D&D 5E 5th ed D&D general impressions from a new player and DM.

[Asisreo]

Imagine the same scenario with combat and maybe it becomes clear what I mean.

Lets say a new player is going through their first combat. Well, you say the goblins are planning to attack and they say they want to fight back. Now, you could resolve the combat here, but you'd be missing some important details that could help later down the line, like HP and slots used. So you just continue combat.

Its their turn and you ask what they do. "I fight," they say. Okay, well what does that look like? "I poke them with my rapier!" is much better but that still leaves which goblin they're targetting. "I use my rapier to poke the goblin with the green sash." Ah, perfect. Now I know exactly how to resolve the action. Roll the attack and damage roll to see if you hit or do damage.

Now, it certainly took more time going through the whole "I fight. Okay well I attack. Okay, well I attack with my rapier. Okay well, I attack with my rapier at the goblin with the green sash." But over time, the player gets used to it. But they didn't have to say exactly how they swung or how they positioned their elbow.

The same thing with searching a room. You don't have to literally talk about every nook and cranny but you also can't expect a pass just from your declaration being broad. You wouldn't let the players say "I win the adventure." Even though, at the end of the day, that's what they were going to do anyways.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Second, if stating that "I look under the bed" means that I automatically find whatever's under the bed, I'd probably be like @fearsomepirate's problematic player and want to specify everything possible. I got a 19 on my investigation check, but maybe, just maybe I had to get a 20 to find that folded up portable hole attached to the bottom of the chair.

At my table, if you make a roll, there are no more chances. The ability check typically represents 10 minutes of due diligence. You've done your best, and if you failed, you failed. There's no trying again with better light, or with help, or switching to detail searching, or whatever. Time to move on. There are also wandering monster checks every 10 minutes. And if you're rolling, you search the whole room; I have too many damn rooms and you bastards just took 90 minutes to kill three goblins to make you roll per armoire.

The mechanics I use are pretty clear-cut, this player just always tries to pull detail out of me after a turn is resolved and I say, "there is nothing interesting here." Like I'll tell him a clay pot is boring and dumb and he'll proceed to ask me whether there are ancient runes carved on it that give him hints about the vampire's ancestry.

There are not.

It's a pot.

It's clay.

I guess it's brown.

 

[Charlaquin]

Second, if stating that "I look under the bed" means that I automatically find whatever's under the bed, I'd probably be like @fearsomepirate's problematic player and want to specify everything possible. I got a 19 on my investigation check, but maybe, just maybe I had to get a 20 to find that folded up portable hole attached to the bottom of the chair.

Notably, at my table you would know if you needed a 20 to find what you were looking for or not, because I tell my players the DC when I ask for checks.

But I think I'd have to watch a video/stream where someone actually did the narrative search well because I don't know how to do it without getting bogged down or feel like I'm potentially playing "gotcha" as a DM. I mean, if the McGuffin is hidden under a loose floorboard how would people know to look there unless they always check the floor in every room?

Well, the fact that I specifically mentioned there was a loose floorboard when I don’t normally do that would be a pretty good indicator. I also use context cues, which are hard to express in these brief examples, which lack such context.

If you get it to work, great. If you can point me to something I can watch/listen to that you think is a good example maybe I can learn something. Until then, I'm not telling anyone they're doing it wrong, I just don't see how to do narrative searches well.

I don’t know about a video or recording of such play (in my experience, actual plays tend to be more focused on social interaction than exploration), but here’s an excerpt from an angry GM article about telegraphing. It’s focused on traps, but the same basic set of principles applies - intentional placement, foreshadowing, context cues, etc. Spoiler tagging it because it’s a bit long (and it’s just one segment of the whole article, most of which is pretty good, though some bits I think haven’t aged well).

