Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 2937084" data-attributes="member: 22779">I don't see playing a character as deep immersion.  Repeatedly characterizing it as such doesn't make it true.  As I've stated, I have zero problem with someone playing their character in the third person.  No problems at all.  That's about as unimmersive as you can get (if that's a word).  See, you mention Smallville.  Now there's a case where there is NO OOC knowledge being used.  Despite the fact that the players may know that Clark is Superman, they choose to ignore it.  However, why go that route?  Why not simply restrict the knowledge in the first place.  Then, such questions are not entirely contrived.  Why would I, as a player in Smallville, bother questioning how Clark ran so fast?   I know.  I can look across the table and see Superman on Joe's character sheet.  For me to have my character start asking questions is entirely contrived.  I'm not asking because I want to know.  I'm asking because my character would want to know and I want to watch Joe squirm as he tries to come up with yet another bogus story.And, of course, the entire house of cards collapses the second Joe can't.  Because Joe doesn't have a team of writers handing him a script, he's more likely to fall on his bottom eventually.  Secret comes out, game take a radical right turn.Now, if I really didn't know that Joe was playing Superman, I'd be much more willing to accept explanations given that I don't have real reason to disbelieve Joe.  I have no idea how he is doing these things, his stories are wonky, but, lacking any other explanations, I have to accept it.I have no problems with players stating their character's actions.  That's groovy.  However, when the player makes his character so much of a wallflower that he's effectively mute, then he adds very little to the table.  Spouting off a stream of conciousness in game would be so jarring.  I've said that before, but, it's the best word.  The players cannot react to it since the SST is stonefaced.  The DM can't really react to it since no one around him knows what he's thinking.Now, if the SST is describing his body action and facial expression, that's communicating and I'm happy again.  There's something to work off of.  He's leaning forward, he's using gestures, he's making a face.  GREAT!  Bloody fantastic.  I have no problem with the SST because he's now COMMUNICATING.  Actually, thinking about it, if you are using body language to communicate, isn't that MUCH more deeply immersive than 3rd party statements?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification