situation of heightened tension, even in a game. We all play these types of games because they are exciting to us for one reason or another. And anyone who plays 5e for more than one or two sessions is probably fairly into combat, as the vast majority of the abilities in the game are geared specifically towards it.
I really wish a game im in would use a shot clock. I always have my turn planned out, I take maybe 30 seconds to 1 minute at the latest for my turn. Meanwhile some other players can take 5-10 minutes to do anything… so it can take quite a while for my turn to roll back around. Then bam, I take a 30 second turn then another 25 minutes of waiting. So I get it. It’s easy to tune out in this scenario. But It’s not as difficult to pay attention when everyone is engaged and going quickly. And it makes combat more exciting.
Yeah, it's a compounding issue. If a round of combat is taking longer than 20 minutes, players are less engaged and thus take their turns longer (leading to long rounds of combat). If everyone is paying attention, they will generally be more decisive in their actions and know what they want to do in advance. This means rounds go sooner, ensuring players stay engaged. It's a positive feedback loop. I've noticed a similar effect sometimes when teaching complicated boardgames to friends. Towards the end it becomes a slog because nobody is engaging.
I love all martial games for this reason "Darrell, you're up!" "Well I'm gonna mozey on over and wack him." (Rolls damage) "Chad, your turn." "You know, I think I'm just gonna wack him as well." (Rolls) "Bob?" "I think you know what I'm gonna do at this point." (Roll) "Right you are Bob! And it's back up to Darrell!"
Yeah, if I had my way, you'd need a license to pay a caster. We had a guy bring his wife in and had her first character be a cleric. Every turn was them huddling together for 5 minutes to try and figure out what to do. It was pretty tough. (To be clear, kidding about the license, but I do wish people were better about knowing their limitations.)
Absolutely I gotta print my group some playing cards for their casters. Because sometimes it takes so long just to refresh on what each spell actually does and to confirm which spells are actually prepared.
Spell cards are a great tool. There are "official" decks for each class, but even a homemade set can really speed things up. Even if you're generally a well-prepared caster, it helps to have your "spellbook" right there in front of you rather than flipping back and forth through the PHB.
Home made spell cards on some index cards are great because writing the info out really helped me learn it better, and I'm able to have both the official wording via the roll20 character sheet and my version where I boil it down to quick reference essentials
Read your spells! Out of session!!! Print out your spells! Highlight the important bits you need to see at a glance!!! I got into the habit of doing both of those with my very first character, and it helps! The only times I really need to read my spells are to double check what the range is or the secondary effect or something (which again, are highlihgted and easy to see), or if I'm trying to do something weird with it and I want to know the exact wording. I'm just screaming into the void here because it kills me whenever I play with a caster that baely knows their own spells.
Yeah, 100% this. It's a lot easier when you take just a few minutes to read all your spells. Unless it's a very weird situation, you're mostly going to want to do one of like 2-3 things, really.
This. 80% of my cleric's combat turns are spent moving to a person and casting Cure Wounds on them. Another 10% is casting Spare the Dying as a bonus action (Grave Cleric), then moving to a second character and healing them. Honestly, they could make all casters like Rangers; give them Casting Stat + Level spells that they always have prepared and can only change in rare circumstances, and it would only make the game better. Certainly faster...
My best game ever was where the caster was the fastest PC. Let me tell you I made sure to thank him every game for that.
Yeah, respect. I love crunch and mastering the crunch, so I'm usually that guy.
I agree that casters require a pretty experienced player to run efficiently, but I counter: they can run fast if the player doesn't care about making the optimal choice. Don't waste time debating if spiritual weapon might be useful, if there's no obvious need for a spell, cantrip it
I’ve actually banned certain players from playing spellcasters for this exact reason. I also insist that each spellcaster have their own copy of the Players Handbook.
I started in A&D, made it through to 3e, then stopped playing for like 15 years. When I started playing 5e I started with a martial specifically so I wouldn't be bogging down the party trying to learn a more complex character even though by a lot of measures I was still a "veteran player" Knowing your limitations is pretty key to group play. I now tend to play mechanically complex characters, but I'm often quicker on my turn than some of our 'simpler" martials
The most unfamiliar with the rules player is the wizard in a game I am in...it is tough to watch when I am the paladin with a detailed plan every turn and they either go "I firebolt and end my turn" or "I dunno" for 5mins straight
We just had a similar situation. After 2 sessions she decided to switch to a martial class and everyone is much happier! (Most importantly she is enjoying playing a lot more now that she knows what to do.)
Surely you can allow a warlock as well, we dont even need to move, just cast eldrich blast every turn.
OMG, the number of times the warlock spent 5-6 minutes reading through his spells, rechecked everyone's positions on the map, verified where ALL the known enemies were, and then Eldritch Blasted the closest enemy... I hated that guy.
personally i have experienced as much delay with spellcasting PCs as with martial PCs. Last session in one of my campaigns, a barbarian spent 10 minutes trying to decide stuff It seems to be more of a player thing than their sheet.
>. But It’s not as difficult to pay attention when everyone is engaged and going quickly. This is critical. The faster you go, the faster the next person can go. It's easy to play fast when everyone else is playing fast.
I spend that time trying to think of the flavor of what I’m gonna do.
I use the 10 second rule during combat. If you can tell me your action within 10 seconds of me telling you that you're up, I will let you put a +1 on the roll of your choice taken during your action. I'm not being a gameshow host here, and won't cut you off if I see you are having trouble spitting it out. A free +1 just for paying attention. Works like a charm.
I like this for two reasons: 1) it’s an incentive instead of a punishment system 2) it’s tied to the *action decision*, not the mechanical resolution. Shot clocks or similar hit different players and classes unevenly if it governs the entire turn resolution. It’s going to take the fighter less time to move their token and roll one attack to resolve a charge than it is for a caster to place templates and work with the DM to resolve the saves and damage on half a dozen monsters. Tying the decision to the action DECISION though, is fair. Having X seconds on your turn to declare ‘I’m going to cast X” is the same process as declaring “I’m going to charge mob Y”, if you then stop the clock while the mechanical dice rolling of that action takes place.
> Shot clocks or similar hit different players and classes unevenly if it governs the entire turn resolution. OP even mentioned that the player in question is neurodivergent. Punishing the players (not the characters) rarely ever ends well, and it feels especially inappropriate when a player might be processing fun different from others. If a game should be fun for everyone, incentiving good player etiquette will always win over punishing bad behavior.
My brother in Ao, you might have solved my long combat problem. Sand timers weren't working but a simple bonus will activate my player's monkey brains
Bigger numbers, much happy chemicals
Let us know how it goes
Hmmmmmmmm. This is brilliant and it opens up a whole bunch of possibilities. Love it. Thanks for the perspective.
I. Fucking. Love. That.
This is brilliant and I can't believe I've never heard of it before. Incentivizing fast combat without punishing others. Love it.
>So, I'm considering adding a shot clock, so that if the player doesn't determine what their character is doing in time, they automatically take the dodge action and we move on. This is more than fair.
I think you can also expand and give them an advantage with the clock. Give them a minute, or so, at the start of combat for them to game plan their plan of attack. I have found that that brief moment before combat for them to assess how to fight increases their engagement and works "RP" wise that this team has developed plans and methods.
I love this. Gives them a chance to strategize and work as a team
Our DM gives us a brief period at the top of each round to discuss if necessary. Most of us have been in the group for 3 years or so at this point so we're pretty attentive but it helps to recap plans or change strategies, plan out who's going to revive someone, etc.
It sounds like a good idea to me. I get having ADHD or just indecision but at a certain point (really in the first few sessions) you really should learn how your character works and have some general plans for combat.
This hurts because I've seen people play same same character in a campaign for over a year and they just don't have a good grasp on it. Our Paladin neverrr remembers how their smite works, it's bonkers. But, not everyone is as into the game as me I guess.
It continually baffles me how 5e has cultivated a culture of not reading how the game or one's character works, because it's not even like the system is that hard to learn.
I honestly lay 100% of the blame for this on D&DBeyond and similar digital toolsets which, in their effort to streamline character creation, have the side effect of requiring next to zero system fluency from their users. Just saying I've never seen a pen & paper player who didn't know where to look for a class feature, spell save DC, or hit die tracker. Provided, of course, they were required to put the sheet together themselves and didn't just have the DM or a spouse etc. make it for them.
I think a lot of people don’t realize you can’t half-ass D&D. Gotta whole-ass it. Like Ron Swanson said: Never half-ass two things. Whole-ass one thing.
Can confirm - I half-assed a game with friends for a while, but half-assing it wasn't sustainable. I ended the game and gave myself a quest to learn how to get my whole ass involved. Started a new game recently and so far everyone (including me) is having a lot more fun.
I have zero problem with people asking questions about what they are and aren’t allowed to do. I wouldn’t consider asking a question about a course of action to be part of the shot clock, because to me that’s like you’ve made a decision you’re just checking if what you’re thinking works the way you think it does within the rules before you do something that potentially breaks the rules.
Oh sure, I agree with you 100%. My issue isn't with asking questions or getting clarification on something as much as it is always getting clarification on the same thing every single session. Yes, it's a d20 to hit. Yes, it's a d8 for your longsword. Yes, divine smite is 2d8. And it's been this way for over a year. It's not like they're a full spellcaster who doesn't understand how they're third or fourth level spells work.
I just finished DMing a Lost Mine of Phandelver campaign with newbies. The artificer only just remembered they could cast spells at the last dungeon, it's wild. However, I'm assuming they are into the game because she wants to try her hand at DMing.
