Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
last encounter was totally one-sided
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6978085" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I'm sure you don't mean to be too contentious, because you're one of the most reasonable posters on the boards!</p><p></p><p>Nevertheless, what I've quoted is contentious. For instance, here is my conception of immersion (not just theoretical, but based on practical experience): the player feels an emotion that, broadly, correponds to the emotion experienced by the PC. So, if the PC is frustrated than so is the player; if the PC is feeling threatened then so is the player; if the PC is exhausted, then so is the player. I find this is more immersive than (say) pretending to be scared when you're not.</p><p></p><p>And I find that stats and mechanics are crucial to this. For instance, when my players were preparing (in character) to confront Orcus, they thought he might be tough. When I told them his stats (in response to the invoker/wizard player's successful monster knowledge check), they were genuinely worried.</p><p></p><p>Or, to give an example of frustration: in my 4e game the polearm fighter and archer ranger were affected by a chained cambion's Mind Shackles attack. Here is the flavour text of the chained cambion, and the mechanic of that ability (from the 4e MM3):</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">A chained cambion's reigning emotion is hate. It hates its life, its captors, and its enemies who roam free. A chained cambion screams its despair within the minds of nearby foes.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><u>Mind Shackles</u> (psychic) Recharge when first bloodied</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><em>Effect</em>: Two enemies adjacent to each other in a close burst 5 are psychically shackled (save ends; each enemy makes a separate saving throw against this effect). While psychically shackled, an enemy takes 10 psychic damage at the start and the end of its turn if it isn't adjacent to the other creature that was affected by this power.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><em>Aftereffect</em>: The effect persists, and the damage decreases to 5 (save ends).</p><p></p><p>The archer and fighter had to stay adjacent or take damage. Which caused frustration (and required some clever acrobatics at some points, due to the terrain of the room). When one saved but the other didn't, and so insisted on staying adjacent, this caused the frustration to turn into resentment. The players really were experiencing the despair and hate screamed into their PCs' minds by the chained cambion. (This monster is one of my favourite ever bits of RPG mechanical design.)</p><p></p><p>As far as exhaustion is concerned, this should be the result of active player resources (not hit points, but things like Action Surge) - so the player gets to choose when to try (just like the PC doing his/her utmost), and then when the resources are all gone but the challenge is still there, the player (like the PC) experiences the feeling of having nothing left.</p><p></p><p>(In 5e, getting Inspiration should also be a part of this cycle - being able to go on.)</p><p></p><p>I prefer these sorts of choices to be made by the players rather than the GM.</p><p></p><p>Here's some old posts that show what I mean:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree with Victim. The less there difference to prospects of success the choice of tactics/approach makes, the more it expresses the values of the players (either outright, or in character as their PCs). Conversely, the more that the prospects of success are responsive to choices of tactics/approach, the more that those choices reflect the means/end rationality (ie the expedience) of the players.</p><p></p><p>An additional dimension in the latter case is whether the GM has set it up on purpose, or not. If the GM has done so, then the players making the "right" choice also shows their ability to respond to and follow GM cues.</p><p></p><p>And a final thought, that links this part of my post with the previous (about mechanics): if the players have reasonably deep pools of resources, then you can combine the two approaches. That is, players can express their values by choosing to expend resources to make their preferred approach viable. For instance, in <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?490454-Session-report-reposted-PCs-stave-of-the-Dusk-War-by-negotiating-with-Yan-C-Bin-and-defeating-the-tarrasque" target="_blank">this session</a>, the player of the fighter PC spent resources to succeed on an Intimidate check and thereby confirm, in his first interaction with a Primoridal and its followers (Yan-C-Bin and some djinni), his status as the divine jailer of those elemental creatures who oppose the gods and thereby threaten the world.</p><p></p><p>And in the same session the players spent resources to persuade Maruts - who were present to observe the beginning of the end times - that they had got the date wrong, and the end times weren't yet coming. This wasn't necessarily easier than fighting the Maruts (the PCs are quite good fighters, and their diplomacy efforts meant that one of their number had to spend a couple of turn solo-ing the Tarrasque), but it was important to the PCs (and hence to their players) to establish it as true that the end times have not yet come.</p><p></p><p>TL;DR: My approach to establishing an immersive game is to ensure that the mechanics enduce a state in the players that corresponds to their PCs; and to frame the ingame situation so that the players can rationally choose to engage it in a way that expresses their values and desires, rather than purely expediently.</p><p></p><p>Some of use were running true free-form campaigns well before this, eg in my case using Keep on the Borderlands, and the D-series, or making up my own stuff.</p><p></p><p>I think it's generally wise to avoid false generalisation. 