Flowery descriptions at the game table

[Pbartender]

I think that you should use as few words as possible while still getting the valuable information across.

That is what aim for as well, but with one caveat...

If I'm trying to impress a certain atmosphere to the scene, I'll have a tendency to elaborate more.

 

[Oryan77]

“an ornate jewelry box”, or “a teakwood jewelry box carved with elaborate designs of butterfly-winged fairies on roses, tulips, and daffodils”?

Instead of saying either of those descriptions, mine would be in the middle ground of those. I'd probably say, "A wooden jewelry box covered with elaborate designs."

I think you need a balance between your examples. Of course, that's if your playing style is like mine. A group that wants to kill stuff without getting involved in the world isn't going to care about a description of an item other than "You find a cool looking longsword".

For me, your flowery description examples are too long-winded and don't serve any real purpose in the game other than to bore players and take time away from the more important parts of the game. The players don't need to know every inch of something to get a mental image of it. Even if you tell someone "a small fancy box", their imagination will do all that extra work for you so you can move on with the game.

 

[TarionzCousin]

To me, this is a context-dependent question. My answer would be "It depends...."

But others have made that point already. I agree with all the "good points" they've all made.

The only thing I have to add is that if you are trying to conceal something in a room, it is a better GM trick to describe it (and everything else in the room) in some detail, rather than gloss over it without specifically mentioning the item in question.

Example: "You enter a room that looks like an office, with a desk covered by some office stuff, a couple chairs, and two doors across the hall."

Trying to hide something? "This 20' by 30' room looks like an office, with a heavy oak desk on which several stacks of parchment, a green quill pen, 4 small ceramic jars, and a rusty tiny knife. Behind and to the side of the desk are two wooden chairs. Two wooden doors are evident, one on the North wall and one on the West wall."

How much description is necessary to get players to investigate the:
A. Green quill pen?
B. Drawers of the desk--not visible from the angle at which PC's enter the room;
C. Something else not explicitly mentioned, like a torch on the wall or something draped over the chair.

 

[CharlesRyan]

I think, just like in a novel, it depends on how important you want the object--and the description--to be.

Lavishing an object or setting with detailed description calls attention to it and makes it important to the players. In this regard, description can be an important tool for laying out the story. (Of course, if you're too formulaic with it, the players will start ignoring the description and simply count your adjectives to figure out how important something should be to them!)

Lavishing description on lots of things makes the description itself--the act of picturing things in your mind--an important aspect of the game. Great if you're building an internally-consistent, atmospheric world for a story-driven campaign, but maybe a distraction in a more tactical or hack-and-slash gaming style.

There's no right answer; it's just a matter of what effect you're trying to achieve.

 

[sckeener]

One word of caution, some people can not handle too much description.

I remember once I had the party encounter a few gricks. One of the priestesses in the party cast inflict wounds on it and I described the feeling of the flesh melting under her fingers and oozing around them....and then when she took her hand way there was a tiny symbol of her goddess burned into the flesh right where her palm was....

3 out of the 7 party members couldn't handle that description.

I think it is easier to get away with flowery descriptions than disturbing descriptions.

I found the above very mild. Eventually I had to create tame and graphic descriptions for some scenes for the more sensitive in my group....(I had a couple of fluffy bunny players and one person that liked to seize on dissidents in the group to boaster her causes.)

 

[LostSoul]

Lavishing description on lots of things makes the description itself--the act of picturing things in your mind--an important aspect of the game. Great if you're building an internally-consistent, atmospheric world for a story-driven campaign, but maybe a distraction in a more tactical or hack-and-slash gaming style.

I think you just want to get across different information based on the style of the game. In a tactical game, the arms and armour of the baddies is important. You need to tell the players that "this guy has fancy spiked plate mail and wields a flaming greatsword with a longbow on his back, and these guys have breastplates and longswords, and are carrying javelins."

 

[Melan]

Description, and I think all communication in RPGs, should ideally evoke rather than describe. So a DM would find a term or three capturing the essence of an object, location or person, or a phrase by which the players themselves will fill out the details. The trouble is, just like giving NPCs and locations good names, this is not an easy craft to master. I certainly haven't mastered it yet, and probably never will.

Now whether someone likes the flowery and ornate style, someting giving the game a feel of exoticism (for which one's skills of High Gygaxian may come in handy), or even unconventional appoaches - like in my circles, where we sometimes use blatantly anachronistic analogies to set mood, like depicting town guards as modern riot police or a gladiatorial arena as a work of socialist realism - is obviously a matter of taste, and of skill as well. Personally, I detest the High Mediaeval and prefer either more modern, or at least different styles. Imagine a campaign communicated as a picaresque tale, a 60s existential novel, a road movie or a Tarantino film - all would be very fun ad different, even if on the surface all of them were about killing stuff and taking their things.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

For instance, should a DM say, “an ornate jewelry box”, or “a teakwood jewelry box carved with elaborate designs of butterfly-winged fairies on roses, tulips, and daffodils”?

