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

[Manbearcat]

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.

Second that. Both viscerally and from a cerebral perspective, I'm always aware. Due to the number of hats he/she is wearing, I don't see how its possible for a GM not to be aware at all times. If absolute awareness is a steady state regardless of system, then mechanics (metagame or process simulating) move the awareness needle not an inch. That has always been the case with me, regardless of system.

 

[Dungeoneer]

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

<snip />

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?

*shrug*

I don't have to focus or visualize or practice or anything. It just happens naturally.

Everyone's experience of the game is subjective. The things that make it 'immersive' will vary by the individual.

It sounds to me like you are suffering a bit from 'analysis paralysis' and might be served by switching to a simpler character build. 13th Age does support that. In fact, thanks to its gridless combat 13A should feel far more 'rules light' (at least to the player) than 4e. I would look at your character build and see if it has too many 'fiddly bits'.

The type of game your DM is running might also be a factor. So, for that matter, might the players at your table. Again, it's all a subjective experience. Any number of factors might contribute to your enjoyment or sense of 'immersion'.

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?

So here's the thing: Damage on a Miss is what we call a 'non-troversy'.

DoaM has been in the game since early 4e, and nobody complained then (and believe me, they were looking for things to complain about!). But recently certain forum posters have discovered that when they start DoaM threads they can generate towering flame-threads with hundreds of replies apiece, which is exactly what they like. Thus, the proliferation of DoaM 5e threads.

13th Age just doesn't have the user base for a post about it to attract hundreds of replies. Thus, even though DoaM is far more ubiquitous in 13A than in 5e, nobody is starting angry threads about it. Rest assured, if it ever achieves D&D/PF levels of popularity you will see lots more angry threads about minor rule #287 which is somebody's personal hobby horse.

In no way should the preoccupations of attention-seeking ENWorld posters affect your thinking on DoaM or any other subject.

 

[Balesir]

On the "speed and immersion" bit, my observation would be that it seems to matter how you approach turn planning. The difference is between deciding what power(s) to use as a primary goal on the one hand, and deciding what you want to achieve and then picking a power to achieve that on the other.

When I say "what you want to achieve", I mean in a general, tactical sort of sense. For example, I might aim to just damage as many enemy as I can, in which case I then select toe most damaging area effect power in my arsenal. Alternatively, I might want to slow or stop certain bad guys getting around our flank - in which case I need a wall, obscurement or zone type power.

Doing it this way, you only need consider a sub-set of the powers you have altogether, not go through each and every one deciding what you might do with it. As you practice this way, it gets even better - you get a feel for what types of general aim are suited to your character.

 

[dd.stevenson]

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.

I'm sorry, I'm still not following. Surely you're not saying that "he doesn't want to be reminded of Y" and "he's not aware of Y" mean the same thing?

I'm honestly on the edge as to whether there's a constructive conversation to be had here or no. I don't have any interest in a lame semantics fight, but I suspect that unless these people you referenced are into some serious Black Leaf shiznit, you've misunderstood them.

 

[fjw70]

I'm sorry, I'm still not following. Surely you're not saying that "he doesn't want to be reminded of Y" and "he's not aware of Y" mean the same thing?

I'm honestly on the edge as to whether there's a constructive conversation to be had here or no. I don't have any interest in a lame semantics fight, but I suspect that unless these people you referenced are into some serious Black Leaf shiznit, you've misunderstood them.

Its possible I miss understand them but I really don't care enough about it question them further.

 

[Cadence]

Thanks for all the suggestions!
@(Psi)SeveredHead for asking about the surroundings and looking for the coolest move
@steenan for thinking about whether some powers focus a lot more on the system than the story
@Dragonblade for suggesting to think about how each power should play out for the character
@TheFindus for focussing on what the character would do in the situation
@Dungeoneer for avoiding analysis paralis by trying to simplify some things in the build
@Balesir for thinking about what I want to achieve and then grabbing a power that helps that, instead of the other way around

Next game is tonight.

