...and finally everybody else.

Quote from: estar;567540This is true for all RPGs because it is a result of the game being moderated by referee adjudicating the actions of the players not the specifics of the rules or the genre of the game.

Is the same true for LARPs?

Quote from: estar;567560The situations that the players can get their characters into are so varied that the only way to properly handle them is by having a human referee adjudicate.

Or by having a system abstract enough that it doesn't get broken when dealing with specifics.

Quote from: LordVreeg;567566AS you notate, mutability, flexibility and evolution are what we do all the time.  So though we may passively 'ingrain' as you say, the contextual imprint can be changed by other context-specific imprintings.  We may not realize it, but it is actually one of the signs of measuring emotional intelligence, this ability to apply learnings from one discipline to another.

But as a group, gamers (and geeks in general) seem to have a lot of low EQ people. Seriously some of the least adaptable people I have ever encountered are in those communities.

Actually, perhaps part of being a geek IS an inadaptability in certain areas.

Quote from: The Traveller;567628When a group of people are collectively deciding the way the plot should work out, you don't have surprise.

Unless you're using a Ouija board, the ULTIMATE story game!

Quote from: Exploderwizard;567633When you go about your daily life do you contemplate actions based on that shit?

Aaaaactually >_>

Quote from: Sacrosanct;567693I typically play in mild 1st person, but nothing as immersive as LARPers.

Strangely, since LARPers have to keep the rules in their head and self adjudicate, it can actually be LESS immersive than Tabletop.

Quote from: soviet;567799In his thread over on RPGnet, Old Geezer (talking about his experiences playing with Gygax) was asked the following question:

"To what extent were character decisions driven by tactics and player knowledge as compared to characterization? For example, how would the table react to a player saying "Yeah, it's really weird that there's a treasure chest just standing there and it's probably a trap or a mimic or something, but my guy Grolgnar *is* pretty dumb and we haven't found *any* treasure so far so he's going to walk up to the chest and open it"?"

He replied:

"100% the former."

Quote from: soviet;567801What standpoint is the Gygaxian player playing from and why is it different?

The player's approach is from a first person perspective. Notice in the first case, the player is engaging the situation and thinking out loud as if he were there, trying to figure it out.

In the alternate case, the player refers to "my guy Grolgnar" as a character in a story, and starts approaching the situation from an authorial standpoint and discussing options based on the character's mental capacity and what would be more 'appropriate' for the situation.

Getting really immersed in a character is completely optional as far as roleplaying is concerned. The important part is approaching the simulation as if were actually taking place and reacting accordingly.

A fire drill is a roleplaying exercise. It isn't a game but it is a situation that demands that you roleplay yourself, in a fire emergency situation. Do you think about what would make for a more dramatic scene, or do you do what is needed to help yourself and others stay safe during the emergency?

A roleplaying game is similar with the exception that you are (usually) playing a character other than yourself. Gameplay and mechanics that force you to constantly engage with game elements rather than the fictional situation in first person, suck the roleplaying right out of the game. This is especially true of using abilities granted to the player, that the character has no concept of.

The basic question in a roleplaying game " what do you do?" should be answerable in first person, in such a way that the answer makes sense to the fictional character in the situation. So things like spending a point of X to have the guy over there, be an old college buddy, or some such nonsense really detract from roleplaying unless the assumed role is storyteller in which case it makes perfect sense.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;567909The player's approach is from a first person perspective. Notice in the first case, the player is engaging the situation and thinking out loud as if he were there, trying to figure it out.

In the alternate case, the player refers to "my guy Grolgnar" as a character in a story, and starts approaching the situation from an authorial standpoint and discussing options based on the character's mental capacity and what would be more 'appropriate' for the situation.

Getting really immersed in a character is completely optional as far as roleplaying is concerned. The important part is approaching the simulation as if were actually taking place and reacting accordingly.