The second one.

Should a DM describe a magic sword as, “a glowing sword with a gem,” or “a heavy, bright-steel sword of exquisite workmanship, etched with extensive interweaving designs; a marquee-cut emerald at the base of the blade is the source of a soft green glow”?

Option #2.

Should a DM describe the castle on the hill as, “a castle on the hill,” or “a gray fortress, with tall towers topped by bright pennants, and surrounded by crenellated walls of made of large granite stones”?

The latter.

How much detail should a DM give to guide the Players’ imaginings of the world they experience? Is using “ten-dollar words” a sign of a good DM, or should the DM keep description to more natural, conversational terms?

All of the the above are not "flowery". At least not as I see it. The examples you've given are short, useful, and VASTLY more interesting and memorable for being 20 words instead of just 2. They are not endless, tedious, and intrusively descriptive where you get a PARAGRAPH of detail for a throwaway item, a simple "establishing shot" of a one-time location, or devoting time and effort to describing things ad nauseum.

Flowery description is putting on your Shakespeare fake beard and hat and describing a flower with a sonnet in iambic pentameter. But saying "castle on the hill" is NON-descriptive. It doesn't tell you a bloody thing. It sparks nobodys imagination, it practically entails an implied description of something boring, tedious, and present only by absolute necessity. If you go through your entire campaign this way you can easily imply this about your entire campaign world. On the other hand, using a description like, "a gray fortress, with tall towers topped by bright pennants, and surrounded by crenellated walls of made of large granite stones," gives players all the description they need, goes WAY beyond giving them NOTHING to work with, and even if they never return there they will be able to immediately associate the name of the place with that ONE LINE description that you gave it. Your entire game world comes to life with brief descriptions like these and it takes almost no effort - unlike a genuinely flowery description which is rarely what is needed or desired.

All that said you want to exercise some discretion in what you describe, when, and why. Sometimes a locked chest is just another chest. You don't need to describe it, just state what it is. But sometimes you WANT players to take an interest in one NPC over another, or to reinforce some seemingly minor detail of your game world. You therefore sometimes need to give a line or two of description to things that really DON'T need it, just to act as a reminder that the PC's are not sitting at your kitchen table like you are. It may be just an ornate jewelry box, but if you describe it as “a teakwood jewelry box carved with elaborate designs of butterfly-winged fairies on roses, tulips, and daffodils” you open up great vistas of possibility and you-are-there qualities. You'll find that players will actually keep for their PC the box with the one line of description rather than the mere "ornate jewelry box" that has twice the gold piece value simply because the box with the description LIVES in the imagination. The box with just the GPV is just that - a gold piece value item like any other and it's form is irrelevant. By giving it no more description than what it is you imply that it HAS no more relevance. It is by occasionally describing even mundane items, characters, and places that a campaign is given a genuine aura of actually existing somewhere - even if it IS just in the imagination.

 

[JustKim]

Whenever I see people around here give an in-game description of just about anything, it comes across as something I would never say normally, and something I would never to expect to hear at a game table. I’d actually feel a bit taken out of the game if the DM (or a Player) started giving me flowery speech and descriptions. Such is good for novels, but not gaming.

There is a difference, I'm sure. Posting on a message board, you have plenty of time to word something just the way you like. Around the gaming table descriptions for most things are not going to be planned in advance, so there's less opportunity for detail. "Flowery" has very negative connotations, so I don't think it's appropriate.

I do appreciate detail and I do notice its absence. Too much detail, and I may as well be reading a novel (although I wouldn't enjoy a novel like that). Too little detail, and I may as well be playing a board game- I'm sure with enough imagination, Candy Land has a really compelling atmosphere.

When a place is described well, I like to go back there. When some treasure is described well, I find myself wanting to keep it even if it doesn't shoot laser beams. When a person is described well, I want to know more about them. This is what immersion is.

 

[Dextra]

I don't DM much, but as a player, you can usually tell when an item is important by how much time is spent describing it. If the only thing in a room is described elaborately, then the players will tend to spend more time on it, either checking for secret compartments, detecting magic etc. Of course, if you want to mess with their heads, describe in minute detail something totally irrelevant:
"On the exquisitely-carved pewter plate lies what appears to be two servings of some smoked scarlet piscine, but only a single, dainty bite has been taken."

We used to do this in Cyberpunk campaigns, just to heighten the paranoia factors. We'd also be asked to make Awareness checks on a regular basis, whether there was something plot-relevant to notice or not.

Then you have to take into consideration the EGO factor. If you're describing everything in the room with equal amounts of "flowery" detail, you'll spend the night trying to wake up your players every time you change locales due to their eyes glazing over!

Anyhoo, I guess what I'm trying to say is that it depends on context. If it is important to convey a particular feeling/mood, then elaborate descriptions may be necessary, and can add to the experience, but as a general rule, we try to keep it simple.