Why can't GMs talk like this?

Mostly because players would get bored or just not understand what you're saying

I can talk like that, in spite of all the claims ITT, it's very easy if you read enough classic literature. However, it makes the players uncomfortable, most likely because they're suddenly held up to a standard they didn't really aspire to. It makes the game very awkward.

You sound like you're full of shit

Holy fucking CRINGE OP.

My player are man children.

They literally say: “Skip!” if I give a monologue or some large description.

You sound like a brainlet.

I would be pissed if they pulled that shit on me. I'd start saying "Skip" after literally anything they would say for the rest of the campaign until they apologized

There were a few QMs who wrote like that, when quests were still alive.

Why be such a passive-aggressive little cuck? The moment someone told me to "skip" what I'm saying, they're kicked out of my house.

because it's funny, I'm friends with my players, and it'll eventually lead to a serious mention of the fact that they better cut that shit out

I'd finish the game, but I wouldn't invite someone who straight up tells me to shut up to another game. Unless it's unbearable, the feedback needs to wait until the end of the game.

Well I'm okay and I'm having fun with my players who seem to think I'm a pretty good GM, can you say the same ?

Yes? How is any of that related to anything I said? Could you make it any more obvious that you're projecting?

These two have the right of it.
Descriptive language is one thing, this is pure verbal onanism.

>because it's funny

Yeah, I bet people laugh at you a lot.

>It makes the game very awkward.

Maybe it wasn't you but you can understand my confusion

It's actually not very good descriptive language though. There's too many similes that require work to decipher, and it doesn't help you to quickly get into the scene.

because I don't want to hear you talk about the castle for longer than we'll spend in it, you cunt

> Not, The moonlight cascading upon the terraces

Pleb, also, this shit is obtuse. You expect the average group PC's to care one whit about your purple prose?

Just start having the PCs fall prey to easily avoidable traps. They would have been easily noticeable if they hadn't told the GM to skip the description.

You let the players minds fill in the blank when you use simpler language. That shit you posted is purple prose and its really fucking hard to describe everything off the top of your head at that level when you improvise.

underrated post

You usually don't have enough time to do that. In a poetic nostalgic scene, this could fit. But if you are in the middle of an important battle, your players will tell you to hurry the fuck up. It ain't worth it.
The way I write tries to reflect the party's overall mood. Thus, when the party is running after something, for example, descriptions are short; when they are calm, the world is vivid and warm, etc etc.

Hopefully, because this is pretentious wankery that's more purple than a suffocating eggplant. Thesaurus writing is the worst kind of writing.

If I were reading a book and the prose was this fucking purple I'd out that shit down. This is bad storytelling all around and I'd roll my eyes if my GM started talking like this.

Bc it sucks. Good writing is brief and inspires further imagination from the audience. Not bloated and removing the need for the audiences imagination.

The players need to know what, conditional atmosphere (light/dark, dry/wet, exaggerated danger), and a hint of something more, some contradiction of expectation.

Here:

>>You come upon a Gothic castle silhouetted by the moon. The moonlight drapes over the castle meeting the surrounding moat giving the illusion that it is floating.

Gothic Castle - they will picture the rest
Light conditions -
Fantasy setting - is it really just an illusion
2 sentences they actually listened to

See, as someone who does spin out some prose in online games or very, very occasionally in quests I totally disagree that this is actually good, spoken, at a table.

At the table you want short, vivid and informative ways to give information to the players. It doesn't matter if it's anachronistic or silly or anything: the point is to make them feel it. Sometimes you can monologue and it'll work but those are rare moments when the player will be completely hooked - your 'spotlight' moments - and if you try to do it all the time it'll fail for sure. You have to read the room. And regardless of how much you like Gracq I think you probably realise that.

Because I only get 8 hours of RPG time a month. I'm not suffering through your mental masterbation when it serves no point.

Would love to see your Prix Goncourt my mans.

It's very beautiful in online games, especially because I can click it away and get on with the actual game

Ive been practicing voices and quick improv but im afraid of totally being an absolute sperg.
Thank you OP for reminding me not to be a sperg.

I usually find that a little more description works well in online games, just because not being face-to-face is naturally less evocative and everyone usually takes a little longer to get their shit together so something to read works.

