How far is too far when describing what a PC senses and feels?

Imaculata · Apr 30, 2019

I take no issue with a DM narrating the thoughts of his PC's, as long as it is part of the descriptive process, and the DM is not playing the players' characters for them. So, saying a smell in the room reminds them of something is perfectly fine. Saying that the PC trusts the npc, is where I draw the line.

Celebrim · Apr 30, 2019

Hussar said:
Yes, I understand that there is a breed of player who are so distrustful of their DM that any, even appearance of, attempt by the DM to impart any sort of narrative control over the PC is seen as a very bad thing.

I don't distrust my DM that much and I hope that my players don't distrust me that much.

This makes me happy. I'm glad your gaming is in a much better place than it was in the past. It always seemed like you were one of the ones that felt you'd been burned bad.

I do think that this issue gets blown way, WAY out of proportion on the forums...

Don't they all?

and that if we were to actually take audio recordings of everyone's games, you'd find examples of the DM intruding upon the PC at nearly all tables. But, hey, maybe I'm wrong. I do know that at my table, no one is going to object this this level of fairly non-intrusive narration by the DM.

Perhaps. But if I do it in a session, I mentally flag it as an area that I can improve on as a DM. I don't think I've ever run a perfect session. Every session I can think of 6 or 12 things that I wish I had done better, even when I think the session went well and everyone seemed to have a good time. So, as a DM I object to the intrusion on the player's domain even if they don't, because I believe I can do better.

Yes, emotional responses - especially fear - are not always something people can control. But it's not for me as a DM to decide that for the player. The player should be the one deciding and narrating that their character's feelings and behavior as they feel best fits the character. The DM has extraordinary powers to script the world to suit his tastes. The least the DM can do is leave his hands off the player's character.

Yes, it is a small error and a small intrusion, but it still matters. Even if no one objects, it still matters. First, it matters because it is a breach of trust, since the DM is not trusting the player to play his character in an interesting fashion. This leads to players who tend to be passive, rather than active participants in the play. All good DMs seek to entertain their players. But it's a breakthrough in the understanding of a player when they realize that it is there job to entertain each other and the DM, and that they can employ many of the same techniques that the DM employs. Secondly, it is a breach of confidence, since you as the DM are not trusting yourself to be able to do the harder work of showing rather than copping out and just telling. Thirdly, it is a failure of the DMing art, since it is perfectly possible to leave a player anxious and worried regarding the outcome of an encounter and so engage the player directly. It's perfectly possible to describe a spooky environment in such a way that the player begins to feel faint palpitations and stress, often eliciting comments like, "I've got a bad feeling about this." and so forth. You don't need to tell the player something is frightening, and to do so is like telling the player something is funny. Saying something is frightening or funny is never as fully satisfying as the thing being frightening or funny.

Immortal Sun · Apr 30, 2019

Nah. I get too much pushback. It's probably fine with a bunch of actors and mature adults. But I don't have those things at my table.

DEFCON 1 · Apr 30, 2019

Celebrim said:
Yes, it is a small error and a small intrusion, but it still matters. Even if no one objects, it still matters. First, it matters because it is a breach of trust, since the DM is not trusting the player to play his character in an interesting fashion. This leads to players who tend to be passive, rather than active participants in the play. All good DMs seek to entertain their players. But it's a breakthrough in the understanding of a player when they realize that it is there job to entertain each other and the DM, and that they can employ many of the same techniques that the DM employs. Secondly, it is a breach of confidence, since you as the DM are not trusting yourself to be able to do the harder work of showing rather than copping out and just telling. Thirdly, it is a failure of the DMing art, since it is perfectly possible to leave a player anxious and worried regarding the outcome of an encounter and so engage the player directly. It's perfectly possible to describe a spooky environment in such a way that the player begins to feel faint palpitations and stress, often eliciting comments like, "I've got a bad feeling about this." and so forth. You don't need to tell the player something is frightening, and to do so is like telling the player something is funny. Saying something is frightening or funny is never as fully satisfying as the thing being frightening or funny.

I am happy to say that for many tables (including my own)... no, indeed, none of what you say here DOES matter. "Breach of trust"? "Breach of confidence"? "Failure of the DMing art"? Sorry... but I don't put NEARLY the same amount of import on this game as you seem to, and neither do my players.

If I "breach their trust", it's because I've done something truly bad outside of the game to them personally as people. Not because I've narrated "The slimy monster with the six thousand eyes and mouths makes your stomach turn and the smell wafting off of it makes you want to throw up."

From what you've said, you appear to me to have much higher stakes in how you play your D&D. Which is fine... to each their own. But just know some of the rest of us believe that this is indeed "merely a game" and don't treat how it's played so intensely. And there ain't nuttin' wrong with that way either.

Celebrim · Apr 30, 2019

DEFCON 1 said:
From what you've said, you appear to me to have much higher stakes in how you play your D&D.

I don't know that I have higher stakes, but I have higher aims.

One thing you'll hear me repeatedly emphasize on the forums is that though role-playing is merely a game and it's purpose is merely leisure and entertainment, yet at the same time it is also an art form. The stakes are everyone enjoys the game or not, and if everyone enjoys the game you've succeeded.

