New DM Problem: Describing Attacks.

[Kmart Kommando]

My problem is how did you reach that femoral artery with a 3 inch dagger.

Uhh, by poking it a half of an inch through the skin of the leg in the right spot, otherwise known as a precision-based srtike.

 

[arscott]

Flavorful description is a lot less important than many GM aids might have you believe. While it's nice to say "He slashes at you for 5 hp" instead of "He hits you for 5 hp", avoid flowery stuff like "The tip of his sword leaves a thin, red line of blood as it slashes across your swordarm".

According to all of my writing teachers, good writing isn't about being detailed and descriptive. It's about being engaging. It's about being direct. And the same goes good GMing.

 

[Hussar]

Uhh, by poking it a half of an inch through the skin of the leg in the right spot, otherwise known as a precision-based srtike.

While that's true on a human, I'm not so sure if it would work when the bad guy is 18 feet tall. Never mind stuff that isn't humanoid.

Mostly I just don't worry about it that much.

 

[Terwox]

I usually ask my players how their killshots happened. Other shots I'll ask them to describe what they were swinging for, and describe the results. (I know it's not realistic, as to-hit implies a non-called shot and going for whatever's available, but so what? )

But yeah, never force it. I always see really long descriptions of normal hits in threads like these -- I've NEVER seen that happen in actual play, except for kill shots or something with thematic importance. Orc mooks don't get that kind of screen time.

 

[Azlan]

I've been DMing for twenty years, and then as now, I find that I can start off with descriptions but as time goes by (whether over time or just in session) those descriptions drop away. There is only so many ways to describe an attack before you end up repeating yourself, and it becomes dull for both players and the DM.

Same here. Not only that, but it slows down combat encounters, which already takes a long time to play out.

Theres no easy solution.

Or is there? What if you use the combat descriptions only for confirmed criticals?

 

[Mighty Halfling]

Additional suggestions & notes:
>>> If you, the DM, start using descriptive attacks, the players will often follow suit.
>>> The biggest problem is when players expect you to alter your battle plan if they create descriptive attacks that would naturally have reprecussions.
Example: If a player says he "severs the creature's left arm" -- then how could that same creature get two claw attacks next round?
Because of that, DMs should expect to coach the players when describing their attacks. Basically, try for fancy descriptions that don't hinder a DM's or the players' attack opportunities.
>>> For a player, it's a lot easier to describe a miss than it is a hit. Why? Because misses generally don't have reprecussions that hits do.

 

[DestroyYouAlot]

I tend to give at least every other attack some "flavor", at least a location and how "ouchie" it is. I really only get into long descriptions for big damage. As far as hit locations, I wing it if it's a normal attack, and I have a post-it with a humanoid stick figure and numbers for hit locations on my screen if I get into a "chest hit" rut. For criticals, I use a critical hit system ("Torn Asunder" from Bastion Press) that has not only hit locations for any conceivable body type, but specific effects for "really critical" hits. (Not to mention fumbles.) It's a great product. So, I don't describe "crippling strikes" unless they actually got one. (Solves that problem, for me at least.)

I think the most common (and understandable) problem new DMs run into is imagining HP as a static value, instead of a reflection of the ability an expert combatant has to avoid damage. Think of it as a Dodge skill that you can't put any ranks into; it's the same thing the party rogue is doing with Evasion, the rogue is just better at it. Otherwise, you have the image of high-level fighters carving great wedges of meat out of each other and archmages frying each other to small puffs of ash every six seconds which makes so many high-level D&D games so cartoonish. Also, that six seconds: A lot can happen in a knife fight inside of six seconds. Avoid the "one roll, one hit" mentality and describe big (non-critical) damage as a series of strikes, rather than two guys standing around running each other through and then looking at their watches for five seconds.

 

[Crust]

Watch some movies and copy some of your favorite fight scenes.

Read some Salvatore or Greenwood novels. Salvatore is notorious for the detailed fight scenes in his books, and Greenwood narrates spell duels spectacularly.

Choreographing battles is something I greatly enjoy.

 

[Dragonbait]

My players try to use my combat descriptions against me. "well you said that he swung this huge blow that nearly took him off his feet...he can't get an opportunity attack now!". God it annoys me.

Same here. I'll say something like "He takes a step back in shock when he sees you sunder his leader" and the players ask if they can get an AoO because he moved. Ignoring the fact that they clearly don't know the rules that well, I'll sometimes have to remind them about "falvour text"

One GM I had figured that if a monk killed a creature on a critical with an unarmed attack, he must have burst into the enemy's chest and pulled out the target's heart, because, y'know, people can't die by broken bones and severe, supernaturally strong physical punishment from kicks and punches...I guess...

 

[Cedric]

The first and most important rule (to me, hehe)...never let a player argue that something else should have happened based on your description.

Oh, he couldn't have sliced for that much damage with such and such weapon, I have dr 5/slashing.

That orc couldn't have stabbed me by surprise, I'm immune to surprise, etc. etc.

Even in good groups I've seen someone try this stuff. *grins*

Just reinforce the concept that this is "Flavor Text" ...the dice have already decided what happened to you in game terms.