Daggerheart "Description on Demand" a GM DON'T

[TwoSix]

I don’t mind the technique because it doesn’t necessarily break my immersion

I prefer it because it helps my immersion. Having to ask the DM for every little detail of what my character would be seeing right in front of my eyes is what breaks my imaginative process.

To me, contributing to the fiction is immersion.

 

[Aldarc]

That's what I'm thinking! Definitely need to see it in action one of these days.

I can see it more clearly in my mind's eye if I think of the players around the table as performers in a troupe, basically actors on a stage in an improv play, but that's a pretty specific TTRPG niche. A lot of players aren't interested in working that hard at the table.

For the players who enjoy it, I wouldn't describe it as work. It's more like a creative opportunity. Keep in mind that this is a fairly common practice in some Neo-Trad circles. These may be games where players want to divulge or showcase things about their PC. This gives them an opportunity to create things that tie their PC to the world.

The problem is everybody has their own definition for what it takes to get them immersed if anything at all works!

Yeah, I typically think of "immersion" in terms of simply gameplay. (Though maybe @Reynard considers this "engagement"?) Am I or is the player immersed in playing the game? Whether or not we are immersed "in character" isn't necessarily my concern, not because I'm not roleplaying my character; instead, it's simply that roleplaying my character doesn't make me somehow oblivious to the fact that I am playing a game using dice with friends or that I'm not taking a moment to enjoy the contributions of my friends to the game.

It's why I like 13th Age's One Unique Thing, it's a fun prompt. Doesn't always work well, but it's a fun idea, why is your PC special?

IMHO, it's definitely something that I would consider adding as a prompt for Daggerheart's Experiences. It seems like it would work well for a Critical Role type game too.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, I typically think of "immersion" in terms of simply gameplay. (Though maybe @Reynard considers this "engagement"?) Am I or is the player immersed in playing the game? Whether or not we are immersed "in character" isn't necessarily my concern, not because I'm not roleplaying my character; instead, it's simply that roleplaying my character doesn't make me somehow oblivious to the fact that I am playing a game using dice with friends or that I'm not taking a moment to enjoy the contributions of my friends to the game.

Maybe I was wrong about "immersion" being an easily understood term. I feel like there are as many definitions for it in this thread as posters. It may be that my use of "engagement" is the same as someone else's "immersion."

 

[Emerikol]

Maybe I was wrong about "immersion" being an easily understood term. I feel like there are as many definitions for it in this thread as posters. It may be that my use of "engagement" is the same as someone else's "immersion."

I think for me, immersion is like when you are reading and the words disappear. You are still mechanically reading the words but your brain has reached a different level. In D&D, reading is acting in character and using the DM/Player interactions to represent the senses. This can lead to an immersive experience. If though the DM suddenly asks you to step out of your character then suddenly you aren't immersed anymore. A good example would be if you were reading a book and suddenly the author addressed you the reader directly. It would be jarring because you were a moment before living the life of a character immersed in that perspective.

 

[kermit4karate]

Maybe I was wrong about "immersion" being an easily understood term. I feel like there are as many definitions for it in this thread as posters. It may be that my use of "engagement" is the same as someone else's "immersion."

Exactly. I'm reading "immersion" but also seeing engagement.

 

[kermit4karate]

With Daggerheart, since more of the storytelling and worldbuilding are offloaded to the players, does it run the risk of suffering from "design by committee," where the resulting mix of styles and plotlines creates a game that lacks a cohesive vision?

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's one insight I think is spot on. The fail state of a Daggerheart game is D&D 5E.

They should consider putting that on the front cover.

 

[zakael19]

With Daggerheart, since more of the storytelling and worldbuilding are offloaded to the players, does it run the risk of suffering from "design by committee," where the resulting mix of styles and plotlines creates a game that lacks a cohesive vision?

No, the GM still maintains oversight and the book has some stuff about how to consider narrative arcs / plot weaves / situations / etc.

Most of the "big" world building stuff is probably up front, as you work together to add details to a starting condition (eg: one of the presented campaign Frames). And then you drop an inciting incident / first quest / whatever you want to call it and play to find out what happens from there - letting players add details around the scenes and bringing in their background stuff as appropriate.

It's looser and more collaborative then a conventional 5e experience probably, but not nearly as "build it on the fly" as say Dungeon World or many of the full narrativist games are.

As @Aldarc said, the game is pretty firmly sitting in the whatever we want to consider the "neotrad" space where the emphasis is on the dramatic story we're telling about these characters and their journey - and thus focused on things that the players and their characters care about.

 

[Reynard]

With Daggerheart, since more of the storytelling and worldbuilding are offloaded to the players, does it run the risk of suffering from "design by committee," where the resulting mix of styles and plotlines creates a game that lacks a cohesive vision?

It is possible, but campaign frames are pretty strong, thematically, and should keep stuff generally in line. Also, the players are not granted any authority here, so the GM can always veto an incongruous element.

 

[payn]

I never understood the immersion discussion. For me immersion is not a sign of quality of TTRPG at all, I am super rarely immersed. Immersion is for me a very sensory feeling, I have it most often in good movies or AAA games with high production values, when sound and visuals immerse me in the world. It is also for me a solitary feeling, Its me silent in the chair of the movie theatre or with my headphones in the dark in front of my TV.

At TTRPG I am fully realizing all the times that we are not a group of hobbits on an epic journey, but a bunch of joking friends at the table, we eat pizza and play pretend to be a bunch of adventurers. I see them rolling a Nat 20 and everybody screaming in joy - I am immersed in the game itself on a meta level, but I think I am super rarely immersed in the ficional world and narration. The rare moments when I am immersed in the narration is when the DM does a "cutscene" with a sophisticated narration und soundtrack aka once again sensory and solitary (everyone shuts up for a few minutes). For one monologue this is fine but I could never play a full evening like that, that would destroy for me the appeal of TTRPG.

IMO immersion is nice to have from time to time in TTRPG, but shouldn't be the target indicator for a GM. Player engagement is much more important for this medium of entertainment.

To the topic of "description on demand": Our tables love this. We do it all the time (we have two tables with overlapping friends and switching DMs). So people who claim its "objectively" bad DMing are plain wrong. Its a matter of preference and everbody who claims otherwise is giving a very opinionated advice that I wouldn't take too seriously (The Alexandrian in a nutshell).

I prefer it because it helps my immersion. Having to ask the DM for every little detail of what my character would be seeing right in front of my eyes is what breaks my imaginative process.

To me, contributing to the fiction is immersion.

Quoted these takes for being excellent examples of personal immersion to show its absolutely not a useless term.

To the contrary of most folks here it would seem, immersion isnt a problem word for me. Its actually a good indicator of the person's taste. Folks often overlook the subjective side of an experience. Many discussions have folks shouting, "the math is good why are you not having fun???" as if objectivity is the only matter to be concerned with in RPG design. Its an aspect of design that is universal, but the subjective is an important factor that has sunk many a game when ignored. Only by having a detailed conversation with folks can you understand if a game can be made to work, or if its just not for that person.

From this very thread I learned that DH encourages DoD, but you can also play without it. That some folks had to learn to like it, and some folks will never like it. Immersion discussion helps me understand both viewpoints on DoD, and I can rest easy knowing that there isnt a singular personal definition with 100% consensus of the entire forum. I understand that has come to mean completely useless around here, but here I am, once again, coming away learning something and taking value in a useless word.