Mini-prephase. I'm doing an open-world campaign and while my players seem to love it so far (have been DMing this one for about 3 or 4 month now), I noticed quickly that my strong suite is NPC RP and thus, adding most of the fun through interesting characters and dialogue. What I however did not add, and often skipped, even, is proper descriptions of places. I stated where they are, as in, the name of the city, and then what part, as in, the temple, the guild, the market, the smithy, or whatever, but I never really described what it looked like inside any of those places, or outside, etc, keeping it super minimal at best. And then I see some other DMs give these vibrant descriptions, where one could actually feel like they're there and form a mental image of the place, yet not only do I feel like I'm terrible at that aspect, I'm also unsure how much it really adds. I play and DM D&D text based, and I feel like that players often skim over things that don't actually add meaningful info, and descriptions, when not relevant for positioning in combat, are one of those things, that are quickly glossed over.
Yet, I actually want to get better at implementing them, but while I thought about that, I also really wondered what others think, how important they are, and how they go about it, etc, cause given that my world is open world, I have A LOT of places and things I would need to describe, and I feel like in some sense, these descriptions could even become quite repetitive, cause while in person, surely the place would be different, but with words, that's hard to do, and very time consuming, too. One thought was to prewrite a lot of these descriptions and add them to folders relating to the places, so whenever they visit a place, I open the respective folder and have the descriptions ready to go, but if they revisit the place, I'd have to improv a rewrite of it, as to keep things somewhat fresh..
Hi! Im Raven, im bi, trans and genderfae! I use she/her pronouns. I have ADHD, Dyslexia, PTSD and I've had complex PTSD since I was 1. I like making dice using Resin, i have a sub 20s 3x3 solve time. -Extended sig-
Architect of Cosmic Tapestries! Title given by Drum.
I think the biggest thing to remember when you describe things is paying attached to the level of detail in a scene. For example, “there’s a desk with a few books on it” vs. there’s a desk with a few books on it, the one on top is bound in red leather and sealed with a brass clasp”
In the second one, you are all but telling the party to go look at this book. You can use that if you need to, say if the book is plot critical. But it can get pretty obvious what you’re doing. Over time, you can throw out a few scenes where maybe the well-described feature isn’t actually important, to keep players on their toes. Or do the opposite, where the pile of books in the first statement is important but you’re glossing over it.
In short, the players only know what you tell them, so be careful where you shine a light.
Honestly, there's no hard or fast rules, and players have changed.
When I first started playing TTRPGs (over 20 years ago now!) it was entirely theatre of the mind. In fact I used theatre of the mind right up until relatively recently. As a result the descriptions of places, things and people were extremely important.
What I noticed around the time COVID hit and since is that players much more seem to need and indeed want the supportive materials like maps, minis, handouts etc. Even then however, I think it really does depend on the group. Some groups will desperately want theatre of the mind, they're in it more for roleplay and for letting their imaginations run wild. Other groups will literally need the actual visuals. There's no right or wrong way here of course, and I am talking in generalisations, but given the work WotC is putting into visualisations like their maps and potential VTT...I imagine it's because there's a clear trend toward showing images over describing and running theatre of the mind.
Never-the-less, my answer is to experiment. Ask your table, what do they want? Try a session with just theatre of the mind, try a session with maps and minis (or tokens) and handouts. See which the group prefer.
I would say as a rule however, that I feel like if a DM is talking for more than 5 minutes at any one time, they're probably talking too much. So try to limit descriptions to the important stuff. Take a cue from Dragon of Icespire Peak or Lost Mine of Phandelver, there's some nice simple descriptions written into Dragon of Icespire Peak that really help give you a sense of a good level of description to have as a base level.
My rule of thumb for describing a scene is at least three details that cover different senses.
If I were to describe a tavern it may look like
" the smell of alcohol and stale sweat hits you as the door opens, you step into a large open room with small wooden tables irregularly set around it. Each table has a small group of people drinking, the sound of conversation and laughter fill the space. A large stone hearth radiates heat and casts a warm light across the room."
Then you can add more details focused around what your players engage with.
Oh, that's nice. I'll give the thread a read. Thank you
np
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hi! Im Raven, im bi, trans and genderfae! I use she/her pronouns. I have ADHD, Dyslexia, PTSD and I've had complex PTSD since I was 1. I like making dice using Resin, i have a sub 20s 3x3 solve time. -Extended sig-
Architect of Cosmic Tapestries! Title given by Drum.
