After a week of vacation at a big hippy music camp in Northern California, I had some game related things based on that I wanted to talk about this week. I’ll get to that later this week, but I want to comment on a weekend post James made over at Grognardia that kind of got my goat when I was relaxing last night with a couple of ales after my long 8-hour drive back to LA.
In a post about dungeon blocks, James makes mention of how he doesn’t really go for “immersive” game play, and that it is somehow some kind of thespian stunt. He claims to have a middle ground, but to me it sounds in this post (and others that he has made) that his players don’t come to really play D&D. It sounds like something James wants to be going on while they socialize. I guess it’s not wrong, but it sure is great D&D when the players come with passion for the game.
I personally don’t consider acting as being a part of immersion. Sure, I happen to have a certain degree of stage improv experience, and it has served me well when presenting an important or interesting NPC. Do I do voices? Hell no, but I do try to have a growly voice for things like orcs, and a calm voice for elf types. I try to do a soft voice for women. But shit, that ain’t acting. Not all (maybe not many) DM’s are even comfortable presenting a character in this way, but I can do it, and having a little charisma doesn’t hurt.
But that is not immersion. Immersion is the DM being in touch with his game world, NPC’s, and the players characters. The DM must be a part of the world and it’s presentation, otherwise he is just the banker in Monopoly. And what helps me is that I use the power of my imagination to get in a mind set where all this stuff is real.
Yeah, I know it’s a damn game and we have to break character constantly. But to feel it and pretend to believe in the world and the characters is a great skill to have. In a little place in my mind and my heart this world is really happening. That is the power of imagination. Do you read a good fictional story constantly reminding yourself that the story never happened? No, you let yourself believe it in it’s own context. The same with a good game that you can feel in your heart, and not just in your head at what is basically just a snacking and shooting the shit session.
All games have some outside chatter and joking, but ultimately that takes away from the game. You don’t have to sit there and act in character or anything, but I think focusing on a game is the best way to get the most out of it. Too much and my players complain. So I kind of make it my job to help “flow” by getting as much focus on the action at hand. We play for three hours on a weeknight twice month, so I do my best to give as much of the game as I can for my players. That is what they are there for. If I can immerse them a bit, all the better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is an excellent post and I'm glad you are able to articulate this important point. I think immersion is really about FOCUS and IMAGINATION. "Acting" has nothing to do with it, and I think people that conflate immersion and thespianism are completely missing the point.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of my best experiences as a player there were no funny voices or special first-person emphases - there was a complex, engrossing world, great characters, and a group of people totally focused on the game. There was no out-of-game chit-chat. There was a crackling atmosphere created by a master narrator interacting with a troupe of roleplayers.
I am speaking totally outside the realm of "game philosophizing" and semantics here, I am only trying to understand what have made my best gaming experiences so great, and what makes me want to play RPGs. In my experience chit-chat and lack of focus are the worst enemies of rewarding roleplay experiences.
I'm big on immersion and role-playing, too. For me a big part of the game is escaping the world around me and diving into something fantastic. I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to do that.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely agree with you. Our group is, I guess, what you'd call "immersive." But it's not amateur theatre or psychodrama. It is really all about everyone being there, in the scene, instead of writing on their character sheet, reading manuals, texting, or quoting Monty Python lines. It is so, so much better.
ReplyDeleteBeing focused on the game doesn't have to do with any kind of acting, that's true. It's also common courtesy if you're going to be partaking in the fruit's of a DM's spare time and effort.
ReplyDeleteInteresting comments Brunomac! I see James' point about not loosing view of the fact that its all a game, but staying focused on the game, and using ones imagination is a big part of the game for me. Some gamers are all about numbers and bending of rules. I'm all about pretending that the whole thing is real, even if Im not an actor or anything like that.
ReplyDeleteWhen people are talking about Immersion and RPGs I think they usually mean narrative immersion which can be helped by "good" acting (and hindered by "bad" acting) but doesn't require any acting on the part of the person experiencing that immersion - no more than reading a book requires you to act out the roles of the characters in the story.
