D&D 5E Roleplaying in D&D 5E: It’s How You Play the Game

[Maxperson]

100% this. Non-telegraphed hidden environmental details lead to player frustration, IME. I mean, give them something to gnaw on: “the wall glistens in places” or “there’s moss at the base of the wall” or “there’s moisture in the air here” or whatever. They still probably won’t connect the dots until they are asked to make a check to avoid slipping or, you know, actually touch the wall and realize it has slippery spots before they even start climbing.

Suppose the party is using darkvision and there is no light for the wall to show glistening? Especially in 5e where vision checks are at disadvantage as well as there being a lack of glistening.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Suppose the party is using darkvision and there is no light for the wall to show glistening? Especially in 5e where vision checks are at disadvantage as well as there being a lack of glistening.

Sure, and what if XYZ? Perhaps you missed the spots where I gave two other options and then said "or whatever"? Or where the PC touches the damp wall before climbing it? I dunno, how about: "There's a dampish, mossy odor in here"... or whatever.

TL;DR: as DM, come up with something

 

[Scott Christian]

Suppose the party is using darkvision and there is no light for the wall to show glistening? Especially in 5e where vision checks are at disadvantage as well as there being a lack of glistening.

Then use wind. People can feel a breeze. Use smell. Darkvision doesn't affect the olfactory. Use sound. Describing an environment with a clue should be one of the pillars of DMing. It is something that every new DM should learn, and every DM after 20 years still needs to practice. It is the free throw in basketball. From the six-year-old shooting to the NBA or WNBA shooting. They all still practice.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, and what if XYZ? Perhaps you missed the spots where I gave two other options and then said "or whatever"? Or where the PC touches the damp wall before climbing it? I dunno, how about: "There's a dampish, mossy odor in here"... or whatever.

TL;DR: as DM, come up with something

That goes to the example of not finding out until you try to climb it. Maybe there's a mossy odor. Maybe the wall is wet and underground, so no moss or other odors and you have to touch it.

My point is that while there may be telegraphing, telegraphing is not always appropriate when describing the environment. There will often be part of the environment that the PCs will not discover until they start poking around and doing things. Those things do not cause #3 to invalidate or call into question #1.

 

[Voadam]

Sometimes PCs describe checking out their surroundings very carefully in a focused deliberate way. Sometimes PCs are doing other things like arguing amongst themselves that can detract from their ability to get small details about their environment. Mechanically some characters are good at/roll well on perception checks while others are/do not.

Telegraphing things can be great fun for the player to work with, but it is not always necessary or appropriate. Sometimes the invisible ninja spy is stealthing well and gets the jump on the PCs without giving them a clue ahead of time.

I can remember playing a mythic monk and assaulting a slightly ruined castle courtyard with demons and cultists and seeing some embedded with ranged weapons off to the side and up some stairs behind a barrier trying to set up a kill zone so I tore off at enhanced speed to engage them in melee . . . and fell right into the pit a little before the stairs that had been covered by an illusion of solid ground. My comment was "Oh well done." as I monk dropped for no damage into the pit and kept running at speed to pop up the other side of the pit and still make it up to the stairs to leap over their barricade and be in position to threaten their missile fire.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

That goes to the example of not finding out until you try to climb it. Maybe there's a mossy odor. Maybe the wall is wet and underground, so no moss or other odors and you have to touch it.

My point is that while there may be telegraphing, telegraphing is not always appropriate when describing the environment. There will often be part of the environment that the PCs will not discover until they start poking around and doing things. Those things do not cause #3 to invalidate or call into question #1

Ok, so player indicates their PC wants to climb the dark, odorless, underground wall* and then the DM describes the wall is wet when the PC touches it. "Do you still want to climb this wet, dark, odorless, underground wall?" There. Now it is telegraphed as the player poked around. The player can now choose to proceed as they see fit.

You have the wrong idea about telegraphing if you think it eliminates the need for PCs to poke around and do things. The purpose of telegraphing is to give the players a clue (or clues) about the environment which they could potentially use to inform their subsequent actions (and, certainly, inform them of why something bad happened when clues are missed).

