Mike Mearls and "Action Economy"

[mrpopstar]

They seem different, to me. The definition you're using seems more observational, the sorts used here, experiential...

I think it's the difference between looking at the game (and thus the narrative) from a Dungeon Master's perspective versus a player's perspective.

The other place discussing immersion goes sideways is the flip side of that. You can defend something from valid criticism by asserting that it's necessary to promote immerssion.

Yes!

That does seem merely semantic in the sense of using action economy as a descriptor or concept. As I alluded, before, action economy has always been there and won't go away, it was just articulated at some point, and, from that point could be considered in more systematic or disciplined ways. So, maybe he wants to get away from that and back to designing, from, I suppose a place of innocence or intuition?

Not as easy as it sounds.

Glad it's not my job, that's for sure!

Creating additional opportunities is what warlords do so I doubt your apologetic

Immersion is, by definition, 1st person. The player becomes the hero from the heros perspective.

It is not, by definition, first-person.



The experience of being transported to the world of a story does not in any way shape or form imply or insist that such transportation is experienced in first-person perspective. (I think this might truly be the great rift in communication and understanding.) All that immersion describes is a change in outlook and decision-making such that the narrative is treated as "real."

That makes DM immersion a great question. On the one hand, where the other players become the heroes of an adventure, the role of the DM is to become the world that the heroes adventure in. For nomenclature, I might even prefer to call all of them ‘players’ of the game, while the players take on the role of ‘world’ and ‘heroes’. In terms of tracking and describing all the monsters and persons in the world, much of the job of the DM is literally 3rd person.

On the other hand, when I describe monsters and scenes, I try do so from the perspective of the heroes. And in this sense, it is 1st person. I become their heroes, so as to describe what they see, hear, smell, from their vantage point. Moreover, when thinking about behavior and motives, I need to view the world from the perspective of each monster. So even tho heroes dont access the information about monster thoughts (besides telepathy), it is much of what causes what the heroes will see. So, the role of the ‘world’ is a fluidity of 1st-person identities. And while constantly in flux, while switching from each hero or monster, can be immersive.

I have a tendency to generate more questions than answers.

 

[Yaarel]

@MrPopstar

But I am talking about a specific phenomenon that exists in D&D. (Not what some might call transportation generally.)

When I say ‘immersion’, I absolutely mean first person. Becoming the hero, and engaging the world vividly from the heros perspective.

 

[Yaarel]

D&D is a roleplaying game, where the player takes on the ‘role’ − the persona, the identity, the perspective − of a character and engages the world as that character.

D&D offers a highly distinctive kind of ‘immersion’ that is rare elsewhere.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I think it's the difference between looking at the game (and thus the narrative) from a Dungeon Master's perspective versus a player's perspective.

I can't recall anyone ever crying immersions from the DMs side off the screen. If the DM doesn't like something, he can always ban it..

It is not, by definition, first-person.
The experience of being transported to the world of a story does not in any way shape or form imply or insist that such transportation is experienced in first-person perspective. (I think this might truly be the great rift in communication and understanding.) All that immersion describes is a change in outlook and decision-making such that the narrative is treated as "real."

By the definition you're using. Though 'real' clearly needs the scare quotes.

The way it tends to be used, here - to preclude 'director stance,' pile onto 'dissociated' mechanics, &c - seems to assume a first person perspective.

 

[Satyrn]

Oh yay! A semantic "discussion"

 

[mrpopstar]

I can't recall anyone ever crying immersions from the DMs side off the screen. If the DM doesn't like something, he can always ban it..

You commented that I was approaching immersion as something observed, and that others more commonly approach it as something experienced. I was acknowledging that and proposing a reason: That I look at the game from the perspective of being a Dungeon Master (managing immersion through narrative), whereas many others might be looking at the game from the perspective of being a player (enjoying their absorbing involvement).

By the definition you're using. Though 'real' clearly needs the scare quotes.

The way it tends to be used, here - to preclude 'director stance,' pile onto 'dissociated' mechanics, &c - seems to assume a first person perspective.

And I wish their games the best.

 

[Garthanos]

He was pretty clear in the original, and quite clear in the Twitter response: the designer's job, particularly with making new 5E subclasses, is to make the action economy not intrude into play as a sub-game. The job of building the D&D action economy is complete, his point was to not much it up when designing new options within that settled system.

Ignoring and not accounting for it... "If this phrase comes up as part of the design process, we have probably done something wrong. If we're thinking of actions as an economic resource that are being spent, I think we've made the game too complicated." ...will accomplish the opposite

 

[Morrus]

Ignoring and not accounting for it... "If this phrase comes up as part of the design process, we have probably done something wrong. If we're thinking of actions as an economic resource that are being spent, I think we've made the game too complicated." ...will accomplish the opposite

“Too complicated” is the last thing I think when somebody says “5E”.

 

[mrpopstar]

@MrPopstar

But I am talking about a specific phenomenon that exists in D&D. (Not what some might call transportation generally.)

Immersion is a universal phenomenon!

When I say ‘immersion’, I absolutely mean first person. Becoming the hero, and engaging the world vividly from the heros perspective.

You can be connected to a character emotionally and cognitively without assuming them within the narrative.

I have plenty of experience managing these two players...

Phillip (playing Gareth): I want to look at the gargoyles. I have a feeling they're not just statues.
Amy: Riva* wants to look at the gargoyles as well. She definitely feels like they're not just statues.​

...both of whom are fully immersed!

*Riva is Amy's character.

 

[Parmandur]

Ignoring and not accounting for it... "If this phrase comes up as part of the design process, we have probably done something wrong. If we're thinking of actions as an economic resource that are being spent, I think we've made the game too complicated." ...will accomplish the opposite

Because the action economy has already been designed, it is set. The context is about delineation of what is not a good idea to mess with when designing new options within that already set system.