ReplyDeleteCyclop: Well said, and that is my experience from the early days as well.
ReplyDeleteChris: no doubt. And I know you use dungeon dressing and blocks, and it never sounds like it takes away from the escapism. To me that only helps.
Dave: Well, I throw a little bit of psychodrama in there. Maybe cause I am psycho.
Will: right, the DM's time is never seen as important enough I think (see my DM as civil servant post). And often players who won't focus are just plain disrespectful to the process.
Havard: yeah, it's pretend. We are giving our imaginations a work out.
Stuart: the acting thing is not for everyone, and no player should have it expected of them. Many players are just plain shy.
It does all come down to how you define "immersion" as you and others have noted. For me, we're dealing with a world we know about almost completely through words alone. If the DM isn't immersed in all kinds of ancillary details about that world, and the players aren't in touch with their characters, then it seems like it would be an incredibly boring game. You have to be able to actually envision what's going on, and "immersion" is what I'd say enables that.
ReplyDeletei think both number of players and session length are a factor here.
ReplyDeletein my group we have 6 players and only some of the time all of them are 100% focused on the game. often 2 or 3 are chatting/tidying up character sheets/looking up stuff in a rulebook, while the others are actively playing. (we also split up a lot, which leaves some of us the role of spectators only)
but these "out of game"-chats are usually gamerelated, so it doesn't harm the others atmosphere much. noone talks about football or anything (only very rarely maybe).
this is only possible, in my mind, cause the group is quite big. if you have only 3 or 4 players this starts being a problem.
we play 6 to 8 hours, with one longer break at some point. it's tough to stay focused that long and everyone appreciates when they can take a short break. when you only have 3 hours to play you have to make every moment count i guess.
You don't have to be an actor, although knowing how to act helps, certainly.
ReplyDeleteRight-on with this post. Absolutely 100% right-on. I love immersion. It's one of the reasons that I actually really enjoy a lot of established D&D settings (like the Realms and Dark Sun). I enjoy immersing myself in the world, imagining what it is like. I hate it when stuff is glossed over. No, we don't need to get bogged down by too much description, but a few sentences here-and-there, talking out certain actions, heightens the experience. Yes it's a game, but it is an imaginative game.
I like the cut of your jib, Brunomac.
ReplyDeleteI think you made your point better here than over on Grognardia; I hope James reads this post. The key issue, as many have pointed out already, is focus: if you came to play D&D, play D&D. Not so long ago, I played in a short-lived group that fell apart because the players wouldn't focus and the DM got fed up; it wasn't worth his time to prepare for a game when most of the players just wanted to socialize.
ReplyDeleteRiley: yeah, the details are important. The DM should really be feeling the setting.
ReplyDeleteShlo: No doubt having less than 4 hours ramps up my "gotta get things done" mentality. Those old 6 hour games of yore were easy to unfocus on. But in those 90's games I could always rely on a player getting bored with the chatter and saying "hey, let's get on with the game."
Dave: Yeah, I always thought the point was to delve into the feeling of imagination, not just going through motions.
Ryan: Thanks, G.
JHB: oh, James is looking. Even comments sometimes, but moreso on the posts about memorabalia and whatnot over the passionate rants.
The lack of immersion is why I stopped organizing live action vampire the masquerade games. It wasn't theatre or acting at all. I never expected players to wear exactly the same clothes as their characters (although a little resemblence like a Ventrue wearing some suit was fine) or act out everything. I just wanted them to think In-Character and focus on the game. Maybe 2 of my 10 players were able to pull that through. Some didn't come to the sessions, which is quite emberrasing, when the game is about reacting to each other's characters. Others just came to read comics and complain about that the Elders do not give them Quests (WTF...?).
ReplyDeleteThen I moved back to good old D&D with fewer, more trusted players. As we're all working people with families who meet once a month to play (for a 8-10 hours long session) it's sometimes hard to make the people play attention, so the first hour is usually about socializing. Then we focus on the game with some breaks here and there. No acting, no DM-motivated drama (the players do some on their own :)), but immersion in the game world, in our characters, our goals.