Go record yourself and let us hear.

...

But why can't GMs talk like this?
>O brood O muse upon my mighty subject like a holy hen upon the nest of night.
O ponder the fascism of the heart.
Sing of disappointments more repeated than the batter of the sea, of lives embittered by resentments so ubiquitous the ocean’s salt seems thinly shaken, of let-downs local as the sofa where I copped my freshman’s feel, of failures as frequent as first love, first nights, last stands; do not warble of arms or adventurous deeds or shepherds playing on their private fifes, or of civil war or monarchies at swords; consider rather the slightly squinkered clerk, the soul which has become as shabby and soiled in its seat as worn-out underwear, a life lit like a lonely room and run like a laddered stocking.

This is SHIT writing. I hope this is bait.

>If you didn't win a prize for your book, you can't criticize me!!!!
A good writer can take criticism. And when a big batch of people shit on your writing, and they're likely to read a lot (it's Veeky Forums, not /tv/) you might consider that they're right.
Also, I bet your writing isn't fucking better in french, you dumb fuck.

It's only real problem is that it substitutes good imagery and rhythm for diction, but that's more of a nitpick than anything.

>accusing me of being a literal dead man
If you can deal with Lovecraft or Dunsany or Arthur Machen you should be able to deal with Julien Gracq. And it absolutely is worse in translation, but it's still not bad.

>good imagery
No. I don't think so. Cliche and overdone to the death imagery. There is no creativity in there, no immersion too.

>Lol I picked a real author, tricked you!
You dumb fuck. You do realize that litterature has evolved with time? The reason why it's overdone is because author like him already did it plenty.
And yes, I can fucking tell you it's worse in translation. You don't write in english like you write in french.

>I bet your writing isn't fucking better in french, you dumb fuck.

Wrong again my friend!

Mate I can't tell if you're trolling or just like 15 years old right now.

>reading comprehension
That's what I said: "it substitutes good imagery and rhythm for diction."

>A good writer can take criticism. And when a big batch of people shit on your writing, and they're likely to read a lot (it's Veeky Forums, not /tv/) you might consider that they're right.
Tell that to Veeky Forums

I can tell you skipped the nouveau roman and nouvelle fiction, you dumb shit.

This.

I can create very sad atmospheres by lowering my voice and slowing my pace of speaking. Or thrill my players with the badassness of a last hit description by just by narrating with an energetic tone.

The DM is not a writer. Is an oral storyteller.

1) I'm not OP.
2) You seem to believe all writing is progressing to some perfect end point.
3( You couldn't even read a Veeky Forums post correctly.

Yes, because art doesn't evolve with time, there is no waves in any medium, and the audience doesn't get used to what has been done before. Dumb shit.

I did misread the post tho. That doesn't invalidate the rest.

Several reasons.
>GMing is tons of improv on top of a slight framework of preparation
>This shit is purple prose of the mouth and like with all purple prose, it quickly gets insufferable. It's like cake of the mind.
>Players very often don't give a shit
>It takes tremendous effort to GM well as-is, without adding writing like a HS sophomore who just found a thesaurus and thinks himself king erudite
>TTRPGs aren't books no matter how much you want to "write" "good" "BBEGs"
>Most people aren't raised or educated to have such a vocabulary or a way with words like this

>purple prose
Yuck. Where's my BBEG, and where's my >fun?

I mean Northern Renaissance > Italian Renaissance user, regardless of whether or not the latter invented perspective.

>tremendous effort to GM well
ehhh

ITT people with no actual taste in literature argue back and forth about a literally who that writes a genre only surpassed in shallowness by YA

Grow up.

I guess I just have high standards for GMs?
When I think of a well-GM'd game, I think of Critical Role (despite Mercer being a bit soft on his players and way soft on his wife) and whatever that Perkins fella is doing, or just an engaged storyteller who manages to engage others and not make even combat or shopping sessions a chore.
80% of Veeky Forums seem to have or be some sort of nightmare GM, and most I have IRL are pretty fucking mediocre, so you know what, I'm gonna say it takes a lot of effort to GM well, yeah.

Who's your favourite author user?

William Gaddis

About a botchered translation. In the original text it's leagues ahead.

