Hiding What You See

As a writer, description is my greatest challenge. While writing dialogs and running action comes pretty naturally to me, something I often hear from my readers is that they cannot “see” the location my characters are in. My words fail to put a clear picture in their minds of what the world looks like. I find this is also true for my D&D experience. My players too often get an un-interesting and un-adorned room in which the adventure happens. Understand that I don’t think I am being lazy by not describing things well, my brain is moving a mile a minute. Descriptions just sometimes don’t make it into the scene. When this happens I am none the wiser because the action and the drama are my strength. I have already passed by the small, oozing fountain or the moss covered, marble stelae.

That said, but not to justify my failings, I have encountered much worse as a player. I have played in a climactic moment, where my party opened the door, only to have the DM ask us what we do. I am sure you have been in this situation dozens of times, where you anxiously open the door expecting to encounter a terrible monster in the next room. We just opened the door, I think we imparted as much to the DM again. His reply was, “No, what do you do?” At that moment, the DM was asking us to act with absolutely no description of what lay ahead. I can still remember how deflated he was when we told him that we look through the now open door into the room. I suggest that the players should not have to ask for any descriptions. I guess there could be circumstances of pitch dark and so forth, but even saying “It’s pitch dark in there” is a description.

Additionally, I have played in slower run games that have also lacked description, although never again to the above standard. A slow game without description might very well be called a boring game. You have to give something.

I imagine the same would be true in a game with too much description, although I’ve never seen such a thing. If everything and every action got painfully detailed descriptions, well, that sounds like a really slow game. So what should be described? Honestly, I am not quite sure.

I think the room an encounter is in, for example should get a few lines of description. The monster or the NPCs therein certainly should. It shouldn’t be a 40’ by 30’ room with four Goblins in it, although you will notice two descriptive words there, the size of the room and the number of Goblins. How much better would it be to say the large, rectangle of a room with crumbling, mud-brick walls contains four squat, blue-skinned humanoids bearing jagged scimitars? I need to work on this.

The Old Game Compared To A Fixed Game

Just real brief: Recently I heard an argument that we should use the original rules in light of a new home brew rule that isn't perfect. This is not about changing rules willy-nilly, or strictly for personal preference. This is about changing broken rules for thought out, even established new rules. Personally, I don't need to compare, and find equivalency between old and new completely unimportant. If I buy a toaster that is broken, only toasts one piece of bread, and I fix it so that it toasts two, then I don't need to regret not having a toaster that toasts one. I need never think of it again. Even if the ideal toaster toasts 4. But, it's down to preference. I, for one, choose to part from much of the original materials, because those books are fouled. I don't trust the makers to be right about producing a good, lasting game experience. No one thinks like Henry Ford did, when they build a car today. In the end, I am not an idealist. I don't think that the core campaign is holy, that it needs to be extra special. Trying new things in campaign is much more practical than in side-game testing. If new stuff doesn't work, end it quickly. Be aware of how stuff IS working, no matter what. Also, everyone should teach themselves what it means to be in and have a good game.  (This isn't for the player who can stop playing in a moment, and never go back to it.  It is much more for people like me, who can't imagine being without it.)

I am so glad that Alexis has a nack for great blogging:

That's more required reading.

To be more inclusive, Disney fires only woman on 'The Mandalorian'

To be more inclusive, Disney fires only woman on 'The Mandalorian': VISTA DEL MAL, CA—In an effort to be more inclusive, Disney has fired Gina Carano, the only female on their hit show 'The Mandlorian'. 'We are a company that believes in diversity and so, when a minority actress says that society isn't inclusive enough, yes, we're going to fire her ass,' Disney s