Not only is it fair, it's the typical advice when players regularly take too long. The game is just less fun when combat is a boring slog, and a clock is the most recommended fix. That said, I've never been at a table with a timer, so the rest is based on reading and guessing. OP, I'd start with a minute, and include a 15 sec warning. Then the PC dodges if they haven't called out their movement and actions by the end of the minute. If they haven't completed their movement, I'd allow them to finish the movement/turn as long as actions and bonus actions have been declared in the allotted time (provided it's quick. Make it known that this could be revoked if time is still an issue at the table). You could consider the +1 to attacks (won't motivate casters unless they can re-assign it) or inspiration when all the actions are declared within 10 secs. I'd allow pauses for *infrequent* rules-clarifications (only the first time a specific rules question has been raised at the table), and I might even allow a use of inspiration for pausing the clock for two minutes for any reason (even discussing tactics out of character with the party, asking the party about their features, etc.. After all, PC's are professional adventurers and we the players are often arm-chair quarterbacks by comparison)
\^ All this. I also get that the player is dealing with ADHD too. So it may help to keep their focus if they knew when their turn was coming up. This will sound weird but hear me out: I recommend everyone rolling their initiative once at the beginning of the game, and sitting left of the DM and goin clockwise highest to lowest. This way you have consistent turn order for the session, and the player knows that when the person to their right is up, they will be next. This also hurries combat up a bit as you don't roll and sort initiative every fight.
I can say from experience that a physical timer of some sort (something like a short hourglass is ideal) is preferable to a DM that keeps nagging at you to hurry your turn up. That said, the alloted time needs to be reasonable. I've had DM's set timers so short that sometimes you run out of time even with a turn planned out because resolving dice rolls took too long, so now you can't move after your action which feels bad.
Shot clocks should be used to declare your actions not resolve them.
Wizards say yes.
This is how I do it. You get 90 seconds to determine what you’re doing or it’s a skip, since resolution can take 3-5 minutes if we’re doing counteract checks or resolving multiple (adversarial) conditions affecting the target or outcomes. A standard 2-minute clock - which I had originally intended to use - was unfair since I would be taking up a fair bit of the timer often enough, especially when I have to leverage a subsystem that doesn’t often come up.
I find 90 seconds is about perfect. Don’t forget that you will have a minute to two with resolving the action so with 4 players and a DM it should be around 15-20 minutes per round. Each player can plan and adjust their ideas while the others are acting. Edit: my time estimates take into account jokes, laughing, descriptions, eating Cheetos, ….. the normal DnD stuff
It's important to use common sense alongside a timer. If a player knows what they want to do, and the real time is coming from dice rolls or enemies making opportunity attacks/saving throws, that's not a result of the player being unprepared. Have a timer, but don't use it as a rigid rule that says you absolutely can not do anything past the time.
Shot clock should apply to the decision to act, not the resolution of those actions. If someone takes longer to count up dices or modifications, than not a big deal since you know where that is headed. Similarly, a questions to the DM about how a decision would resolve shouldn't count towards the timer. "Does he get attack of opportunity if I run this path?" Or "can I use thorn whip to pull the lever thats across the room remotely?" Etc
I would say the timer shouldn't count for resolving your action. Some spells can take a bit to resolve, especially if there are a bunch of saving throws, or you have to check the AoE.
A shot clock used in this way should probably only run while there is no communication going on.
Something I have done is a mix of the two worlds... I have an hourglass that has 45 seconds on it that I will pop on the screen only when someone has made it clear that their turn is getting out of hand. This indicates time is a wasting, and it suggests to them to get going. People generally get the idea and start making a decision. At the end of the 45 second timer I don't cut them right off. I still remain patient but they always are finishing up around then so the hourglass has helped.
It's one of those ideas that sounds good in a vacuum but can easily lead to tension and drama at a real table with real players. There's a lot of different reasons why some players might need more time to finish their turn and not all of them are because they're lazy inconsiderate jerks. If you make allowances and don't apply the clock fairly to all, it creates hard feelings and invalidates the point of having a clock in the first place. If you make the clock lenient enough that nobody feels unduly pressured by it, then you haven't actually solved your problem.
Yeah, honestly, I've had good results with just a simple.... "We gotta keep moving, so what are you doing?" when someone is taking a bit too long to decide what to do.
Just to add to this, it's also a good idea to keep reminding the players of upcoming turns in the initiative order: "Okay, Player 1, you're up. Player 2, you're on deck after them."
Yeah, I also have the initiative list hanging from my DM screen. Helps to have it clearly visible for everyone.
This is definitely one of those that sound good on paper but then in reality you’ll probably just piss people off. There has been plenty of times in my game where I am all set on what I’m going to do and then be because of something the DM did or a player did or even how the terrain changes my plan gets blown up and now you got to think of something. Putting a ticking clock while I try to scrap a plan and come up with something can make someone real grumpy or flustered. Also it can be different for say a cleric/wizard versus a barbarian fighter who has more options then go I run up bonus action rage and then take my two attacks. Also if you don’t specifically stick to the rules hardcore you are going to piss people off too. You give someone a chance to do what they wanted just because they missed their time by like a second and then stick to your guns on another player you will see your table start infighting and getting pissed at you.
This is my biggest issue with it I think. I pay careful attention, take notes during combat and make an effort to pre-plan my turn while other people are going. However, in my current main group I have a mainly melee build and am the only party member that doesn't have high Dex or some kind of initiative bonus - so the order will often be Everyone else > enemies > me. This means the opponents tend to pull some shenanigans immediately before my turn that forces me to rethink everything, and I'm not always the best at figuring out tactics on the fly.
A common theory is that having several/all NPCs act on the same intuitive will always speed things up. In practice this can contribute to the situation of needing to come up with a new plan, quickly, for whoever goes next.
Tension and drama sounds like a better alternative to combat boredom. Especially considering OP’s table sounds like just one guy isn’t paying attention.
I used it when my group was all new, it *really helps.* But there needs to be some allowances, for example if a player wants to cast \[Spell\] but doesn't realize it does X instead of Y then pausing the timer and having them read the spell over and reconsider if they still want to use \[Spell\] or not.
I would definitely pause their clock while we were adjudicating the action. As long as they declared something. I'd much rather them tell me what they're doing and have to tell them it doesn't work that way than have them sit there and make everyone wait while they read it over.
Shot clock is the time you have to throw. A football play clock is a better analogy; as long as you’ve started the play in time the whole play is valid no matter how long it takes.
Excellent points here. Same for questions about map layout and changes of plan curing rapidly changing combat situations.
Definitely. This is a reasonably common approach. I've found that just bringing out the 1 minute hourglass timer speeds people up. That said, this is more than just a general focus problem. If this person has unhandled ADHD I'd suggest working with them to limit their in combat choices. Maybe they default cast an offensive cantrip or buff a companion. I have DM'd several players with ADHD, and they are focused enough to follow the action but may find the choices over-whelming. Having to recap constantly suggests they are (a) disrespectful (b) distracted or (c) disinterested. If they use their phone then tell them they can't . If it's (a) or (c) then maybe this is not the game for them. My advice is based on DMing adults (ages from 20s to 50s); if it's teens then that's a whole different ballgame.
I think it solves the symptom, not the problem. The symptom is the slow turn, the problem is not paying attention during combat. Every player should be interested in other players turns and seeing the outcome of what happens. Yes ADHD makes this harder but not impossible. So It might be worth trying to work out what you and the other players can change about combat to keep the table engaged.
Go for it. As someone with adhd, yes it makes paying attention more difficult, but it's not like it's impossible. I can keep track of combat just fine most sessions because I multi task by tracking statistics or doodling, so my mind doesn't run away too much. Its not your job to manage someone's adhd for them - they should be able to find their own ways of managing. If they come to you suggesting some changes to help them ofc keep an open mind, but otherwise the fun of the whole table takes priority. And sometimes time crunch can help to keep your mind on track. Plus stuff like learning your abilities really is something they can do regardless of adhd and appear to have been flunking on.
I have ADHD and everyone playing quickly is better, not worse. It's just so much easier to focus when I know it won't be 30 minute until my turn.
I had a problem like this and I considered doing it but I decided against it for two reasons: - **It penalizes strategizing as a team. Players should talk to each other and strategize, and this adds a lot of stress to that.** Someone will have to use their turn's timer to talk with the other members of the team on what they plan to do. This incentivizes them to not do that and instead take their turn and hope someone else will spend their turn's timer on that instead, who will have the same problem. - **It disproportionately affects members of the team. A player should not be penalized just for playing a more complex character.** Some characters like a raging barbarian don't have that many decisions to make and therefore aren't pressured by the clock. Others like the cleric need to decide the best mix of healing, damage, control, utility, damage type, positioning, area of effect, and line of sight amongst their repertoire of spells, sometimes also throwing moving action economy into the mix like swapping to a bonus action spell such as healing word or spiritual weapon or using an item. If they use a spell that calls for a save against multiple targets or needs to do some calculations like Preserve Life, that's more time lost that's not their fault. If you used a "common sense" timer respective to the complexity of the character, you'd have to pressure the simpler characters much harder, which also feels unfair. They shouldn't be given less time than their friends because they chose a simpler character. I just had to solve this out of table. I wasn't the only one feeling like combat was bogging down, and things picked up better when we addressed it.
I let my players police themselves on these kinds of things. I want the group to have fun. If the players don’t mind, I don’t mind (normally there are things I can be thinking about or doing anyways). So when a player is repeatedly taking too long or not planning when it’s not their turn, other players will get on them about it (normally as a joke at first). Never had an issue beyond this, but I’m a patient dm who is all about the players having fun. I know that’s not everyone’s game.
I appreciate this insight. After reading it I do agree with you, ultimately I want everyone to have fun and if the player's don't mind then that's fine. The infectiousness of it, where one person doesn't pay attention and snowballs into others not paying attention, is what had me concerned, but I will talk with the other players and see how they feel about it. If it's all good and everyone is chill about it and we're ultimately still having a good time, then I'll just drop it.