A fire drill is a roleplaying exercise. It isn't a game but it is a situation that demands that you roleplay yourself, in a fire emergency situation. Do you think about what would make for a more dramatic scene, or do you do what is needed to help yourself and others stay safe during the emergency?

A roleplaying game is similar with the exception that you are (usually) playing a character other than yourself. Gameplay and mechanics that force you to constantly engage with game elements rather than the fictional situation in first person, suck the roleplaying right out of the game. This is especially true of using abilities granted to the player, that the character has no concept of.

The basic question in a roleplaying game " what do you do?" should be answerable in first person, in such a way that the answer makes sense to the fictional character in the situation. So things like spending a point of X to have the guy over there, be an old college buddy, or some such nonsense really detract from roleplaying unless the assumed role is storyteller in which case it makes perfect sense.

I think a lot of roleplaying games have mechanics that are difficult to use from a solely first person perspective. What do hit points mean? What does spending a fate point look like? What does taking 10 look like? What does rolling to hit look like, even?

I think people step out of their character's perspective to engage the rules all the time, in both kinds of games. Are they still roleplaying at that precise minute? Maybe not. Does that make what they're playing not a roleplaying game? No.

When I'm in a fire drill, I might be thinking about a lot of things. I might be thinking about what I'm going to have for lunch, or what I'm going to do in D&D that night. I might even be thinking about how organised my team looks in front of my boss, or try to stand near the front so I can get back in to the office quicker, or try to stand near to a girl I like and start up a conversation. I can have all these thoughts and still participate in the fire drill effectively.

By the same token, when I'm roleplaying, I can think about what would be the most tactically useful manoeuvre, or what would be the best time to reveal my character's backstory, or what would be some fun stakes of failure for this diplomacy roll, or whether I should find a way to draw another player in to the situation because he's not had much to do lately, or whether we've got time to get into this fight scene yet because I've got to leave for my train in ten minutes. I can think about all these things at the back of my mind and still be describing my character's actions, or improvising some dialogue, or whatever. If you were at the session watching me you would not think 'oh, he's not roleplaying'.

Quote from: soviet;567921I think a lot of roleplaying games have mechanics that are difficult to use from a solely first person perspective. What do hit points mean? What does spending a fate point look like? What does taking 10 look like? What does rolling to hit look like, even?

What part of "what do you do?" requires you to deal with any mechanics whatsoever on a character level?

Quote from: soviet;567921I think people step out of their character's perspective to engage the rules all the time, in both kinds of games. Are they still roleplaying at that precise minute? Maybe not. Does that make what they're playing not a roleplaying game? No.

When I'm in a fire drill, I might be thinking about a lot of things. I might be thinking about what I'm going to have for lunch, or what I'm going to do in D&D that night. I might even be thinking about how organised my team looks in front of my boss, or try to stand near the front so I can get back in to the office quicker, or try to stand near to a girl I like and start up a conversation. I can have all these thoughts and still participate in the fire drill effectively.

By the same token, when I'm roleplaying, I can think about what would be the most tactically useful manoeuvre, or what would be the best time to reveal my character's backstory, or what would be some fun stakes of failure for this diplomacy roll, or whether I should find a way to draw another player in to the situation because he's not had much to do lately, or whether we've got time to get into this fight scene yet because I've got to leave for my train in ten minutes. I can think about all these things at the back of my mind and still be describing my character's actions, or improvising some dialogue, or whatever. If you were at the session watching me you would not think 'oh, he's not roleplaying'.

Roleplaying isn't about thought control. At a game, I'm thinking about all kinds of things. When actually playing , it is from a 1st person perspective.

The consequences of failure are something I might think about before taking action but deciding stakes isn't something under my control so why dwell on it?

If I'm playing D&D then its because I want to roleplay an adventurer in a fictional setting. If I want to roleplay a storyteller and tell stories then I will play a game suited to that.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;567899First John Morrow, as he's the longest.

