Immersion, Threat or Menace?

[mythusmage]

Some people prefer to distance themselves from their character and the events their character goes through. They'd rather treat the character as a game piece to be manipulated instead of as a role to be played. In this thread I'd like to ask those people why? Why do you prefer non-immersion? Why treat your character as a game piece? What is it about immersion you dislike?

I can't promise I'll respond to every post individually, but I will read them. When I see a common theme I'll do my best to follow it up. Thanks ahead of time for any responses this post gets.

 

[Gahnomen]

Just so I'm clear about the differences between immersion and non-immersion.. For instance:

First, the DM describes a tavern, the general tone of the place and how busy it is. The DM also describes the innkeeper, a gruff looking man with one arm missing, the hand replaced by a hook (and so on and so forth).

an "immersed" player would say something along the lines of 'I walk up to the innkeeper, fiddling with my pouch of money'. He'd then wait for a reaction from the DM; "Greetings traveller, what do you need on this rainy eve?", and then an in-character conversation would ensue.

A "non-immersed" player would more or less say 'I walk up to the innkeeper and buy myself a room for the night.' and be done with it.

Is that about it, or am I missing something?

 

[mythusmage]

Pretty much.

And let me take this opportunity to remind people the reason for this thread is to find out why some people do not engage in immersion. It is not to debate the respective merits of immersive and non-immersive play.

 

[Gahnomen]

I can think of a couple of reasons for not engaging in immersive play. First and foremost it could be shyness/feeling silly or the likes.

Another reason, and perhaps a more valid one is conservation of time. You can skim over unimportant bits by doing them in a non-immersive fashion, and as a DM I do that every now and then. For instance when the players are going to buy rations in the boring little town they always stop by, nothing exciting has happened there and we all just want to get a move on.

 

[Professor Phobos]

I doubt many people put too much emphasis on stuff like "getting a room at a tavern" and "doing your taxes."

But, "dueling your mortal enemy" or "begging for your lost love's life" or "negotiating a cease-fire" requires a lil' bit of immersion to be truly enjoyable.

 

[mythusmage]

I doubt many people put too much emphasis on stuff like "getting a room at a tavern" and "doing your taxes."

But, "dueling your mortal enemy" or "begging for your lost love's life" or "negotiating a cease-fire" requires a lil' bit of immersion to be truly enjoyable.

Professor, please see post #3 in this thread. I'd like to focus on the thread theme instead of getting off on a tangent.

 

[BSF]

I do both. Heck, I do both in the same campaign. Much of it depends on personal mood. At times I don't have the energy to get into the headspace of my character. But I am still with my group and still trying to participate in some ways.

For different players, I have noticed that some of them are uncomfortable with blurring the lines of who they are and what they are doing for recreation. I have had players who want to immerse deeply sitting at the same table with those that are very hesitant over the barest immersion. I try to juggle them so they both have fun at the table.

some folks are just more self-conscious and feel uncomfortable taking on the first person persona of 'somebody else'. They may prefer a third person persona.

For what it is worth, I find that the more personal the RP actions are, the less immersive some people are comfortable being. I mean, when you are playing the dashing rake trying to seduce the elegant noblewoman, but you are at a table with all your male gaming buddies, you might get a little uncomfortable speaking in first person to the bearded game master running the noblewoman NPC.

 

[Professor Phobos]

Professor, please see post #3 in this thread. I'd like to focus on the thread theme instead of getting off on a tangent.

Why don't people engage in immersion? I think that's a bad term, by the way; I certainly don't "immerse" myself in-character and I do view characters as tools. But I view them as tools not merely to achieve the acquisition of items and XP, but to achieve dramatic or story ends as well. I know many excellent roleplayers who do not "immerse", and in my experience it is a dead end; characters should be in service of the greater good (creating a fun game), rather than an end in themselves. Immersion is a distraction; getting "in character" requires a player to take on the same basic assumptions for gameplay as the character, which leads to such negative ends as a player being reluctant to allow said character to die. A good death scene is something that can improve a game as a whole; it is rarely good for the dying character.

Ultimately, I think being immersed prevents the necessary perspective for a player to really screw with his character. No character wants an "interesting life" (as in the Chinese curse), after all.

(You could count that as a reason I don't do immersion, if you want. Summary: "Because there are more effective methods to encourage good roleplaying.")

 

[mythusmage]

BSF, the question is why don't you (you being anybody who doesn't practice immersive play) don't practice immersive play. It is not about the respective merits of immersive and non-immersive play. I'd like to keep this on-topic.

 

[mythusmage]

Why don't people engage in immersion? I think that's a bad term, by the way; I certainly don't "immerse" myself in-character and I do view characters as tools. But I view them as tools not merely to achieve the acquisition of items and XP, but to achieve dramatic or story ends as well. I know many excellent roleplayers who do not "immerse", and in my experience it is a dead end; characters should be in service of the greater good (creating a fun game), rather than an end in themselves. Immersion is a distraction; getting "in character" requires a player to take on the same basic assumptions for gameplay as the character, which leads to such negative ends as a player being reluctant to allow said character to die. A good death scene is something that can improve a game as a whole; it is rarely good for the dying character.

Ultimately, I think being immersed prevents the necessary perspective for a player to really screw with his character. No character wants an "interesting life" (as in the Chinese curse), after all.

(You could count that as a reason I don't do immersion, if you want. Summary: "Because there are more effective methods to encourage good roleplaying.")

Thank you. Now, could you explain more how you understand immersion. Why do you consider immersion a distraction and a barrier to screwing with your character? What are the more effective ways to encourage good roleplaying as you see them?