And yet you speak of Literally Whos.
Get fucked bucko.

Just want to say as the user who asked I still disagree with you, but I am not

>people with subjective tastes are inherently inferior to my subjective tastes
Your opinion is noted and ignored.

>the most important and influential postwar author
>literally who
Literally (you).
I accept your opinion.

The GM and another player at my table are English majors, and I've read nearly all of Clark Ashton Smith and Jack Vance's repertoire. Some willfully protracted periodic embellishment is our taste.

Istill haven't read Julien Gracq tho.

>Waaah, it's a known american author, that means he must be good and known in the whole WORLD
No.

>>Waaah, it's a known american author, that means he must be good and known in the whole WORLD
But he is. I don't think you understand how wrong you are.

Can we talk about what a good GM description looks like?

I think most of us can agree that OP's text is about as useful as throwing a shit-covered thesaurus at your player's face. But I think there is also some value to adding details and flavor to your descriptions beyond just
>It's night. There's a castle with a moat.

I like the "five senses" technique. I keep a note on my gm screen that just says "sight, sound, smell, touch, taste". Whenever I describe a location, monster, NPC, etc. I try to at least hit more than one sense.
>It's a full moon, and you can see the castle surrounded by a dark moat. You can smell smoke in the air, and hear muffled talking and clinking from inside the walls.
Or for an NPC, something like:
>He's a short dwarf wearing tarnished metal armor and a dusty red tabbard. He shakes your hand with a strong, calloused grip, and when he gets close you can smell sweat, dirt, and alcohol. He speaks to you with a warm, sing-song voice, slightly slurring the occasional word.

Any other GMs have good tips for descriptions, and how to come up with interesting stuff on the fly?

>the most important and influential post war author
>wrote three minor works of almost no importance.

I think it really depends on the group, but, most of the time, I think a good dm is one that narrates sparsely and only to create atmosphere. Going on and on about shit the players don't care about is dumb.
(you)

>(you)
I'm serious though. He's no Vonnegut, Salinger or Harper Lee.

To call him more than a minor author is absurd hyperbole.

>Why can't GMs talk like this?

I used to. Professional actor and all that - improvising that sort of dialogue is a ton of fun for me.

I stopped because my players were bored. They didn't want a verbally-painted mental picture, they wanted to get to the "good stuff". Mostly, that meant dice rolling and splitting up treasure.

I have a new group who really likes Pendragon, and so I can get away with a bit of that sort of verbiage, but they still get bored with it pretty quick, so I have to limit myself. Hopefully, the plan to run a short TOR campaign will come through, where I can play a loremaster and talk in character like that all the time.

I get self-conscious and it takes a long time because you'll no doubt have to repeat yourself. I used to do a lot of MMO RP and can "play author" a bit in text-based games because of it, however that style of RP is much easier when you're narrating one character interacting with the environment and speaking than when you're trying to evocatively describe a scene using metaphor and simile. As a GM, unless I am playing a purely text-based game where I can type it up I'll just speak as I normally do.

The thing is, what OP gave is not a "verbally-painted mental picture". It's such gratuitous adjective masturbation I feel like OP needs to clean up and take a nap now. It does a piss poor job of actually describing the scene.

A good writer and narrator knows brevity is key to good description.
>Thus surprised in its oneiric immobility, one would have said, however, that it rode in a measureless ease, like the silent frolics one comes upon by night in certain forest glades.
is totally lacking in brevity. Just bullshit meant to sound eloquent.

>I'm serious though
And yet you follow that statement with something no sensible person would say. I would definitely agree that the authors you mentioned are more well known, but in no way did they have as much an impact on later authors and academic thinking as Gaddis did. Though it's up for debate whether he was the first postmodern author, like Pound did for Modernism, Gaddis spearheaded the postmodern movement as a whole with The Recognitions--a novel which served as a template for almost every subsequent postmodern author, including William Gass, John Barth, John Hawkes, Thomas Pynchon, and Kurt Vonnegut. You also have to think about how impactful he was on David Foster Wallace and Jonathan Franzen, both of whom, though more popular, built many of their ideas around those had he had expressed 50 years before then.

Become the dm and do it then if its so easy
Besides its quite pompous for gming purpose, in literature it works better but most player don't want to heard a long tirade without much information to play around with

I didn't take OP as literally meaning that specific verbiage, but along the lines of "why don't GMs fully describe what a PC experiences instead of minimalist description that covers the bare minimum visual input and no other senses?"

Because that's actually a recurring debate that comes up with some frequency.

>Gaddis spearheaded the postmodern movement as a whole
I mean sure, if you arbitrarily decide that Gaddis marks the begging of the transition to postmodern (instead of literally anyone else), then yes he's an author of minor importance, instead of an absolute nobody.

Because people always interrupt me

Because imagination is for children. I'm at the table to make my numbers go up. If you want to masturbate with words, go write a book and leave me out of it.

>I'm at the table to make my numbers go up.
Don't care if its bait or srs, made me laugh.

>if you arbitrarily decide that Gaddis marks the begging of the transition to postmodern (instead of literally anyone else)
I'm convinced at this point that you have no idea what you are talking about. The only postmodern author with as much academic notoriety around that time period was John Hawkes, but he had neither the same level of controversy surrounding him nor the same synergistic presence that Gaddis had. EVERY major academic author after Gaddis was influenced by his style and ideas; saying he wasn't important is like saying Joyce wasn't important.

Because three hours in my creative juices need player input to keep going and because I'm not a fucking author with hours to spend describing, in unneeded detail, what an enchanting moss laden cavern with artificial sun and giant throbbing phallic mushroom monsters looks like.

Joyce was a hack.

U rite

1- Because I absolutely refuse to fall into the trap of overpreparing a script for an adventure
2- I also don't talk in purple prose
3- I don't write in purple prose either
4- My players would hate it
5- I would hate it

>A legion of horribles, hundreds in number, half naked or clad in costumes attic or biblical or wardrobed out of a fevered dream with the skins of animals and silk finery and pieces of uniform still tracked with the blood of prior owners, coats of slain dragoons, frogged and braided cavalry jackets, one in a stovepipe hat and one with an umbrella and one in white stockings and a bloodstained wedding veil and some in headgear or cranefeathers or rawhide helmets that bore the horns of bull or buffalo and one in a pigeontailed coat worn backwards and otherwise naked and one in the armor of a Spanish conquistador, the breastplate and pauldrons deeply dented with old blows of mace or sabre done in another country by men whose very bones were dust and many with their braids spliced up with the hair of other beasts until they trailed upon the ground and their horses' ears and tails worked with bits of brightly colored cloth and one whose horse's whole head was painted crimson red and all the horsemen's faces gaudy and grotesque with daubings like a company of mounted clowns, death hilarious, all howling in a barbarous tongue and riding down upon them like a horde from a hell more horrible yet than the brimstone land of Christian reckoning, screeching and yammering and clothed in smoke like those vaporous beings in regions beyond right knowing where the eye wanders and the lip jerks and drools

Why can't GM's talk like this?

Something that bugs me is describing an NPC. Do you go as far as to describe the dirt on their fingernails and do you stick to good ol "show dont tell descriptions? I've seen DMs describing their personalities..upon MEETING npcs. Sure, sometimes people have a gesture or an attitude that clearly reflects their personalities, but people are not open books.
UGH..where do you draw the line?

Clearly fishing for replies, but is this copied from something, or did you make this bad quote yourself?

McCarthy's campaign would be lifechanging.

>where do you draw the line?

Wherever I feel it should be drawn.

Way too fucking wordy. I like to embellish somewhat, but not that much.

If you want to establish some good atmosphere without boring your players to death, I suggest preparing a playlist of music ahead of time with appropriate songs for different areas & moments. If you're playing online, you can find stuff on YT and ask your players to all hop into a synchtube channel and leave it running in the background.

>Julien Gracq (French: [gʁak]; 27 July 1910 – 22 December 2007; born Louis Poirier in Saint-Florent-le-Vieil, in the French département of Maine-et-Loire) was a French writer.[1] He wrote novels, critiques, a play, and poetry. His literary works were noted for their dreamlike abstraction, elegant style and refined vocabulary. He was close to the surrealist movement, in particular its leader André Breton.[1]