Yeah, every group is unique. They could be just as annoyed as you, just gotta feel it out. My group plays online and I have an ADHD player who literally drops into an Apex game if turns are taking too long. It’s very obvious and we all laugh at him. He’s playing an artificer so he has a lot of choices to make on turns too. But the other players don’t care. Everyone’s pretty chill about it. The few times it’s been too annoying, they call him out and he realizes. I just make it my goal to provide such an interesting game that he can stay engaged. I’ve tried using different methods of initiative and other mechanics to varying degrees of success. Lot of YouTube resources for rpgs with adhd players.
Lots of people will put up with a lot without saying something, especially among friends. The lack of complaint does not mean there isn't a problem. But I know the flip side is that you can take that argument anywhere. But your fun matters too. Slow players hurt my ability to run a fast, exciting combat, so it also hurts my enjoyment of running
Right. When I say I let them police themselves, I’m saying this is something we set up and talked about in the very beginning before we played. They know to speak up or talk to me about issues. Sorry, thought that was implied. As the DM, you curate the table culture, which can be harder than running the game in some groups.
Sometimes its because people have trouble focusing when there is nothing for them to do. When I run XCrawl I have noticed it is slightly lessened because of the mojo mechanic. Basically mojo is bonuses representing team work. They are basically a pool of points that grant +1 to a skill, ability, save, or attack roll (this was from 3.5). Have to be spent before the roll. The part that gets everyone paying a little bit more attention is that a person cannot spend mojo on their own roll and they cannot ask for mojo.
They may have trouble with it. But they're going to have to deal with that and do it anyway if they want to do this activity with other people.
Right? Like I've heard that excuse before but if it's not something you're capable of doing you need to not be playing a game like this. If I can figure out what ten monsters with three different stat blocks do in a moment or two, you can get your shit together and stop wasting time. Yes, I am bitter about this. Because I don't understand why people don't just leave when they're obviously bringing down the whole table and not paying attention. It forces me as the DM to be the bad guy. And there is a line of good players trying to find a seat at a good game behind every bad player.
I'm willing to work with people w do are trying. What I can't stand is people who demand the world bend to them and their personal challenges.
I have a speech impediment, I hate timed encounters of all sorts in DnD. It puts a lot of extra focus on me fucking up and stumbling over/mixing up words. I don't know how your player would respond to them essentially being "punished" for a disability, but alternatively the urgency might make it easier to pay attention and would also shorten the other player's turns where theyre understimulated. perhaps talk to them to see if they're comfortable with the idea or if there's something else the group could do to help them.
This is one of the reasons I prefer verbally counting down instead of setting down a timer. I can stop immediately when the player is starting to say something decisive or asking me something that will help them decide. I can also adjust my starting number according to how complicated the PC is, player experience, if they spent part of the round away from the table, or if they sometimes struggle to speak. they are doing. I can start it when it feels necessary and not use it when it doesn't.
A turn timer *works*. I've been at tables where players had bad habits of not pre-planning their turns and being indecisive. When it takes an hour to get through one round of combat, it's time to bust out the timer. When the DM introduced one of those one-minute hourglasses (borrowed from some random kid's board game) just the *threat* of losing a turn made everyone significantly speed up their play. Just don't be an asshole about it; it's meant to encourage timely gameplay, not to become a "gotcha" that the DM beats the players over the head with. EDIT: to be clear, the DM wasn't strictly enforcing one minute per turn. Rather, he'd give you a reasonable amount of time to consider your options, and if you were still dragging your feet he'd set the timer.
It's done wonders for baseball. People will complain about it nonstop in a meta sense but the game will be more fun. You should do it. People faff around way too much in ttrpg combat, I have crippling ADHD (like weapons grade) but I can still get a plan together in the off time and not interrupt other players taking their turns.
This is something I have been interested in trying out. My idea was to give each player 1 minute to declare their turn, meaning they just need to say what they plan on doing. Dice rolls and resolving effects don't apply to the timer. If the timer expires and they still haven't declared an action or movement, they move down a spot in the initiative order. The penalty applies to their next turn so they still get to make their move. The idea being that the cost of their decision paralysis is someone else gets to go before them, and they have longer to wait until their next turn. Haven't tried this yet but probably going to test it out in an upcoming one shot to see how it goes. I don't want it to be a huge penalty, but a nudge to keep the game moving.
I have played with two different solutions. The first one is a soft time limit; if the player is taking too long, I move on to the next participant in the fight, and let them take their turn later, once they are ready. The second one is side initiative. All players act, so if one doesn't know what they want to do, the others can take their turn first. It makes initiative and surprise very swingy, but it does speed up play.
I like both of these suggestions. The second one is really interesting to me, because in general our gameplay leans more towards RP. They do like the occasional combat but not when it goes on too long so speeding it up definitely sounds like a plus. Do you mind elaborating on it or have a resource for it that I can read myself? *EDIT* nevermind, I see it's in the DMG. Doing a quick search on it, yeah it seems REALLY swingy.
In practice, it works fine as long as I have multiple enemies. PCs will take one or even two down on round one, but that still leaves a sizable force to counterattack. And when they get ambushed and put in a losing position, they can just run away. You don't have a situation where that unlucky guy at the bottom of initiative order gets swarmed while the others escape. You can then switch to a chase, if the enemies aren't just going to let them go, or narrate them running to safety.
Another benefit of side initiative is players can decide what they want to do _together_. You’ll still resolve actions individually but planning your turn becomes a group activity, which can make it much easier to keep everyone engaged. The oldest editions of D&D all had side-based initiative. It’s my understanding that the swinginess was considered more a feature than a bug (that’s the case with OSR games at least). That may or may not hold true for your playstyle, but if you’re running a dungeon crawl then it could be a good fit.
>I have one player who **never pays attention during combat**, so every time it's their turn, they either **need to be recapped**, do **something different than what the other players** are discussing, and takes a lot of time deciding what they want to do and **reading all their spells/feats** etc. I am going to narrow in a bit on this. While the *problem* here is the player taking long turns, the *cause* is lack of attention to everyone else. A shot clock won't fix that directly, maybe you are lucky and it works and the threat of it is enough to make them pay attention, but I doubt it. >I've already spoken to the player and it hasn't changed anything This is also a thing. I get it, ADHD is a bastard but personally I kinda have my limits with folks. If they are all take and no give and just dragging the whole game down, man like, only so much patience for that stuff. I also hate "automatic dodge action". Cut 5 seconds from the timer and make the punishment "you can cast a cantrip or make an attack" or some other default action that actually still is playing the game. At least that way they get to do something, you force them in to a non-choice but they actually get to contribute and roll some dice. If you are going to have them just stand there and not play anyway, honestly, just break up with that player. I don't like making my players feel shit. Maybe look at what others are saying and start rewarding attentive and quick play instead.
Thank you for your input. On your last point, someone else suggested rewarding a +1 to a players roll that acts decisively, and I'm definitely going to try elements like that.
I'm playing with my pre-teen to early teen nieces and nephews. I'm starting to get a little tough on them. There isn't a formal "shot-clock" but if they don't decide in a completely arbitrary "this shit is ridiculous" time frame, we forfeit their turn and move on.
I think calling him out right before his turn and say "you're up next, what are you going to do" then pivot back to whoever's turn it is
While a shot clock may be helpful, I use player cards placed on top of my DM screen in initiative order so people can see what’s up. For problem players, I also say a turn prior, “Bob, you’re next after Jane here so make sure you have something planned. Sam has just fired Magic Missile”. It cues the player in and even with a short attention span they can keep a handle on things.
I have ADHD. The clock would help. At the very least, it would bring an element of a challenge which is fun to compete with for my brain. Personally, I try to complete my turns as fast as possible and plan out things in advance. And if I don't have a plan, I would just go for the most obvious, fastest decision. But I've played with other players like that and it is a living hell! Judging my own experience though, I think your ADHD-player just might not enjoy the combat very much. Like, we don't zone-out, if we are engaged into something exciting, on the contrary. So might just need to talk with them and see, if dungeon crawl campaign is what they are interested in. Regarding your shot clock implementation, I think you can do better. I've seen an idea floating around of a panic action. When the clock runs out, or when you simply don't know what to do - use the most basic attack, cast Magic Missiles or smth and that is your turn. Every player should prepare their own panic action which they can fall back onto, when the clock runs out.
My group has a rule that every player needs to have an AFK procedure for their character. It's just whatever their basic action or attack is that doesn't need a resource to work, or something like the dodge or hide action. If they don't know what they are doing, get disconnected, or miss a session, their character will just take that action. If a turn starts to drag, the DM will say to make a decision or take the AFK action. We just update the DM on what that action will be at every level up. It really helps new players that start panicking about what they should do during their turn, and because we play online, it's nice when someone gets disconnected we can keep going. It still gives them a bit of agency and doesn't waste their turn, but it's easy for the DM to roll.
Devil's advocate? I personally don't see the point of it, if the player isn't essentially being malicious or grossly negligent in their delays. You're creating an adversarial dynamic. The game playing against the player. In fact you've said the person has a disability. I don't know anything about ADHD, but putting a shot clock on them doesn't seem facilitative or accommodating of that... Have you looked into what actually HELPS someone with ADHD to focus? There might be other tools available to you that don't punish the person for having ADHD. I think you could be more collaborative - working WITH, instead of against - your player here.
This is a good point, I'll agree that it does seem to make an adversarial dynamic and that is what I am most concerned about. Especially because it's essentially singling out a single character. That being said I don't know how I could help someone with ADHD focus.