TMI, but I'm sure he appreciates the assessment.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;567899I do EXACTLY the same thing. For example, when one of my characters is in a bar fight in a western town, I see the tables and chairs, I smell the beer, I hear the sound of broken glass, I'm THERE. Whatever makes sense to visualize.

But what happens when I go behind the bar and grab the shotgun? Wait, WHAT shotgun? The shotgun which I ASSUME WILL BE PRESENT in a western bar where fights tend to break out. And if a shotgun ISN'T present, it needlessly disrupts my immersion

Immersion into what, exactly?

You see, your character can certainly assume there's a shotgun behind the bar and most of the time, he'd be right.  But are you roleplaying in a montage of Tombstone, Silverado, or Big Whiskey Montana, or are you roleplaying in this particular town, in this particular bar?

Because in the Songbird Saloon in the town of Jerusalem Falls, Ol' Clem Johnson who owns the place is one of those rare Christians who walks the walk.  He asked himself once "Who would Jesus shoot?" and the answer was "No one."  So Clem doesn't have a shotgun behind the bar, not even to defend himself.  Now his old buddy Jack, who plays the piano, however, isn't that much of a "turn the cheek" kind of person, and so he keeps a shotgun up under the piano keyboard where he can get to it.

This is stuff you'd find out if you were from this town, or spent time talking to it's inhabitants, but if you are some low-down, four-flushin' sumbitch outlander just off the range who thinks he's gonna shoot himself out of gettin' caught cheatin' at poker, by grabbin' Clem's gun?  Well, you're in a whole lot of trouble.  Welcome to a Living World, where it might just not be Hollywood.

Quote from: CRKrueger;567974Welcome to a Living World, where it might just not be Hollywood.

And there's that surprise thing I was talking about before.

Quote from: CRKrueger;567974Immersion into what, exactly?

You see, your character can certainly assume there's a shotgun behind the bar and most of the time, he'd be right.  But are you roleplaying in a montage of Tombstone, Silverado, or Big Whiskey Montana, or are you roleplaying in this particular town, in this particular bar?

Because in the Songbird Saloon in the town of Jerusalem Falls, Ol' Clem Johnson who owns the place is one of those rare Christians who walks the walk.  He asked himself once "Who would Jesus shoot?" and the answer was "No one."  So Clem doesn't have a shotgun behind the bar, not even to defend himself.  Now his old buddy Jack, who plays the piano, however, isn't that much of a "turn the cheek" kind of person, and so he keeps a shotgun up under the piano keyboard where he can get to it.

This is stuff you'd find out if you were from this town, or spent time talking to it's inhabitants, but if you are some low-down, four-flushin' sumbitch outlander just off the range who thinks he's gonna shoot himself out of gettin' caught cheatin' at poker, by grabbin' Clem's gun?  Well, you're in a whole lot of trouble.  Welcome to a Living World, where it might just not be Hollywood.

Solid fucking gold man. :cool:

Quote from: CRKrueger;567974You see, your character can certainly assume there's a shotgun behind the bar and most of the time, he'd be right.  But are you roleplaying in a montage of Tombstone, Silverado, or Big Whiskey Montana, or are you roleplaying in this particular town, in this particular bar?

Because in the Songbird Saloon in the town of Jerusalem Falls, Ol' Clem Johnson who owns the place is one of those rare Christians who walks the walk.  He asked himself once "Who would Jesus shoot?" and the answer was "No one."  So Clem doesn't have a shotgun behind the bar, not even to defend himself.  Now his old buddy Jack, who plays the piano, however, isn't that much of a "turn the cheek" kind of person, and so he keeps a shotgun up under the piano keyboard where he can get to it.

This is stuff you'd find out if you were from this town, or spent time talking to it's inhabitants, but if you are some low-down, four-flushin' sumbitch outlander just off the range who thinks he's gonna shoot himself out of gettin' caught cheatin' at poker, by grabbin' Clem's gun?  Well, you're in a whole lot of trouble.  Welcome to a Living World, where it might just not be Hollywood.

