Lets talk about immersion.

What does it take for you to get into the setting?

For me its largely about experiencing the setting as something unique and distinct-from-reality, yet complete in every aspect. If there are glaring holes in the setting it pretty much ruins the immersive experience for me.
This means that the parts of the setting the characters experience all the time are the ones that most strongly affect immersion.
And since all roleplaying is done by communication the names you give to these elements have a strong impact on how you experience them.
For example if the mythology of your campaign world sees the sun as a giant phoenix, then saying "Phoenix rises in the east" every time the characters wake will have a strong impact and remind the players every time about just how important the Phoenix-religion is in their campaign world.
Getting unique descriptors for things like time and distance are also a step forward to not disrupting immersion (i.e.: it would make absolute no fucking sense to measure time in a medieval fantasy world in minutes and hours, when there are no exact clocks in the first place).
But don't distribute those descriptors over the whole rulebook: make a glossary at the very beginning, so players and GMs know what you are talking about (getting into the campaign world shouldn't be unreasonably hard).

Also make the unique details important. Going on for page after page about the the different currencies your fantasy kingdoms use and how they look like is going to fill many pages, but how much impact is it going to have on your games (i.e. how often is a player going to say in-game "I look closely at the coins to see their emblems and then calculate the exact change course to the Paderbornian Shekel!", instead of just "Money? Cool, I buy me a new suit of armor!"). Also don't overdo the parts of the game world which players are never going to experience anyway (Harnmaster and the metaplot of Revised V:tM come to mind...).

Lastly- while immersion is about the game world- some elements on the meta-game level can also facilitate immersion.
Like in the WoD, where you are using different (literary) names (Storyteller, chronicle, chapter, scene etc.) for tried-and-true roleplaying techniques or Deadlands, which uses pulpy Wild West terms (Posse, rolling the bones, acing, Grit etc.).
Making props part of the game can help to (whether it is initiative cards in Deadlands or lighting candles and running background music before a session of a horror game).

And lastly, you need a group that is prepared to let immersion happen, because if that isn't the case, you might as well quit trying.

Quote from: alexandroWhat does it take for you to get into the setting?

Verisimilitude.

Quote from: alexandroThis means that the parts of the setting the characters experience all the time are the ones that most strongly affect immersion.

For myself, I would modify this slightly.  For me, the issue is not so much the parts of the setting that my character experiences all of the time but the parts of the setting that my character looks at closely, cares about, and makes decisions based on.  In fact, I've learned that I can avoid or reduce the problems that I have playing immersive characters in settings with verisimilitude problems by creating characters that aren't very interested in how things work in the setting.  In other words, I create a character less likely to notice the problem.

Quote from: alexandroGetting unique descriptors for things like time and distance are also a step forward to not disrupting immersion (i.e.: it would make absolute no fucking sense to measure time in a medieval fantasy world in minutes and hours, when there are no exact clocks in the first place).

I actually consider this to be more of a problem than a help, unless the conversion is 1:1.  The problem is that time, distance, and weight are things that people have an intuitive sense of.  So long as the setting uses measurements that I (as the player) am familiar with, my character can borrow that intuitive sense of what certain measurements mean from my player sense of those things.  But if the measurements are alien, I either need to convert or have to think about what the measurement means to my character, both of which take a far bigger toll on immersion for me.  I role-play with a person with a very different take on this so YMMV.

Quote from: alexandroLastly- while immersion is about the game world- some elements on the meta-game level can also facilitate immersion.

For me, with the possible exception of props, the more the meta-game distracts me, the harder time I have immersing.

Quote from: alexandroAnd lastly, you need a group that is prepared to let immersion happen, because if that isn't the case, you might as well quit trying.

The bigger issue is that players with other objectives can get angry at immersive decisions if, for example, they are not optimal in combat or ruin the story.

QuoteFor me, with the possible exception of props, the more the meta-game distracts me, the harder time I have immersing.

For this reason this is best done as game prep.
Unless you make "immersive mechanics" like in Deadlands and DRYH, because there you have something you (probably) have in the game anyway, so it might as well be something fancy...

QuoteFor me, the issue is not so much the parts of the setting that my character experiences all of the time but the parts of the setting that my character looks at closely, cares about, and makes decisions based on.