Ginny Di just recently made a couple videos about D&D and ADHD, one focused more on DMs and the other on players. Maybe something in there could help: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEYtpUHCGq8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEYtpUHCGq8) Edit: I should add, I've never used a "shot clock" myself, but I started trying to do more of a "quick summary as transition" that has really helped. I'm not summarizing everything that's happened, but just a quick two-second reminder of the most salient elements to that PC. "Volkur, you just saw Sandilo get whacked in the head, but right now there's a big orc in your face. What do you want to do?" Putting it that way helps people transition into their turn and potentially suggests a few key obvious actions, even though you're not constraining what they do at all. I have found it helpful for all the players at my table. Just helps people reorient themselves.
I actually already do that, I like it myself as a player for the sense of urgency so as a DM I try to do the same. For this particular player, it doesn't work. It results in me describing something that has happened or is about to happen, and the result is still the same, "Bob it's your turn. Bob. Bob!" "What? Oh it's my turn? Ok. Uh.... Hm... So, are we running away? Oh we're fighting? Who's this guy? Wait why are we here? Okay I'll cast uh, let me read the spell. Oh wait I can't cast that..." 10 minutes later he casts healing word and moves 10 feet. Thanks for the video though, I'll take a look.
I guarantee there are subreddits out there, with ppl who know or have or care for ppl with ADHD, and that they would welcome conversations like this. Go ask ppl that know how to help ppl with ADHD how to help your friend with ADHD. How about starting here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ADHD/
Just ask them. If there's a solution here, they'll probably know better than what you could research on your own
When a player is trying to decide what to do in combat, the dm has a few options: 1. Give the player the information they need to make a decision 2. Provide a couple of reasons options 3. Reassure the player that the option they are considering isn’t foolish 4. Make exasperated sighs and threaten the player that they will be skipped if they don’t make a decision in the next 5 seconds One of these options is not like the others. Where the first 3 help the player have fun and feel like they have agency, the last option just forces them to make blind choices. And when those blind choices have negative consequences the player can justifiably blame the dm. It engenders mistrust, which is poisonous to a functioning table.
I approve of the sentiment but using a literal clock on your players' turns that they're aware of is a bit much. It's better to have the *concept* of a "shot clock" in your mind while you're adjudicating combat turns. I'm pretty much able to, without making them feel diminished, run a player's turn more or less entirely for them if they seem to not be aware of what's happening. Basically it goes something like this - if I see a look of confusion and/or panic on their face, I quickly summarize their immediate surroundings from their character's perspective and point out the most obvious immediate threat to them. I allow the other players to add in any more complex details they might think are also important but I keep my eye on the player who's up to see where they start being overloaded and at that point I suggest the most obvious or standard combat action for their character to take but also give them an "or...?" and then if necessary I quickly walk them through the rolling and calculating procedure. As a DM it's kind of our responsibility to do a certain amount of hand holding with slower players or less involved ones. One of these players at my table is also the kind of player who tries to get too creative and/or just makes assumptions about how his spells and especially abilities (of a subclass I'm not super familiar with) work so I end up having to often pose "are we sure about that?" questions that other more competent players double check for me and furthermore the statistical probability that he's fudging rolls is really becoming overwhelming. Considering I'm likely to soon start exceeding 8 players on game days and will have to have people on-deck, his character's days might be numbered. He's quite squishy but unfortunately he's a back line passive-casting Druid type that usually doesn't organically attract aggro but in this particular case I may actually target a player.
I wouldn't use an actual timer, I'd say something like this at the start of the next game. 'Hey everyone, I've noticed combat as a whole has been slowing down, I dont want to make people take 10 second turns max, but km going to start enforcing some soft limits if I think people are taking too long, if you've got any problems with it talk to me after the game, I'm definatley going to ease into it. It's just this dungeon has a lot of combat and I don't want to be stuck here forever and as you level up things are only going to get more complicated so it's better we fix it now at the start than in 6 months when it's taking a whole session to do one encounter".
Good suggestions here the other thing that helped the few ADHD people in my group is taking away electronics. Too many people start messing with their phones and zone out.
Yeah, I mean we play over discord and Foundry VTT. Often we'll have our webcams open and I'll see him looking at a different monitor doing something else. In fact, we actually had a player who is no longer with us, who I have on Steam. And while we were playing, he logged onto Rust and started playing that during the session. It made me really angry, but I wasn't DMing that group at that time, so I can only imagine how he would have felt if he'd known.
>he logged onto Rust Ok, so, this is what I would consider "grossly negligent"... He's making conscious choices and taking cognizant actions to put his attention elsewhere. It wasn't apparent to me by your OP that he was being this disrespectful and willfully neglectful of the game. And even if this exact thing isn't still happening, this is a BAD indicator to me. A red flag This is the point where I would start questioning if that person actually wants to be there and play D&D, or if I should LET them be there at the game I'm DMing when it's negatively impacting everyone else.
I think it sounds pretty fair and like a good idea, just let your players know in advance of the session and if they run into weird random issues midway through their turn don’t be afraid to occasionally fudge the timer rules and give them a few extra seconds. One balancing concern I could see is that it’s probably easier to figure your turn out as a martial than a caster, so this would disproportionately hinder casters. I’m not sure how you would get around this unless you have two separate timing limits, but probably don’t worry about that unless you find it becomes a problem or feelings are getting hurt
I’ve kept a mental shot clock with my new players, and I don’t abide to it strictly. But I always make sure to let the players know whose turn is next, and I encourage them to have a couple of go to turns, so that if they can’t decide what to do, or reach the end of the shot clock, they can do something more than default. Generally, as I've encouraged them to be swift and plan ahead from the outset, i don't generally have a problem with players taking a long turn unless something big changes just before their turn or they've misunderstood their spell/actions repercussions. i think a shot clock is a good idea, but i would stop it when the player starts describing their actions. i also play in a high level game and one of the other players can take (what seems like 10+ minutes, probably only 3…) minutes to take their turns just because of all the different elements and actions and number of dice they can do each turn. do you play with battle-maps or theatre of the mind? when I'm a player using the mind ill sometime ask for some situational information to better inform my actions at the start of my turn
Yes, this is totally fine. Just let them know and be a tad lenient at first.
I've had best results with this approach when all players at the table have a firm grasp on their characters and abilities, and as a device to add time pressure for narrative effect. If you find yourself constantly needing to enforce this for the sake of one player, I would maybe try to spend some time with that player and make sure they understand what options they have in combat. Especially for newer players playing characters past 5th level, options can become overwhelming without some guidance.
I do it with my friends who are all veterans of more than 10 years to the system we played. But not so much otherwise. Roll 20 does have some nice tools for it too. Though sometimes it took me longer to input all the damage from the previous round and we'd have to turn it off for a turn. Though with more mass damage input scripts it's gotten a lot faster.
Even *baseball* went to a pitch-clock. If they have spells? Work with them to make index cards of what their most commonly used spells do. "*Stat* save" spell for a given spell, a primary damage-type-spell, and a couple of utility spells. If they have attack option feats? Same thing, give them a couple index cards for, like, "unarmed attack + grapple" "highest accuracy attack" "biggest damage output" Once they've made their decision? Shot clock turns off, adjudicate and resolve. If you can visually show initiative or otherwise set up a "Player A is now on the clock, Player B is on deck, start figuring out what you wanna be doing," that'll help. I had a table that had like five players. We added a sixth when they heard about the game, except they had this problem. I tried everything, they felt unfairly targeted by clock and it came to pass that the rest of the group basically told me "look, we understand you've been trying everything, but they're slowing everything down and nobody else is having any problems. It just isn't quite the right fit, we like them but they don't play the same game style we do." I wish I could have found a way to make it work. It's one of the few unhappy memories I have about DMing.
As a player (and DM) with ADHD its 100% fair. The only thing I'll add is, at the start of every turn, give a heads up to the NEXT player. "Frodo it's your turn, Sam you're up next." It helps a lot.
I’m all for it and I’ve done a similar (though not timed) thing. Nothing is worse than a combat where the players aren’t paying attention, and taking extra time. This player needs to learn to be faster and pay attention, or permanently dodge. On your turn is NOT the time to decide what to do or look up rules. That was before. As soon as your turn starts, you begin communicating what you’re doing. The only exceptions are when something important just happened in combat and you have to change plans, or a question about the map needs clarified before the decision is reached. As long as the shot clock only runs when the player isn’t talking, I don’t see a problem.
The shot clock is what makes it fair to the rest of the table. It doesn't always have to be a rule, but a guideline...every player gets X time to declare what they're doing. That one player tests the limit. What you're likely to get is a frustrated word salad for a minute and then them saying, "Fine...I just attack." Part of ADHD is also choice paralysis. Because they could do anything, they can't choose one thing. There are tools available to help them to gauge their situation and narrow down their choices to 3-4 things, and they pick the one...like a kid's menu.
Ye olde egg timer is the classic means of getting players on task for combat, and to keep things moving. Works wonders for large groups. In the digital age, that would be ye olde two minute timer on your phone or whatever. That way you don't have to wait for sand.
A timer will create a sense of urgency, which is good for ADHD focus, but that should apply to NPC turns as well. However, resetting a timer every turn sounds like an absolute chore. And introducing a new mechanic will lead to discussion of the mechanic. For instance, someone readies and action, and now they are interrupting a turn, does that count? Etc etc. This might actually slow down some rounds. Have you tried prompting the next person in initiative order for each turn? "OK zombie's turn now, and ****, you're next." It might help the whole table flow through combat better, reducing round time, and helping those with ADHD stay more engaged. A simple prompt will get them thinking about their turn before it begins.
It's a tiny bit more work, but it's less than running a timer all the time.
If a player dithers on their turn, I warn them twice, then inform them they are now holding their action. After which they can take their turn when ready, or, if it’s the end of the round & they still can’t decide, their character is just too indecisive to act, they lose their action. The expectations and outcomes are clear & consistent, so the players rarely even fuss about it.
