Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8300460" data-attributes="member: 71699">I am not sure what you mean by "at the population level", but as to more or less pro or anti immersion design. I reflect on Griffin Mountain compared with say Out of the Abyss. The latter takes a situation that could be represented highly immersively and - as written - tramples over immersion with hob-nailed boots. That whole Alice In Wonderland shtick. Griffin Mountain on the other hand presents people, places and facts in a neutral way that allows a group to properly explore the imagined world. It is light touch, primarily presenting history (or archaeology or anthropology) rather than story. We can of course use it to tell stories.The approach of the designers in OOTA is very opposite. Very anti-immersive. For example the determination to get the characters to Gauntlgrym. As written it is very against showing what is there and letting things play out as they may. It takes work to overcome its purpose. Of course, it is rich material and a fascinating scenario, just handled anti-immersively. Likely most written D&D modules are in that category.I admit that immersion is not yet as well understood as one would like. Possibly, in part that is because immersionists are interested in seeing what is there - drinking in rather than shouting out. And possibly also for what you seem to be touching on, which is that people are trained toward or inclined to certain things. Maybe humans just like more to see or impose pattern, story. And yes, the word is used in different ways and one persons "jarring to my immersion" pronouncement might really mean some other kind of jarring. The word most often seems to be ambiguated with inhabiting a character, where in my view the most sincere immersion inhabits the world.</blockquote>

Verification