D&D 5E New DM help if you would be so kind

[Harzel]

And another perspective on narrating travel - I tend to gloss over it if nothing dramatic is happening. My players seem happy with that, and I don't think they are looking for me to give them descriptions of the shadow-dappled clearings in the forest, etc, unless there is something interesting going on in said clearing.

I absolutely agree that the point of the game is not to have the players sit and admire my awesome descriptive skillz. (Although, technically, that would not be possible anyway, since I, um, don't really have awesome descriptive skillz. ) And yet...

Not quite my experience, because the players make choices that change things.

and so from the players' reaction to something that I didn't consider particularly interesting, something interesting may arise. Crossing a stream in a forest that has lots of streams might not seem particularly interesting, but the PCs might decide to stop to fill their waterskins. And then something interesting might happen. The water might be tainted. Or the water might be enchanted. Or just because they are off their horses and bending down, it might be a good time for them to find some item that foreshadows what is ahead of them. Or later when they are being pursued by something unpleasant, they might think to "go back to that stream we crossed a little while ago" and wade downstream to throw off their pursuers.

Or they could come to the top of hill and pass a stone outcropping. They might ignore it, or they might ask what kind of rock it is. And then I have to quick invent some local geology. It could be basalt, in which case, the cave that they come across a bit later might be a lava tube. Or it could be quartz, in which case the cave might be an abandoned gold mine inside of which casting Fireball and burning away the support timbers would be a really bad plan. Or maybe a good plan. Depending. Or the rock might be mica schist in which case, because my players are the kind that will put rocks in their own packs, they may take some along because it is sparkly. Which might later be a help or a hindrance or a conversation starter with an NPC.

So I'm kind of split-brained about it. If I take "who am I to decide what is interesting" to its logical conclusion, then I end up narrating the pebble the PCs kick aside with the first step of their journey and describing the ant that they squash with the second step and we don't get anywhere fast. But I also don't want to completely pass up the chance of the irrelevant becoming relevant in a lovely organic fashion. So personally, I try to aim for a sort of middle ground. Mostly, I try to give the players enough of the general lay of the land so that they might plausibly feel like their characters are actually travelling through the world. But then every so often I let my eyes (or ears or nose) wander over the fictional landscape and bring in what I am noticing at that moment as I travel with them. Clouds. Dust. A bird. A rabbit. A pool of water beside the road. A rock that looks like a face. Two tall trees. Snow on the mountain peaks. Or maybe even the lack of anything interesting - mile after mile of dusty rutted road across a sparse grassland baking in heat of the summer sun.

I certainly have stuff planned that I want the PCs to encounter based on what has happened so far. Loads of stuff. But I also want a smattering of stuff that even I don't know if it is interesting or not when it pops into being.

EDIT: Caveat - this applies mainly to places the PCs haven't been before, or places that have changed since they were there (e.g. different season, trampled by orc army, etc.) and assumes that they are at least to some extent in exploration mode. If they are in familiar territory, then it's going to be ... familiar. Likewise if there is something that is really focusing their attention - they are on an urgent errand or being pursued by enemies, etc. - then they are unlikely to notice random stuff so don't bother them with it.

 

[pemerton]

from the players' reaction to something that I didn't consider particularly interesting, something interesting may arise.

This is true. But presumably it's equally true that, from their reactions to things that you did consider interesting, something interesting would arise. So it's not as if you lose out by focusing on the stuff you expect to be interesting. (Unless you misjudge, of course, but that's an inevitable risk of GMing.)

Crossing a stream in a forest that has lots of streams might not seem particularly interesting, but the PCs might decide to stop to fill their waterskins. And then something interesting might happen. The water might be tainted. Or the water might be enchanted. Or just because they are off their horses and bending down, it might be a good time for them to find some item that foreshadows what is ahead of them.

There are two ways I prefer to incorporate this sort of stuff.

One is as part of the narration, rather than as a consequence of action declaration and resolution (ie "As you are riding along, you notice [such-and-such-a-thing], rather than "OK, so you've dismounted to fill your waterskin - you notice [such-and-such-a-thing]). If foreshadowing is worthwhile, then I don't feel it should depend on the vagaries of the players describing their dismounting from their horses.

The second is as a consequence for action resolution that is already in play. Eg in my BW game, the PCs were crossing the Bright Desert to the Abor-Alz hills, and the elven ranger failed his check (Orienteering is the relevant BW skill). The consequence that I narrated was that the waterhole they arrived at in the foothills had been deliberately fouled - it turned out, upon investigation, that this filthy thing had been done by a (wastrel) elf.

You could have the foreshadowing similarly be consequent on a successful check; or even as a trade-off for a fail ("Failed your riding check? OK, the fall does 6 hp of damage, but as you lie there in the grass nursing your injuries, you notice [such-and-such-a-thing]")

The enchanted stream seems a trickier case, insofar as it's not a natural outcome of a failed check (it seems a boon rather than a problem) but nor is it the natural outcome of a successful check (the PCs aren't looking for an enchanted stream, after all). I would probably introduce that, if I wanted to use it, as part of the narration of the PCs camping. (Eg "You find a small stream that you can camp nearby." Then the players probably declare some low-key action involving the stream - washing, watering horses, or whatever - and that's your way in.)

Or later when they are being pursued by something unpleasant, they might think to "go back to that stream we crossed a little while ago" and wade downstream to throw off their pursuers.

For me, that sounds like a successful Nature or Survival-type check in the context of an escape ("Surely we crossed a stream in this lush forest - we want to head back to it to throw off pursuit" - success means yep, they find the stream and head down it; failure means either (i) there's no stream, or (ii) they don't make it back there in time - GM's choice).