Action Trumps Description
Wise words for game masters. Authors are advised to always show, never tell. So too it is with gameplay, where more fun comes from playing things out than listening to a GM drone on.
Next time you are about to start a monologue, stop and put the game back in player hands. Do this by setting a scene and giving them a choice or asking what actions the character take.
Parley offers a great alternative. Want to tell your group the history of the world? Unless players need this information right now, plan instead a series of encounters with sages, historians, old elves, libraries, treasure books, gossip and rumors to get across over time the key people, places and things in a history. Provide contradictory information to make things even more interesting.
In conflict with this advice, you need a minimum of description to play the game. Combat results, encounter introductions, and actions of NPCs all need describing. That is why the title of this post says action *trumps* description – it does not completely replace it.
Use this advice to change your mental stance during the game. Whenever you are about to describe something, ask instead how you can stir action to get your key messages across. Look for ways to trim description a little bit and replace it with something interactive.
Another takeaway hidden in this tip is to make descriptions shorter, even if there is no action to replace the dropped parts. Practice making every word count. Instead of a one minute summary of an overland trip, shorten it to a single sentence of highlights. If players ask for more detail, that is great as it shows they are engaged.
When players do ask questions that require descriptive responses from you, try giving them answers that match the generality of the question. Get specific (where the good details always are) if the players ask for specifics. You are not trying to screw your group over here, like it was a wish spell or legal contract. Instead, you are rewarding them for paying attention, imagining the scene, and seeing the game through characters’ eyes. You are also giving them an opportunity to jump in and interact by thinking up what questions to ask.
For example, “What does the NPC look like?” should garner a response along the lines of, “he appears to be a warrior and not too happy seeing you.” Nice and short without missing something important that would change the group’s approach to the encounter.
If players respond with, “What weapons and armour does he have?” or “Do we see scars or signs of battles on his equipment?” you can give them those specific details.
You are still providing description, but it becomes an interactive process. It gives players options and decisions to make. It requires more involvement than just receiving information passively from the GM.
So, as you plan and run games, look for every opportunity to facilitate action where you would otherwise just provide static description.
Discover more from Campaign Mastery
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
August 9th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
I definitely agree you should show not tell. If you ever decide to use an NPC to demonstrate something in the story, see if you can actually use one of your player characters instead. It means your players won’t feel detached from the action and get bored, it will relate the story more to them.
August 9th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
While I agree in principle with this advice, Johnn, there is a caveat and an exception that are worth noting, IMO.
The caveat is to be careful that getting specific information can become like pulling teeth if you take the process outlined too far. The solution to this is to ensure that when describing in generalities, you don’t leave something important out; you don’t have to identify it, or describe it explicitly, but you should make it clear that there’s something there. “And there’s something piled up in the corner.” “And he is wearing some kind of tabard, make a politics check to see if you recognise it.”
The exception is this: I will stop all description and all also stop answering questions if I am seriously interrupted. That’s not the same thing as the players buzzing amongst themselves (so long as they aren’t loud enough to actually drown me out; but if they intervene to ask another question while I’m in the middle of something, I will stop the description or answering the question or whatever immediatly. (Okay, so I usually give two or three warnings first). Once the flow of information has been disrupted, the players can assume that they fail every skill roll, blindly fail to notice the excrutiatingly obvious, and so on – whatever is necessary to force them to miss the information they weren’t willing to wait for unti I was finished. But this is aimed at penalising one specific type of bad behaviour, not because there’s anything wrong with this position in general.
August 9th, 2010 at 6:09 pm
I sometimes hate talking and describing some “thing” or action. You get this feeling that the players are losing interest and just waiting for you to finish. Yeah, this post hit home for me.
Tourq recently posted..Deck of Many Boons
August 9th, 2010 at 8:43 pm
Good points Onion and Mike.
Mike, I agree with giving the generalities, and advise minimizing them as much as possible without robbing players of key info. I like your policy of switching gears to the latest query to dissuade interruption!
August 10th, 2010 at 5:18 am
It can be hard to strive for a balance, but generally, I try to limit my descriptions to the bearest essentials while still being able to signpost the information that the players need to process the situation and react appropriately.
I’m not sure I agree with the policy of interupting the GM – it pretty much depends how long the Gm has been talking before such interruptions. I find a lot of modules, even professional ones, have highly detailed, descriptive text blurbs that can take a while to read out, and details can get lost in the mix.
Plus, as someone who suffers with dyslexia, and is prone to making such interruptions, not everyone has the same mental capacity for keeping information in their head. It’s not so much a case of inattention or boredom, but the fact that too much detail can overwhelm players, so important features can be missed or require constant reminding of in the sea of information.
Finally, by keeping descriptions vague and having the PCs engage by asking questions, you can improvise details in your encounters better. When players ask whether something si present, they normally have some form of plan in mind, and by allowing it to be present even though you haven’t explicitly stated it can help spice up the encounter and make it much more fun for everyone involved.
Da’ Vane recently posted..Mission- Infinity
August 12th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Short, simple and immensely practical storytelling advice. Interactivity – in any story, game, or any sort of entertaining, teaching or learning event – is critical. Engage your audience.
Often, it’s these most basic lessons in running great games and telling – no, *showing* – great stories where we need regular reminders.
August 15th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
[…] Action Trumps Description There are tons of ways to hand over information to players, but nothing will bring a game to a halt faster than a long dissertation on the history, details, relations or other methods of sharing your “brilliance” with the players. Keep the action high and merge in the descriptive details with the action pieces. It works well, and is a technique that I use quite often. […]
August 22nd, 2010 at 7:37 am
For example, “What does the NPC look like?” should garner a response along the lines of, “he appears to be a warrior and not too happy seeing you.” Nice and short without missing something important that would change the group’s approach to the encounter.
If players respond with, “What weapons and armour does he have?” or “Do we see scars or signs of battles on his equipment?” you can give them those specific details.
How does this mesh with the school of NPC design that every NPC should have one standout detail for the players to remember them by? Do you tell them about the gold buttons or the handlebar mustache right off, or wait for them to ask?
August 22nd, 2010 at 8:49 pm
Hi Noumenon,
That’s a great question. The spirit of the post is to make every word of a description count, and if it can be replaced by action, do so.
If a detail for an NPC is meant to brand him – give him a memorable identity – then go ahead an include such details in your description. I’d still try to fit the details into the action, but if screen time is limited for the NPC, or the time is right for some reason, then by all means talk about the buttons and ‘stache up front.
However, I feel actions speak louder than words, and so it’ll be the actions of the NPC that make him truly memorable, not his appearance. So, I’d focus more on what he is and what he does to bring him to life versus visual details.
August 22nd, 2010 at 9:07 pm
I use three criteria in combination to decide such questions: (1) Is it obvious? If not, it waits for someone to look more closely or in the right way – magical sight or whatever; (2) could the information change the player’s choice of actions? If not, then it can be deferred; and (3) is it a distinguishing feature, something that can be used to identify this person in the future, and which tells the PCs something about the person? If not then it’s definitely fluff and can be set aside.
I also try to take into account ‘professional expertise’ – so a Fighter might notice things like weapons and armour, while a Mage would be more intent on other things.
Finally, I would point out the difference between ‘memorable’ (the term that Johnn used in his reply) and ‘identifiable’ – the term I just used – and say that if the detail is just to make them ‘memorable’ then I agree with Johnn.
July 22nd, 2014 at 12:35 am
[…] Action Trumps Description […]