D&D 4E 4e/13thA immersion question and 5e/13thA DoaM question

[herrozerro]

EN World isn't for or against anything, other than being a pro-D&D (in all forms) community. With individual members, your mileage may vary.

Since EN World is an RPG news site and got its start reporting scoops on 3E, there is a definite skew toward reporting and discussion of the current/latest versions of games, but that isn't a pro- or anti- position.

Aside from a vocal minority, I think you'll find most EN Worlders are accepting of all forms of the game.

I figured as much. It's just sad that so many use statements like that.

 

[steenan]

Mechanics-based tactics are in general something that prevents or disrupts immersion for me. Using map and miniatures, calculating modifiers, tracking details of how my abilities work. It's not a big problem, because I can have fun without immersion, too - and I don't tend to play D&D very immersively. But in general, anything that requires me to think more about how the mechanical pieces interact than about how the character would act in the fictional situation won't work well with my immersion.

The number of powers is not a problem. Having too many may be time consuming, but isn't more immersion-breaking than being too restricted and unable to express what I would like to do in fiction (see: 3.x, where any combat maneuver other than simply dealing damage was heavily penalized unless you specialized in it).

Powers having unclear or too complicated effects are much worse, because they require focusing on the system. As are rules that leave character powerless or useless for significant time.

 

[Dragonblade]

EN World isn't for or against anything, other than being a pro-D&D (in all forms) community. With individual members, your mileage may vary.

Since EN World is an RPG news site and got its start reporting scoops on 3E, there is a definite skew toward reporting and discussion of the current/latest versions of games, but that isn't a pro- or anti- position.

Aside from a vocal minority, I think you'll find most EN Worlders are accepting of all forms of the game.

Yes, exactly. I didn't mean that EN World itself has a position.

 

[Dragonblade]

Mechanics-based tactics are in general something that prevents or disrupts immersion for me.

I'm the opposite. Having mechanical differentiation and support behind my PC's actions makes immersion easier for me. If the visual narrative I attach to my PC is always mechanically distilled down to "make an attack roll" and the attack rolls are the same, that gets real boring for me. Why should I go through the mental exercise of imagining a dramatic fight if the real world analog is me rolling the same attack roll over and over again?

I like to mentally map my character's mechanical powers and abilities to how the fight plays out in my imagination. If I have a list of tactical options, like attack X, shift Y, and do damage Z, OR attack Y, shift Z, and do damage X, etc. then I liken that to a martial artist searching for an opening, maneuvering around their opponent, etc.

When the mechanics matter, then I feel my PC's choices matter. And when my choices matter, its much easier for me to engage my imagination.

 

[TheFindus]

1 - A question for 13th Agers or 4e-ers about immersion

So, how do you stay feeling like you're in character or doing what your character would in combat instead of feeling like you're running through a checklist to see what you should do next? (Or would a real-life character in combat just have a mental check-list like an NFL quarterback and go on auto-pilot?) Does it work to just try to focus on visualizing, or to not consider the whole range of powers? Is it just a matter of practice?

My advice: when playing older versions of DnD, I always thought about what my PC would do in a specific situation. As a martial character I did not have many written-out options, though, besides "I attack with my sword" or "I charge and attack with my sword" or "I move around this opponent and attack with my sword". Of course, I could have tried to pull cool stunts, the result being determined by the rolling of dice as prescribed by the DM. Spellcasters would read through the spell description and think about how effective a certain spell would be. They could also use the martial attack forms, of course.
In 4E and 13th age, what has changed is the amount of written-out options for martial PCs. And that is basically it. It does not hinder you to do anything else you think would fit the situation. Instead, it provides a solid mechanical framework to help you narrate certain things you want to do. So the Paladin in 13th age can use Bastion and say "I try to save the Mage next to me from harm from that blow" etc.
You get better at narrating this the more you play. I am sure you will find that 4E and 13th age make narration very easy.

2 - A question about 13th Age/5e and DoaM

Maybe I'm just thinking too much about it. That another player's effectiveness depended on whether they had an odd-miss or even-miss also didn't help me picture it as more than plusses and minuses. That player did do a nice job of narrating what they did (after they saw the die result) though.

I bolded the important part. DOAM is not a problem unless you take "miss" and "hit" literally. "Hit" and "miss" are abstractions, just as "save" is. Because when you "make your save" in older editions of the game, a lot of times, you still take damage (and are therefore not "saved" at all). And since a combat round is 6 seconds of action, swings, moving, ducking and hp are not considered meat, there is a lot of room to narrate DOAM. Obviously, you play with people who are able to narrate things in a plausible way. That is important.