I don't use any VTT -- the closest I come is a camera that is trained on a quickly drawn map on a big sheet of graph paper.
I have a sticky note attached to my screen with the sense I mention int he thread linked previously. I describe what is needed, and then I ask them if they are looking for anything in particular.
You can say a lot with a few words -- and nothing sets a scene faster than you giving their senses a workout.
I also love the point noted above about the level of detail you use. You should be careful there -- I have a rule of one line per things, because I will go off on a description if I don't rein it in.
I give them a good rough of the area -- they have to focus on a place for me to go into more detail.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
IMO it's good to prioritize. If you already spend a good bit of time on social interaction and NPC personality, you can and should certainly put less effort and time into describing things.
The interaction of your npcs will add much depth and paint an image of the situations well on its own, so detailed describing adds less value.
Too much description might actually slow down the game too much, when combined with heavy RP.
When deciding what to describe, maybe ask yourself one questions: Does this create extra value to the game/players or help advance the story?
I have learned that the answer to the root question varies greatly, depending on the players involved. I have recently plopped back into the DM chair, after 20+ years away from it, and the game. At our live table, we have one player who loves detail, especially relating to the world and the story line, and will track all of it.
Another player would prefer that all play be done on maps, with figurines/markers, because that is the best way that they can track the game progress, and especially the combat action. For my part, as either DM or player, I prefer theater of the mind, as the story and action both tend to go faster that way.
Yet another player only wants to know what is required to get to the place, and find the thing, and how to locate and buy the other thing they want, with the loot they have gathered. Any further attempt at adding detail makes that one player visually and verbally impatient with the rest of the table, often to the point of distraction.
Still another player insists on "Multi-tasking", and will often ask those at the table to catch them up on things, make their decision/move, then go back to doing stuff, usually unrelated, sometimes a video game, on their handheld screen.
I have told all at the table that I get into the story, big time, and with me as the DM, their gonna have to put up with my narration now and then. If I'm telling them something through narration or NPC interaction, then there is information within that they can use, and might even need, in order to succeed in the adventure.
Because of this wide variety in player preferences, I have been considering starting another table group; a group that enjoys being part of the story. At this point, perhaps only one player in our current group would be asked to play in that campaign.
I have learned that the answer to the root question varies greatly, depending on the players involved. I have recently plopped back into the DM chair, after 20+ years away from it, and the game. At our live table, we have one player who loves detail, especially relating to the world and the story line, and will track all of it.
Another player would prefer that all play be done on maps, with figurines/markers, because that is the best way that they can track the game progress, and especially the combat action. For my part, as either DM or player, I prefer theater of the mind, as the story and action both tend to go faster that way.
Yet another player only wants to know what is required to get to the place, and find the thing, and how to locate and buy the other thing they want, with the loot they have gathered. Any further attempt at adding detail makes that one player visually and verbally impatient with the rest of the table, often to the point of distraction.
Still another player insists on "Multi-tasking", and will often ask those at the table to catch them up on things, make their decision/move, then go back to doing stuff, usually unrelated, sometimes a video game, on their handheld screen.
I have told all at the table that I get into the story, big time, and with me as the DM, their gonna have to put up with my narration now and then. If I'm telling them something through narration or NPC interaction, then there is information within that they can use, and might even need, in order to succeed in the adventure.
Because of this wide variety in player preferences, I have been considering starting another table group; a group that enjoys being part of the story. At this point, perhaps only one player in our current group would be asked to play in that campaign.
I think you put into words one the biggest flaws of tabletop RPG:s.
Because what you described is a real issue: When players want different types of games entirely. Now if it were a solo game, they would just get a different game. If it were an online game, they would just join a different game.
But tabletop RPGs are a group game. You can't usually just press "join game" and have your fun. Oftentimes you have to make do with what you get and finding ANY group can be really tricky, at least where I live. You might get an ill-fitting group of individuals, but the other option is no group at all.
I feel ya. I've had my share of dysfunctional groups. I was incredibly lucky to find a couple of amazing guys here on DnDB, who happened to live in the same country and also have very similar play styles.They live quite far away, so we play online mostly. But we did meet up and are going to meet up again.