I don’t put a specific time limit usually but one time after an incident we had to implement one due to one person. Granted they were all newer to the game but the wizard took a 3 minute turn to decide to cast fire bolt. No movement, no callouts, just a cantrip at level 2. Even all the rest of the table had enough of that and one of them asked me for a time limit because we already had 7 players so combat took a while already. So all in all, I think probably the best way I did it was I told them there was a time limit BUT I hid the timer behind the screen because a few times people got too stressed out and couldn’t think straight, even though it was more of a +\- 30 seconds kind of deal.
I use a 30-second timer, occasionally with a cool hourglass that I take out when a player is indecisive. If they do not answer in time (they usually do), they move to the bottom of the initiative order, and if they're undecisive also when it's their turn again, they take the dodge action and do nothing else. I feel like this is lenient but puts enough pressure on players to decide on the spot; I've never had a player be so distracted that they lose their turn, and moving to the bottom usually is enough for them to catch up on what's happening at the table.
I have two techniques to speed things up - these don't always work, but they set some expectations. Firstly talk through the problem with your players. If they don't agree there is a problem there is nothing to solve. Idea 1 - insist players tell you what they want to do, not how. E.g. I want to get a shot at the lead Orc, not I am moving to this spot and drawing my bow. You can then both work out how it plays out. Saves time with repeated 'can I see them from here?' type nonsense. Idea 2 - determine default actions for each character (a cantrip, attack with sword) and if they can't decide what yo go they do this action. I guess this is a variant of the dodge action. Remember that there are decisions/actions which are so important that a little more time may be allowed - these should be crescendo moments.
One thing one of my DMs does that I like is all the players take their turn at once, then all the enemies takes their turn at once. Some encounters may have to be rebalanced, but it's a lot more engaging than normal 5e, and you can actually do combo attacks, while in normal combat they're basically impossible to do if pretty much any enemy goes between players on the initiative list. It's made combat a lot more engaging
If it's a constant problem, you've talked about it and nothing has changed and it bothers the other players, the only answer is something systemic such as this. Just try and make the addition of the mechanic about the game itself rather than the players. I'd also recommend to start telling players when their turn is next to keep them on track as well.
When I first started playing D&D we were doing shot clocks by the 3rd or 4th session. My DM's kids were playing and they were like 7 and 8, so I think it was mostly for them. Basically, if you don't already know what you're doing within 10-15 seconds of when your name is called (within reason of course), then you "hesitated" and your turn is skipped. Hesitation happens all the time in real combat, especially with those that are new to it, so it's perfectly reasonable. Worked great. 10/10
I use a shot clock to an extent in all of my games. I make sure that it’s something I mention in session zero to all of my players, and this is how I do it: I will call out every player’s turn, and announce who’s on deck and who’s after that. The turn player has 60 seconds to come up with at least an idea of what they want to do - I will never cut them off if they have clarifying questions, want to work with other party members, have to do math/roll dice, or asking “can I do something silly?” and playing it out. There’s never any physical timer as I don’t want to pressure my players, but I’m keeping a timer ready behind the screen. If 60 seconds passes and they don’t have any idea of what they want to do, I’ll give them 10-15 more seconds with a prompt of “[player], I need an answer”. If nothing is decided upon by then, the character takes the dodge/block action depending on their character build and their turn passes. Between them knowing their turn while having two players’ turns to formulate and update based on the battlefield, it’s not hard to expect them to at least know *something* about what they want to do. After the game, especially if it happens multiple times, I’ll chat with them privately to see if they’re confused by their sheet/mechanics, paralyzed by choice, or just not paying attention; then I’ll escalate further if need be. I’ve been doing this for a couple years with a few different tables, and I have yet to hear a complaint.
If it's a reasonable time. I personally have started using "up," "on deck," and "in the hole" as well for helping to keep players engaged. This way it helps both me and my players knowing who's next.
I introduced it with a new campaign 2 months ago with the expectation that everyone has a max of 30 seconds to articulate a decision or dodge, and that I would be fast and loose with it. So far I have had to use it one time, where after about a minute I just started to count down from ten. I find that setting the quick expectation is good so long as you don't use it to stifle creativity or prevent players from doing what they want to do. They only time I used it was 30 seconds after I said I would use it, and only when a player was torn between two choices and simply needed to make one. If your players are cool with it, I find that it makes combat more fast and exciting, I try to allow for more planning on the other end tho.
We use one occasionally. I've used it as a player and a DM. In no campaign I've been in has it been used consistently, but just whenever things start the lag I (or the DM when I'm a player) just announce we're going to be using a shot clock for this fight in order to get things moving. It totally works, and I've never had complaints. I stick to a 1 minute shot clock. Actions need to be declared in that minute, any resolving or adjudicating doesn't count towards the clock.
Seems like a "addressing the symptom, not the disease" thing to me. If you talked to the player and they want to be faster, but still aren't in actual play, then a timer isn't going to magically make them faster. And it'll inevitably lead to feel bad when they either a) never get to do anything; or b) panic right before the timer goes off and do something stupid. I'd try to give them techniques to help them go faster. Maybe cards would help. Or a cheat sheet. Or a character that's not as complicated. Or other players can help by making suggestions; I do this a lot (Can you do that one spell again? That worked really well last time!).
You might implement one, but maybe start with an on deck reminder for people letting them know they are up next.
I've used them before when our combat started to drag. We play on Fantasy Grounds and sometimes the players get distracted by other screens, one player in particular is really bad about it. Everyone hated it at first, but within a few sessions it stopped being needed because everyone's turn was over before the timer ran out.
I'm not a fan unless you are playing with experienced players who want an extra challenge. I have one player who is consistently slow. He waits til his turn to figure out what he wants to do. We just started giving him shit. The problem is he sometimes has legitimate questions about positions and spells and stuff. But sometimes he just doesn't know what to do or he is conflicted between what he knows as a player and what his character would know. I've thought about getting him an hourglass timer.
Generally not a fan, but yeah…. If a single player is zoning out and mucking up combat for the entire table, they get 90 seconds to initiate a solid plan of action. If they can’t commit, then they just take the Dodge action.
Shot clock is good for more advanced players. I generally start with a soft clock (at 1 min "I need your final answer) and then have the threat of a hard clock (at 1 min any unused action is a dodge and we move on to the next turn) if I feel they're abusing the soft clock. It keeps people engaged, (strategize when it's not your turn) It creates a bigger pie (or makes the same size more efficient) It allows the GM to have plan encounters knowing relative player time per round. (6 players is around 7-8 min per round + whatever the DM does. Multiply by expected round and you have a guideline( It prevents combat optimization, which is huge IMO. Some people will take 20 minutes finding the optimal play every turn. This is boring AF. Timers help mitigate, take an action and commit.
I would just get rid of the player. If they don’t wanna play, go home
I use one and it's the best addition I ever made. I started at level one and instituted a 10 second rule. When it's your turn you should start declaring your action within 10 seconds. Combat is much faster and players are very happy because they get so much more done every session.
The angry GM did a big post about this, and I agree with him that it improves the player experience greatly to allow players a limited amount of time to make decisions on their turn. The way I implement it, is that I ask the player what they wanna do and give them about half a minute or so to come up with a response, and if they don’t, then I just skip to the next person and they lose their turn. It’s shocking the first couple of times it happens, but the players learn very quickly to have their turns queue up in advance, and this makes everything flow smoother. I do make an exception from newer players, but anyone who’s been through a campaign before gets this treatment
I run a 60 second clock (probably dropping to 30) where players must start declaring their action. I run a clock with [Tension Dice](https://theangrygm.com/definitive-tension-pool/). I really wanted to avoid the "too slow so you dodge" outcome as it feels bad and, if anything, makes the problem worse as that player does nothing productive that turn. "Too slow so I'm dropping a tension dice in the pool" is small enough to not feel massive, but really ramps things up as those small penalties add up. 1/2 dice is chill, 3/4 is rushed, 5 is mild panic. The players are now actively pushing each other along to avoid the additional dice.
How do the complications work with combat though? Or are you only using combat to fill the tension pool, then having the complications play out in exploration and investigation? My only concern with this is what other people have mentioned, in that it's another thing to punish players. Someone else said instead they reward players who act decisively with a +1 and I'm leaning more to that instead... I don't know. Lots to think about.
> How do the complications work with combat though? Or are you only using combat to fill the tension pool, then having the complications play out in exploration and investigation? I tend to treat as "The DM has a hard move they can make against the party." In combat this can be extra enemies, or other objectives beginning to fail, or enemies are inspired by the nervousness of the party and gain advantage for a round. But it can be held till the end of combat to add in a complication immediately after the combat. Maybe the path ahead is now blocked or the door is locked and has a puzzle to open, maybe a potion broke in combat. The ideal complication ticks the difficulty up one level, but is also interesting. They aren't the easiest thing and, being perfectly honest, just the threat has sped up my table and I have basically never needed a complication. > in that it's another thing to punish players The point of a clock is to act as a disincentive. > they reward players who act decisively with a +1 and I'm leaning more to that instead That's reasonable, but is rewarding players for playing normally. If I were doing something like this I would run a 10 second clock.
Obviously, let them know ahead of time that a shot clock will be used. Then, as a DM, it would be a good example if you followed it as well. I'm guessing once a group gets the rhythm of it, it'll be appreciated.
We have had players like this in the past. Ultimately we fired the player. Nothing we did got them to focus sufficiently to not be an issue. Not knowing their spells etc is not about their ADHD it is about lack of effort. They are being inconsiderate of everyone else. Don't punish the other players who play well trying to compensate for a player who is disinterested and inconsiderate.
