How to get better at describing actions, not rolls

[Greenstone.Walker]

A thread in the d&D 5E forum got a little derailed into a "GM describing what players do" discussion.

One poster described my problem exactly.

I've just had enough times of:


"I intimidate the orc!


"How?"


"Uh... With intimidate."

So, how can we educate ourselves and our fellow players to describe intentions and actions instead of asking to make rolls?

"I raise my sword and roar at the orc, trying to get him to run away."

vs

"I roll to intimidate the orc."

Obligatory AngryGM link: 5 Simple Rules for Dating My Teenaged Skill System

 

[iserith]

I'll start with a repost of the analogy I put in the other thread:

The odd thing about that though is that if I ask my 3-year old nephew how he might get the cookie jar on the counter that is out of his reach (the goal), he could tell me different ways to get it (the approach). Some of those will be automatic failure ("I make a cape out of a towel and fly!"), some automatic success ("I ask Uncle Iserith to get it for me!"), and some possible but uncertain ("I ask my mommy!"). He might even have a good idea how he would try to scare away a monster, having never played D&D in his life or, naturally, having very little in the way of life experiences compared to the average D&D player.

What my nephew doesn't have in the way of his ability to establish a goal and approach are an expectation that game mechanics might be involved. So one wonders why a 3-year-old can do what some DMs claim older folks playing a game cannot!

Based on this, I think that it should be pretty natural for most anyone to articulate a goal and an approach to achieving that goal. Kids can do it, so why all of a sudden do some people seem unable? I think it may have something to do with training, habit, and to some extent, a desire for a shorthand. ("I roll Intimidate..." becomes shorthand for trying to achieve X by doing Y, where X and Y are understood to everyone at the table already. Except when it's not the "standard" goal or approach for that table.)

When a player doesn't give me a clear goal and approach, which actually happened once in my Saturday session, I just ask them to restate what they want to achieve and how they go about it. I'm not looking for flowery language or "active roleplay" as the Basic Rules calls it (first person) - just a clear statement so I can adjudicate. Evocative description and interactions are just a bonus that have nothing to do with my adjudication.

Finally, one other thing I do is I remind players that the d20 is not their friend. It will kill them and everyone they've ever loved given half a chance. So why would you ASK to roll a die? In a game where the DM decides success, failure, or uncertainty - and only in the latter case do we roll - doesn't it make sense to try your best to remove uncertainty so you don't have to roll? That means gathering information, taking precautions, and otherwise trying to achieve automatic success. It's not always possible, of course, due to the fictional circumstances at play, but why on earth would you ask to involve that fickle d20?

Edit: I notice this was placed in the General RPG forum. Please read the above through the lens of D&D 5e. I might not have the same thoughts on the matter in another system.

 

[Nagol]

I'll start with a repost of the analogy I put in the other thread:

The odd thing about that though is that if I ask my 3-year old nephew how he might get the cookie jar on the counter that is out of his reach (the goal), he could tell me different ways to get it (the approach). Some of those will be automatic failure ("I make a cape out of a towel and fly!"), some automatic success ("I ask Uncle Iserith to get it for me!"), and some possible but uncertain ("I ask my mommy!"). He might even have a good idea how he would try to scare away a monster, having never played D&D in his life or, naturally, having very little in the way of life experiences compared to the average D&D player.

What my nephew doesn't have in the way of his ability to establish a goal and approach are an expectation that game mechanics might be involved. So one wonders why a 3-year-old can do what some DMs claim older folks playing a game cannot!

Based on this, I think that it should be pretty natural for most anyone to articulate a goal and an approach to achieving that goal. Kids can do it, so why all of a sudden do some people seem unable? I think it may have something to do with training, habit, and to some extent, a desire for a shorthand. ("I roll Intimidate..." becomes shorthand for trying to achieve X by doing Y, where X and Y are understood to everyone at the table already. Except when it's not the "standard" goal or approach for that table.)

When a player doesn't give me a clear goal and approach, which actually happened once in my Saturday session, I just ask them to restate what they want to achieve and how they go about it. I'm not looking for flowery language or "active roleplay" as the Basic Rules calls it (first person) - just a clear statement so I can adjudicate. Evocative description and interactions are just a bonus that have nothing to do with my adjudication.

Finally, one other thing I do is I remind players that the d20 is not their friend. It will kill them and everyone they've ever loved given half a chance. So why would you ASK to roll a die? In a game where the DM decides success, failure, or uncertainty - and only in the latter case do we roll - doesn't it make sense to try your best to remove uncertainty so you don't have to roll? That means gathering information, taking precautions, and otherwise trying to achieve automatic success. It's not always possible, of course, due to the fictional circumstances at play, but why on earth would you ask to involve that fickle d20?

Edit: I notice this was placed in the General RPG forum. Please read the above through the lens of D&D 5e. I might not have the same thoughts on the matter in another system.

This works quite well for areas that are both tangible and where the DM has any form of grounding and is capable of making reasonable judgement calls. It fails for 'soft' goals or where the DM is incapable of making reasonable judgement calls.

Here's a 'soft' example, I am a strong introvert. Like this side of clinical diagnosis strong. I have close to no capacity to engage in small talk; once we're past weather, I'm done. Heck, I don't even follow sports, so I can't comment on how the local team(s) recent activity. Imagine If I am playing a character with strong skills and talents that should cover small talk, ingratiating myself with others in a social setting, and extracting data from innuendo, leading questions, and basically making people like me. Asking me 'How do you go about it?" will get a blank stare. You might as well ask me how my character is casting a spell. I don't know; I've never succeeded.