But that is a low aim, and we ought to be - we the sort of participants in the hobby that care enough about it to be posting in the forums on EnWorld 1000's of times, designing our own systems and games, and often as not on these boards publishing them for the enjoyment of others - aiming higher. Just as a movie maker or a novelist aims to create great work within the constraints of their budget and genre, so we too ought to be aiming to create great work. That isn't to say that I think you at all times need to be aiming to create the roleplaying equivalent of an Oscar nominee or the great American novel, but whatever it is you create, you ought to do it well.

Which is fine... to each their own. But just know some of the rest of us believe that this is indeed "merely a game" and don't treat how it's played so intensely. And there ain't nuttin' wrong with that way either.

I didn't say that there was. But my aims are to grow the hobby both in ubiquity and acceptance, and also in its maturity as an art form. That's why I bother writing things at EnWorld, because I think the hobby matters and can be beautiful.

FXR · Apr 30, 2019

Something I’ve not delved into much, but I see Matt Mercer do quite often, is describing the internal state of a PC, even up to recalling memories and having thoughts...

For example, when encountering some scary creature he might suggest that the PCs feel a sense of dread and a cold pit in their stomach. When encountering an intimidating NPC he might describe a PCs throat going dry. When entering some familiar location he might describe a PC having a memory of some past experience. He’s even gone so far as to suggest what a character thinks! That last one seems like a step too far for most tables but his players trust that these moves are all in aid of building an engaging and memorable story (which is reliably the case).

So, where do you draw the line? Do you describe autonomic reactions the PCs might feel? Sweat, hairs rising, bile in the throat? Do you provide memories that the player didn’t suggest they try and recall? Do you describe what PCs think about a situation?

My guidelines are the following:

i) I never contradict something which was written in the character's background, but I can freely add something to it. For instance, if Manuel the Minotaur was borned and raised in Neverwinter and never left it, until the Campaign started, I'm not gonna add that he went on a pilgrimage to the Moonsea, but I can state that the bandit he just fought in the forest looks like Ben the Shoemaker, who was his grumpy neighbor when he grew up. Just the same, I can add that, on certain trip, he remembers that when he was young, he caught a fever and his hands felt like two balloons.

ii) I describe autonomic reactions, but I tried not to go the lazy way and actual describe what causes this reaction. It is also very clear that this description in no way prevent a player from choosing how his character acts. Exemple: "Looking at the strange idol with green glowing eyes, you feel a wave of dread coming over you", doesn't prohibit the player from smashing the idol to pieces, trying to pick the precious stones that are inserted in it or leaving the room. If I want to a character to act in a certain way, there has to be failed saving throw involved.

TaranTheWanderer · Apr 30, 2019

I just use appropriate metaphors and let the players determine how they feel.

For instance, they were walking down a cave with vines hanging. One of them felt something drip on their shoulder and I described a dead Grimlock suspended at the ceiling by the vines. He was strangled to death and blood was dripping from his mouth. It was to foreshadow the encounter that was around the next corner.

They made a perception check and I described a sound of something moving. It was like,

"a whisper that sounds like dead leaves rustling. Dead leaves rustling through a graveyard..."

I didn't need to tell them how their characters felt. They were afraid.

Other than that, I might suggest a mood or energy about a place/NPC. "foreboding, abandoned, lively" and that usually cues the players.

Guest 6801328 · Apr 30, 2019

TaranTheWanderer said:
"a whisper that sounds like dead leaves rustling. Dead leaves rustling through a graveyard..."

I didn't need to tell them how their characters felt. They were afraid.

Yes. This is exactly what I meant earlier when I said I'd rather the players themselves feel their hair stand on end, rather than tell them that their characters' hair stands on end. (This is exactly my definition of 'immersion': it's not play-acting your character with whatever your notion of fidelity is; it's feeling the emotions your character is supposedly feeling.)

jayoungr · Apr 30, 2019

Depends on the player. Most of my experienced players prefer to do that part for themselves, but when I'm working with newer players who seem more hesitant to roleplay, I fill in more of the gaps to make the fiction more vivid and give them an idea of how to work with the story. I usually add a qualifier like "maybe," though, to give the player a chance to offer a different interpretation.

As an example, I recently ran an adventure where only the druid succeeded on a roll to figure out how some clockwork creatures were coordinated. I told the player, "You look at how they're working together, and maybe it reminds you of bees or ants: the little ones are drones, and they're being overseen by that large one clinging to the ceiling."

Hussar · May 1, 2019

It's hilarious.

I've been told on these boards a thousand times to trust the DM. That the DM deserves my implicit trust all the time.

Yet, when the rubber meets the road, suddenly it's, OH HELL NO. Dirty DM, get your fingers off my character. I could understand if a DM is suddenly rewriting a character's background, but, "You feel X" or "You character believes Y" is too much? Seriously?

Funny how things actually roll around. All this time I've gotten flak for not trusting the DM, yet, apparently, very few folks in this thread actually do have the trust in their DM to allow the DM to make pretty minor, fleeting declarations about their characters.

I love the taste of irony in the morning.