Yes, but if I can't even act out my characters conversation ("We meet here in... oh wait...right..."), because I'm missing vital elements as to how the game world works, then it pretty much breaks the suspension of disbelief for me.

I agree these units should be something you can remember easily, or you could make it so, that the characters traits refer only to the game world: if the character can move 20 jawbones a turn and the GM tells you the target is 10 jawbones way, you don't have to remember that a jawbone is roughly half a foot- the important information (can I get to him in one turn) is already there, no matter what kind of measurement you use to express it.

Ultimately it falls upon the GM to juggle the game elements and present them to the players (and if necessary elaborate on them, if they are particulary interested in one element). The "GM as the players eyes and ears" description of the GM job is the most important in this kind of game.

Of course this also means that in a immersive game the GM is the only one, who doesn't actually experience immersion, so he has to find some other way to make the game worthwhile to him.

Quote from: alexandroYes, but if I can't even act out my characters conversation ("We meet here in... oh wait...right..."), because I'm missing vital elements as to how the game world works, then it pretty much breaks the suspension of disbelief for me.

Well, that doesn't really conflict with what I said.  If you don't create the sort of character that makes those kinds of suggestions, then that problem doesn't come up.

Quote from: alexandroI agree these units should be something you can remember easily, or you could make it so, that the characters traits refer only to the game world: if the character can move 20 jawbones a turn and the GM tells you the target is 10 jawbones way, you don't have to remember that a jawbone is roughly half a foot- the important information (can I get to him in one turn) is already there, no matter what kind of measurement you use to express it.

I don't know about you, but I try to visualize the scene for my character.  If I don't know what a "jawbone" is, then I have trouble with the visualization and with making basic assessments like "close or far", "big or small", etc.  I necessarily think in character in terms of "Can I get to him in one turn?" which is also why I have problems with scene based and challenge based mechanics.  That's just not how I'm thinking in character.

Quote from: alexandroUltimately it falls upon the GM to juggle the game elements and present them to the players (and if necessary elaborate on them, if they are particulary interested in one element). The "GM as the players eyes and ears" description of the GM job is the most important in this kind of game.

For me, personally, I'm not so sure that's true.  What's most important for me is that the GM doesn't contradict other things that have been established about the setting in the process.

Quote from: alexandroOf course this also means that in a immersive game the GM is the only one, who doesn't actually experience immersion, so he has to find some other way to make the game worthwhile to him.

For the most part, I do agree with this, which is why I don't want to take on a more GM-like role as a player.  But as a GM, I can sometimes experience bits of immersion through the eyes of my NPCs.

Quote from: alexandroLets talk about immersion.

What does it take for you to get into the setting?

Verisimilitude for me as well.  Which requires a careful selection and control of incongruities to maintain suspension of disbelief.

QuoteFor me its largely about experiencing the setting as something unique and distinct-from-reality, yet complete in every aspect. If there are glaring holes in the setting it pretty much ruins the immersive experience for me.

A tall order, the more it diverges from reality the more work it will take to make it seem complete or make sense.

QuoteThis means that the parts of the setting the characters experience all the time are the ones that most strongly affect immersion.

Yes, but not for me to get into the setting.  I would also like the big picture, the nations, the cultures, the politics.  If it has an effect on the setting as time goes by and that information can be used by me, e.g., exploiting rivalries, trying to reconcile them, it has meaning.  In immersion I relish taking the background “fluff” of the world, understanding it and using it.
 

QuoteAnd since all roleplaying is done by communication the names you give to these elements have a strong impact on how you experience them.

If you tap into your players base knowledge and preconceptions.  If the player has no idea of ancient Egyptian names like Imhotep will evoke nothing.  REH, for me, is a master of evoking much in a single word, by using our preconceptions.  Stygia, Turan, Vilayet, all evoke a feel because we associate certain cultures already with the sounds those words make.  

QuoteFor example if the mythology of your campaign world sees the sun as a giant phoenix, then saying "Phoenix rises in the east" every time the characters wake will have a strong impact and remind the players every time about just how important the Phoenix-religion is in their campaign world.

