Yeah I don't see a big deal with miniatures or steam kettles (especially the later where you are talking to the player, not the character and the player needs to understand what images you are invoking). I am also not overly rigid about this. A lot of my campaigns are more 'first person' but I am not strictly policing it. The biggest walls would be around things like out of character knowledge. I use a lot of anachronistic language when I run games. That sort of thing doesn't worry me at all.
It is also worth pointing out, this is a preference issue. Some GMs find miniatures help, some don't. Me and Rob run games differently in this respect, I do strict theater of the mind with no miniatures. But they each have their advantages and disadvantages. Miniatures and maps make things clear, I am more okay than some GMs with things being more open to interpretation (though I do try to be as clear and precise as I can). And I will occasionally do things like sketch out an outline of what players see so they understand things like the terrain. One thing I do often do though is I will track player and NPC movement on paper so things aren't shifting around.
I believe the key takeaway from this is that there are multiple perspectives to consider. Going back to the example of art, while we have our brushes, paints, and canvas, there are fundamental techniques for using them. What it amounts to the end is a toolkit from which we assemble the particular way we make our painting. Even artists nominally part of the same school, like the Impressionists, all have their own unique techniques alongside the ones that are shared in common.
With tabletop roleplaying, from talking with you, we share some things in common, but like you said, you have your own unique mix of techniques and goals that contrast with mine.
Just as a personal comment, Rob's sandbox games and his mysteries are very good (I also had a chance to run Scourge of the Demon Wolf a few years back and it is right up my alley).
I appreciate the compliment and the shout out.
But I also played in one of his middle earth sessions (which was a little different in style and that was great too).
So the trick there was the excellent presentation of Middle Earth in the One Ring/Adventure in Middle Earth RPG. My view is that the pedal hits the metal for any setting, and how characters and creatures are roleplayed. While I read Tolkien's books multiple times, and knew the history well, I never felt I understood enough why different characters acted the way they did. What were the deep cultural reasons that could make what I've been calling a plausible extrapolation to roleplay other characters that would feel like they are from Middle Earth. But the One Ring/AiME laid it all out in a way that I finally got it, and as a result, I was able to run successful Middle Earth campaigns and sessions like the one you experienced.
Rob's great at getting into character too (I on the other hand am rather dry in my delivery, and not much of an enthusiastic actor).
Not everybody wants to do the funny voices (acting) even if they have the ability. This is supposed to be a hobby we enjoy, so do what's best for you!
On mysteries in general a lot of this is really going to pivot on the system too. Just as an example if you are using a game like Gumshoe, that can still do the objective mystery, but it is also more structured around scenes. I ran a fun investigation using the early version of that system, ecoterrorist and it was a blast. That system will be different than the system I normally use to run mysteries but it still does what I am talking about. So this is one of the reasons I think getting into the details of play isn't as important as objective backstory simply existing
So funny story about Gumshoe, I played a campaign with my friend Tim of Gothridge Manor and he did a really good job with the system. What impressed me was its underlying philosophy about mysteries. It wasn't about whether the characters would find the clues, but rather about how they would find the clues. And what they do with the information afterwards.
So that got me thinking about skills, along with my experiences with supporting the software and hardware of the metal cutting machines the company I work for builds. It occurred to me that people generally don't fail at a skilled task once they are beyond a certain skill level for that task. Most times that I saw a real-world failure that wasn't attributed to carelessness the individual was short on time, resources, or didn't have the right equipment.
For example, several of the metal cutting devices we sell for the machines are rated to cut up to a certain thickness. However, that maximum thickness is often right at the edge that the cutter can do reliably. So the operator has to be far more careful in setting up the cutting equipment to get a nice, clean cut. Even then, it takes several tries after several failed "skill rolls," so to speak, before the right combination of speed and parameters is found.
So I started applying what I called the Gumshoe principle to how I handled skills regardless of system. And it worked out, the result felt more organic to what the characters can do. Eventually, I refined my ideas and wrote them up in my Basic Rules for the Majestic Fantasy RPG>
I got asked about it a lot, so I posted the chapter as a free download.
