A pet peeve of mine in movies and books is forced exposition, one of the many reasons the first suicide squad movie is so bad is that you have literally an exposition guy (he exists just to randomly explain character backstory or history).
Generally in TTRPG I try to avoid this using the standard storyline approach of show don’t tell, or having history and lore come out of things the characters do, questions they ask if NPCs, or research they do in libraries, or documents they find. I don’t have an NPC give a long narrative and I don’t provide long out of game information documents.
Is exposition something your aware of and try to avoid, if so what are your techniques for doing so and if not, I am intrigued why not and how it might or might not impact how you write things out and prepare?
I agree in spirit but I also run a lot of homebrew. Out of game exposition is necessary because people come in with an expectation that lore will more or less line up with the forgotten realms. It’s awkward when the ranger announces he’s decided we should mount an expedition to the underdark and the DM has to break the news that 1) there is no such thing in this world and 2) his PC probably didn’t just say all the stuff he just said.
A better storyteller than I could maybe weave this into seamlessly into the adventure but… (shrugs).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
PC - Ethel - Human - Lvl 4 Necromancer - Undying Dragons * Serge Marshblade - Human - Lvl 5 Eldritch Knight - Hoard of the Dragon Queen
DM -(Homebrew) Heroes of Bardstown *Red Dead Annihilation: ToA *Where the Cold Winds Blow : DoIP * Covetous, Dragonish Thoughts: HotDQ * Red Wine, Black Rose: CoS * Greyhawk: Tides of War
I'm in with Bartjeebus - I start my campaigns with DM exposition and explain the world from the character perspective. That way the players can make characters that fit the setting and even compliment the plot hooks I put in there with ideas of their own. After that? The NPC's don't do exposition. A savvy party might research a well known NPC and find the equivalent information as a skill check or two, but the NPC rarely just throws it out there in a vomit of words.
Unless it's the BBEG doing their monologue. That just has to happen! ;)
I agree in spirit but I also run a lot of homebrew. Out of game exposition is necessary because people come in with an expectation that lore will more or less line up with the forgotten realms. It’s awkward when the ranger announces he’s decided we should mount an expedition to the underdark and the DM has to break the news that 1) there is no such thing in this world and 2) his PC probably didn’t just say all the stuff he just said.
A better storyteller than I could maybe weave this into seamlessly into the adventure but… (shrugs).
I tell my players up front, this world is homebrew as players please check in with me about what your characters know or don’t know. But I would do this even if it was based on a known world, a player saying, my character wants to go into the under dark, would have me asking, how do they know about that. The reason I prefer homebrewing is because there is no opportunity of this kind of meta knowledge.
I'm in with Bartjeebus - I start my campaigns with DM exposition and explain the world from the character perspective. That way the players can make characters that fit the setting and even compliment the plot hooks I put in there with ideas of their own. After that? The NPC's don't do exposition. A savvy party might research a well known NPC and find the equivalent information as a skill check or two, but the NPC rarely just throws it out there in a vomit of words.
Unless it's the BBEG doing their monologue. That just has to happen! ;)
Thinking about it I do run a kind of intro to the world although I try and keep it very minimal, think star wars opening crawl, it sets the scene for the opening moments of the movie but at no point in that crawl is the force mentioned, or the various other planets, but I don’t explain to much in that opening crawl. I set the scene of the world,
I agree in spirit but I also run a lot of homebrew. Out of game exposition is necessary because people come in with an expectation that lore will more or less line up with the forgotten realms. It’s awkward when the ranger announces he’s decided we should mount an expedition to the underdark and the DM has to break the news that 1) there is no such thing in this world and 2) his PC probably didn’t just say all the stuff he just said.
A better storyteller than I could maybe weave this into seamlessly into the adventure but… (shrugs).
The player was assuming some things about the world based on previous games (or reading books). This could be metagaming, since the player character didn't have the experiences the player had in previous games. On the other hand, it could be things considered to be common knowledge (at least for rangers) in the Forgotten Realms.
In the latter case, players should come into a game in a homebrew world not assuming they know anything about the world. The player characters, however, do know something. In order for the players to learn what their characters know, they should ask the DM questions at the appropriate time. If the thing would be common knowledge to everyone, then the DM just answers. If the thing would only be known to some people in the world, then the DM calls for an appropriate Arcana, Religion, History, Nature, or plain Intelligence check, which the DC set according to how rare the knowledge is, or perhaps taking into account the particular background of this character. I usually use a sliding scale for the DC. Beating a DC of around 15 to 25, depending on the subject, will get you all the lore I have written about that subject, at least lore that is known to anyone at all in the world. Missing by less than 5 means you'll get most of the info. Missing by less than 10 means you'll get a scrap. In fact, I'll usually call for a roll even for common knowledge. No matter how badly you roll, you'll get the answer to your question. But if you roll well, I'll throw in some bonus related knowledge that you didn't specifically ask for.
This way, you can eventually accumulate knowledge of my world, without a huge infodump at any one time. Knowledge will be retained better when the player regards it as relevant at the time.