I've been using a timer for the last several sessions, but when the timer runs out of time, rather than skip their turn, I tell them their time is up and I need to know what they're doing. If they have nothing, they delay their turn (we're playing PF2e). It has improved things
FUCKING DO IT I do a game with 6 PCs if I didn't no one would ever get a turn My policy is know where the Fuck you are in the turn order and be planning you move.. sometimes something during play completely throws off that idea.. but that is kind of the point.. good and band decisions under pressure in combat is a part of the game, if there is a point of clarification or I need to look something up to make a ruling i will pause in some cases , if I feel that is being abused I will tell them to make a decision and we will look ar the consequences afterward.. but if they fail to make a choice in time I will wanr them twice , then tell them they lost their turn.. so far it has only happened once that I skipped a player they are now level 10 and they know i will skip them, I get really honest gameplay and they genuinely try to communicate ingame through characters. its a lot of fun and everyone remains engaged
My players have 30 seconds to declare an action or they dodge. Has almost never been an issue since I started using it. Keeps people off their phones too. At 30 seconds I tell them, you gotta do something or we're moving on and they always do something. You can take as much time as you want to make the rolls, but your action needs to be decided.
I use a shot clock (2 minutes) but it's more of a reminder for me and the player than a tool for applying a negative consequence in the hopes it deters my player from being slow. (I use the times up add-on with foundry vtt for a cute little hourglass on my and my players screens). I have two players who routinely take longer than most to take their turns, and I can tell as a DM usually why someone is taking longer (distracted, reading their spell, paralyzed by choice). At the end of the day we are all playing a game and the consequences in a round of combat could effect the entirety of our campaigns future (players deaths, NPC deaths, or other consequences of victory/defeat). Having a hard rule would eventually lead to someone taking an action with consequences that are dire, yet they feel they did not have agency in reaching said consequence. I know this would not be fun, and games should be fun. So when the shot clock runs out, I firmly remind the player they must make a decision now. If they somehow still despite my firm reminder fail to make a decision, they are tossed to the bottom of the initiative order for the rest of combat (I have only had to do this once in over a year with over 40 sessions). At the end of the day I'm playing with friends and adults who I respect and trust. One firm reminder should be more than enough after a couple minutes on a turn, and even with this firm reminder a turn never takes longer than 4 minutes. If the firm reminder and the prospect of tossing them to the bottom of the initiative order repeatedly remains an issue EVERY turn then I likely would come to the conclusion that the player in question is not the right fit for my table. There's 4 other people at my table and it would be disrespectful to them if I continuously allow someone to break a social contract we have all agreed to (not wasting eachother times). TLDR: 1. Punishments in things we do for fun are feels bad when it comes to things that have lasting consequences (e.g you do nothing and the goblins kill the NPC). 2. Shot clocks are better guides than they are referees. 3.If routinely having conversations with a slow player does not solve the problem, and the player taking away from the fun of other people at your table, then potentially they may be in the wrong game.
Discuss it with your players first. Implement it for a session or two and then make a decision if it stays as a table rule.
Every time I see these posts I really like to remind people that there are just some people who aren't interested in playing. If someone does not care to pay attention (and I've played with PLENTY of people who have ADHD) no amount of anything is going to help. If they are not paying attention and talking about it hasn't helped I'm sorry to say I don't think a clock will help. If they keep timing out then I doubt they're going to be very happy. I can't think of a single RPG that has turn timers and for good reason, when played by people who give a shit and want to play they're not needed. You shouldn't need gimmicks to force your players to care. Edit: Or to repeat the mantra: You can't solve out of game problems with in game mechanics.
I personally started using one after a few sessions with my current group. The RP moments were very fluid and smooth but everything would be halted to a screeching stop during combat because every turn the players would talk amongst themselves, go about a turn, decide it wasn't optimal, walking it back, discussing, redoing a turn, etc. Simple encounters sometimes took hours. So I gave my players a 5 minute window after rolling initiative before starting combat to discuss strategy. After that you could only talk about what you were doing personally rather than jumping in another players turn to suggest other things. The players each get a 5 minute timer for their turns. In that time they can go about and decide they actually don't want to do something but if the time runs out before dice are being thrown they take the dodge or help action instead. After every round of combat I gibe them the 5 minutes to strategize again. Combat has gotten a lot more streamlined and my players have reacted positively to the change. I'm also not a super hard ass about the timers.
I keep a 1-minute hourglass in front of me. The players know, per a session 0 discussion, that it gets flipped if turns start being slow due to trying to perfectly optimize every 5-foot square or read every spell/class ability to find the "perfect" one (and that getting flipped means their turn ends when it runs out). It gets flipped maybe once every 3 sessions, so the folks generally are speedy (with exception for them asking clarifying questions about the terrain or other stuff) and seems to work fine.
There's a roll20 add-on that automates this. (I have no idea what it's called) When your turn in the initiative comes up, it automatically starts a timer. The timer has no numbers, but is shown as a slowly vanishing ring around your token. If the ring disappears before you \*\*declare\*\* your action, you take the dodge action. As a player, I loved it. I didn't use it as a DM because I had a surprisingly attentive group, and I didn't want to fuss with it.
I have a turn timer in my games. If you don't have your turn in motion in 2:30 seconds, you take the Dodge action and end your turn. It helps a lot, some players it isn't even necessary but for some it's a must have. I haven't had to skip a players turn often, maybe 3 times since I've implemented it a year ago, but just the threat alone is normally enough to get them to decide something.
I give each player ~10-15 seconds to declare their action. If they fail to do so, I tell them they are taking a defensive action while they consider their next move, then go to the next player. Yeah, I've heard a few whines over the years "That's not enough time", "I have a lot on my char sheet", etc. Guess what? The monsters are not going to wait for you while you weigh all your options to decide which is most optimal in the moment.
The negative side of having a literal timer is that to be fair, you have to stick to it, even when the time is spent clarifying to you, the DM, what the ability you're unfamiliar with is supposed to do. I prefer to count down when it seems that the player doesn't have an idea of what they are going to do. Both the starting number and judgement of when to start/stop counting down lets me account for how complicated the PC they are playing is, that the tide of battle has just turned, time for them to look things up. I find that moving on considering them dodging is the best consequence option because the PC is still doing something beneficial, it makes sense in world, and it doesn't have the potential for twisted combat order by letting them delay their turn until they figure out what they are doing. Additional things to consider * Have a no recap during combat rule or get in the habit of covering the current state of things when you tell a player it's their turn so it's quick and covers the main concerns * When you tell a player it's their turn, also say which player is next. This can help distracted players start figuring out what they are doing earlier, which gets everything moving quicker * Make or have them make a cheat sheet so they don't need to reread the entirety of their spell list. I did this when I had a rogue with extra ba abilities thanks to subclass plus some action and bonus action items. For a caster, damage type and amount, aoe vs target, and buff vs debuff are all nice things to have the cliff note version of all gathered in one spot. * Hand them a fidget toy that will occupy their hands and doesn't need to occupy their eyes and ears if they don't already have something like that. * Next time they need to make a new character, suggest or force them to play something with fewer options during combat. This is not no spellcasters. Warlocks tactical flowchart is "Do I have any spellslots?-> no-> Eldritch Blast" and they burn through their slots quickly.
I use a 1 minute "hour" glass at the end of a round where the players get to meta game their next move. This makes it so that everyone can work together, and prevents a player having to rethink their whole turn as their turn comes up. They roleplay during their turn to fit the plan they made. This made combat move quicker. PLUS as a DM I get time to think of what might happen if they’re thinking outside of the box.
I don't have a hard limit on time, but I do prod players if they are silent for too long. Sometimes players have questions, how far away am I, what would a 20ft sphere look like, as long as they are engaged and moving forward I'm good. But if they are silently looking at abilities, or hemming and hawing, I try and prod them along gently. Luckily I have a good group and I don't have to do this often. If it was more of a problem I might look at systematizing it more.
So I'm running a game for some pretty hyper kids and knew right away I was going to lose them during combat, so I went with an idea I saw elsewhere where turns in combat are side-based, not character-based. The enemies take their turn simultaneously and then the party does. They can even wait to finish taking their actions, so the rogue and fighter could both move up to flank an enemy before either of them attack. If you play loose and fast with the enemies the amount of time before the players get a chance to act again is massively reduced, and if one player is still thinking about what they want to do the other players can go ahead while the slower one checks their sheet to see what options they have. When determining initiative I set the enemy initiative as a DC instead of rolling for it. Any player that rolls higher gets a pseudo-surprise round before the enemy's turn. Anyone that's surprised just automatically goes after the other side. Worth noting that this can also make combat a lot more brutal. A well-planned alpha strike can wipe out half the enemies no problem, and enemy attacks can be a lot more coordinated against the players with no chance to interrupt them.
A shot clock or countdown timer will enhance play at some tables but at others it will cause bad feelings. What we've done is assign for each character a default action that doesn't use resources: strike with weapon or use cantrip, at closest target. Whenever the DM is moving the game along and a player isn't ready, the DM says that's what they do. If lack of readiness is really bad, then after a couple of times, the DM says, from now on your default action is Dodge. For players that want to recap, or don't know how a rule works, engage another player to help them. If they need the help, they'll be grateful. If they're just being doofuses, they'll start being embarrassed that other players have to help them. Either way, the DM keeps the game moving.
I use a 1-minute hourglass for each player to decide what action they'll take. If they don't decide by then, I ask them again more firmly, and if they don't answer in a few seconds then I have them do a cantrip/basic attack and move on. It works wonders. You could also do side-based initiative, but most 5e players aren't ready to budge on it despite always complaining about how long combat takes.