Spoiler

How to Scream “Here There Be Traps”​

Recently, my players were exploring an ancient tomb. As they walked along a hallway, they came to a place where seismic activity had damaged the masonry and exposed the bare rock behind the walls. The hallway was a disjointed ruin. It seemed like just flavor text. And then, an arrow trap! Click! Wham! Ouch!

After the arrow trap went off and healing spells had been administered, the players searched for the trap. And they discovered the trap was a simple trip wire and hand crossbow that been hidden amongst the rubble. It wasn’t part of the original tomb. It had been added and concealed by the damage. The player put it together very quickly. The current tomb robbers (which the players had been sent to deal with) had set up traps so they could plunder undisturbed. And they could only set traps where the damage to the dungeon allowed them to conceal traps.

WHICH IS EXACTLY HOW I PLANNED IT.

Sometimes, it takes players a few tries to figure out the patterns in my trap placement. Sometimes, they never stumble on it. But there is ALWAYS a pattern to my trap placement. And, right off the bat, I try to warn players about the traps. Sometimes, they will encounter a sprung trap and a corpse. And they can examine the trap carefully and figure out the clues. Other times, I will place a trap in a place where I know they can survive the trap and retreat if need be. That tomb trap was literally the first encounter in the tomb. It was basically just inside the door.

You can do this any number of ways.

For example, imagine you have a dungeon that contains traps. When the party walks between certain statues, spears shoot out of the floor and stab them. The trap isn’t in the statues. And the dungeon is full of statues. And many statues don’t have traps nearby. But the traps always come between statues. If the players examine the statues, they will discover that the ones near traps have their swords and shields reversed. They are left-handed. If they don’t ask about that detail, don’t reveal it outright. But they will probably be nervous about walking between ANY pairs of statues for a while.

You want several layers of detail is the point. There should be a detail that warns that there COULD be a trap if they pay attention to the flavor text. And then you want another layer of detail that gives a more specific answer and makes it really easy to guess where the traps are. That layer of detail is the one the players have to ask about. They have to stop and purposely examine things.

And this actually makes logical sense. Remember, when someone builds traps, they need a way around those traps. Even if it is just so they can get out after they finish arming the traps. Visual clues, hidden switches, tiny details that only they know to look for? Those are the equivalent of a password system.

And traps are expensive and time consuming to create. No one puts traps everywhere. They put them where they will do the most good. Or harm. Depending on which side of the swinging blade you’re on. In my tomb, for example, the raiders were kobolds. Classic trap builders. And there were some passages of the tomb where the ceiling had collapsed and they were in bright sunlight. Kobolds hate sunlight and they are dazzled by it. Those are the hallways they couldn’t guard or patrol. And that’s why they set traps along those halls.

See? It’s very deliberate.

If you place traps at random in your game, you teach your players that there’s no art to finding traps. They either have to guess randomly or search everywhere. If your traps are deliberate and telegraphed, and if they reward attentive players, they are interesting. They are fun. They teach the players that you will reward them for being attentive and smart.

I’ll note that I actually disagree with Angry about not telling the players the trapped statues swords and shields are reversed unless they ask. That’s “you didn’t say you were looking up” nonsense if you ask me. But otherwise I agree with the general techniques here.

An example of how I’ve use these techniques with hidden items: in my modified take on Death House from Curse of Strahd, there are several firearms hidden throughout the house. The first time one might be found is in the coat closet in the foyer. If players are exploring thoroughly, they’re likely to open the closet. In the closet is coats, a top hat, a box of gunpowder and ammunition, and a “secret” panel in the wall which has fallen open, with a musket inside. Throughout the rest of the house, there are several more firearms hidden. All in places it would make logical sense to hide a gun (folks from gun-owning families will likely have some basic sense of this), and moreover, there’s always an obvious box of powder and ammo near where a gun is hidden. Players who pay attention may notice this pattern, and when they see a box of powder and ammo, know there’s a firearm hidden somewhere nearby. Even if they don’t know precisely where to look, they should have enough of a general idea where to start looking