Oh, and about the "x happens on an even/uneven roll" in 13th age: just describe what you want to achieve with the power you are using. Pick a fitting narrative for the result that could be achieved by using that power. If you roll even (or uneven, depending on the power description), you succeeded, otherwise you did not. So you still deal damage, but there is no extra effect.

Have fun playing 4E/13th age.

 

[Obryn]

I find this statement and others like it strange. Why does everyone seem to think that en world is against certain games?

I've seen it said that en world is against 4e. A haven for 4e. Against osr. For osr. What is en world for or against?

The sign of a true edition warrior is a conviction that they were banned for their views, rather than banned for their behavior.

Usually hating on stuff is angrier and ruder than posting about stuff you like, so the folks who hate on something tend to get banned or moderated, and then go about crowing about how they were mistreated because the mods/morrus/etc. just love whatever it is they were railing against.

 

[dd.stevenson]

I can't help you with immersion. This is something I have never experienced with RPGs. I am well aware I am playing a game when I have played any RPG.

I don't understand why people say things like this. "Immersion" is not a synonym for delusion.

 

[mlund]

Finished our first session of 13th age last week and have our second in a few days. I like the OUT/backgrounds/big-list-of-spells-and-powers for my cleric, am getting a handle on him as a person, and he played just fine mechanically in our first combat. The party seems like it should have lots of good role-playing opportunities.

1 - A question for 13th Agers or 4e-ers about immersion

My problem is that there are a lot of powers I can do as quick actions and a lot I can do as my regular action, so each round I'm looking over my stack of powers and the the rough layout of where everyone is and trying to figure out what the optimal set of them to use is. I can do it quickly enough to be ready before it gets to my turn, but it feels like once combat starts that I step out of character and into a generic strategy or video game.

Frankly, I think 13th Age handles keeping the number of actions available at any given point to a minimum compared to many other editions. Yes, there are more and less complex characters. Some characters wind up with maybe 10 or so spells or equivalent class abilities by the end of their career. The casters are complex. I think the Cleric probably suffers from having the most combat-relevant activated abilities between spells, invocations, and domains - while the Wizard gives you the most dials to play with if you want to monkey with Vance's Polysyllabic Invocations and Cantrip Mastery.

Sorcerers and Rogues have a fair pile of actions to pick from to make people stop living, but you can generally figure out which ones are and aren't applicable round-to-round if you aren't texting on your cellphone between rounds.

The Fighter and Bard have Flexible Attacks, so you don't have analysis paralysis on using those abilities. You look at the die and figure out which one or two options (if any) apply.

The Barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin have so few options on their character sheet applicable round-to-round it isn't even funny. Most of the odd-ball effects are one-per-battle or once-per-turn rage-out type abilities anyway.

2 - A question about 13th Age/5e and DoaM

So, there seems to be a mass of hate about DoaM for 5e. Did I miss the big hubbub of dissatisfaction when people read 13th Age and saw damage on a miss, or is the audience that completely divorced from 5e? Is there any difference in the conception between the two?

13th Age specifically says that a natural 1 doesn't deal damage on a miss. That kind of eliminates most of the extreme arguments. It's also more broadly applied. Along with the escalation die it makes it very clear that the longer you stay in combat with this level of combatant the closer you are coming to an ugly end. Most importantly, 13th Age makes it clear this is not a simulator of any sort, and because it doesn't carry the D&D Brand nobody seems emotionally invested in trying to force the issue.

- Marty Lund

 

[pemerton]

For me, immersion is more about emotion than about cognition.

That is, I don't need to feel that I am making the same sorts of micro-level decisions as my PC is. At least as far as combat is concerned, I haven't been in a fight for about 30 years and that was a schoolboys' fist fight. So I don't even really know what sorts of micro-level decisions my PC might be making. My personal conception of fantasy combat is heavily influenced by cinema, which I am told bears at best a passing resemblance to the reality of fighting with pre-gunpowder weapons.

What I want is mechanics that will make me feel anxious, scared, excited, etc in a way that somewhat corresponds to how my PC would be feeling. So mechanics that generate pressure, and then permit dramatic recoveries, are desirable for me. I tend to find DoaM in 4e is just a part of that. It's a species of auto-damage, that therefore (when applied against PCs) helps generate pressure or (when applied by PCs against NPCs/monsters) helps generate a feeling of momentum towards victory.

 

[fjw70]

I don't understand why people say things like this. "Immersion" is not a synonym for delusion.

My comments come from people saying "X reminds me we are playing a game and breaks my immersion." I am always aware I am playing a game.