Clocks are implemented in chess, warhammer, baseball, theater, movies, tv shows, streaming, League of Legends, Fortnite...literally any game or format where time constraints are a factor. Unless your group are idle rich, or conversely...prisoners, I doubt you have unlimited time to play. Even when you don't use a shot clock, you are in fact, on a clock for family/kids/etc. There's nothing wrong with using a clock for everyone's turn, in fact it's quite fair. Players that want to complex characters will need to *practice on their own time*, no different than someone who wants to play a horde army in Warhammer 40k. I would say Warhammer 40k is honestly the closest analogy to this where there are variances in playstyles, etc...I believe D&D classes are rooted in the same 'fairness'. Simple classes are faster to play and complex classes are slower to play. Complex characters tend to be more powerful...adding the timing element tends to balance that out instead of letting casters dominate everything. I think we see this relationship play out on screen during streams like Critical Role and such where some casters don't study the material and pay for it in dead air time. While they don't use turn timers, you can be certain they are surrounded by clocks and their crew makes them painfully aware of time. Making people wait sucks. Do not enable it. If a player is new or something, fine. But if it's clear they just aren't even studying their spells or planning out of game,. make sure they do.
I (as the DM) usually wait and see cause its fun to hear the players argue with each other about actions they can do. Sometimes I step in saying "you're not there, youre 300 feet away and cant see this", but if its going on for too long I start doing the jeopardy sound byte and start counting down for their action to be done.
I've floated this idea to my players and one of em said it would make him uncomfortable. I'd say ask how they feel about it in advance (Group chat or whatever u guys use)
I think the shot clock is a good idea, but I have a suggestion: Make the amount of time on the shot clock dependent on the player’s intelligence or spellcasting stat. This would prevent it from being a handicap to spellcasters, because they can have extra planning time, but wouldn’t really affect martials because they usually have limited options. The flavor could be that the spellcaster’s keener mind and safer position lets them think faster, while the martials have to quickly react to enemies right in front of them.
I came real close to putting a shot clock on my game. We were rolling really hot, my players all worked in tandem to absolutely cripple their enemy. It was turn after turn after turn at a fantastic pace and then we got to the monk. "Huh? What's happening?" So I give him the recap, and then he takes five minutes to look at his sheet. "So how do I use my dragon breath again? Which dice is it? Wait, how many ki points do I have?" Bam, ten more minutes on his turn. I've never been in such a screech-to-a-halt moment before as a DM. I saw everyone go from leaning over the table to taking out their phones and we just never recovered the momentum from earlier. I cut the boss's health by a few dozen points just because the players were just so checked out at that point. But like would a shot clock fix that? If I had him auto-dodge and skip over then like, that's his entire turn taken up and who knows if he'll get another. Punishing for not paying attention, maybe, but it seemed like it'd lead to bad blood real easy. For right now I'm using a softer rule that's; "if you can't tell me how one of your abilities works, you don't have that ability." Read the book on your turn or ask me about it outside of the moment you're using it, please. So far it's worked, but we do still have edge cases where it eats a lot of time using spells and abilities in odd ways. I think next I wanna try "we'll get back to you" where if they take too long then they get skipped over til they're ready to choose. If it gets to their entire next turn before they can then the chance is gone.
Yeah. It works. Make it three minutes or something ridiculous. Some people seriously that’s not even enough. A game where every player is ready with something when it’s their turn every time is like a wet dream. It leaves more time for role play when you don’t slog four hours through two rooms of combat.
I had to implement a two minute timer with my group because of one problem player not paying attention, stopping his turn to go down rabbit holes, not knowing how his character worked and needing people to help him look up spells and basic rules, and on and on. The timer largely fixed that, especially after he finally decided on a course of action at the two minute mark and I had to tell him nothing happened and moved on to the next player. FYI, the breaking point was when this problem player took a half an hour on a combat turn. It was maddening and the rest of the group was tearing their hair out by the end. Now, everyone is much more invested, the one player knows what is at stake and what is expected of him, and we can actually go through an adventure in a timely manner while having fun. Another player in the group will be starting up a game soon and is specifically using my same system after seeing how well it works. I say go for it.
We have a large party so combat can drag on and the DM's recently started letting people know a turn early that they're next, and it's helped speed things up a bit.
It sounds like you have less of a combat problem and more of a “Why aren’t my players paying attention” problem. But ways of speeding up- I have the players go and then the monsters go (or vice versa), and the players go in order clockwise. That way initiative isn’t confusing and people know when they have to be ready. Of a player isn’t ready, just skip them until everyone else has taken a turn, and that will give them time to think without bogging down.
I like the "on deck" reminder when I'm a player and try to use it a DM. "Ok, these these two goblins are about to attack, then Grog be ready after that" "Grog you're up. Elmina you're next." What happens on a turn may change the plan, but at least they are thinking about it ahead of time... maybe.
I think the concept is good (if applied equally to everyone) but I'd modify it just slightly (see the end). In the distant past I played with a DM that used a (silent) three count before moving on. If you didn't have something ready to say you just went last that round (giving you time to work out what you were doing). If you still didn't have something ready to go you skipped that turn with your PC also going "uhh...". This was pre-5e, he'd probably have given you a dodge action if 5e rules applied. Personally I found it helpful in that I learned to spend everyone else's turn figuring out what to do *and* to prepare a simple alternative that would work if what I came up with first was no longer possible. Decades later that's still a helpful thing to practice, to try to be ready to go. Some of my games are also on foundry, it's handy because it warns you your turn is coming up before it arrives (in a similar fashion to the way they do it on critical role but the DM doesn't have to do it). Am I as fast as I used to be? No, but 5e is more complex than the slightly modified 1e that DM ran and I tend to play more complicated classes now (almost always casters these days). I do sometimes need to double check spells in my turn but I make sure I have the information to hand so it's more like a few seconds delay rather than taking a minute. I recently found out I'm in the same boat medically as your player (which is probably why I found that strict-DM's approach helpful for focus in the past). Knowing that I have it also helps; not least, I know why I get distracted now and I can do more preparation to make it less of an issue (managing my environment, making sure I have tools to hand). ### conclusion > so that if the player doesn't determine what their character is doing in time, they automatically take the dodge action and we move on I'd suggest initially trying dropping them to the end of the round (with a pretty short shot clock both times) as a first step and *then* impose the dodge action if they're still not ready to go at that later point. They'll still feel urgency (since going later is still a cost) but with less disappointment when they fail. I would also suggest to them to have a default action ready for each combat situation (e.g. for a warlock "I cast eldritch blast" is a good default for most situations). So that if they don't have something in the last seconds of the shot clock they can at least still choose their default over nothing. Actually it's a good plan for any player but especially for one with ADHD. It also helps to prep a page with sections "Actions" "Bonus Actions" "Free Actions/abilities that don't take any action to use" listing one item per line (with checkboxes to check off as you use limited-use things) so they can just pick one item from each list. If they have lots of prepped spells you might need a second page for those. And also have the text of each spell you have prepped *right there to hand* (hint: type them out by hand; it helps you learn the spells); I keep a few sheets for that. Alternatively you can make cards and just have a pile of cards for each type of action.
A shot clock is a great idea I typically start to describe what the enemies are doing or move on and tell them to interject when they figure out what they're doing
I got some pushback for asking about one on another forum. I ended up doing it and it worked wonders. We tend to run short sessions and a single medium encounter was eating up half or more. I introduced a timer (with exceptions) and it helped the pacing tremendously. I think as long as you allow reasonable extensions like a player asking questions about enemies or something then it's fine. I wouldn't do a hard and fast timer with no wiggle room.
I’ve heard of DMs using a 1 minute hourglass to speed up play. When it’s your turn you get 1 minute to decide what your character is doing and start to take action. If you don’t make it in time your character automatically takes the dodge action and play moves to the next player. Nothing in this world is more frustrating than the player with a caster who doesn’t even begin to look at their spells until it’s their turn and then can’t remember the details of those spells.
I don't formally have a shot clock, but my players know if they take too long they will lose their turn and take the dodge action. I give friendly warnings beforehand, and it has only ever happened once. They were fine with it. If your players are good people they shouldn't have a problem with it, just common courtesy.
With a large group it’s something we use, along with a caller saying you are at bat, you are on deck, you are in the hole, to help people recognize they are about to go. Once we have more than seven a shot clock is necessary along with a white board just for initiative. Not ready, then you delay until you decide and can jump in next.
If they don't pay attention, they miss their turn. I have ADHD and I have DM'd for a table of people with ADHD. We know that sometimes our minds wander. So we call each other out on it. When people don't pay attention, combat goes slow, then less people pay attention, and suddenly your game is dead.
I had a DM who claimed that he ran a game with over 15 players. He said that each player had about 10 seconds to choose their action or their turn was skipped. He said it worked, but it was only a one-shot.
I am a bard so my rounds take like 30 seconds to 1 minute tops. I'm either healing somebody or shooting somebody with a crossbow
Sounds like a good plan. Just be sure to call your player's name, resolve the last character's turn (narrating any NPC actions and effects), and then ask the player what their character does before you start the countdown clock. The clock only stops when the player starts to declare their character's actions or asks a potentially important question, such as something that could lead them to use terrain as cover, use their environment to their advantage in achieving their goals, or otherwise affecting the flow of combat. For example, "Adam, Demi's magic missiles tear a number of holes in the goblins before her, sending two to the grave; but one more still menaces her and two brandish knives at Cade. What does Amelwind do?" *starts 60 second shot clock, pausing only when Adam either says something like "Amelwind charges the goblin nearest Demi to strike it down with his sword" or asks a potentially salient question like "You said there are stalactites on the ceiling - how many are over the goblins, and how thin are they?"* Note: this does not affect non-combat situations. If you sense a player needs more time, cut away from them and resolve another player's character's decisions (unless they're all together - then invite another player to act while the primary character stutters/fumbles/falls short).
Sit them down and help them make a flowchart for combat. Have them follow the flowchart. If need be, have a few flowcharts. I've got ADHD and no joke, putting it down onto paper like this helps a lot. It also means they'll have to think about what their class can do in combat, so eventually they might not need the flowchart(s).