We can all just hope to find that group where our expectations are well aligned. :)
Have your players asked for more detailed descriptions? If not, it's probably not that important to them. Tell them you want to do better at implementing descriptions and ask them what they think about it. Some players love them, some will just tune them out, most are in between the two. It's up to you to find out where your players fall on the spectrum and you do that by asking them. Then, if nobody is opposed to it, phase it in slowly to practice and to get them used to it.
I can relate with that so much! Since I do pbp instead of having a live table, it can be quite hard for me to see when people are multitasking, but I can feel it and it is honestly infuriating and disrespectful, cause it slows down everyone, just cause they have attention span of a fly. I banished those players from my games really quickly as a result.
But yeah, truthfully, I haven't really asked my people if they want more descriptions. I know one of them really wants the combat roleplay in detail, and that part is much easier for me than describing a room lol. I'll try communicating it a bit more. I do a lot of my work off-screen and unnoticed, just reading up and learning and improving my DMing without really communicating it with them, but I suppose this is one detail I should communicate.
I have learned that the answer to the root question varies greatly, depending on the players involved. I have recently plopped back into the DM chair, after 20+ years away from it, and the game. At our live table, we have one player who loves detail, especially relating to the world and the story line, and will track all of it.
Another player would prefer that all play be done on maps, with figurines/markers, because that is the best way that they can track the game progress, and especially the combat action. For my part, as either DM or player, I prefer theater of the mind, as the story and action both tend to go faster that way.
Yet another player only wants to know what is required to get to the place, and find the thing, and how to locate and buy the other thing they want, with the loot they have gathered. Any further attempt at adding detail makes that one player visually and verbally impatient with the rest of the table, often to the point of distraction.
Still another player insists on "Multi-tasking", and will often ask those at the table to catch them up on things, make their decision/move, then go back to doing stuff, usually unrelated, sometimes a video game, on their handheld screen.
I have told all at the table that I get into the story, big time, and with me as the DM, their gonna have to put up with my narration now and then. If I'm telling them something through narration or NPC interaction, then there is information within that they can use, and might even need, in order to succeed in the adventure.
Because of this wide variety in player preferences, I have been considering starting another table group; a group that enjoys being part of the story. At this point, perhaps only one player in our current group would be asked to play in that campaign.
I think you put into words one the biggest flaws of tabletop RPG:s.
Because what you described is a real issue: When players want different types of games entirely. Now if it were a solo game, they would just get a different game. If it were an online game, they would just join a different game.
But tabletop RPGs are a group game. You can't usually just press "join game" and have your fun. Oftentimes you have to make do with what you get and finding ANY group can be really tricky, at least where I live. You might get an ill-fitting group of individuals, but the other option is no group at all.
I feel ya. I've had my share of dysfunctional groups. I was incredibly lucky to find a couple of amazing guys here on DnDB, who happened to live in the same country and also have very similar play styles.They live quite far away, so we play online mostly. But we did meet up and are going to meet up again.
We can all just hope to find that group where our expectations are well aligned. :)
In fact, I actually do quite a bit of solo DMing, pbp with multiple solo players actually has been much more enjoyable for me than DMing for a group. Scheduling is way easier and you can just play whenever you both have time spontaneously instead of having to wait for the whole group, and if it's 1 on 1, you can't have 1 dude slow down the whole group, so it's overall just a much more pleasant pace and the story can be much more personalized, too. Basically, I think solo players are actually pretty damn cool to DM for.
But aside of that, I've become a full time DM really, since none of my friends DM anymore, as they all just play with me DMing, but reading some of these responses makes me want to be a player for a cool DM again.
My two cents is that descriptions of locations should be relatively short and sweet unless significant detail is needed for the plot. In my last game, my players went to eight areas in a town and detailed descriptions of all those areas would have killed the game when a few sentences would suffice. I like the old adage, a fence should be tall enough to do do the job, but not so big to obscure the view. Likewise, a description of a locale should give a vision of the area, but not be so long to slow the game.
The last thing I would add is that I have sight, sound and smell descriptive words on my DM screen, two dozen per category. I mix and match those words as needed to describe a scene.
I am a 40 something year old physician who DMs for a group of 40 something year old doctors. We play a hybrid game, mostly based on 2nd edition rules with some homebrew and 5E components.
That last tip is pretty nice. I was looking up websites with lists for adjectives, etc, and I even made myself a anki deck (spaced repetition flashcards) to memorize some new descriptive vocabulary. I'm not a native, so I have gaps in my vocabulary at times, and I figured learning some new words would be a good thing to do to improve my descriptions as well.