One of the other players suggested printing out the various spells and powers (index card size) instead of literally having them on a big list. I'm hoping that having them sorted into thematic piles will make it easier to follow the suggestion to think about what I want to do, and then grabbing the action that enables it. (Seems obvious thinking about the power cards in 4e, but something I'd never used in the editions I've played more).

Since a bunch of the domain powers are buffy/quick actions, I think I'll also try to move back into my old-fashioned comfort zone a bit by subbing out one or two of the buffy/quick action spells for some with more direct effects (damage and healing). I can then change the mix when I'm feeling it more.

--

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.

That seems like a good explanation of why no hub-bub to me.

The bottom line is you're unlikely to see a lot of hand wringing over 13th Age's unapologetic embrace of non-simulationist mechanics because the folks who get upset over those things probably wouldn't be playing 13th Age in the first place.

I think I was conflating all the positiveness over 13thA's release here on the boards and the fact it was d20, with a level of popularity that would have caused it to overlap with the pro-3/3.5/PF crowd. Silly of me in retrospect, since that ignores all the other ways that d20 has been used that pull away from its origins into the wider world of gaming, and that of course the number of posts relative to other things was huge right at the release.

---

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.

As @dd.stevenson says I don't plan on forgetting that I'm playing a game.

Is "get into character" a better word choice? (Is there a good web-page that describes the subtleties in their definitions?)

I was trying to get at the difficulty I was having trying to view things from the point of view the character would have instead of just choosing things from a list based on their mechanical effectiveness. Or as @pemerton says, getting some emotion out of it that corresponds to how the PC would be feeling. If it's all just plusses and minuses and moving little squares through a grid, then why bother giving the parts of the game names like elf, dwarf, or spell or call it role-playing?

Its possible I miss understand them but I really don't care enough about it question them further.

But don't let me get in the way of your dismissive non-caring

 

[waderockett]

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. ...but it feels like once combat starts that I step out of character and into a generic strategy or video game.

Here's a potential take on roleplaying the 13th Age cleric, arrived at by watching the cleric in the campaign I run:

When you choose to play a cleric, you're stepping into the role of someone with responsibilities to others: to a god (or gods), a religion, and -- as The Guy Who Buffs and Heals Better Than Others -- to the party during combat. Your job in life is to protect and take care of people in addition to smiting.

Combat is an extension of this. Your decisions during combat are complex because your life is complex. You always have to quickly sort through multiple options in your head. Do I heal this person, strengthen that person, or smash this person with my maul? Who's closest to death right now, and of them, who gives us the most chance of getting out of this battle alive?

It's a difficult burden you've assumed by joining holy orders.

 

[pemerton]

One of the other players suggested printing out the various spells and powers (index card size) instead of literally having them on a big list. I'm hoping that having them sorted into thematic piles will make it easier to follow the suggestion to think about what I want to do, and then grabbing the action that enables it.

On a 4e PC sheet, I find it is helpful to group powers by action type and by effect - so if I'm looking for (say) a close burst, they're all grouped together on the sheet and I can choose the most suitable one.

Other sorts of easily-readable markers help two - for instance, (H) as a notation on powers that do healing; or * on all the radiant powers; etc.

Basically anything that makes the relevant information recoverable by glancing rather than reading.

 

[Emerikol]

I believe 13th Age makes no pretense of being a game for the kinds of people who dislike damage on a miss. It uses dissociative mechanics all over the place without a second thought. The target audience I believe is 4e people who still harken back to some old school principles like ToTM. Your typical simulationist is going to reject 13th Age out of hand.

Thus the reason 13th Age does not have an outcry over damage on a miss. If the whole game is entirely objectionable on so many levels there is no point fighting over one mechanic. With 5e, there is still hope that overall the game will be a playable game for the people 13th Age ignored.

 

[EnglishLanguage]

Speaking of dissociative, you ever going to actually define that term at some point?