I honestly cannot come up with a situation where telegraphing is not appropriate.

* if light were cast, would we find the party in a white room, perchance?

 

[HammerMan]

Yes, but not for every aspect of the game.

Specifically, the places I agree with their design decisions are the places where they didn’t leave it open to interpretation, and the parts I don’t like are the ones that are open to interpretation.

funny thing... me too

 

[HammerMan]

Then use wind. People can feel a breeze. Use smell. Darkvision doesn't affect the olfactory. Use sound. Describing an environment with a clue should be one of the pillars of DMing. It is something that every new DM should learn, and every DM after 20 years still needs to practice. It is the free throw in basketball. From the six-year-old shooting to the NBA or WNBA shooting. They all still practice.

and if you are leaving out details make damn sur you understand WHY they wouldn't get those details

 

[Maxperson]

Ok, so player indicates their PC wants to climb the dark, odorless, underground wall* and then the DM describes the wall is wet when the PC touches it. "Do you still want to climb this wet, dark, odorless, underground wall?" There. Now it is telegraphed as the player poked around. The player can now choose to proceed as they see fit.

Just a nitpick, but that's not telegraphing. Telegraphing implies that something might be present. It's a clue. If they touch the wall and discover it to be wet and slippery, it's not a telegraph of the wall being wet and slippter.

You have the wrong idea about telegraphing if you think it eliminates the need for PCs to poke around and do things. The purpose of telegraphing is to give the players a clue (or clues) about the environment which they could potentially use to inform their subsequent actions (and, certainly, inform them of why something bad happened when clues are missed).

I didn't say that. I said that sometimes things are not going to be telegraphed due to how the environment is set up and that poking around is how you find those things. That doesn't mean that no poking around is going to be present when telegraphing happens. Sometimes it will. Sometimes it won't.

I honestly cannot come up with a situation where telegraphing is not appropriate.

Spilled ink in a closed drawer. That was easy. It's an environmental description that you aren't going to know about until you poke around and open the drawer. Dry rot on the bottom of the dresser that isn't discoverable until the dresser is turned over is another. There are lots of descriptions that won't be present or telegraphed until you poke around.

* if light were cast, would we find the party in a white room, perchance?

No, but the wall would probably glisten

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Sometimes PCs describe checking out their surroundings very carefully in a focused deliberate way. Sometimes PCs are doing other things like arguing amongst themselves that can detract from their ability to get small details about their environment. Mechanically some characters are good at/roll well on perception checks while others are/do not.

Certainly.

Telegraphing things can be great fun for the player to work with, but it is not always necessary or appropriate. Sometimes the invisible ninja spy is stealthing well and gets the jump on the PCs without giving them a clue ahead of time.

Presumably, the PCs are in some dangerous location or have recently had a tense social interaction or whatever making the plausibility of ambush quite real. Telegraphing needn't happen right at the time of the attack.

I can remember playing a mythic monk and assaulting a slightly ruined castle courtyard with demons and cultists and seeing some embedded with ranged weapons off to the side and up some stairs behind a barrier trying to set up a kill zone so I tore off at enhanced speed to engage them in melee . . . and fell right into the pit a little before the stairs that had been covered by an illusion of solid ground. My comment was "Oh well done." as I monk dropped for no damage into the pit and kept running at speed to pop up the other side of the pit and still make it up to the stairs to leap over their barricade and be in position to threaten their missile fire.

One might possibly expect some kind of physical defenses in such a location. What else was happening in the scene? Maybe some evidence of magic? Were the embedded creatures making their movements obvious in some way as to serve as a distraction? These are rhetorical questions. The telegraphing could have been super subtle and/or may have been way before the assault even started. Without knowing more about the scene and, indeed, the runup to the scene, it is hard to know if there was zero clue about pits or illusion magic or defenses in general.

TL;DR The purpose of telegraphing is to avoid blatant gotchas.