This whole website seemed very useful, having multiple collections of words. My idea as a non-native was essentially to copy paste it, categorize them and add definitions to the words that I'm not familiar with, so that I have an easy to navigate list of words to choose from the next time I would need to describe something..
I am a 40 something year old physician who DMs for a group of 40 something year old doctors. We play a hybrid game, mostly based on 2nd edition rules with some homebrew and 5E components.
Formatting is not great, private message if you want the original MS word document
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Velstitzen
I am a 40 something year old physician who DMs for a group of 40 something year old doctors. We play a hybrid game, mostly based on 2nd edition rules with some homebrew and 5E components.
Mini-prephase. I'm doing an open-world campaign and while my players seem to love it so far (have been DMing this one for about 3 or 4 month now), I noticed quickly that my strong suite is NPC RP and thus, adding most of the fun through interesting characters and dialogue. What I however did not add, and often skipped, even, is proper descriptions of places. I stated where they are, as in, the name of the city, and then what part, as in, the temple, the guild, the market, the smithy, or whatever, but I never really described what it looked like inside any of those places, or outside, etc, keeping it super minimal at best. And then I see some other DMs give these vibrant descriptions, where one could actually feel like they're there and form a mental image of the place, yet not only do I feel like I'm terrible at that aspect, I'm also unsure how much it really adds. I play and DM D&D text based, and I feel like that players often skim over things that don't actually add meaningful info, and descriptions, when not relevant for positioning in combat, are one of those things, that are quickly glossed over.
Yet, I actually want to get better at implementing them, but while I thought about that, I also really wondered what others think, how important they are, and how they go about it, etc, cause given that my world is open world, I have A LOT of places and things I would need to describe, and I feel like in some sense, these descriptions could even become quite repetitive, cause while in person, surely the place would be different, but with words, that's hard to do, and very time consuming, too. One thought was to prewrite a lot of these descriptions and add them to folders relating to the places, so whenever they visit a place, I open the respective folder and have the descriptions ready to go, but if they revisit the place, I'd have to improv a rewrite of it, as to keep things somewhat fresh..
Thoughts on it all?
I had a problem like this too and got lots of help that might help you as well. Just take a look and see if it helps.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/dungeon-masters-only/180092-i-need-a-bit-of-help
Hi! Im Raven, im bi, trans and genderfae! I use she/her pronouns. I have ADHD, Dyslexia, PTSD and I've had complex PTSD since I was 1. I like making dice using Resin, i have a sub 20s 3x3 solve time.
-Extended sig-
Architect of Cosmic Tapestries! Title given by Drum.
Oh, that's nice. I'll give the thread a read. Thank you
I think the biggest thing to remember when you describe things is paying attached to the level of detail in a scene. For example, “there’s a desk with a few books on it” vs. there’s a desk with a few books on it, the one on top is bound in red leather and sealed with a brass clasp”
In the second one, you are all but telling the party to go look at this book. You can use that if you need to, say if the book is plot critical. But it can get pretty obvious what you’re doing. Over time, you can throw out a few scenes where maybe the well-described feature isn’t actually important, to keep players on their toes. Or do the opposite, where the pile of books in the first statement is important but you’re glossing over it.
In short, the players only know what you tell them, so be careful where you shine a light.
Honestly, there's no hard or fast rules, and players have changed.
When I first started playing TTRPGs (over 20 years ago now!) it was entirely theatre of the mind. In fact I used theatre of the mind right up until relatively recently. As a result the descriptions of places, things and people were extremely important.
What I noticed around the time COVID hit and since is that players much more seem to need and indeed want the supportive materials like maps, minis, handouts etc. Even then however, I think it really does depend on the group. Some groups will desperately want theatre of the mind, they're in it more for roleplay and for letting their imaginations run wild. Other groups will literally need the actual visuals. There's no right or wrong way here of course, and I am talking in generalisations, but given the work WotC is putting into visualisations like their maps and potential VTT...I imagine it's because there's a clear trend toward showing images over describing and running theatre of the mind.
Never-the-less, my answer is to experiment. Ask your table, what do they want? Try a session with just theatre of the mind, try a session with maps and minis (or tokens) and handouts. See which the group prefer.
