Immersion?

[dbm]

There is a desire to avoid temptation in both the player and the character in GURPS, that does not hold in Fate where the character wants to avoid temptation but the player seeks it out for reward in the form of Fate points.

 

[thefutilist]

I’m not @Micah Sweet but I can give a solid example of the point.

Consider a character who is an alcoholic. This is probably a strong driver of behaviour and (assuming being in recovery) it might well make sense for the character to avoid situations where they are tempted to succumb to their addiction.

In a game like GURPS, while you get some benefit from taking Alcoholism as a disadvantage during character creation there is no upside during play - it’s all downside from there on. So, as a player, it makes sense for you to also avoid situations where your disadvantage could come up.

Contrast that with a game like Fate where being an alcoholic would probably be an Aspect. In that system there is little / no upfront benefit from taking this aspect; the benefit comes from having your aspect impact you during play. So as a player, there is incentive for you to engage with scenes where your addiction will negatively impact you.

Hence, with a system like GURPS the player is incentivised to act consistent to the behaviours of a person who might have such a disadvantage. While in Fate the player is incentivised to act counter to the behaviours of a person who might have such a disadvantage, notionally in the pursuit of a more interesting story.

Let me back up and break down my objection a bit further.

I was thinking in terms of what makes sense for the character as seen from a third person perspective. If you were watching a movie does it make sense for the character to do this? I submit that if you’re chasing story the action has to make sense. Although it’s possible that’s not what Micah means because it’s so obviously a given that it should.

Mechanical incentives and currencies are a whole different thing. Different players interact with them differently and it’s possible they’re muddying the waters here.


Do you remember or are you aware of the old ‘torch dropper’ conversations?

There’s this GM talking about how his party went into a dungeon. They’re in the depths and this one character is holding the only torch. They hear this terrifying roar and the character holding the torch flings it to the ground in terror and tries to flee. The whole party is subsequently murdered.

There’s a lot of division as to whether that constitutes good play. If the player holding the torch decides that’s what makes sense for his character to do, given who the character is and the situation at hand, then that’s that right?

The problem is ‘makes sense to do’ is meaningless. Me, you, Micah, and Pemerton probably have moments where it’s obvious that a character ‘would just do that’. We’re inhabiting the character, feeling what they’re feeling, all that stuff. I think this is the tip of the iceberg though. There’s a whole load of orientation toward play. Cognitive understanding of character action and motivations, Norms and expectations. That go on under the surface.


Anyway I’m not really bringing any conclusions to the conversation, just saying that I think it’s kind of complicated

 

[dbm]

I was thinking in terms of what makes sense for the character as seen from a third person perspective.

I think that is key. In my opinion of immersion, the player is looking at things from a first person perspective.

 

[Deset Gled]

Immersion is not something that can be discussed in a session zero IMO. Its a very personal and introspective feeling at least in my experience. My most immersive experiences are when I am alone or when the others are silent and immersed themselves (like in a movie theatre). TTRPG is quite contraproductive, because it demands to communicate with each other. Even if we all agree to always stay in character and act our asses off it will still be rarely immersive to me, because its not Daniel Day-Lewis in a grand costume at an impressive movie set doing an oscar worthy monologue, but my buddy Alex at my living room table with pizza crumbs in his beard acting on high-school-level. Its still a lot of fun to me! I love it! But its not immersive, I don't get "lost in the world, lost in the fiction" - For this feeling I choose other media and hobbies.

Isn't everything you just said after "Immersion is not something that can be discussed in a session zero" something that can be discussed in a session zero?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Let me back up and break down my objection a bit further.

I was thinking in terms of what makes sense for the character as seen from a third person perspective. If you were watching a movie does it make sense for the character to do this? I submit that if you’re chasing story the action has to make sense. Although it’s possible that’s not what Micah means because it’s so obviously a given that it should.

Mechanical incentives and currencies are a whole different thing. Different players interact with them differently and it’s possible they’re muddying the waters here.


Do you remember or are you aware of the old ‘torch dropper’ conversations?

There’s this GM talking about how his party went into a dungeon. They’re in the depths and this one character is holding the only torch. They hear this terrifying roar and the character holding the torch flings it to the ground in terror and tries to flee. The whole party is subsequently murdered.

There’s a lot of division as to whether that constitutes good play. If the player holding the torch decides that’s what makes sense for his character to do, given who the character is and the situation at hand, then that’s that right?

The problem is ‘makes sense to do’ is meaningless. Me, you, Micah, and Pemerton probably have moments where it’s obvious that a character ‘would just do that’. We’re inhabiting the character, feeling what they’re feeling, all that stuff. I think this is the tip of the iceberg though. There’s a whole load of orientation toward play. Cognitive understanding of character action and motivations, Norms and expectations. That go on under the surface.


Anyway I’m not really bringing any conclusions to the conversation, just saying that I think it’s kind of complicated

I would argue that you are assuming "chasing story" is the primary goal of play. This is not true for everyone, no matter how much folks who chase story believe it must be. I run games to create verisimilitudinous worlds with interesting stuff happening in them, and let the players choose how they want to explore that world through their characters. When I play, I explore the GM's setting through my PC, acting as if that world is real and making choices based on what I think my PC would do in that situation. I am not looking for the choice that would necessarily lead to the best story, and as a GM I do not channel my players towards "exciting narrative opportunities" or the like. That's what I was talking about. The choice that makes the most sense is only the same choice that leads to a good story (intentionally anyway) if chasing story is your biggest priority.