I hate to say it but it’s not much different than having reams of data on different names for coins.  Sun is a giant phoenix, burning chariot, ball of gas, who cares.   The players will only know that it is important to you that the sun has a different name.
Instead, if every morning the local folks perform some ritual to the rising sun that interrupts the PCs plans then they will get the importance.  Soldiers refuse to attack at dawn for religious reasons, it is considered an ill omen if offerings are not made (maybe moral is low, maybe it really is an ill omen a detriment to everything you try that day), etc.  Then they will begin to care and learn to work with and around this. They will see it is more than just a name change.  

QuoteGetting unique descriptors for things like time and distance are also a step forward to not disrupting immersion .

I have to completely disagree with you.  Different made-up names for distance and time completely disrupt immersion as they constantly pull the players out of the narrative and into the real world to make a conversion before it makes any sense to them.  If you want different names to convey a feel use units or names that evoke the size of the unit.  For example, and “arn” I have no idea what it is but get the sense it is close to an hour just from the sound, or a “cycle” this makes me think of a year especially if you give ages in it.  Likewise if someone says “frak” as a curse I get a good feel for the meaning, opposed to “tanjit” a neat idea but it conveys nothing.  If your units are close to this then you have conveyed feel and information at the same time.  Instead if you say it takes a “grabble”, what does that mean?  
I’ll be the first to admit this is all cultural, what will work in England, Australia, Spain will all be different.  
You can also use archaic units which people still have a sense for (even if wrong) such as dram, league, fortnight. Again this depends on how well read your players are.  You can also try to get players to learn units especially if you are going for a historical period or specific culture. Then it may make sense, otherwise they’ll probably consider it a waste of time.

Quote(i.e.: it would make absolute no fucking sense to measure time in a medieval fantasy world in minutes and hours, when there are no exact clocks in the first place)

? ? You do know that people did measure time in such units in medieval times and they did have clocks and ways of measuring time back then? Those time units go back millenia and were considered useful even then, along with the second.  Maybe they didn't care about the precision we do today, but I see how it fails to make sense that these would be the names of their time units.

QuoteBut don't distribute those descriptors over the whole rulebook: make a glossary at the very beginning, so players and GMs know what you are talking about (getting into the campaign world shouldn't be unreasonably hard).

I’m not going to learn another language to get into the game world, glossary or not.  If the words themselves cannot evoke their meaning then forget it.  People and place names are fine, those we are used to being different.  Units of time, distance, weight, the names of the sun, water, dirt, trees, other common substances, it’s ridiculous.  Again, if you are trying to recreate a historical culture then using those words for things makes sense.   But if you are just making it up, it will probably fall very flat.

QuoteAlso make the unique details important. Going on for page after page about the the different currencies your fantasy kingdoms use and how they look like is going to fill many pages, but how much impact is it going to have on your games (i.e. how often is a player going to say in-game "I look closely at the coins to see their emblems and then calculate the exact change course to the Paderbornian Shekel!", instead of just "Money? Cool, I buy me a new suit of armor!").

So changing the name of the sun is cool and unique but recreating a feel for the historical chaos of currency is not?  Multiple currencies also require money changers and you can drive home the politics of your world.  Money changing is mandatory because the rulers want to control the currency.  Not that I find this worthwhile in my own setting but I can see some value in having shekels, denarii, etc.  

QuoteAlso don't overdo the parts of the game world which players are never going to experience anyway (Harnmaster and the metaplot of Revised V:tM come to mind...).

Yeah, up to the GM.  Really a matter of your time and how it helps you design everything else.  Certainly don’t expect your players to know it if it is something that will never, ever have impact and that they can never, ever use.  Yet I still might read it if it is well written as it gives me a feel for the world and GM’s thinking.

QuoteLastly- while immersion is about the game world- some elements on the meta-game level can also facilitate immersion.
Like in the WoD, where you are using different (literary) names (Storyteller, chronicle, chapter, scene etc.) for tried-and-true roleplaying techniques or Deadlands, which uses pulpy Wild West terms (Posse, rolling the bones, acing, Grit etc.).
Making props part of the game can help to (whether it is initiative cards in Deadlands or lighting candles and running background music before a session of a horror game).

A game element I wish more designers would head.  The need to come up with a new word, especially intentionally misspelled ones, is a sign of poor design or a clear misunderstanding of trademark and copyright law.  For a western game I like the idea of calling moral, “grit” or “guts”, for a 1920’s gangster game, “moxy”, for a WWII game “courage” and for a fantasy game “valor.”  Certainly moral works just as well but doesn’t evoke the genre nearly as well.  That’s of course if your game is strongly tied to a setting or genre.