I would say as a rule however, that I feel like if a DM is talking for more than 5 minutes at any one time, they're probably talking too much. So try to limit descriptions to the important stuff. Take a cue from Dragon of Icespire Peak or Lost Mine of Phandelver, there's some nice simple descriptions written into Dragon of Icespire Peak that really help give you a sense of a good level of description to have as a base level.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
My rule of thumb for describing a scene is at least three details that cover different senses.
If I were to describe a tavern it may look like
" the smell of alcohol and stale sweat hits you as the door opens, you step into a large open room with small wooden tables irregularly set around it. Each table has a small group of people drinking, the sound of conversation and laughter fill the space. A large stone hearth radiates heat and casts a warm light across the room."
Then you can add more details focused around what your players engage with.
np
Hi! Im Raven, im bi, trans and genderfae! I use she/her pronouns. I have ADHD, Dyslexia, PTSD and I've had complex PTSD since I was 1. I like making dice using Resin, i have a sub 20s 3x3 solve time.
-Extended sig-
Architect of Cosmic Tapestries! Title given by Drum.
I don't use any VTT -- the closest I come is a camera that is trained on a quickly drawn map on a big sheet of graph paper.
I have a sticky note attached to my screen with the sense I mention int he thread linked previously. I describe what is needed, and then I ask them if they are looking for anything in particular.
You can say a lot with a few words -- and nothing sets a scene faster than you giving their senses a workout.
I also love the point noted above about the level of detail you use. You should be careful there -- I have a rule of one line per things, because I will go off on a description if I don't rein it in.
I give them a good rough of the area -- they have to focus on a place for me to go into more detail.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
IMO it's good to prioritize. If you already spend a good bit of time on social interaction and NPC personality, you can and should certainly put less effort and time into describing things.
The interaction of your npcs will add much depth and paint an image of the situations well on its own, so detailed describing adds less value.
Too much description might actually slow down the game too much, when combined with heavy RP.
When deciding what to describe, maybe ask yourself one questions: Does this create extra value to the game/players or help advance the story?
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I have learned that the answer to the root question varies greatly, depending on the players involved. I have recently plopped back into the DM chair, after 20+ years away from it, and the game. At our live table, we have one player who loves detail, especially relating to the world and the story line, and will track all of it.
Another player would prefer that all play be done on maps, with figurines/markers, because that is the best way that they can track the game progress, and especially the combat action. For my part, as either DM or player, I prefer theater of the mind, as the story and action both tend to go faster that way.
Yet another player only wants to know what is required to get to the place, and find the thing, and how to locate and buy the other thing they want, with the loot they have gathered. Any further attempt at adding detail makes that one player visually and verbally impatient with the rest of the table, often to the point of distraction.
Still another player insists on "Multi-tasking", and will often ask those at the table to catch them up on things, make their decision/move, then go back to doing stuff, usually unrelated, sometimes a video game, on their handheld screen.
I have told all at the table that I get into the story, big time, and with me as the DM, their gonna have to put up with my narration now and then. If I'm telling them something through narration or NPC interaction, then there is information within that they can use, and might even need, in order to succeed in the adventure.
Because of this wide variety in player preferences, I have been considering starting another table group; a group that enjoys being part of the story. At this point, perhaps only one player in our current group would be asked to play in that campaign.
I think you put into words one the biggest flaws of tabletop RPG:s.
Because what you described is a real issue: When players want different types of games entirely. Now if it were a solo game, they would just get a different game. If it were an online game, they would just join a different game.
But tabletop RPGs are a group game. You can't usually just press "join game" and have your fun. Oftentimes you have to make do with what you get and finding ANY group can be really tricky, at least where I live. You might get an ill-fitting group of individuals, but the other option is no group at all.
I feel ya. I've had my share of dysfunctional groups. I was incredibly lucky to find a couple of amazing guys here on DnDB, who happened to live in the same country and also have very similar play styles.They live quite far away, so we play online mostly. But we did meet up and are going to meet up again.
We can all just hope to find that group where our expectations are well aligned. :)
Finland GMT/UTC +2
Have your players asked for more detailed descriptions? If not, it's probably not that important to them. Tell them you want to do better at implementing descriptions and ask them what they think about it. Some players love them, some will just tune them out, most are in between the two. It's up to you to find out where your players fall on the spectrum and you do that by asking them. Then, if nobody is opposed to it, phase it in slowly to practice and to get them used to it.