4e didn't fall short in my expectations - it exceeded them. And it didn't look anything like an MMO (I've not played them, but I've seen them played, and heard reports of the play of them, and they don't seem to resemble anything like what I've described from my 4e games in this post).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6978085, member: 42582"] I'm sure you don't mean to be too contentious, because you're one of the most reasonable posters on the boards! Nevertheless, what I've quoted is contentious. For instance, here is my conception of immersion (not just theoretical, but based on practical experience): the player feels an emotion that, broadly, correponds to the emotion experienced by the PC. So, if the PC is frustrated than so is the player; if the PC is feeling threatened then so is the player; if the PC is exhausted, then so is the player. I find this is more immersive than (say) pretending to be scared when you're not. And I find that stats and mechanics are crucial to this. For instance, when my players were preparing (in character) to confront Orcus, they thought he might be tough. When I told them his stats (in response to the invoker/wizard player's successful monster knowledge check), they were genuinely worried. Or, to give an example of frustration: in my 4e game the polearm fighter and archer ranger were affected by a chained cambion's Mind Shackles attack. Here is the flavour text of the chained cambion, and the mechanic of that ability (from the 4e MM3): [indent]A chained cambion's reigning emotion is hate. It hates its life, its captors, and its enemies who roam free. A chained cambion screams its despair within the minds of nearby foes. [U]Mind Shackles[/U] (psychic) Recharge when first bloodied [I]Effect[/I]: Two enemies adjacent to each other in a close burst 5 are psychically shackled (save ends; each enemy makes a separate saving throw against this effect). While psychically shackled, an enemy takes 10 psychic damage at the start and the end of its turn if it isn't adjacent to the other creature that was affected by this power. [I]Aftereffect[/I]: The effect persists, and the damage decreases to 5 (save ends).[/indent] The archer and fighter had to stay adjacent or take damage. Which caused frustration (and required some clever acrobatics at some points, due to the terrain of the room). When one saved but the other didn't, and so insisted on staying adjacent, this caused the frustration to turn into resentment. The players really were experiencing the despair and hate screamed into their PCs' minds by the chained cambion. (This monster is one of my favourite ever bits of RPG mechanical design.) As far as exhaustion is concerned, this should be the result of active player resources (not hit points, but things like Action Surge) - so the player gets to choose when to try (just like the PC doing his/her utmost), and then when the resources are all gone but the challenge is still there, the player (like the PC) experiences the feeling of having nothing left. (In 5e, getting Inspiration should also be a part of this cycle - being able to go on.) I prefer these sorts of choices to be made by the players rather than the GM. Here's some old posts that show what I mean: I agree with Victim. The less there difference to prospects of success the choice of tactics/approach makes, the more it expresses the values of the players (either outright, or in character as their PCs). Conversely, the more that the prospects of success are responsive to choices of tactics/approach, the more that those choices reflect the means/end rationality (ie the expedience) of the players. An additional dimension in the latter case is whether the GM has set it up on purpose, or not. If the GM has done so, then the players making the "right" choice also shows their ability to respond to and follow GM cues. And a final thought, that links this part of my post with the previous (about mechanics): if the players have reasonably deep pools of resources, then you can combine the two approaches. That is, players can express their values by choosing to expend resources to make their preferred approach viable. For instance, in [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?490454-Session-report-reposted-PCs-stave-of-the-Dusk-War-by-negotiating-with-Yan-C-Bin-and-defeating-the-tarrasque]this session[/url], the player of the fighter PC spent resources to succeed on an Intimidate check and thereby confirm, in his first interaction with a Primoridal and its followers (Yan-C-Bin and some djinni), his status as the divine jailer of those elemental creatures who oppose the gods and thereby threaten the world. And in the same session the players spent resources to persuade Maruts - who were present to observe the beginning of the end times - that they had got the date wrong, and the end times weren't yet coming. This wasn't necessarily easier than fighting the Maruts (the PCs are quite good fighters, and their diplomacy efforts meant that one of their number had to spend a couple of turn solo-ing the Tarrasque), but it was important to the PCs (and hence to their players) to establish it as true that the end times have not yet come. TL;DR: My approach to establishing an immersive game is to ensure that the mechanics enduce a state in the players that corresponds to their PCs; and to frame the ingame situation so that the players can rationally choose to engage it in a way that expresses their values and desires, rather than purely expediently. Some of use were running true free-form campaigns well before this, eg in my case using Keep on the Borderlands, and the D-series, or making up my own stuff. I think it's generally wise to avoid false generalisation. 4e didn't fall short in my expectations - it exceeded them. And it didn't look anything like an MMO (I've not played them, but I've seen them played, and heard reports of the play of them, and they don't seem to resemble anything like what I've described from my 4e games in this post). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
last encounter was totally one-sided
Top