Quote from: Xanther? ? You do know that people did measure time in such units in medieval times and they did have clocks and ways of measuring time back then? Those time units go back millenia and were considered useful even then, along with the second.  Maybe they didn't care about the precision we do today, but I see how it fails to make sense that these would be the names of their time units.

Not outside the cities, where they didn't have the big clocks to look at.
Remember portable timepieces weren't invented back than, so the populace had to rely at simple, straightforward measurements ("at dawn", "at noon", "at dusk") to convey when to do something.

QuoteI hate to say it but it's not much different than having reams of data on different names for coins. Sun is a giant phoenix, burning chariot, ball of gas, who cares. The players will only know that it is important to you that the sun has a different name.

They will know, for example, that the religion of the phoenix is so predominant in the country, that it even seeped into popular language. They will know, that even remotely disagreeing with this notion is something completely alien in this world. They will know that conducting rites at night can't be something connected to this kind of religion. ... And of course the examples you mentioned.

I agree that it has to be important.
If you just pop out names that have no meaning that is of course wrong.
But it doesn't hurt to reinforce important aspects of the setting, so the players don't have to backpedal too often ("Attacking at dawn is something most soldiers will refuse? Isn't my character supposed to know about this?").

Quote from: alexandroNot outside the cities, where they didn't have the big clocks to look at.
Remember portable timepieces weren't invented back than, so the populace had to rely at simple, straightforward measurements ("at dawn", "at noon", "at dusk") to convey when to do something.

People measured time by hand, literally, you can get a rough gauge by the hour of the day by hand breadths above the horizon and shadow, sun dial.  Knowing what time of the day it was was very important for prayer in medieval society.  

Knowing the time to the minute, sure they didn't care, but they certainly had a good idea of what hour it was and could gauge a minute if they needed to by counting.  They certainly could guess quarter hours.  Yeah its about a quarter hour down the road would make sense to them.

Quote from: alexandro...
If you just pop out names that have no meaning that is of course wrong.
But it doesn't hurt to reinforce important aspects of the setting, so the players don't have to backpedal too often ("Attacking at dawn is something most soldiers will refuse? Isn't my character supposed to know about this?").

Now that I can see.

Quote from: alexandroLets talk about immersion.

What does it take for you to get into the setting?

For me its largely about experiencing the setting as something unique and distinct-from-reality, yet complete in every aspect. If there are glaring holes in the setting it pretty much ruins the immersive experience for me.
This means that the parts of the setting the characters experience all the time are the ones that most strongly affect immersion.
And since all roleplaying is done by communication the names you give to these elements have a strong impact on how you experience them.
For example if the mythology of your campaign world sees the sun as a giant phoenix, then saying "Phoenix rises in the east" every time the characters wake will have a strong impact and remind the players every time about just how important the Phoenix-religion is in their campaign world.

You know, if you haven't read Tanith Lee's fantasy novels, you should try them. I bet you would really like them.  She is particularly good at making exotic-yet-believable pre-modern mindsets.


As for gaming, I think the key is the creation of a shared world, where all the participants are committed to making contributions.

The system I've seen this work best with was Rolemaster, but that was, I believe, an accident of circumstances rather than the inherent strength of the system.

Quote from: alexandroUltimately it falls upon the GM to juggle the game elements and present them to the players (and if necessary elaborate on them, if they are particulary interested in one element). The "GM as the players eyes and ears" description of the GM job is the most important in this kind of game.

Of course this also means that in a immersive game the GM is the only one, who doesn't actually experience immersion, so he has to find some other way to make the game worthwhile to him.

I'm not so sure this is always the case.  While it may be in some ways harder for the GM to have a sense of immersion while playing, it is not impossible if the GM considers his world a kind of living Otherworld place that he's in tune with in a kind of shamanistic sort of way.   In other words, the GM is describing the World he is "seeing" to the Players.  In this sense he is immersed more, rather than less than the Players, since it is his vision of the World that is being described.  