I can relate with that so much! Since I do pbp instead of having a live table, it can be quite hard for me to see when people are multitasking, but I can feel it and it is honestly infuriating and disrespectful, cause it slows down everyone, just cause they have attention span of a fly. I banished those players from my games really quickly as a result.
But yeah, truthfully, I haven't really asked my people if they want more descriptions. I know one of them really wants the combat roleplay in detail, and that part is much easier for me than describing a room lol. I'll try communicating it a bit more. I do a lot of my work off-screen and unnoticed, just reading up and learning and improving my DMing without really communicating it with them, but I suppose this is one detail I should communicate.
In fact, I actually do quite a bit of solo DMing, pbp with multiple solo players actually has been much more enjoyable for me than DMing for a group. Scheduling is way easier and you can just play whenever you both have time spontaneously instead of having to wait for the whole group, and if it's 1 on 1, you can't have 1 dude slow down the whole group, so it's overall just a much more pleasant pace and the story can be much more personalized, too. Basically, I think solo players are actually pretty damn cool to DM for.
But aside of that, I've become a full time DM really, since none of my friends DM anymore, as they all just play with me DMing, but reading some of these responses makes me want to be a player for a cool DM again.
The points above are all really helpful.
My two cents is that descriptions of locations should be relatively short and sweet unless significant detail is needed for the plot. In my last game, my players went to eight areas in a town and detailed descriptions of all those areas would have killed the game when a few sentences would suffice. I like the old adage, a fence should be tall enough to do do the job, but not so big to obscure the view. Likewise, a description of a locale should give a vision of the area, but not be so long to slow the game.
The last thing I would add is that I have sight, sound and smell descriptive words on my DM screen, two dozen per category. I mix and match those words as needed to describe a scene.
Velstitzen
I am a 40 something year old physician who DMs for a group of 40 something year old doctors. We play a hybrid game, mostly based on 2nd edition rules with some homebrew and 5E components.
That last tip is pretty nice. I was looking up websites with lists for adjectives, etc, and I even made myself a anki deck (spaced repetition flashcards) to memorize some new descriptive vocabulary. I'm not a native, so I have gaps in my vocabulary at times, and I figured learning some new words would be a good thing to do to improve my descriptions as well.
https://simplicable.com/descriptive-words/descriptive-words
This whole website seemed very useful, having multiple collections of words. My idea as a non-native was essentially to copy paste it, categorize them and add definitions to the words that I'm not familiar with, so that I have an easy to navigate list of words to choose from the next time I would need to describe something..
Combat Narration: SOUNDS
Batter Arm Arterial Spray Modifiers Sounds:
Bang Abdomen Blood curdling shriek Barely audible Cacophony Pop
Blast Chest Bouncing head Blaring Chime Rumble
Bludgeon Ear Crumpled on the ground Deafening Clank Shrill
Blast Eye Clutching entrails Ear splitting Clatter Squeak
Crack Face Exploding into mist Muffled Crash Squeal
Crunch Forearm Dislocating Pulsating Drone Sweet
Clash Foot Flying across the room Roaring Fizz Sonorous
Cut Groin Gasping for breath Rhythmic Groan Yelp
Dislocate Hand Remains of pulpy tissue Soft Growl Yowl
Drive Knee Screaming in pain Staccato Gurgle Wheeze
Eviscerate Jaw Shattering ribs Rich Melodious Scream
Grind Pelvis Spraying teeth Thunderous Musical
Impale Shoulder Twitching
Skewer Vomiting blood
Slam
Slice
Slash
Splinter
Strike
Thrust
Tear
SMELL
Modifiers Good: Bad:
Faint Aromatic Acrid
Heavy Clean Burning
Laden Earthy Fetid
Pungent Flowery Fishy
Rich Fruity Musty
Strong Intoxicating Malodorous
Wafting Minty Nauseating
Piquant Putrid
Savory Rancid
Sweet Sickly
Tangy Sour
Stale
Stinging
Velstitzen
I am a 40 something year old physician who DMs for a group of 40 something year old doctors. We play a hybrid game, mostly based on 2nd edition rules with some homebrew and 5E components.
Formatting is not great, private message if you want the original MS word document
Velstitzen
I am a 40 something year old physician who DMs for a group of 40 something year old doctors. We play a hybrid game, mostly based on 2nd edition rules with some homebrew and 5E components.
Oh yes, I would love that! That's amazing. Sorry I'm seeing this late, have been busy