Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Underman" data-source="post: 5988348" data-attributes="member: 6696705"><p>I think in classic D&D, it's quite frequent to step back from character to some degree and try to reconcile X to Y. I think that "not roleplaying" (your phrase, not mine) refers to not seeing X or not caring about X relative to Y.</p><p></p><p>Let's say that you want your PC to join the party [Y]. The rational thing for your PC to do [X] may be to say i) "you're crazy, no way", ii) "I'm not sure, tell me more" or iii) "hell yes!"</p><p></p><p>Now I don't like the term "not roleplaying". I'm not really sure what "roleplaying" means and I don't think it has anything to do with this thread.</p><p></p><p>That said, depending on your character concept and consistency with past actions, some of those X's are going to be more "true to character" than others. I just think that "less roleplaying" or better "less immersion" is when you say "Sure" (ie., my PC agrees to join the party) [Y] without thinking about X at all.</p><p></p><p>So I'll infer that "less immersion" is when the player is <strong>primarily</strong> motivated to do Y and doesn't have any X in mind. I think that's when the danger of "dissociation" feeling comes in.</p><p></p><p>A simulationist mechanic does the easy work for you. It basically gives you a default X up front and it can be selected as true to character at the character design phase. You can keep spamming that simulationist mechanic and your pre-assumed Xs is generally aligned with your Ys, whether you're actively imagining it or not at any one time in play.</p><p></p><p>Whereas a metagame-y mechanic can be unsatisfying if I perceive that X is unknown or X doesn't make sense and therefore I have to frequently imagine X and why my PC is doing X relative to Y. Or my fellow players are doing Y and not articulating anything about X but I'm part of the shared narrative. So it can be easier to gloss over it all (like an awkward saving throw or a tactical skirmish move that you don't think about in-game). But when you gloss over a simulationist mechanic as you will inevitably do through the session, <em>at least you have that default X for you</em>.</p><p></p><p>In short, I feel like I'm doing "less roleplaying" when there's a whole lot of Ys and a whole lot of glossing over the Xs. And it's only "dissociated" when the nature of the mechanics (plus the presentation) isn't helping any with the immersion.</p><p></p><p>I don't know if I articulated that properly. It's strange analyzing the psychology of this.</p><p></p><p>EDIT: Oh, and I figure "dissociation" is best used to describe a feeling, not a thing</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Underman, post: 5988348, member: 6696705"] I think in classic D&D, it's quite frequent to step back from character to some degree and try to reconcile X to Y. I think that "not roleplaying" (your phrase, not mine) refers to not seeing X or not caring about X relative to Y. Let's say that you want your PC to join the party [Y]. The rational thing for your PC to do [X] may be to say i) "you're crazy, no way", ii) "I'm not sure, tell me more" or iii) "hell yes!" Now I don't like the term "not roleplaying". I'm not really sure what "roleplaying" means and I don't think it has anything to do with this thread. That said, depending on your character concept and consistency with past actions, some of those X's are going to be more "true to character" than others. I just think that "less roleplaying" or better "less immersion" is when you say "Sure" (ie., my PC agrees to join the party) [Y] without thinking about X at all. So I'll infer that "less immersion" is when the player is [B]primarily[/B] motivated to do Y and doesn't have any X in mind. I think that's when the danger of "dissociation" feeling comes in. A simulationist mechanic does the easy work for you. It basically gives you a default X up front and it can be selected as true to character at the character design phase. You can keep spamming that simulationist mechanic and your pre-assumed Xs is generally aligned with your Ys, whether you're actively imagining it or not at any one time in play. Whereas a metagame-y mechanic can be unsatisfying if I perceive that X is unknown or X doesn't make sense and therefore I have to frequently imagine X and why my PC is doing X relative to Y. Or my fellow players are doing Y and not articulating anything about X but I'm part of the shared narrative. So it can be easier to gloss over it all (like an awkward saving throw or a tactical skirmish move that you don't think about in-game). But when you gloss over a simulationist mechanic as you will inevitably do through the session, [I]at least you have that default X for you[/I]. In short, I feel like I'm doing "less roleplaying" when there's a whole lot of Ys and a whole lot of glossing over the Xs. And it's only "dissociated" when the nature of the mechanics (plus the presentation) isn't helping any with the immersion. I don't know if I articulated that properly. It's strange analyzing the psychology of this. EDIT: Oh, and I figure "dissociation" is best used to describe a feeling, not a thing [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top