As for the general question, I think the most important key to immersion is the Descriptive Power of the Gamesmaster.   I've seen some games where the GM simply describes all the world and action in terms of points, ie "You see a 2nd Level Goblin", rather than "Ahead in the shimmerling firelight of your torches you see the glint of pale green eyes... emerging from the dark you are confronted by a short, thin-limbed, black haired and savagely fanged Goblin wearing a red cap and green vest, and carrying a stout little sword with a black blade."

The ability of the GM to actually Describe scenes, and have a World worth describing, is what makes immersion work for me.   I know some GMs who do it oh so well, and others who never come close.   Needless to say I adore the former, and am entirely indifferent to the latter.

Quote from: VBWyrdeI'm not so sure this is always the case.  While it may be in some ways harder for the GM to have a sense of immersion while playing, it is not impossible if the GM considers his world a kind of living Otherworld place that he's in tune with in a kind of shamanistic sort of way.   In other words, the GM is describing the World he is "seeing" to the Players.  In this sense he is immersed more, rather than less than the Players, since it is his vision of the World that is being described.

I don't like this approach, because in my experience every GM who did this just ended up treating his players as "setting-tourists", who have the privilege of seeing all the cool stuff that his pet-NPCs do and what happens in the campaign world because of it, without actually affecting the outcome in any way (the same GMs also complain loudly, that the players always "ruin" their "story").
One of these railroad-y GMs actually had the nerves to tell the players (including me) after we had suffered through his "plot": "Thank you, you were a great audience."

YMMV, of course.

Quote from: alexandroI don't like this approach, because in my experience every GM who did this just ended up treating his players as "setting-tourists", who have the privilege of seeing all the cool stuff that his pet-NPCs do and what happens in the campaign world because of it, without actually affecting the outcome in any way (the same GMs also complain loudly, that the players always "ruin" their "story").
One of these railroad-y GMs actually had the nerves to tell the players (including me) after we had suffered through his "plot": "Thank you, you were a great audience."

YMMV, of course.

Indeed.  This is one of the dangers of this approach.  I am merely pointing out that from an immersion perspective it is possible for the GM to engage in such a way as to also become immersed in the World experience.  I really don't recommend the Shaman approach for all GMs.  In some cases it would work, in others it would not.  This danger spot, however, can be avoided by the GM disassociating the Player Characters from the World Characters (NPCs), and allowing the PCs to be 'guests' in the World, influenced purely by the Players.   Moreover, I would recommend GMs specifically avoid conceiving of a specific plot line for the story beyond the initial setup.   I very much try to avoid thinking that the story should go any way in particular once the game has begun, and I allow the Players free reign to decide where to go and what to do for themselves.   Even though I did a lot of work preparing for the Spring Fair, and had all kinds of story around it, and wanted the Players to go there, they actually chose to adventure elsewhere and the game went a completely different direction.   And guess what - I totally loved it.   In this way the game surprises me just as much as the Players.   And for me that's more satisfying than Railroading the story along.

Quote from: alexandroWhat does it take for you to get into the setting?

Youth, free-time, and a lack of responsibility.

That's not being snarky, that's the truth. The only time we really immersed ourselves in the setting was when we didn't have full-time jobs, families, or reponsibilities (beyond being responsible for entertaining ourselves).

Now, we go through he motions of gaming. It's more of a social occasion, a chance to hang out. The game is secondary, hanging out comes first. We have played a few good games, some fairly recent, but the immersion factor is missing.

I think when I retire, I'll return to roleplaying with a vengence. I'll sit around in my depends, smoking my pipe, and run an uber campaign.

Quote from: VBWyrdeAs for the general question, I think the most important key to immersion is the Descriptive Power of the Gamesmaster.   I've seen some games where the GM simply describes all the world and action in terms of points, ie "You see a 2nd Level Goblin", rather than "Ahead in the shimmerling firelight of your torches you see the glint of pale green eyes... emerging from the dark you are confronted by a short, thin-limbed, black haired and savagely fanged Goblin wearing a red cap and green vest, and carrying a stout little sword with a black blade."

I've had some very immersive results from MUDs.  A DM describing clairvoyance is at a disadvantage: a MUD can give your terminal the data feed you would get from being in another room, with highlighting to indicate clairvoyance.  It's immediate, and if a clairvoyant is teamed with a party, only the clairvoyant sees the additional info -- which is a nice touch.