Also, of course, you can research in libraries. For this, I ask for an Investigation check, and the DC will depend on how much information that particular library has on the subject and how much time they spend researching. If it's only an obscure mention in one dusty tome on an unrelated subject, then the DC will be 25 or more even if they spend all day.
If I really need the players to know something about lore to drive the story forward, then an NPC will not shut up until they listen to his ravings. This will at least introduce the subject. I do expect them to ask follow-up questions. If they don't, well then they miss the plot hook, and consequences happen down the line.
I think the issue isn't with exposition, its with an exposition dump. Exposition is required for any story. You just don't want to sit there and tell them everything all at once. It gets boring and ruins the mystery. So you tell them a little here and a little there. Maybe thrown in a term of a name they don't know, then let them hear it again later, then finally figure out what it means.
I was at a Patrick Rothfuss book signing and he said something like: Telling a story is a two step process. First you have to have a secret, then you have to keep the secret.
That's stuck with me, and I think its really the trick of it. Don't give anything away unless the players need it to be able to move forward.
As others have already said, some exposition is not only good, it's necessary. One trick I use (I also write books) is to only explain the stuff that isn't already in the character's index. If I describe something as 'typical' then everyone knows that the person or place in question is a standard Tolkien-esque version of that thing. "Typical male Dwarf" means bearded, grumpy, and stubborn. The next time your party reaches a city they've never seen or visited, you can handwave most of it and drop a detail or two because in reality that's how their characters would look at it.
"As you crest the hill, you look into the valley and see the walled Human city of Questionheim. While large for a city, Questionheim is not as big as (huge city) or (other huge city). One thing of note though is that close to the center of the city you see a large, round shape floating in the air. It appears to have some sort of square object suspended beneath it by ropes"
The players have just seen their very first hot air balloon! If the players want to ask specific questions based on their character like "I have a pretty good Stoneworker skill. Does the stonework of the city look good?" or perhaps "As a Wizard, I'm always on the lookout for a Wizard school or library. Please let me know if I see any."
This way you drop enough description so the players have a rough idea of where they are and what it looks like but THEY have to make the effort to look for details.
As others have already said, some exposition is not only good, it's necessary. One trick I use (I also write books) is to only explain the stuff that isn't already in the character's index. If I describe something as 'typical' then everyone knows that the person or place in question is a standard Tolkien-esque version of that thing. "Typical male Dwarf" means bearded, grumpy, and stubborn. The next time your party reaches a city they've never seen or visited, you can handwave most of it and drop a detail or two because in reality that's how their characters would look at it.
"As you crest the hill, you look into the valley and see the walled Human city of Questionheim. While large for a city, Questionheim is not as big as (huge city) or (other huge city). One thing of note though is that close to the center of the city you see a large, round shape floating in the air. It appears to have some sort of square object suspended beneath it by ropes"
The players have just seen their very first hot air balloon! If the players want to ask specific questions based on their character like "I have a pretty good Stoneworker skill. Does the stonework of the city look good?" or perhaps "As a Wizard, I'm always on the lookout for a Wizard school or library. Please let me know if I see any."
This way you drop enough description so the players have a rough idea of where they are and what it looks like but THEY have to make the effort to look for details.
I think I need to clarify, in a roleplay setting absolutely you need to describing be things as DM, I meant long monologues from NPCs explaining stuff or imparting in game information.
I don't do long monologues. If characters don't ask follow-up question after an initial paragraph of dialogue from an NPC, I change the subject. If players aren't picking up on my lore, maybe it wasn't interesting enough and I should try again with some more eye-catching, mouth-watering, fishy-smelling, tantalizing, siren song lore.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A pet peeve of mine in movies and books is forced exposition, one of the many reasons the first suicide squad movie is so bad is that you have literally an exposition guy (he exists just to randomly explain character backstory or history).
Generally in TTRPG I try to avoid this using the standard storyline approach of show don’t tell, or having history and lore come out of things the characters do, questions they ask if NPCs, or research they do in libraries, or documents they find. I don’t have an NPC give a long narrative and I don’t provide long out of game information documents.
Is exposition something your aware of and try to avoid, if so what are your techniques for doing so and if not, I am intrigued why not and how it might or might not impact how you write things out and prepare?
I agree in spirit but I also run a lot of homebrew. Out of game exposition is necessary because people come in with an expectation that lore will more or less line up with the forgotten realms. It’s awkward when the ranger announces he’s decided we should mount an expedition to the underdark and the DM has to break the news that 1) there is no such thing in this world and 2) his PC probably didn’t just say all the stuff he just said.
A better storyteller than I could maybe weave this into seamlessly into the adventure but… (shrugs).
