John Dallman
Hero
I wrote about immersion at some length in issue 5 of The Path of Cunning, the GURPS fanzine I co-edit. It's a bit long to re[peat all of here, but the 'zine is free for the downloading.
To summarise, immersion is my desired state when role-playing, both as player and GM. It isn't something I can do immediately with a new character or a new setting. I have to get used to them first.
It means playing the game, as far as possible, from inside the character’s head. Ignoring the things that they don’t know, solving problems the way they would, being them as well as I can achieve. Playing in "Actor stance" is necessary to achieve this, but is not sufficient by itself.
The thing I like most about immersing myself in a character, setting aside parts of my own identity and personality, is that it lets me escape from the limitations of my own personality. I have been more eloquent, more devious, and more ingenious while in character than I can manage as myself. Inspiration happens to me in-character, in accordance with the character’s personality rather than my own.
When GMing, when I have run a setting for a few tens of sessions, thought about it quite a lot during that time, and started to realise how it really works, I start to instinctively understand what’s going on. Session preparation becomes brief and general, although I try to think of names beforehand, being poor at improvising those. As the characters act, I can respond as the setting almost without thought, and with a reasonable level of consistency. I don’t always know why things in the setting are a certain way, although I usually realise after a while.
Immersed in actor stance, some things that are important in other play styles don’t seem relevant to me. I have no interest in genre tropes, because I’m not emulating a different form of story, like a novel or a film. I’m creating story through the medium of role-playing, which is its own form, and works best when it’s done in its own way. Jokes and references made by the characters are fine; some of them engage in humour to relieve the tension of the situation.
This is primary creation, not adaptation. It is on a small scale, with a limited audience, but that doesn’t make it worthless: done right, it can be very entertaining. I don’t regard writing novels or making TV programmes as “better” or “superior” forms of story creation, just different ones.
To summarise, immersion is my desired state when role-playing, both as player and GM. It isn't something I can do immediately with a new character or a new setting. I have to get used to them first.
It means playing the game, as far as possible, from inside the character’s head. Ignoring the things that they don’t know, solving problems the way they would, being them as well as I can achieve. Playing in "Actor stance" is necessary to achieve this, but is not sufficient by itself.
The thing I like most about immersing myself in a character, setting aside parts of my own identity and personality, is that it lets me escape from the limitations of my own personality. I have been more eloquent, more devious, and more ingenious while in character than I can manage as myself. Inspiration happens to me in-character, in accordance with the character’s personality rather than my own.
When GMing, when I have run a setting for a few tens of sessions, thought about it quite a lot during that time, and started to realise how it really works, I start to instinctively understand what’s going on. Session preparation becomes brief and general, although I try to think of names beforehand, being poor at improvising those. As the characters act, I can respond as the setting almost without thought, and with a reasonable level of consistency. I don’t always know why things in the setting are a certain way, although I usually realise after a while.
Immersed in actor stance, some things that are important in other play styles don’t seem relevant to me. I have no interest in genre tropes, because I’m not emulating a different form of story, like a novel or a film. I’m creating story through the medium of role-playing, which is its own form, and works best when it’s done in its own way. Jokes and references made by the characters are fine; some of them engage in humour to relieve the tension of the situation.
This is primary creation, not adaptation. It is on a small scale, with a limited audience, but that doesn’t make it worthless: done right, it can be very entertaining. I don’t regard writing novels or making TV programmes as “better” or “superior” forms of story creation, just different ones.
Last edited:
