I'm a huge fan of immersive RPing. How about you?

[Wyrmshadows]

Personally, as a DM/GM I am a great fan of immersive RPing experience for my players. I really enjoy it when they get into character and interact with one another or NPCs in my campaign and both act and react in character as if the events of the story are real.

I enjoy it when I try to frighten the PCs and players say that they got the chills because of the atmophere I wove for them. I have seen real emotion at the table (no, not just players pissed that their character died) and an embracing of the shared storytelling elements to the point where we didn't roll dice for an entire session.

What I think is great is when players talk not just about cool battles, but dramatic, poingnant, terrifying interactions with aspects of the campaign that are beyond the rolling of dice. IMO D&D/RPing games without the immersive PRing element would be dull.

So where do you stand?


Wyrmshadows

 

[Andor]

I completely agree. If I'm not immersed in character why aren't I playing a board game?

 

[hectorse]

I don't really care as a player, but as a DM I try to put the hooks in there if some player is interested.
Not too big on that either, most of the time we just goof around

 

[Cadfan]

I completely agree. If I'm not immersed in character why aren't I playing a board game?

You'd be amazed at how dismissive the board gamers are of RPGs.

"Sub par dice fests coupled with amateur theatrics. There's no challenge."

 

[Mr. Wilson]

Sometimes I'm happy to spend 4 hours and never touch dice, sometimes I'm happy to roll dice for 4 hours and not engage in much RP.

It's all rock and roll to me.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I want some immersion, but if I don't get to roll dice, why am I playing a game and not just telling stories? Of course, when all I do is rolling dice, why am I playing a role-playing game instead of a board game?

I think my current group might lean a little too much on the dice part, but maybe that's the fault of using modules and adventure paths...

 

[Voadam]

I voted for immersive but I love combat.

I love getting into character in combat, charging into the face of danger and laying the smack down.

I dislike stopping to consider how much power attack or expertise to fiddle around with for optimal mechanical output. I want to have a few straightforward options to deal with the tactical situation and then to dive into the heart of smiting bad guys in the chaotic press of combat.

1e AD&D and red book Basic D&D are more to my taste than Iron Heroes in general. Quick and to the point without too many distracting mechanics or excessive resource tracking that pull me out of feeling immersed in my character.

 

[Mallus]

I didn't vote, seeing as I believe you can do all that simultaneously.

I'm a huge supporter of 'schizophrenic role-playing'; at any given moment I might be deeply immersed in my fictional persona, or throwing the dice like Vegas high-roller, praying for a natural 20, or pondering the tactical situation like some kind of Rommel whose tanks were replaced by elves, or solving a problem using my character's skills, or solving a riddle using my own, or some amalgam thereof.

The interesting thing about RPG play is it's fluid nature. How players shifts stances over the course of a single session. Talking in character in an accent one minute, reciting some Python bit the next, so the speak.

I *think* I know something about playing good characters when I game. I mean, they entertain my fellow players, and that's the most meaningful criteria I can think of to judge them by.

 

[Scribble]

I like a mix of both.

 

[Umbran]

I want some immersion, but if I don't get to roll dice, why am I playing a game and not just telling stories?

Because the dice-rolling/telling-stories dichotomy is a false one?