Post of the [strike]day[/strike] [strike]week[/strike] month.

Wait a minute.  Is someone implying that unless the players dictate the scenario/surroundings/NPCs, it breaks immersion?

I thought it was the DM who decided those things, not the players.

What happens when you expect a shotgun to be under the bar, and your buddy who is playing character B expects a baseball bat?  Whose immersion gets broken in that scenario?

Been out of touch for a day. See what happens?

We call it the ' beer test' in the cbg'.  One of the story gamers postulated if having a player just grab a beer that was on a bar was taking narrative control, and I answered that of course it was.  
We talked about it until I asked her what kind of beer it was.   She said she could make that up as well.  I answered that first, " do you see where this is going?  Once you stop receiving and start projecting, it changes the way we naturally perceive the world.   And secondly....how do you know that beer and wine production has not been seriously thought out and that you are actually fucking with the setting?". And then I proceeded to link the beer and wine page of celtricia to the argument...

Quote from: Sacrosanct;568001What happens when you expect a shotgun to be under the bar, and your buddy who is playing character B expects a baseball bat?  Whose immersion gets broken in that scenario?

A Narrative Rift opens and one gets sent to the Mirror Universe.  Or, you stop the action, and go through Conflict Resolution, set stakes, determine outcomes and roll to see who gets to determine the narrative.  However, with Complications, and Fallout the shotgun might be unloaded if you win anyway, so you should make sure all the players know to always go for the Louisville Slugger, even in eras before Baseball.

Quote from: LordVreeg;568004We call it the ' beer test' in the cbg'.  One of the story gamers postulated if having a player just grab a beer that was on a bar was taking narrative control, and I answered that of course it was.  
We talked about it until I asked her what kind of beer it was.   She said she could make that up as well.  I answered that first, " do you see where this is going?  Once you stop receiving and start projecting, it changes the way we naturally perceive the world.   And secondly....how do you know that beer and wine production has not been seriously thought out and that you are actually fucking with the setting?". And then I proceeded to link the beer and wine page of celtricia to the argument...

Yeah, as a player I want to explore the setting, not create it as I go.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;567631GDQ - linear or not?

I see GDQ as a campaign, not a single adventure. GDQ is more akin to an adventure path than anything else.

Now if I'm following your argument, are you saying that you see GDQ as a linear adventure done right? That would mean that, since the adventures themselves are linked by somewhat rigid clues or leads in, you mean that if each "scene" (i.e. module) is like a mini-sandbox, but the outcome is consistent (reaching the end of the giant compound to find the Chief's treasure, the map and chain that will transport you to the Rift of the Frost Giant Jarl), then it's linear.

Is that what you mean?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;568006Yeah, as a player I want to explore the setting, not create it as I go.

Well, let me be more forthcoming and possibly too honest.  I play and prefer very long term campaigns, which may color my feelings and choices.
This does not change the fact that I don't believe a player can play a role and narrate at the same time.
But it may help explain why I am so adamant about someone telling me what beer theyvare dry king or if there is a weapon under the bar.  
In a game where one guy or gal has spent hours creating and detailing the setting, a shared narrative style tends to be a worse fit, getting aside of the whole language debate.  Maybe my issue, there.

Quote from: CRKrueger;568005A Narrative Rift opens and one gets sent to the Mirror Universe.  Or, you stop the action, and go through Conflict Resolution, set stakes, determine outcomes and roll to see who gets to determine the narrative.  However, with Complications, and Fallout the shotgun might be unloaded if you win anyway, so you should make sure all the players know to always go for the Louisville Slugger, even in eras before Baseball.

Well, if the player decides what is and isn't in the game world, what's to stop them from saying they find a plasma rifle?  Suck it DM, that's what the player wants.