Long descriptions on pcs

[number13]

I dislike them.  Short evocative descriptions provide a much clearer picture in my mind's eye than the epic novellas attached to many PCs.  

My feeling is that a description ought to be about two average paragraphs in length.  The NPCs tend to have just the right amount of text.  

Agree?

[Bestatte]

If it's more than 8 lines long, chances are I'll just skim over it looking for the pertinent parts and ignore the rest. And so longer than 7 lines is wasted on me. If it's less than 5 lines, it had -better- be chock full of information all jam-packed into them. If you fill 4 lines with nothing but information about your hair, then you're not giving me a character description. You're giving me a Clairol advertisement and frankly I'm just not interested.

In the game I played before coming into Arm, the code was limited and we were unable to make more than a 4-line description. So we had to think very carefully how we'd put all that info into those 4 lines. Overall body type, facial features, hair, any special twitches or scars..all had to be in 4 lines.

Poetry is great, and so is prose, but if you think I'm going to endure 12 lines of text just to discover that you're male, then fuggedaboudit.

[Larrath]

Depends on the arrangement.  I personally prefer longer descriptions (no 25 liners though), as long as they are that long with reason.

Once a description becomes long, though, again, arrangement becomes an issue.  I don't care where you say that your marble green eyes are a verdant shelter in the middle of the fucking desert if it's a five line desc, but a 15 liner should have the eyes placed under the hair and above the nose.

And, well, that's it really.  Just arrange it so that it makes sense, and I'm happy.

[gfair]

Do what you want, and don't judge me for doing what I want to do.  Descriptions are art, not all of us are good artists, but art runs the gamut from Spartan to epic.  A single line of paint on a white canvas is considered art by experts, while others go and paint the Cistine Chapel and everyone calls that art as well.

Character descriptions parallel the gamut of art just as much - you can't judge someone for making a long description.  Yeah, you think maybe they just think their PCs or roleplay or whatever better (because at times I've thought that) but I've also done up a long desc or three and all I was going for was greater detail.  Information density. Read it and interpret it, you know a thousand different things about the faces of your closest friends and family members - Arm faces are no less detailed, some people want to add more, others less.  Do what you like, go for whatever concept you want, just leave the judgement out of it.

[number13]

Character descriptions parallel the gamut of art just as much - you can't judge someone for making a long description.  

I'm thinking function trumps form in this case.  It can be difficult to quickly parse required information from a longer description.  

I can recall working with university students who would be asked to confine a paper to a single page.  Many students would cram as many words on that single page as possible--shrinking fonts and widening margins.  Half the words squished on those nearly unreadable pages were unnecessary--easily removed without altering the conveyance of a single idea.  (plus, half the ideas in those papers weren't worth conveying....)
 
The moral of the story: bigger isn't better.  Information density and readability are far more important than a sheer quantity of words, especially considering how character descriptions are likely to be used.

Anyway, it's a game, not a graded exercise.  This just happens to be a particular pet peeve of mine.

Shutting up now.

[John]

I believe quality over quantity. I think a quality long decsription is better then a bad short description. I think a quality short description is better then a bad long description.

Regardless of size, if it's a quality description it's good in my books (plus I can steal the format for my next char if it's a good description )

[jmordetsky]

size doesn't matter. It depends on how well written it is.

A 25 liner that flows is fine, as is a 5 line that creates a concrete image for me is as well.

Though either of those will tend to teeter toward the extreme where it's either long winded, in which case it will be skimmed or childishly simple in which case it's missed its purpose.

With that said, I prefer long winded if need be. But like all things perfection lies somewhere in the seperation of extremes.

[Tamarin]

I don't like the "hemmingway" style of writing descs:

The man is tall.  He has black hair.  His face if kind of round.  His shoulders are somewhat broad.  His nose is average, like the rest of his body.  His feet are a foot long.  Etc, etc.

[spawnloser]

Personally, I have no problem with a 7-9 line description just based off of its length.  Granted, it means that I have to pause while I read people's descriptions, but if a description is well-written, the length hardly matters.  If it's the Hemmingway style or disjointed and akward to read, I'm not going to be impressed with the person's presumption.  If you are not capable of writing an easy to read 9 line description, don't.  I won't fault you for having a 4 line, simple description...but I will fault you for looking like your cat barfed up your description all over my screen.

[Tamarin]

I won't fault you for having a 4 line, simple description...but I will fault you for looking like your cat barfed up your description all over my screen.

That's hilarious.  Nicely done.

[Quirk]

Hey, let's not get dissing Hemingway. You're doing as grave an injustice to the man by calling those "Early Reader" style descs by his name (e.g. "This is a man. He has two eyes. He has a nose.  He has a mouth.") as you would be doing Shakespeare if you termed all those painful faux-medieval prose snippets you see in bad MUDs "Shakespeare-style".

