D&D 5E What are your biggest immersion breakers, rules wise?

[iserith]

TLDR; people vary on immersion, and that's fine. It's not cool to denigrate other people's opinions on the matter.

It is not "denigrating other people's opinions" to offer a solution, among other solutions, to a problem. In fact, it's recognizing the problem being reported as real and trying to help which is neither dismissive nor obnoxious. People can adopt the proposed solutions or they can choose not to.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[DammitVictor]

Some people find more abstract mechanics allow them to more easily immerse themselves in the fiction of a TTRPG.

Some people find that more realistic mechanics allow them to more easily immerse themselves in the fiction of a TTRPG.

Compounded by the fact that realism in roleplaying games is so very rarely realistic, and you've got a recipe for some terrible misunderstandings.

 

[Oofta]

If there is a post that is soliciting people to say what things cause issues for them with immersion, then, no, it isn't helpful for someone to reiterate, "There are no problems with immersion. The problem is with you."

I would note that you were making that argument in tandem with someone who was advocating for a particular playing style, and reiterated several times that the real issue is that people who had issues with immersion (aka, did not play the same way) really just weren't creative.

But sure, whatever. If you have an issue with what I am saying, isn't the issue really you?

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and I pretty much ignore iserith's posts nowadays ... but his style does come across as "I'm right you're wrong". I tried to explain that* and he blocked me.

So while I agree, it's a battle you will never win. Much like I just accept that somebody in inflexible armor has unrestricted movement and can dodge anything if and only if the metal plates in the armor are held between two layers of leather with rivets.

*Along with a disagreement on how to interpret rules, pointing out that he skipped critical clarifying rules and so on. Water under the bridge.

 

[iserith]

If there is a post that is soliciting people to say what things cause issues for them with immersion, then, no, it isn't helpful for someone to reiterate, "There are no problems with immersion. The problem is with you."

I would note that you were making that argument in tandem with someone who was advocating for a particular playing style, and reiterated several times that the real issue is that people who had issues with immersion (aka, did not play the same way) really just weren't creative.

What I read was that the source of the issue is the person who has a certain sensitivity to particular things that take them out of the feeling of being immersed and that is true in my view. The rules (or the "metagaming" or whatever) are just triggers that activate the response. A solution to that is to improve on one's ability to creatively explain away those things in order to remain immersed. That is directly addressing the certain sensitivity someone has to the triggers which is at the heart of the problem rather than only trying to eliminate the triggers. This is similar to the techniques employed to get over more serious issues like fear of heights. One can avoid high places (the trigger) for the rest of one's life or take the more difficult but arguably rewarding step toward desensitization treatment.

But sure, whatever. If you have an issue with what I am saying, isn't the issue really you?

I could choose to ignore your mischaracterizations, yes, and what I see as your purposeful avoidance of the source of the problem (ourselves). But I don't think that would be as helpful as pointing them out.

 

[Garthanos]

DMs and Players looking things up in the books at the table... like I saw in the small amount of 3e that I got to play. Is that mechanics? probably complexity and obtuse natural language writing style of those mechanics were the root of it.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[CleverNickName]

You keep saying they didn’t “really” hit you, as if the game tried to pretend they did hit you and then faked you out or something. That’s why I pointed out the way 5e instructs the DM to describe the effects of damage. If your DM is running the game as the book instructs, there should never have been any suggestion that they did hit you, beyond a glance or a graze, until your HP hit 0. If you don’t care for that way if narrating damage, I understand and respect that. But rendering that as “it didn’t really hit me” is odd to me. No, it didn’t hit you. Who said it did?

See, I do understand what the rules say about it, and I don't disagree with what the rules say about it. It's just that the rules are breaking my immersion (which is the topic of this thread). In my mind, if an arrow does not contact my character's skin, it is impossible for it to have any lethal effect (or even harmful effect), whatsoever, on my character. I know that is contrary to what the rules say, but my willful suspension of belief still gets jarred. Reminding my imagination what the rules say doesn't help, because my imagination doesn't care.

It's just something I have to deal with, if I'm going to play a game. (shrug) I don't think I'm the only one with this quirk of the mind, judging by this thread (and the countless "damage on a miss" arguments from the days of D&D Next.)

 

[Oofta]

See, I do understand what the rules say about it, and I don't disagree with what the rules say about it. It's just that the rules are breaking my immersion (which is the topic of this thread). In my mind, if an arrow does not contact my character's skin, it is impossible for it to have any lethal effect (or even harmful effect), whatsoever, on my character. I know that is contrary to what the rules say, but my willful suspension of belief still gets jarred. Reminding my imagination what the rules say doesn't help, because my imagination doesn't care.

It's just something I have to deal with, if I'm going to play a game. (shrug) I don't think I'm the only one with this quirk of the mind, judging by this thread (and the countless "damage on a miss" arguments from the days of D&D Next.)

Would it help if HP were renamed "plot armor"?

 

[iserith]

In order to "read" that, you pretty much have to ignore everything that I wrote.

Or I simply read those posts more charitably than you.

How many times have I said to you that you can't just selectively quote me and chose to ignore what I write?

I can though - you have no control over this and perhaps knowing this may help with your anger. But anyway that's not what I'm doing. I'm responding to what I find relevant and useful or cutting out long blocks of text for formatting purposes.

Since you don't want to engage with literary concepts such as "suspension of disbelief," why don't you try "irony."

Engaging on these subjects are not necessary in my view and simply obfuscates the underlying problem. The source of the issue as I see it is sensitivity to the triggers that break people out of the feeling of immersion. A solution is to address that sensitivity directly, one that I employed myself, so I know that it works (at least for me and some people I know and @Charlaquin by the sounds of it). It's really not any more complicated than that. People can try this themselves or keep on trying to eliminate the triggers or perhaps both. It's up to them.