I am a long-time player and DM as well as being a published author. One of my (many) issues is that there is a pretty fine line for both with regards to how much description and detail you should use for your scenes and setting.
Modern games and stories are much easier because there is more likely to be a common frame of reference. If I say 'White F-150 pickup truck' most players and readers will know what I'm talking about. However, it gets harder when you're talking about something more abstract.
'You all walk into the Green Goblin Inn where your contact has agreed to meet you.' Okay...as a DM, how much detail do you think your players need? As a Player, how much detail do you want? I've been in games and read books that range from 'The Green Goblin is a fairly mundane inn, with rented rooms on the second floor and the main floor dominated by the common room.' to full-on Tolkein-esque descriptions that would make a criminologist drool. There has to be a happy medium somewhere.
I usually go with the former type of description unless the players ask for details but I'm always looking to improve my DMing skills.
How much detail do you use as a DM and without prompting, how much do you want as a player?
One advice I've been given is to use two points for each of the five traditional senses in order to establish atmosphere. It provides enough detail for atmosphere whilst not going too long on it. I'd then add Important details as needed to understand what's happening - obviously, that's usually visual in nature.
So going in the pub, I might mention:
You can see that it's dark and dingy.
The patrons are whispering in a gentle murmur, except for one party of gnomes who are having loud and boisterous game of darts in the far corner.
You can smell the familiar scent of intertwined tobacco smoke and spilt ale.
You can taste the pollution in the air from the dirt and sweat.
You can feel the waterlogged carpet giving way underfoot.
You can see that the pub is laid out with plenty of tables, but it's standing room only, with all the tables taken. Moving around in here is going to be difficult.
It takes perhaps ten or twenty seconds to recount, but it properly sets the atmosphere. I'd put it in order of strength and obviousness. Things that would immediately overpower your sense go first, more subtle things that require paying attention to come last.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Personally, I play it by ear when I am DMing. A more important moment or location might get a lot more description than something rather mundane. Additionally, factors outside the game are important - what your players find interesting, the timing of the session and what needs to be done to reach a stopping point before it ends, the pace at which the players are moving, etc. You have to consider what might occur in the room - more description could be helpful if the party is going to get up to trouble and needs to know the obstacles, for example. How you are setting the stage also is a factor - if you are using a beautifully drawn map or a bunch of terrain miniatures, that can help mitigate the need for a description. There are lots of different data points which can go into the decision - the job of the DM is trying to figure out that balance.
Finding that exact balance is hard—even professional authors struggle with this sometimes (looks pointedly at Robert Jordan’s messy writing). Even exceptional DMs are going to mess it up every now and then.
If one has not yet figured out that balance or regularly has trouble striking the right tone, I rather like Linklite’s metric above. I think I will be passing that along to a few DMs I know.
As a DM, I'm a minimalist. I prep as much information as is needed for the players to understand where the characters are and then wait for them to go deeper through character actions. I write content with game players in mind and treat them as chaos agents who drive the story through their interests and actions.
I think this is significantly different from writing for a reader. There, you need detail to create a sense of place and must also drive that into action. An author can't step back and let the reader be a chaos agent to the story. There is no way for the reader to do that.
It took me a long time to realize that this is why I can't write fiction. I can describe a place and set up a situation, but my joy as a storyteller is watching the players breathe life into the story. Writing requires the setup and the action that the game narrative gives to the player.
I am a long-time player and DM as well as being a published author. One of my (many) issues is that there is a pretty fine line for both with regards to how much description and detail you should use for your scenes and setting.
Modern games and stories are much easier because there is more likely to be a common frame of reference. If I say 'White F-150 pickup truck' most players and readers will know what I'm talking about. However, it gets harder when you're talking about something more abstract.
'You all walk into the Green Goblin Inn where your contact has agreed to meet you.' Okay...as a DM, how much detail do you think your players need? As a Player, how much detail do you want? I've been in games and read books that range from 'The Green Goblin is a fairly mundane inn, with rented rooms on the second floor and the main floor dominated by the common room.' to full-on Tolkein-esque descriptions that would make a criminologist drool. There has to be a happy medium somewhere.
I usually go with the former type of description unless the players ask for details but I'm always looking to improve my DMing skills.
How much detail do you use as a DM and without prompting, how much do you want as a player?
Don't forget that there's quite often a cultural aspect to things you take for granted. You say most people will know what you're talking about if you say a white F-150 pickup truck but while I understand white and pickup truck I've no idea what the F-150 bit is without Googling it because Ford never really sold them in the UK. Meanwhile my local pub was built in 1713 (and feels like it's never been updated since) so my players have a much better handle on how an old feeling fantasy tavern is because we regularly drink in one than for instance someone born in California. Not necessarily a consideration for us as DMs unless we're playing internationally but definitely a consideration when writing a book
One of my players in my regular game has aphantasia: they don't form mental images in response to description. This has forced me to totally rethink the way I describe spaces; it's been tough, but overall I think it's been good for me. Now whenever my players enter a space they'll spend a meaningful amount of time in, the first thing I do is sketch a floorplan. This used to take a while, but I'm getting much faster with practice. (For complex spaces, I do this ahead of time.)
Once I have the floorplan, I try to keep my descriptions tight and focus on the way a space feels to be in. If a physical detail doesn't establish a vibe, can't be immediately interacted with, and isn't asked about, I omit it. I used to hesitate to describe a place using subjective judgements, but I find it helpful now. This means instead of saying: "The bar smells of smoke, dirt, and body odor. The tables are discolored and the floor is slightly sticky." I'll explicitly tell the players "Neither the bar nor the clientele seems like it's been cleaned recently." I find that gets a more emotional-level response from my players, especially the one who I know isn't building a mental image out of my descriptions.