I prefer what I'd class as a medium-length desc, somewhere between 7 and 12 lines. I've very rarely seen a 4 or 5 line desc that looked wrought by a skilled wordsmith, and the extremely long descs I've met often seem self-indulgent. Generally I skim a desc to give myself an impression of distinguishing features, and then if my impression of it is unusually good or humorously bad, I go back and reread it. Reading a really well-crafted desc is like being treated to the emotes of an expert. Sometimes I see a desc so befitting the portrayal of the character and his or her environment that it creates a little atmosphere all of its own. Sometimes I cringe. So it goes.

Quirk

[gfair]

The moral of the story: bigger isn't better.  Information density and readability are far more important than a sheer quantity of words, especially considering how character descriptions are likely to be used.

Nobody ever said bigger was better, and certainly, as I was hoping to allude to in my art analog, one person's trash is another person's treasure - information density and readability are not far more important - those are just as much opinions as the opinion on what kind of desc is better.  A point on readability - no two people read at the same level or with the same grammatical knowledge. The average reading level of the US is a Grade 5 reading level, so the only relevant issue on readability is: don't make something so complicated that you have to look up the dictionary to recall what the words mean in your desc. People who choose to use more complex words and concepts have every right to do so, and the fact that some might not be able to read the description and understand it should have no bearing on what those people want to do.

Again: Go for whatever quality and ideas and concepts you want out of a desc, and don't judge others, just read, learn, try to understand, you'll be a better person for it. Bigger is better, just as equally as smaller is better.

As for Hemmingway-style: It's only good if it's done well.  Hemmingway rules as an author, the simplicity of his writing doesn't fully tell the tale of what he is getting across to readers through interpretation.

[HaiWolfe]

I rarely write my PC descriptions (and NPCs on another MUD) over 5 or 6 lines, under the assumption that it's more important to transmit all the necessary information in a compact package that more people will read, than to wax poetic over what usually end up being minor details.

I could be wrong, but I figure that if people have to scroll up an entire screen length in order to read a description, most won't have the time (or attention span) to digest all that information and create a solid mental image of that character.

The above opinion's merely from a practical standpoint, not to bash longer descriptions. A well-written, lengthy description can be very informative and enjoyable to read, provided one has the time to pause and take it all in.

[Ralin]

Hmmm...

If I want to write a 15 line desc, I will.
If I want to write a 5 line desc, I will.
If you don't like 'em, don't read 'em.

Done.  

[Carnage]

I generally work from at my personal minimum 8 lines, to about thirteen. Generally around nine or ten. Any more than fifteen and you're nuts. Around five or so, it seems like you're just trying to rush through chargen and have barely put any thought into your character.

[Angela Christine]

I think that some details can be left out of a shortish main-description and then added back in with emotes.  It isn't really necessary to mention that your elf has pointy ears, because nearly every elf has pointy ears, yet almost every elf main description mentions their almond-shaped eyes and pointy ears.  It's ok to leave off your ears, and then occasionly scratch you pointy ear (or whatever) in an emote.

Personally, I like 5-7 line descriptions.


AC

[sarahjc]

I have yet to see a very well thought out 4 line description that gives me a good idea of what that person looks like. And I almost always skim the very long ones.  It's just too much and I feel rather overwhelmed by them.

I think 9 lines is the ideal. Seems you can fit enough good detail into 9 lines.  There is enough room to get all the basics in and be artistic about it, but not overly picturesque. Yes, I do want to know about the basics; hair, eyes, body shape, height and significant scars, but I also want to get a feel for your character. Meaning do they hold there mouth in a permanent pout, walk with an off balance gate? Are they an average and forgettable face, or someone with an extraordinary feature that I would remember should I cross their path again? Do they hold an air about them? A fierce crows footed five mile stare or a stooped and rather shy posture..  

However I don't care for people who use far too many comparisons..  

Her eyes are deep and vast pools of mouton silver, that have been dripped into a pallet of smooth, golden-tanned skin that shimmers as if it where a wind swept sand dune on a clear still day. And these eyes, though cool and calm as the quiet just before dawn, seem to hold a peaceful and gentle quality..

This is obviously a rather exaggerated non-sensible example, but I have seen things that where close.. Just tell me the facts.. I don't need a literary landscape, I just want to know what you look like..

These of course, are just my thoughts on it.

[John]

Around five or so, it seems like you're just trying to rush through chargen and have barely put any thought into your character.

As someone who works on the 4 line lower limit, that really isn't true. It might seem like that, but it aint true

[Morrolan]

It isn't really necessary to mention that your elf has pointy ears, because nearly every elf has pointy ears, yet almost every elf main description mentions their almond-shaped eyes and pointy ears.

Except that when wearing a hood, there is no mention of racial identifiers, unless it is elsewhere in the long desc...

[Cuusardo]

I got confused when I first read this post, because it was talking about long descs.  When I think long desc, I think ldesc, which is what people see when they enter a room you're in.

Now, onto main descs (mdescs?)...  The length of it should not matter, as long as it gives a clear picture of the character without leaving too much or too little to the imagination.