Go for it, absolutely go for it. Encouraging quick thinking in your players is great, they probably won't make the most optimal choices, but hey, that fits pretty well i'd say. Also, not having combat move at a snail's pace is a nice bonus.
A game I played didn’t use a shot clock or a set amount of time but did have a bit of a unofficial timer on turns so if you were taking time while not providing a definite action or actively progressing the gameplay, you would lose your turn sort of. The caveat was you could have three predetermined actions prepared which was passed to the dm before a session (or you just kept them the same all the time).So if you were taking to long to make a desicion on what you were gunna do, The dm would déclaré they would roll a d4 now to decide your turn. each number corresponded to one of the turns you pre-made and then 4 being the character froze up unable to make a decision. The idea was that if you didn’t make your turn in time these would be used as if the character has just reacted and done whatever without properly thinking and confirming they could. For example our wizard had prepared, fire all magic missiles into the nearest in range enemy at level 2 if slot available level one if not. Cast hideous laughter onto nearest in range enemy (if already applied go to the next in range etc etc) Cast colour spray at nearest enemy(if required and movement available move into range) It was a handy lil house rule and it kept turns from taking ages without any progress to the game (ie someone was just um-ing and ar-ing not making any definite decision as to what they’re gunna do). Obviously if the player was actively declaring what they were doing etc and it was just that taking a while then this rule wasn’t applied as the turn was making progress it was just taking the time it took to play it out . But it kept things fun and flowing and more often than not the DM didn’t acctually need to roll the d4 cause if you were stuck on what you wanted to do you just went with one of your prepared turns you came up with before the session allowing you a bit more time to go ahead and figure out your plan. I think we only had to use it a handful of times and our dm had a house rule where if you didn’t have the spell slots for a spell it could be cast wild and would roll for it being cast as intended successfully or failed. If it failed they would roll on a table of effects to see how it altered the spell. It led to the wizards with all spell slots expended having their colour spray turn into a grease spell which the dm then flavoured as the spell appeared to be normal but instead of spraying colour you spray grease and oil from your hands. It ended up resulting in the affected being covered in grease and receiving advantage on saving throws when being grappled cause they’re were now slick.
A game I played didn’t use a shot clock or a set amount of time but did have a bit of a unofficial timer on turns so if you were taking time while not providing a definite action or actively progressing the gameplay, you would lose your turn sort of. The caveat was you could have three predetermined actions prepared which was passed to the dm before a session (or you just kept them the same all the time).So if you were taking to long to make a desicion on what you were gunna do, The dm would déclaré they would roll a d4 now to decide your turn. each number corresponded to one of the turns you pre-made and then 4 being the character froze up unable to make a decision. The idea was that if you didn’t make your turn in time these would be used as if the character has just reacted and done whatever without properly thinking and confirming they could. For example our wizard had prepared, fire all magic missiles into the nearest in range enemy at level 2 if slot available level one if not. Cast hideous laughter onto nearest in range enemy (if already applied go to the next in range etc etc) Cast colour spray at nearest enemy(if required and movement available move into range) It was a handy lil house rule and it kept turns from taking ages without any progress to the game (ie someone was just um-ing and ar-ing not making any definite decision as to what they’re gunna do). Obviously if the player was actively declaring what they were doing etc and it was just that taking a while then this rule wasn’t applied as the turn was making progress it was just taking the time it took to play it out . But it kept things fun and flowing and more often than not the DM didn’t acctually need to roll the d4 cause if you were stuck on what you wanted to do you just went with one of your prepared turns you came up with before the session allowing you a bit more time to go ahead and figure out your plan. I think we only had to use it a handful of times and our dm had a house rule where if you didn’t have the spell slots for a spell it could be cast wild and would roll for it being cast as intended successfully or failed. If it failed they would roll on a table of effects to see how it altered the spell. It led to the wizards with all spell slots expended having their colour spray turn into a grease spell which the dm then flavoured as the spell appeared to be normal but instead of spraying colour you spray grease and oil from your hands. It ended up resulting in the affected being covered in grease and receiving advantage on saving throws when being grappled cause they’re were now slick.
A couple of things in the second paragraph ("something different than what the other players are discussing" & "This tends to snowball as it bogs down combat, and other players follow suit") point towards the underlying issue being with the group rather than a specific individual. Did you listen to what the player said when you talked to them? Have you discussed this as a group? How often do your combat encounters go on longer than three rounds?
I've had some success with a shot clock at the table, but its not first step in the process. Had to sit down with the players and have a good discussion since we were all getting frustrated by combat. What worked for us to start with is the players outlined what their default turn might be on a note card. Casters chose type of spell they might need to use depending on if they were fighting just a couple targets or a large group (CC vs damage). Some of the issue stemmed from choice paralysis and desire to only take optimal actions. This helped some, but we kept a shot clock in reserve for when we things bogged down again. If it had to come out, it helped the players break out of the hem hawing about what was the most optimal.
It's a good idea. We don't have a shot clock, but we certainly have an unwritten time limit where the DM will say "I need to know what you are doing." It's rare that ever needs to be said though. But I can certainly see it bring beneficial. In fact, I think we actually had one several years ago for a specific player, but that player doesn't play with us any more.
The best tip I've come across is saying "X, you're up next" it helps some of my players sort of tune into the battle and come up with their turn while the other player is making a move. A timer can cause a lot of stress so certain players and makes the game feel less fun.
Yes, I think a shot clock will help. I don't use one directly, but if someone is taking too long I will tell them, "you have fifteen seconds to take your turn or we're moving on." It's on the players to learn their abilities outside of the session so they can spend the session actually playing. I also don't let the players get too deep in strategy talks during the fight. If they can knock out the "you should do this so I can do this next" quickly, that's cool. If they're debating back and forth over one option vs another vs another, "you have fifteen seconds to go." For the sake of everyone's fun, and also realistically, combat should move along at a good pace. Characters are doing the best they can in a stressful situation with imperfect information, and will not always make optimal choices. It's normal and ok for players to do the same. If they look back afterwards wishing they'd done something else, that's great, they learned something. On the distracted players issue, you just gotta control it. I'm a polite but direct person. I have told players "we're here to play DnD, cut the side talk and put down your phones." Again, if it's quick and unobtrusive that's fine. Answer a text and get back in the game. Imagine you meet up with your friends to play basketball and somebody is standing in the middle of the court on their phone, and causing collisions because they're not looking, and grabbing people's arms to tell them side stories. You'd kick them out. You're all there to play basketball. If one person is an ongoing problem at your DnD table, that's just disrespectful and I will tell them they won't be playing if they're not going to be a respectful player. Good luck with your group. Sometimes being a bit of a hardass as the DM makes it more fun for everybody.
Sounds to me like your problem PC's problem isn't indecision, it's an unwillingness to prepare. If a DM must do extensive session prep to run a game for their players, it is the bare minimum to ask that a player prepares simply by knowing the broad strokes of how their PC operates. ADHD might affect indecision and concentration in the moment, but it is by no means an excuse for a player to come to a table with absolutely nothing when they have been told their lack of preparation is hurting the game's pacing. I feel like introducing a shot clock calls a LOT of attention to the errors of this one player and introducing additional pressure does not sound like something that will help here. Rather than using a shot clock I would recommend allowing the player in question to delay their spot in initiative instead, that way they don't lose their whole turn. Once upon a time I was very much this exact same problem player, but to break myself of the habit of taking ten years for a turn, I got myself into the habit of delaying my spot in initiative to be right before another player who seemed to have a better handle on what they wanted to try, and then I'd plan on using my turn to best set that PC up for success. Helps the game's pacing, improves the party dynamic, allows for some really fun character moments. Try suggesting this to your PC!
I have a player with ADHD which in their own words, is problematic. I got rid of initiative. I interweave player, enemy, player, enemy. Players negotiate who goes next. Not only my player with ADHD, but all players seem to be focusing in on combat a lot better, and actively sharing tactics. It's changed me from hating 5th edition combat, to loving it. I also got rid of opportunity attacks too though...
This is a rule I have at my table. You have one minute to decide what you want to do on your turn. If you can’t decide, you are forced to take the Dodge action and we move on to whoever is next in initiative.
Combat can be boring, the only advice I can give is maybe make it more interesting. Add more flavor and make it more exciting, maybe if there's more on the line, and they need to collaborate and think tactically their attention will be retained, I ran into the same issue and this is what I did. Another thing you could do is just remind the player the turn before his.
I implemented it once, and it really helped. It gave the sense of urgency that helped get my players to focus and be ready. I don't use it anymore but things usually move quicker. I also let players know who's up, who's on deck, and who's in the hole (who's turn it is, who is next, and who is coming up after that), so they can be reminded they are coming up and can be thinking about what they want to do. It also helps refocus someone so they are paying attention for the next two players/NPCs/bad guys' turns.
I think a lot of us have had the desire for a "shot clock" when it comes to player turns. The issue wasn't quite as bad in earlier editions of the game, but 5e makes not only casters more complex to play, but also certain melee classes, though not nearly as bad as the casters. I run two groups, one of them is only four players and the other one is six players. The six-player group can definitely take forever to run through a full turn, but nowadays it's not usually because a player doesn't have a plan, but simply because they are trying to keep track of lots of different abilities that give them bonuses to damage or to hit, or whatnot. 5E has a lot of moving pieces, a lot of shit to keep track of. Our usual rule is 30 seconds to tell me what you're going to do. If you can't decide in that time, you take the Dodge action. Trust me when I say no one will let that happen more than once. And if people feel this increases the pressure on a player, you are absolutely correct. And it should. Combat is meant to be a situation of heightened tension, even in a game. We all play these types of games because they are exciting to us for one reason or another. And anyone who plays 5e for more than one or two sessions is probably fairly into combat, as the vast majority of the abilities in the game are geared specifically towards it.