One of my players in my regular game has aphantasia: they don't form mental images in response to description. This has forced me to totally rethink the way I describe spaces; it's been tough, but overall I think it's been good for me. Now whenever my players enter a space they'll spend a meaningful amount of time in, the first thing I do is sketch a floorplan. This used to take a while, but I'm getting much faster with practice. (For complex spaces, I do this ahead of time.)
Once I have the floorplan, I try to keep my descriptions tight and focus on the way a space feels to be in. If a physical detail doesn't establish a vibe, can't be immediately interacted with, and isn't asked about, I omit it. I used to hesitate to describe a place using subjective judgements, but I find it helpful now. This means instead of saying: "The bar smells of smoke, dirt, and body odor. The tables are discolored and the floor is slightly sticky." I'll explicitly tell the players "Neither the bar nor the clientele seems like it's been cleaned recently." I find that gets a more emotional-level response from my players, especially the one who I know isn't building a mental image out of my descriptions.
This is great advice! I love the idea of changing how you describe things to keep your style from sounding stale.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am a long-time player and DM as well as being a published author. One of my (many) issues is that there is a pretty fine line for both with regards to how much description and detail you should use for your scenes and setting.
Modern games and stories are much easier because there is more likely to be a common frame of reference. If I say 'White F-150 pickup truck' most players and readers will know what I'm talking about. However, it gets harder when you're talking about something more abstract.
'You all walk into the Green Goblin Inn where your contact has agreed to meet you.' Okay...as a DM, how much detail do you think your players need? As a Player, how much detail do you want? I've been in games and read books that range from 'The Green Goblin is a fairly mundane inn, with rented rooms on the second floor and the main floor dominated by the common room.' to full-on Tolkein-esque descriptions that would make a criminologist drool. There has to be a happy medium somewhere.
I usually go with the former type of description unless the players ask for details but I'm always looking to improve my DMing skills.
How much detail do you use as a DM and without prompting, how much do you want as a player?
One advice I've been given is to use two points for each of the five traditional senses in order to establish atmosphere. It provides enough detail for atmosphere whilst not going too long on it. I'd then add Important details as needed to understand what's happening - obviously, that's usually visual in nature.
So going in the pub, I might mention:
It takes perhaps ten or twenty seconds to recount, but it properly sets the atmosphere. I'd put it in order of strength and obviousness. Things that would immediately overpower your sense go first, more subtle things that require paying attention to come last.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Personally, I play it by ear when I am DMing. A more important moment or location might get a lot more description than something rather mundane. Additionally, factors outside the game are important - what your players find interesting, the timing of the session and what needs to be done to reach a stopping point before it ends, the pace at which the players are moving, etc. You have to consider what might occur in the room - more description could be helpful if the party is going to get up to trouble and needs to know the obstacles, for example. How you are setting the stage also is a factor - if you are using a beautifully drawn map or a bunch of terrain miniatures, that can help mitigate the need for a description. There are lots of different data points which can go into the decision - the job of the DM is trying to figure out that balance.
Finding that exact balance is hard—even professional authors struggle with this sometimes (looks pointedly at Robert Jordan’s messy writing). Even exceptional DMs are going to mess it up every now and then.
If one has not yet figured out that balance or regularly has trouble striking the right tone, I rather like Linklite’s metric above. I think I will be passing that along to a few DMs I know.
As a DM, I'm a minimalist. I prep as much information as is needed for the players to understand where the characters are and then wait for them to go deeper through character actions. I write content with game players in mind and treat them as chaos agents who drive the story through their interests and actions.
I think this is significantly different from writing for a reader. There, you need detail to create a sense of place and must also drive that into action. An author can't step back and let the reader be a chaos agent to the story. There is no way for the reader to do that.
It took me a long time to realize that this is why I can't write fiction. I can describe a place and set up a situation, but my joy as a storyteller is watching the players breathe life into the story. Writing requires the setup and the action that the game narrative gives to the player.
Don't forget that there's quite often a cultural aspect to things you take for granted. You say most people will know what you're talking about if you say a white F-150 pickup truck but while I understand white and pickup truck I've no idea what the F-150 bit is without Googling it because Ford never really sold them in the UK. Meanwhile my local pub was built in 1713 (and feels like it's never been updated since) so my players have a much better handle on how an old feeling fantasy tavern is because we regularly drink in one than for instance someone born in California. Not necessarily a consideration for us as DMs unless we're playing internationally but definitely a consideration when writing a book
One of my players in my regular game has aphantasia: they don't form mental images in response to description. This has forced me to totally rethink the way I describe spaces; it's been tough, but overall I think it's been good for me. Now whenever my players enter a space they'll spend a meaningful amount of time in, the first thing I do is sketch a floorplan. This used to take a while, but I'm getting much faster with practice. (For complex spaces, I do this ahead of time.)
Once I have the floorplan, I try to keep my descriptions tight and focus on the way a space feels to be in. If a physical detail doesn't establish a vibe, can't be immediately interacted with, and isn't asked about, I omit it. I used to hesitate to describe a place using subjective judgements, but I find it helpful now. This means instead of saying: "The bar smells of smoke, dirt, and body odor. The tables are discolored and the floor is slightly sticky." I'll explicitly tell the players "Neither the bar nor the clientele seems like it's been cleaned recently." I find that gets a more emotional-level response from my players, especially the one who I know isn't building a mental image out of my descriptions.
This is great advice! I love the idea of changing how you describe things to keep your style from sounding stale.