Here's a 'hard' example. The character is in a futuristic setting and desperately trying to repair a plasma sled (what's that you ask? I don't know but I think it sounds neat). Assuming tools are available, asking "How" is pointless. Neither the player nor the DM knows how a plasma sled works let alone how one would safely go about repairing one. Now you can clarify where the character's priorities lie: safety, speed, or quality.

 

[Caliban]

Read fantasy books and fantasy movies. Preferably not ones actually based on D&D. They'll give plenty of examples how to do things, and hopefully you or your players will internalize it and/or be inspired by them when they try to do it in a game.

 

[Valmarius]

Imagine If I am playing a character with strong skills and talents that should cover small talk, ingratiating myself with others in a social setting, and extracting data from innuendo, leading questions, and basically making people like me.

If you said exactly that, I think that's enough information to ascertain your goal and approach. I can easily adjudicate that as requiring a Persuasion check, with success making the party-goers friendly towards you.
You might not even have to roll if your character was a noble or famous adventurer.

The character is in a futuristic setting and desperately trying to repair a plasma sled (what's that you ask? I don't know but I think it sounds neat). Assuming tools are available, asking "How" is pointless. Neither the player nor the DM knows how a plasma sled works let alone how one would safely go about repairing one. Now you can clarify where the character's priorities lie: safety, speed, or quality.

This one seems straightforward too. I might clarify, "Sounds like you want to fix the Plasma sled using the tools at hand?" If you agreed then it could be a Engineering check of some sort, or automatic success if you're not in a rush and can spend the whole day working on it.

 

[iserith]

This works quite well for areas that are both tangible and where the DM has any form of grounding and is capable of making reasonable judgement calls. It fails for 'soft' goals or where the DM is incapable of making reasonable judgement calls.

Here's a 'soft' example, I am a strong introvert. Like this side of clinical diagnosis strong. I have close to no capacity to engage in small talk; once we're past weather, I'm done. Heck, I don't even follow sports, so I can't comment on how the local team(s) recent activity. Imagine If I am playing a character with strong skills and talents that should cover small talk, ingratiating myself with others in a social setting, and extracting data from innuendo, leading questions, and basically making people like me. Asking me 'How do you go about it?" will get a blank stare. You might as well ask me how my character is casting a spell. I don't know; I've never succeeded.

Here's a 'hard' example. The character is in a futuristic setting and desperately trying to repair a plasma sled (what's that you ask? I don't know but I think it sounds neat). Assuming tools are available, asking "How" is pointless. Neither the player nor the DM knows how a plasma sled works let alone how one would safely go about repairing one. Now you can clarify where the character's priorities lie: safety, speed, or quality.

Sure. As I noted in my post, I'm not looking for any "flowery language." What I also mean is that while I want reasonable specificity, I only need a clear statement of goal and approach, nothing more, in order to perform my role as DM. Thus, "I engage in small talk, ingratiating myself with others while trying to extract data from innuendo, leading questions, and basically making people like me..." is a sufficient statement. Similarly, "I try to repair the plasma sled using my repair kit..." would also be sufficient. "I roll an Insight check..." or "I make a Tools check..." not so much.

 

[Nagol]

If you said exactly that, I think that's enough information to ascertain your goal and approach. I can easily adjudicate that as requiring a Persuasion check, with success making the party-goers friendly towards you.
You might not even have to roll if your character was a noble or famous adventurer.

I'm more likely to say something like "While at the party, I use my Conversation skill" just like I would say "While at the party I cast Fireball". In either case, asking me to clarify how I do what I want to do will get a blank stare. I know as much about magic as I do conversing easily with others and gaining intel.

This one seems straightforward too. I might clarify, "Sounds like you want to fix the Plasma sled using the tools at hand?" If you agreed then it could be a Engineering check of some sort, or automatic success if you're not in a rush and can spend the whole day working on it.

Sure, that example probably isn't very strong. Once I think of a better one, I'll post it.

 

[Nagol]

Sure. As I noted in my post, I'm not looking for any "flowery language." What I also mean is that while I want reasonable specificity, I only need a clear statement of goal and approach, nothing more, in order to perform my role as DM. Thus, "I engage in small talk, ingratiating myself with others while trying to extract data from innuendo, leading questions, and basically making people like me..." is a sufficient statement. Similarly, "I try to repair the plasma sled using my repair kit..." would also be sufficient. "I roll an Insight check..." or "I make a Tools check..." not so much.

A I posted to Valmarius, I'm more likely to say something like "While at the party, I use my Conversation skill" just like I would say "While at the party I cast Fireball". In either case, asking me to clarify how I do what I want to do will get a blank stare. I know as much about magic as I do conversing easily with others to gain intel. That description came from me paraphrasing the skill description in the game system. How helpful can it be for you to ask me how and have me open the book and read the skill description aloud?

 

[Bawylie]

I'm more likely to say something like "While at the party, I use my Conversation skill" just like I would say "While at the party I cast Fireball". In either case, asking me to clarify how I do what I want to do will get a blank stare. I know as much about magic as I do conversing easily with others and gaining intel.




Sure, that example probably isn't very strong. Once I think of a better one, I'll post it.

I actually have autistic players and developmentally retarded players who are able to give me reasonable statements of intent and approach.


-Brad

 

[Nagol]

I actually have autistic players and developmentally retarded players who are able to give me reasonable statements of intent and approach.


-Brad

Intent? Sure. I want to collect intel on X from the partygoers using the Conversation skill. There's intent and approach. Anything more detailed regarding 'how' isn't coming from me. Another player may chip in with a suggestion or two and I'll say "Like that."