PC - Ethel - Human - Lvl 4 Necromancer - Undying Dragons * Serge Marshblade - Human - Lvl 5 Eldritch Knight - Hoard of the Dragon Queen
DM - (Homebrew) Heroes of Bardstown * Red Dead Annihilation: ToA * Where the Cold Winds Blow : DoIP * Covetous, Dragonish Thoughts: HotDQ * Red Wine, Black Rose: CoS * Greyhawk: Tides of War
I'm in with Bartjeebus - I start my campaigns with DM exposition and explain the world from the character perspective. That way the players can make characters that fit the setting and even compliment the plot hooks I put in there with ideas of their own. After that? The NPC's don't do exposition. A savvy party might research a well known NPC and find the equivalent information as a skill check or two, but the NPC rarely just throws it out there in a vomit of words.
Unless it's the BBEG doing their monologue. That just has to happen! ;)
I tell my players up front, this world is homebrew as players please check in with me about what your characters know or don’t know. But I would do this even if it was based on a known world, a player saying, my character wants to go into the under dark, would have me asking, how do they know about that. The reason I prefer homebrewing is because there is no opportunity of this kind of meta knowledge.
Thinking about it I do run a kind of intro to the world although I try and keep it very minimal, think star wars opening crawl, it sets the scene for the opening moments of the movie but at no point in that crawl is the force mentioned, or the various other planets, but I don’t explain to much in that opening crawl. I set the scene of the world,
The player was assuming some things about the world based on previous games (or reading books). This could be metagaming, since the player character didn't have the experiences the player had in previous games. On the other hand, it could be things considered to be common knowledge (at least for rangers) in the Forgotten Realms.
In the latter case, players should come into a game in a homebrew world not assuming they know anything about the world. The player characters, however, do know something. In order for the players to learn what their characters know, they should ask the DM questions at the appropriate time. If the thing would be common knowledge to everyone, then the DM just answers. If the thing would only be known to some people in the world, then the DM calls for an appropriate Arcana, Religion, History, Nature, or plain Intelligence check, which the DC set according to how rare the knowledge is, or perhaps taking into account the particular background of this character. I usually use a sliding scale for the DC. Beating a DC of around 15 to 25, depending on the subject, will get you all the lore I have written about that subject, at least lore that is known to anyone at all in the world. Missing by less than 5 means you'll get most of the info. Missing by less than 10 means you'll get a scrap. In fact, I'll usually call for a roll even for common knowledge. No matter how badly you roll, you'll get the answer to your question. But if you roll well, I'll throw in some bonus related knowledge that you didn't specifically ask for.
This way, you can eventually accumulate knowledge of my world, without a huge infodump at any one time. Knowledge will be retained better when the player regards it as relevant at the time.
Also, of course, you can research in libraries. For this, I ask for an Investigation check, and the DC will depend on how much information that particular library has on the subject and how much time they spend researching. If it's only an obscure mention in one dusty tome on an unrelated subject, then the DC will be 25 or more even if they spend all day.
If I really need the players to know something about lore to drive the story forward, then an NPC will not shut up until they listen to his ravings. This will at least introduce the subject. I do expect them to ask follow-up questions. If they don't, well then they miss the plot hook, and consequences happen down the line.
I think the issue isn't with exposition, its with an exposition dump. Exposition is required for any story. You just don't want to sit there and tell them everything all at once. It gets boring and ruins the mystery. So you tell them a little here and a little there. Maybe thrown in a term of a name they don't know, then let them hear it again later, then finally figure out what it means.
I was at a Patrick Rothfuss book signing and he said something like: Telling a story is a two step process. First you have to have a secret, then you have to keep the secret.
That's stuck with me, and I think its really the trick of it. Don't give anything away unless the players need it to be able to move forward.
As others have already said, some exposition is not only good, it's necessary. One trick I use (I also write books) is to only explain the stuff that isn't already in the character's index. If I describe something as 'typical' then everyone knows that the person or place in question is a standard Tolkien-esque version of that thing. "Typical male Dwarf" means bearded, grumpy, and stubborn. The next time your party reaches a city they've never seen or visited, you can handwave most of it and drop a detail or two because in reality that's how their characters would look at it.
"As you crest the hill, you look into the valley and see the walled Human city of Questionheim. While large for a city, Questionheim is not as big as (huge city) or (other huge city). One thing of note though is that close to the center of the city you see a large, round shape floating in the air. It appears to have some sort of square object suspended beneath it by ropes"
The players have just seen their very first hot air balloon! If the players want to ask specific questions based on their character like "I have a pretty good Stoneworker skill. Does the stonework of the city look good?" or perhaps "As a Wizard, I'm always on the lookout for a Wizard school or library. Please let me know if I see any."
This way you drop enough description so the players have a rough idea of where they are and what it looks like but THEY have to make the effort to look for details.
I think I need to clarify, in a roleplay setting absolutely you need to describing be things as DM, I meant long monologues from NPCs explaining stuff or imparting in game information.
I don't do long monologues. If characters don't ask follow-up question after an initial paragraph of dialogue from an NPC, I change the subject. If players aren't picking up on my lore, maybe it wasn't interesting enough and I should try again with some more eye-catching, mouth-watering, fishy-smelling, tantalizing, siren song lore.